ferences and absence of points of the compass, the description of Donata's tenements as standing on the Rio (presumably that of S. Giovanni Grisostomo) on one side, opening by certain porticoes and stairs on the other to the Court and common alley leading to the Church of S. Giovanni Grisostomo, and abutting in two places on the CA' POLO the property of her husband and Stefano, will apply perfectly to a building occupying the western portion of the area on which now stands the Theatre, and perhaps forming the western side of a Court of which Casa Polo formed the other three sides.* We know nothing more of Polo till we find him appearing a year or two later in rapid succession as the Captain of a Venetian Galley, as a prisoner of war, and as an author. V. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE WAR-GALLEYS OF THE MEDITERRANEAN STATES IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 25. And before entering on this new phase of the Traveller's biography it may not be without interest that we say something regarding the equipment of those galleys which are so prominent in the medieval history of the ment of the Mediterranean.† Arrange Rowers in to every Eschewing that "Serbonian Bog, where armies separate oar whole have sunk" of Books and Commentators, the man. theory of the classification of the Biremes and Triremes of the Ancients, we can at least assert on secure grounds that in medieval armament, up to the middle of the 16th century or thereabouts, the characteristic distinction of galleys of different calibres, so far as such differences existed, was based on the number of rowers that sat on one bench pulling each his separate oar, but through one portella or rowlock-port. And to the See Appendix C, No. 16. Large extracts were given in the first edition (App. C. No. 10), but I have not thought it necessary to print them again. I regret not to have had access to Jal's learned memoirs (Archéologie Navale, Paris, 1839) whilst writing this section, nor since, except for a hasty look at his Essay on the difficult subject of the oar arrangements. I see that he rejects so great a number of oars as I deduce from the statements of Sanudo and others, and that he regards a large number of the rowers as supplementary. It seems the more desirable to elucidate this, because writers on medieval subjects so accomplished as Buchon and Capmany have (it would seem) entirely misconceived the matter, assuming that all the men on one bench pulled at one oar. classes of galleys so distinguished the Italians, of the later Middle Age at least, did certainly apply, rightly or wrongly, the classical terms of Bireme, Trireme, and Quinquereme, in the sense of galleys having two men and two oars to a bench, three men and three oars to a bench, and five men and five oars to a bench.* That this was the medieval arrangement is very certain from the details afforded by Marino Sanudo the Elder, confirmed by later writers and by works of art. Previous to 1290, Sanudo tells us, almost all the galleys that went to the Levant had but two oars and men to a bench; but as it had been found that three oars and men to a bench could be employed with great advantage, after that date nearly all galleys adopted this arrangement, which was called ai Terzaruoli.† Moreover experiments made by the Venetians in 1316 had shown that four rowers to a bench could be employed still more advantageously. And where the galleys could be used on inland waters, and could be made more bulky, Sanudo would even recommend five to a bench, or have gangs of rowers on two decks with either three or four men to the bench on each deck. 26. This system of grouping the oars, and putting only one man to an oar, continued down to the 16th century, during the first half of which came in the more Change of System in modern system of using great oars, equally spaced, the 16th century. and requiring from four to seven men each to ply them, in the manner which endured till late in the last century, when galleys became altogether obsolete. Captain Pantero Pantera, the author of a work on Naval Tactics * See Coronelli, Atlante Veneto, I. 139, 140. Marino Sanudo the Elder, though not using the term trireme, says it was well understood from ancient authors that the Romans employed their rowers three to a bench (p. 59). + "Ad terzarolos" (Secreta Fidelium Crucis, p. 57). The Catalan Worthy, Ramon de Muntaner, indeed constantly denounces the practice of manning all the galleys with terzaruoli, or tersols, as his term is. But his reason is that these thirdsmen were taken from the oar when crossbowmen were wanted, to act in that capacity, and as such they were good for nothing; the crossbowmen, he insists, should be men specially enlisted for that service and kept to that. He would have some 10 or 20 per cent. only of the fleet built very light and manned in threes. He does not seem to have contemplated oars three-banked, and crossbowmen besides, as Sanudo does (see below; and Muntaner, pp. 288, 323, 525, &c.). In Sanudo we have a glimpse worth noting of the word soldiers advancing towards the modern sense; he expresses a strong preference for soldati (viz. paid soldiers) over crusaders (viz. volunteers), p. 74. (1616), says he had heard, from veterans who had commanded galleys equipped in the antiquated fashion, that three men to a bench, with separate oars, answered better than three men to one great oar, but four men to one great oar (he says) were certainly more efficient than four men with separate oars. The new-fashioned great oars, he tells us, were styled Remi di Scaloccio, the old grouped oars Remi a Zenzile,-terms the etymology of which I cannot explain.* It may be doubted whether the four-banked and fivebanked galleys, of which Marino Sanudo speaks, really then came into practical use. A great five-banked galley on this system, built in 1529 in the Venice Arsenal by Vettor Fausto, was the subject of so much talk and excitement, that it must evidently have been something quite new and unheard of.† So late as 1567 indeed the King of Spain built at Barcelona a galley of thirty-six benches to the side, and seven men to the bench, with a separate oar to each in the old fashion. But it proved a failure.‡ Down to the introduction of the great oars the usual system appears to have been three oars to a bench for the larger galleys, and two oars for lighter ones. The fuste or lighter galleys of the Venetians, even to about the middle of the 16th century, had their oars in pairs from the stern to the mast, and single oars only from the mast forward. § 27. Returning then to the three-banked and two-banked galleys of the latter part of the 13th century, the number of benches on each side seems to have run from twenty- Some details five to twenty-eight, at least as I interpret Sanudo's of the 13th calculations. The 100-oared vessels often mentioned Galleys. (e. g. by Muntaner, p. 419) were probably two-banked vessels with twenty-five benches to a side. century The galleys were very narrow, only 15 feet in beam.|| L'Armata Navale, Roma, 1616, pp. 150-151. † See a work to which I am indebted for a good deal of light and information, the Engineer Giovanni Casoni's Essay "Dei Navigli Poliremi usati nella Marina dagli Antichi Veneziani," in " Esercitazioni dell' Ateneo Veneto, vol. ii. p. 338. This great Quinquereme, as it was styled, is stated to have been struck by a firearrow, and blown up, in January 1570. Pantera, p. 22. § Lazarus Bayfius de Re Navali Veterum, in Gronovii Thesaurus, Ven. 1737, vol. xi. p. 581. This writer also speaks of the Quinquereme mentioned above (p. 577). Marinus Sanutius, p. 65. But to give room for the play of the oars and the passage of the fighting-men, &c., this width was largely augmented by an opera-morta, or outrigger deck, projecting much beyond the ship's sides and supported by timber brackets.* I do not find it stated how great this projection was in the medieval galleys, but in those of the 17th century it was on each side as much as ths of the true beam. And if it was as great in the 13th century galleys the total width between the false gunnels would be about 22 feet. In the centre line of the deck ran, the whole length of the vessel, a raised gangway called the corsia, for passage clear of the oars. Fore. The benches were arranged as in this diagram. The part of the bench next the gunnel was at right angles to it, but the other two-thirds of the bench were thrown forward obliquely. a, b, c, indicate the position of the three rowers. The shortest oar a was called Terlicchio, the middle one b Posticcio, the long oar c Piamero.† I do not find any information as to how the oars worked on the gunnels. The Siena fresco (see opposite) appears to show them attached by loops and pins, which is the usual practice in boats of the Mediterranean now. In the cut from D. Tintoretto (p. 35) the Gunnel. a a Hull. of Line ........ Aft. Bench. Bench. Corsia or Central Gangway. groups of oars protrude though regular ports in the bulwarks, but this probably represents the use of a later day. In any case the oars of each bench must have worked in very close proximity. Sanudo states the length of the galleys of his time (1300-1320) as 117 feet. This was doubtless length of keel, for that is specified (" da ruoda a ruoda") in other Venetian measurements, but the whole oar space could scarcely have been so much, and with twenty-eight benches to a side there could not have been more than 4 feet gunnel-space to each bench. And as one of the objects See the woodcuts opposite and at p. 35; also Pantera, p. 46 (who is here, however, speaking of the great-oared galleys), and Coronelli, i. 140. † Casoni, p. 324. He obtains these particulars from a manuscript work of the 16th century by Cristoforo Canale. VOL. I. g مد |