Galley Slaves Gallery

[NiupraFan]

Galley Slaves by Nobllevulchur.

She heard the heavy tread of the overseer approaching as he sauntered down the aisle between the rowing benches. She always worried when he was near, so she risked a glance over her shoulder to see what he was up to. “Oh no,” she said to herself. Two bad signs. First the whip and then the grin.


Eleni was one of thirty women who powered the galley through strenuous oaring. This voyage was from Brundisium to Neopolis. The air had been stagnant, not the slightest breeze, so the captain ordered “oars”. The seas remained calm which meant the crew could not deploy the sails and the women had to keep rowing for hours.


All the galley slaves were naked, chained and displayed the cruelty of the two slave drivers by the numerous swollen, crimson whip welts on their backs, asses, legs and breasts.


Eleni was worried. The slave drivers usually wore their whips coiled and stuck in their belts. But “the monster” as she called him but whose real name was Felix, had his whip out and was cracking it in the air, shaking off the bits of dried female flesh that still adhered to the leather. He was a true sadist and he always grinned as he tortured the naked slave girls. He was grinning now.


She began to row more vigorously, the muscles in her arms, back and buttocks rippling with the effort. Maybe he would spare her if he saw her working hard. Her body was already drenched in sweat, rivulets ran down her dangling breasts and even her blonde pussy thatch was damp with it. Now added to that was fear-sweat.


Felix stopped by her bench. She was terrified, preparing herself for the fiery pain of the lash cutting into her naked flesh. But he merely winked at her, leaned over cupping her right breast in his rough, massive palm and then squeezing her boob tightly. She winced at this breast assault, but she didn’t dare interrupt her rowing. He enjoyed the fear he saw in her eyes. He released her breast and then slapped both her boobs, leaving the imprint of his hand on her breast flesh. He then walked to the bench of the slave girl directly in front of her.


Sophia was a young Greek girl who had labored as a field slave on a large farm outside Rome. Working naked and barefoot outdoors under the lash, she was greatly relieved when the overseer told her she was being traded for another slave girl and would be sent to her new owner. She didn’t realize that she was exchanging one hell for another. Now she was a galley slave working even harder than in the fields and still naked and lashed.


Eleni had an unending view of Sophia from the rear, watching her muscular back and buttocks move in cadence with the rest of the slave girls, the toes of her dirty bare feet grip the damp deck with the push and pull of her oar. Like all the other slave girls, Sophia’s back, ass and legs bore evidence of the sadistic overseers’ whip lashes, some marks fading and others freshly etched into her flesh.


The young Greek had large, curvaceous breasts which undulated rhythmically as she worked the oar. Unfortunately Sophia’s generous breasts were occasionally the targets of the slave driver’s sadistic lust to inflict pain and humiliation on the slave girls. Eleni could see the curving whip welts on the edges of Sophia’s breasts. In the past Eleni had watched in horror as the two slave drivers had lashed Sophia, the lashes curling around her well-rounded boobs, inflicting incredible agony and suffering.


Eleni watch as Felix stood by Sophia seated on her rowing bench, towering over her, his whip at the ready. “Oh gods, spare her, spare her,” Eleni whispered a prayer to herself. Sophia herself was visibly trembling with panic, her full breasts quivering, her nipples erect with fright.


“I’ve been watching you, slut,” Felix told her, a large grin on his face. “You’re not working as well as the other sluts on board. Not pulling your weight, girl” “Please master, I’ll work real hard, I promise,” Sophia pleaded.


“She’s just tired, worn out. We’ve all been rowing for hours. She works just as hard as any of us, asshole,” Eleni thought to herself. “It’s just an excuse, you prick, to torture a busty young girl, you pig.” Of course if Eleni had said that out loud she would have been tied to the mast whipped by all the crew, starting with the captain. Now all she could do is nothing, but wait and witness another injustice.


“Yes you will row hard, whore,” Felix said. “Here’s a little something to remind you.”


He brought the whip down forcefully over the tops of her jutting boobs. Sophia’s screams frightened all the other slave girls as her shrieks echoed throughout the galley. Felix looked with pleasure as the slash over her wobbling boobs swelled and turned crimson. Eleni tears welled in her eyes in sympathy for Sophia’s suffering.


The next lash fell in the middle of her breasts, the leather whip landing just inside her large pink areolas. Sophia’s cries were truly horrendous as the unbearable agony of those breast cuts radiated throughout her whole body. Felix then sent the whip to the undersides of Sophia’s breasts, the blow lifting them up from her chest, flying freely in the air before bouncing back down.


Felix wasn’t done. He lashed her naked back, leaving a long diagonal mark on her flesh, then repeated the blow creating a long X on her body. He finished by delivering two long lashes to her naked buttocks, the whip following the curves of her ass.


Sophia collapsed over her oar, panting and sobbing uncontrollably. Eleni wanted to comfort the suffering slave girl, holding her and caressing her, but the chains prevented her from moving from her seat.


The other slave driver who was named Marcus walked up to Felix and patted him on the back. “You know how to keep these bitches in line, mate.” Felix nodded in agreement. Both brutes returned to the rear of the vessel for snacks of cheese, figs, olives and wine.


The wind finally began to pick up and the order was given to “rest oars”. The slave girls at last could ease their fatigued-wracked bodies. Sophia’s wails had died down to soft whimpering. Her back and buttocks ached with pain, but much worse was the constant throbbing agony from her wounded boobs.


Eleni still burned with anger at how unfairly poor Sophia had been treated, whipped for no good reason. Tortured by a monster who enjoyed inflicting pain on a defenseless, naked girl. Her only consolation was that her own breasts hadn’t been striped by the cruel lash. But that could change at any time. She lived in constant fear of the slave drivers’ whips. Now all she could do is rest until the next time the captain ordered “oars”.

 

[willowfall]

An interesting fact about later galley slaves (say after 1400 CE) is that criminals that were sentenced to long terms as galley slaves actually did survive their sentence to be released back to society. This is of course in contrast to how Hollywood portrays it, and I'm not saying the majority of them survived but enough did to make a mark in the history books.

That would indicate to me that there were Captains who realized their ship depended on the engine (the rowers) to survive battles and being in a sea (the Med) full of pirates. Very much like a naval or merchant captain today wouldn't drive his engines to the point they could no longer propel the ship.

It is also interesting that while ancient warships (Carthage, Greece, Rome, etc) relied of free paid professionals to row their warships, medieval warships (up at least to Lepanto as far as Islamic fleets were concerned) used a great deal of slave power to row the warships. I have often wondered if this was a result of (1) slave labor on land (in Europe) falling out of favor, (2) worker wages rising to a point where navies couldn't recruit rowers (again Europe) or (3) an excess of males slaves being captured (Islamic powers).

A pointer towards #3 is the fact that into the European expansion into central Asia (1700+ CE) European males were the preferred labor slaves in those slave markets while Persian girls were the top level sex slaves in the same market (which did see European women coming thru them).

kisses

willowfall

 

[Vladimir_Vladislav]

(1) slave labor on land (in Europe) falling out of favor, (2) worker wages rising to a point where navies couldn't recruit rowers (again Europe) or (3) an excess of males slaves being captured (Islamic powers).

A pointer towards #3 is the fact that into the European expansion into central Asia (1700+ CE) European males were the preferred labor slaves in those slave markets while Persian girls were the top level sex slaves in the same market (which did see European women coming thru them).

Interestingly, while galley slavery on the Mediteranean is strongly associated with the Barbary Corsairs, another big player in this domain was Spain, that, since the 1570s, started deploying galleys to protect their trade routes from French and English corsairs, most of the crew on those galleys being enslaved/imprisoned, usually on a sentence ranging between 2 to 10 years.

On the three points that you brought up (strictly speaking about the Spanish navy here):

1. Pretty solid point. While for a long part of the Middle Ages, it was fairly common to see people enslaving individuals of their own nationality, as time went on, it became less and less acceptable. Generally speaking, people were more willing to turn a blind eye to enslaving foreigners or criminals. There was also that the Spanish preferred to enslave captured Ottomans or Africans that already had some experience in rowing (although they also used natives from the Americas, criminals from their colonies, captured French and English soldiers, Roma people and so on).

2. While it is true that the wages saw a slow and steady increase throughout the time, working on a ship didn't really pay that great, considering the hard work and the living conditions. Nevertheless, there were still plenty of people eager to join, in hopes of escaping extreme poverty back home. However, there were three other reasons why they were more inclined to use slaves or prisoners. First, free crewmen are able to quit once the voyage is done. They might decide they've had enough of the tough life on the ship and go home. Second, many prisoners decided to stay on the ship once their sentence was up, since they would actually get pretty decent salaries. They had a lot of experience and were used to living in rough conditions so, why not give it a shot? Third, usually you want your professional oarsmen for your main navy, that will fight the other colonial powers, so it would only make sense to use slaves/prisoners for the ships that defend trade routes/coastal towns from corsairs.

3. In the case of the Ottomans (that you just brought up), it would seem that this is the case. Similarly, the Spanish had an excess of male slaves from their colonies in America. Most Spanish ships in the Americas had crews composed mostly of free men (again, you don't really want to rely on slaves when you have to fight with other colonial powers or pirates, or to see a mutiny while you're trapped in the middle of the Atlantic). Then of course, there's also that they didn't really have much of a choice, since using female galley slaves wasn't really an option.

 

[willowfall]

Interestingly, while galley slavery on the Mediteranean is strongly associated with the Barbary Corsairs, another big player in this domain was Spain, that, since the 1570s, started deploying galleys to protect their trade routes from French and English corsairs, most of the crew on those galleys being enslaved/imprisoned, usually on a sentence ranging between 2 to 10 years.

On the three points that you brought up (strictly speaking about the Spanish navy here):

1. Pretty solid point. While for a long part of the Middle Ages, it was fairly common to see people enslaving individuals of their own nationality, as time went on, it became less and less acceptable. Generally speaking, people were more willing to turn a blind eye to enslaving foreigners or criminals. There was also that the Spanish preferred to enslave captured Ottomans or Africans that already had some experience in rowing (although they also used natives from the Americas, criminals from their colonies, captured French and English soldiers, Roma people and so on).

2. While it is true that the wages saw a slow and steady increase throughout the time, working on a ship didn't really pay that great, considering the hard work and the living conditions. Nevertheless, there were still plenty of people eager to join, in hopes of escaping extreme poverty back home. However, there were three other reasons why they were more inclined to use slaves or prisoners. First, free crewmen are able to quit once the voyage is done. They might decide they've had enough of the tough life on the ship and go home. Second, many prisoners decided to stay on the ship once their sentence was up, since they would actually get pretty decent salaries. They had a lot of experience and were used to living in rough conditions so, why not give it a shot? Third, usually you want your professional oarsmen for your main navy, that will fight the other colonial powers, so it would only make sense to use slaves/prisoners for the ships that defend trade routes/coastal towns from corsairs.

3. In the case of the Ottomans (that you just brought up), it would seem that this is the case. Similarly, the Spanish had an excess of male slaves from their colonies in America. Most Spanish ships in the Americas had crews composed mostly of free men (again, you don't really want to rely on slaves when you have to fight with other colonial powers or pirates, or to see a mutiny while you're trapped in the middle of the Atlantic). Then of course, there's also that they didn't really have much of a choice, since using female galley slaves wasn't really an option.

All very good points. Except I'd point that the merchants ships ALWAYS paid better than the navy did (one of the reasons the British navy had such trouble staying up to strength) and that people who earned their living from the sea (thus having skills the navies wanted) had much better options than crewing a warship. In fact the British navy paid "sailors" (those who actually knew what they were doing) better than they paid landmen (the mass unskilled labor aboard that mostly provided brute strength to run the ship). So if you wanted to go to sea naval vessels were your next to last option (rowing for the enemy bein the worst option) given a choice.

Galleys were deployed in small numbers outside the Med (the English Channel and the Caribbean) but basically they were found to be unsatisfactory when dealing with sea conditions. Also, unlike even sailing warships, galleys had very little cargo capacity or crew quarters making them difficult to operate at a distance from their main logistical bases. The fact that Spain tired to use them in the Caribbean (or even got them there intact) says something quite remarkable about the Spanish navy and its sailors (sorry Hollywood the English generally FOLLOWED everyone else, they didn't lead the way).

You see slave crewed Islamic galley warships even into the early 19th Century. Partially I think this is because the concept of 'slave soldiers' appeared in a lot of Islamic societies and thus was psychologically and socially more acceptable. Also unlike the European use of enslaved Africans (and native locals) as part of a massive agricultural labor force the Ottomans (and their tributaries) just didn't have a need for that. Areas under Islamic control that produced food already had large free (if downtrodden) labor forces of locals. Thus with raids and piracy producing an excess of male slaves (women almost exclusively sold for the sex trade), and the need to make those endeavors profitable you had very few outlets other than naval galleys for the unskilled parts of the male slave population. And for the navies while you fed slaves but didn't pay them unlike free labor who expected both upkeep and to be paid thus were more expensive.

And to loop back to Ancient navies professional rowers out of the local population was very doable because galleys spent very little time at sea, thus allowing the men to work their normal occupations, and campaigning season was primarily between the planting and the harvesting of crops thus not affecting food production for city states (like in Greece). Once Rome controlled the Med she had very little need for large naval forces and could (did) make her sailors into a professional full time navy with no other job. In effect 'legionnaires' at sea.

And Captains while you may like the idea of being able to bang your rowers as a side benefit, a preggers girl isn't much good with an oar (or whatever else you wanted her for).

kisses

willowfall

 

[Naraku]

Ancient galleys were used to ram into an enemy ship. Contrary to what most people thing, the ram was not meant to sink the ship; rather, it was ment to lock the ships together. The crew would then board and fight hand to hand. In these circumstances, you would want all of the men crowded into the relatively small space to be able to take part in the battle. The rowers would drop their oar, grab a sword and start fighting in defense or attack.

The tactics were different in medieval and early-modern naval warfare. The ram was abandoned. Instead, the idea was to get within firing range and bombard the enemy vessel; at first with arrows, then, after the introduction of gunpowder, with muskets and cannon. Only after enough damage to the crew and ship was inflicted, would boarding be undertaken. The upper deck would be devoted to archers/gunners and cannon with the rowers confined below.
Venetian
Ottoman

 

[willowfall]

Ancient galleys were used to ram into an enemy ship. Contrary to what most people thing, the ram was not meant to sink the ship; rather, it was ment to lock the ships together. The crew would then board and fight hand to hand. In these circumstances, you would want all of the men crowded into the relatively small space to be able to take part in the battle. The rowers would drop their oar, grab a sword and start fighting in defense or attack.
View attachment 1354873
The tactics were different in medieval and early-modern naval warfare. The ram was abandoned. Instead, the idea was to get within firing range and bombard the enemy vessel; at first with arrows, then, after the introduction of gunpowder, with muskets and cannon. Only after enough damage to the crew and ship was inflicted, would boarding be undertaken. The upper deck would be devoted to archers/gunners and cannon with the rowers confined below.
View attachment 1354874Venetian
View attachment 1354875Ottoman

Interestingly, and the last major use of ramming, at the Battle of Lissa in 1866 the outgunned Austrian-Hungarian Empire naval force made ramming the major tactic when facing an Italian fleet with superior fire power. The Italians got thumped but an analysis of the battle indicates that it was Italian command failures (if not outright cowardice by the squadron commander) not ramming that won the battle for the Austro-Hungarians.

In ancient battles the ram (which was usually at or above water level with a square not sharpened point) could also be used to sheer off the oars on one side or the other to disable the enemy ship.

Naraku I have to disagree with you on

it was ment to lock the ships together.

It was definitely designed to smash the enemy ship and ruin its watertight integrity. If they had been meant to lock the ships together the Romans would never have to invented the "corvus" to do exactly that and allow them to deploy their superior infantry as a boarding force. Greek warships also carried relatively few marines (infantrymen). Also if the rowers abandoned their benches to fight the ship would have been essentially immobilized and a large number of men moving around on the deck would have destabilized the ship (reproductions of Greek triremes show them to be fairly unstable). Finally the reason ancient rams were blunted was exactly to prevent they attacking ship from becoming locked with its opponent (ala the CSS Virginia when she rammed the USS Cumberland with a sharp ram which then got stuck and the only thing preventing the Virginia from going down with the Cumberland was the ram ripping off).

kisses

willowfall

 

[Loxuru]

French galleys in the 16th - 17th century were manned with criminals at the oars. In the 17th century, they got company from Hugenots who had refused to convert their religion, and were sentenced to the galleys for life.

Interestingly, and the last major use of ramming, at the Battle of Lissa in 1866 the outgunned Austrian-Hungarian Empire naval force made ramming the major tactic when facing an Italian fleet with superior fire power. The Italians got thumped but an analysis of the battle indicates that it was Italian command failures (if not outright cowardice by the squadron commander) not ramming that won the battle for the Austro-Hungarians.

The Battle of Lissa occurred in a stage of arms development when armor was superior over gunpower. Altough the circumstances of the Austrian victory (and the ramming stage of the battle) are still a controversy, Lissa left a huge legacy in warship design for the next 50 years. Warships were equipped with a ramming bow as standard weaponry. This explains the characteristic concave bow shape of warships, that, for instance, the British Royal Navy maintained up to the design of the Queen Elisabeth class battleships, commissioned in 1916!

Also the famous HMS Dreadnought (1906), reputed for her advenced firepower, featured a ramming bow. Curiously, this would be her only weapon used during the WWI, when, on 18 March 1915, she sunk the submersible SMS U-29 by ramming.



Generally, ramming tactics were not used systematically applied after the Battle of Lissa, while the ramming bows aggravated the impact of accidentally collisions.

 

[Naraku]

It was definitely designed to smash the enemy ship and ruin its watertight integrity. If they had been meant to lock the ships together the Romans would never have to invented the "corvus" to do exactly that and allow them to deploy their superior infantry as a boarding force. Greek warships also carried relatively few marines (infantrymen). Also if the rowers abandoned their benches to fight the ship would have been essentially immobilized and a large number of men moving around on the deck would have destabilized the ship (reproductions of Greek triremes show them to be fairly unstable). Finally the reason ancient rams were blunted was exactly to prevent they attacking ship from becoming locked with its opponent (ala the CSS Virginia when she rammed the USS Cumberland with a sharp ram which then got stuck and the only thing preventing the Virginia from going down with the Cumberland was the ram ripping off).

kisses

willowfall

You are correct. I confused to two tactics of ramming and boarding.
This does show the need for trained professional rowers. Breaking the oars or ramming and reversing before getting entangled and pulled down, both required skill and co-ordination on the part of the rowers. You can't get that from slaves.

French galleys in the 16th - 17th century were manned with criminals at the oars. In the 17th century, they got company from Hugenots who had refused to convert their religion, and were sentenced to the galleys for life.


The Battle of Lissa occurred in a stage of arms development when armor was superior over gunpower. Altough the circumstances of the Austrian victory (and the ramming stage of the battle) are still a controversy, Lissa left a huge legacy in warship design for the next 50 years. Warships were equipped with a ramming bow as standard weaponry. This explains the characteristic concave bow shape of warships, that, for instance, the British Royal Navy maintained up to the design of the Queen Elisabeth class battleships, commissioned in 1916!

Also the famous HMS Dreadnought (1906), reputed for her advenced firepower, featured a ramming bow. Curiously, this would be her only weapon used during the WWI, when, on 18 March 1915, she sunk the submersible SMS U-29 by ramming.

View attachment 1355483

Generally, ramming tactics were not used systematically applied after the Battle of Lissa, while the ramming bows aggravated the impact of accidentally collisions.

Ramming was used in both World Wars as anti-submarine tactics. Even merchant ships would sometimes ram surfaced subs, sometimes sinking the sub, although not without incurring damage.

After the Battle of Actium, Octavian had the rams removed from captured Egyptian ships and put on display. The rams are long gone, but the mountings still exist.

I found one historian's interpretation of this monument that's interesting if a bit speculative:
"Polyvalent meanings behind naval ram displays were prevalent and ingrained in the Roman world, especially at Octavian’s Campsite Memorial for the Actian War. Naval rams and their display alluded to gender and power discourses within Roman society. These discourses included Roman notions of sex, penetration, domination, phallus size, and ideas of achieved hierarchies of masculinity. Analyzing ram displays through Roman perceptions of gender and sexuality, specifically concerning ancient masculinity, reveals that rams functioned not only as weapons of war but also as metaphorical phalloi that embodied and projected immense power. Octavian’s ram display at Actium was used to effeminize Marc Antony through the successful defeat and figurative castration of his fleet, which was done by cutting off the rams from the bows of the warships. By exhibiting the rams as such, Octavian asserted his own impenetrability and masculine virtue, which simultaneously promoted Antony’s penetrability and lack of masculinity. In choosing the largest rams, Octavian implied that his masculine prowess was invincible. The ram display unveiled Octavian’s phallic dominion over all other Greeks and Romans. As Octavian’s naval ram display was the largest and most impressive of the ancient world, he effectively rendered all previous ram dedications subordinate to his own."

 

[Loxuru]

Ramming was used in both World Wars as anti-submarine tactics. Even merchant ships would sometimes ram surfaced subs, sometimes sinking the sub, although not without incurring damage.

True, of course. When the opportunity offered itself, ramming a sub was an option, since it was hardly survivable for the latter. But it was no battle tactics, since, curiously, the ramming bow was a heritage of a 19th century close quarters combat like the Battle of Lissa, while these dreadnought's main batteries had a range of 20-30 km.

 

[willowfall]

A couple of points:

"The Battle of Lissa occurred in a stage of arms development when armor was superior over gunpower." - Don't think this is necessarily an accurate statement as there are numerous cases of ironclads being shot thru during the American Civil War. Now in some cases it was bad ship design, in cases were they weren't in was because the guns were not used effectively. An example of ineffective gun usage would be the USS Monitor using charges much smaller than the guns could handle in her action against the CSS Virginia because the navy wasn't sure of the effect full charged would have on the integrity of the Monitor's hull. Yet she was putting significant dents in the Virginia. If she had used full charges there might never have been a debate as to who actually won that engagement.

"Ramming was used in both World Wars as anti-submarine tactics. Even merchant ships would sometimes ram surfaced subs, sometimes sinking the sub, although not without incurring damage." - Absolutely true but then of all major combatant vessels a sub is easily the most fragile but is also very hard to hit with a gun (analysis of Jutland indicated a hit rate by the big guns was less than 5% overall. And before you laugh at poor shooting the US military fired approximately 10,000 rounds of small arms ammo for every casualty it inflicted shouting while getting shot at isn't easy. Especially when the target is moving at 20+ knots.). So if you can run it down, why not?

Military history has always a race between offense and defense, to bring it back to ancient galleys the Carthaginians were much better sailors than the Romans were so how do the Romans nullify that? Turn a sea battle into a land battle where they hold the upper hand.

And while having a bevy of sexy beauties power you ship may be great for your libido (to say nothing of your darker desires) even I'm willing to admit that your average male my size and weight is going to be a superior rower to me.

But I suppose if Winston Churchill had been a Roman Senator instead of saying "rum, sodomy and the lash" about the British navy he would have said "wine, sodomy and the lash" about the Roman.

kisses

willowfall

 

[kendelo]

"Claudius, we captured these barbarian warriors!"
Claudius looked them over..."You were supposed to fight to the death, were you not?"
The women bowed their heads.."Yes Claudius."
"As you have dishonored your tribe you are not worthy to be sex slaves, as sex slaves can have pleasure. You will know only pain and suffering."
"Please just kill us Claudius!''
"No. Guards! Brand them, blind them, and burn their clits! Then take them to the ship and chain them to the oars! They would not fight to the death so we will work them until they die! No mercy for cowards!"
Claudius looked on as the guards quickly did their damage...chained, blinded, branded and they were led away in agony.
"Make sure the crew rapes and sodomizes them too. They will regret not dying in battle every moment until they die."

 

[Mecro901]

.

 

[Mecro901]

.

 

[Hugin&Munin]

 

[Paul1969]

All very good points. Except I'd point that the merchants ships ALWAYS paid better than the navy did (one of the reasons the British navy had such trouble staying up to strength) and that people who earned their living from the sea (thus having skills the navies wanted) had much better options than crewing a warship. In fact the British navy paid "sailors" (those who actually knew what they were doing) better than they paid landmen (the mass unskilled labor aboard that mostly provided brute strength to run the ship). So if you wanted to go to sea naval vessels were your next to last option (rowing for the enemy bein the worst option) given a choice.

Galleys were deployed in small numbers outside the Med (the English Channel and the Caribbean) but basically they were found to be unsatisfactory when dealing with sea conditions. Also, unlike even sailing warships, galleys had very little cargo capacity or crew quarters making them difficult to operate at a distance from their main logistical bases. The fact that Spain tired to use them in the Caribbean (or even got them there intact) says something quite remarkable about the Spanish navy and its sailors (sorry Hollywood the English generally FOLLOWED everyone else, they didn't lead the way).

You see slave crewed Islamic galley warships even into the early 19th Century. Partially I think this is because the concept of 'slave soldiers' appeared in a lot of Islamic societies and thus was psychologically and socially more acceptable. Also unlike the European use of enslaved Africans (and native locals) as part of a massive agricultural labor force the Ottomans (and their tributaries) just didn't have a need for that. Areas under Islamic control that produced food already had large free (if downtrodden) labor forces of locals. Thus with raids and piracy producing an excess of male slaves (women almost exclusively sold for the sex trade), and the need to make those endeavors profitable you had very few outlets other than naval galleys for the unskilled parts of the male slave population. And for the navies while you fed slaves but didn't pay them unlike free labor who expected both upkeep and to be paid thus were more expensive.

And to loop back to Ancient navies professional rowers out of the local population was very doable because galleys spent very little time at sea, thus allowing the men to work their normal occupations, and campaigning season was primarily between the planting and the harvesting of crops thus not affecting food production for city states (like in Greece). Once Rome controlled the Med she had very little need for large naval forces and could (did) make her sailors into a professional full time navy with no other job. In effect 'legionnaires' at sea.

And Captains while you may like the idea of being able to bang your rowers as a side benefit, a preggers girl isn't much good with an oar (or whatever else you wanted her for).

kisses

willowfall

Enslaved rowers probably did not last long because of the horrible conditions aboard.

 

[willowfall]

Enslaved rowers probably did not last long because of the horrible conditions aboard.

A semi-excellent point but I think the Hollywood has overdone the whole "horrible conditions" thingy. And please I'm NOT saying conditions were what we would consider "good".

For a moment let's look at it from the perspective of the galley Captain and the military authorities and equate a galley rower to a cavalryman's horse.

We'll start with the cavalryman. His horse was literally the way he survived. It was his mode of combat, his way to survival if retreat was necessary, his personal supply wagon. He took the best care he could of the horse (and unlike in the movies) most cavalrymen DIDN'T get attached to their horses (some didn't even name them) BECAUSE an experienced cavalryman knew the horse was probably not long in service. It could die or be abandoned due to exhaustion, it could get killed or badly wounded in combat and not returned to duty or it might wind up in the pot if supplies were short. As an example during the late Native wars in the US it wasn't uncommon for a military column to lose most of its horses in a single campaign and wind up getting back to base on foot. A cavalryman didn't abuse his horse (if he was smart) but neither did her coddle it or fall in love with it. It wasn't a pet.

Now onto the war galley slave. Literally the ship could not move without an effective group of rowers who could work as a team, the life (or freedom) of the non-slave crew members depended on having an effective engine. And for a brief moment look at the galley slave's perspective on combat. If the ship didn't perform effectively YOU could die (go down with the ship, etc) and there was no guarantee that if you survived and fell into enemy hands that you would be freed (Muslims also fought Muslims so if you were Christian you weren't get sent home and it was the same on the Christian side). So it was in the best interest of the Military authorities kept their ships in running order (ie: a good supply of healthy rowers and keeping experienced rowers in the best condition possible) and it was certainly in the interest of the Captain to keep his "engine" working as best he possibly could.

So as with the cavalryman's horse, I suspect that slave rowers were kept in much more reasonable condition than we have been led to believe (by people who don't know squat about galley slaves nor care to portray history accurately) because the effectiveness of your squadron was only as good as the ships forming it and if you were on board a galley, your life literally depended on the engine NOT breaking down at the wrong moment.

Also rowers needed time to get to learn their "trade" (and if you don't believe me go try rowing a boat if you never have) and to become a team. An effective trained team of slave rowers was worth 100 times what a brand new crew of rowers who had never worked together was worth.

Did they coddle the slave rowers? Certainly not! But did they beat or starve them to death at the oars because they were sadistic brutes? Not if the crew wanted to live very long in combat.

kisses

willowfall

 

[Paul1969]

A semi-excellent point but I think the Hollywood has overdone the whole "horrible conditions" thingy. And please I'm NOT saying conditions were what we would consider "good".

For a moment let's look at it from the perspective of the galley Captain and the military authorities and equate a galley rower to a cavalryman's horse.

We'll start with the cavalryman. His horse was literally the way he survived. It was his mode of combat, his way to survival if retreat was necessary, his personal supply wagon. He took the best care he could of the horse (and unlike in the movies) most cavalrymen DIDN'T get attached to their horses (some didn't even name them) BECAUSE an experienced cavalryman knew the horse was probably not long in service. It could die or be abandoned due to exhaustion, it could get killed or badly wounded in combat and not returned to duty or it might wind up in the pot if supplies were short. As an example during the late Native wars in the US it wasn't uncommon for a military column to lose most of its horses in a single campaign and wind up getting back to base on foot. A cavalryman didn't abuse his horse (if he was smart) but neither did her coddle it or fall in love with it. It wasn't a pet.

Now onto the war galley slave. Literally the ship could not move without an effective group of rowers who could work as a team, the life (or freedom) of the non-slave crew members depended on having an effective engine. And for a brief moment look at the galley slave's perspective on combat. If the ship didn't perform effectively YOU could die (go down with the ship, etc) and there was no guarantee that if you survived and fell into enemy hands that you would be freed (Muslims also fought Muslims so if you were Christian you weren't get sent home and it was the same on the Christian side). So it was in the best interest of the Military authorities kept their ships in running order (ie: a good supply of healthy rowers and keeping experienced rowers in the best condition possible) and it was certainly in the interest of the Captain to keep his "engine" working as best he possibly could.

So as with the cavalryman's horse, I suspect that slave rowers were kept in much more reasonable condition than we have been led to believe (by people who don't know squat about galley slaves nor care to portray history accurately) because the effectiveness of your squadron was only as good as the ships forming it and if you were on board a galley, your life literally depended on the engine NOT breaking down at the wrong moment.

Also rowers needed time to get to learn their "trade" (and if you don't believe me go try rowing a boat if you never have) and to become a team. An effective trained team of slave rowers was worth 100 times what a brand new crew of rowers who had never worked together was worth.

Did they coddle the slave rowers? Certainly not! But did they beat or starve them to death at the oars because they were sadistic brutes? Not if the crew wanted to live very long in combat.

kisses

willowfall

I read once that the origin of cologne was for people to cover their mouths, nose from the horrible smell coming from the rowing deck. Great points, Willowfall. I did try rowing, it was not easy!!

 

[willowfall]

I read once that the origin of cologne was for people to cover their mouths, nose from the horrible smell coming from the rowing deck. Great points, Willowfall. I did try rowing, it was not easy!!

Thank you. There is evidence that the ancient Egyptians used to have perfumed lumps of fat on their head to cover up the smell as they walked thru the streets. I didn't quite believe that until I had significant contact with the Amish, after a couple of events with a lot of them around I think I begin to understand.

Cleanliness, as we understand it, is a relatively new phenomena. During the American Civil War the Union army had to write into the manuals a regulation requiring the officers to make sure the men bathed at least once a week because bathing while not unknown, was not as common as it is today. And having done Civil War reenacting you don't realize how smelly you have become until you are away from the event. That is because the WHOLE WORLD you just spend the weekend in became smelly together, lol. The Vietnamese soldiers reported that they could always tell when Americans were nearby because something in the jungle smelled good with was so unusual.

So if we ever do get a time machine one of the things we are going to have to do is condition the travels to be ready for the world to stink.

kisses

willowfall

 

[Paul1969]

Thank you. There is evidence that the ancient Egyptians used to have perfumed lumps of fat on their head to cover up the smell as they walked thru the streets. I didn't quite believe that until I had significant contact with the Amish, after a couple of events with a lot of them around I think I begin to understand.

Cleanliness, as we understand it, is a relatively new phenomena. During the American Civil War the Union army had to write into the manuals a regulation requiring the officers to make sure the men bathed at least once a week because bathing while not unknown, was not as common as it is today. And having done Civil War reenacting you don't realize how smelly you have become until you are away from the event. That is because the WHOLE WORLD you just spend the weekend in became smelly together, lol. The Vietnamese soldiers reported that they could always tell when Americans were nearby because something in the jungle smelled good with was so unusual.

So if we ever do get a time machine one of the things we are going to have to do is condition the travels to be ready for the world to stink.

kisses

willowfall

True! I visited relatives in Europe and they told me I showered too much! Present day!

 

[Tmaster]

Hello everyone. I'm new here, although I've been a lurker for many years. So It's cool to be here
I thought I'd share my new art piece here.

Artist is me, BRANDeadKERRA.
The rest of this series will be posted here on my Deviantart:

https://www.deviantart.com/brandeadkerra/art/Reena-At-Work-Commission-Story-979426912

I like the concept of having something to motivate the others going on amidships.