Behind the Galleys: The Arsenal
The organization and upkeep of a war fleet required a complex system to manage materials, men, and resources. Until the fifteenth century, warfare had made considerable use of private shipping, but then Ottoman pressure increased the importance of a strong, permanent core of state-owned warships.
Consequently, the emergence of a standing navy called for an intricate system of resource procurement and management. Here, we will examine various sectors of this system, together with the complex relations between the navy and the state, overall.In the late Middle Ages, Venice’ s state arsenal was justly famous all over Europe.[1634] It was first conceived simply as a shipyard, but in the fourteenth century it increasingly took on the functions of a factory for producing merchant ships, especially big galleys that could also be employed militarily, and light galleys. It must be stressed that the Venetian arsenal, like the Ottoman one, incorporated all phases of production, from making sails to manufacturing gunpowder. It is widely thought that the methods used in the construction of warships anticipated the factory system, in terms of the standardization of production and the degree of control over workforce. Equally important, from the mid-fifteenth century onward, it was Venetian government policy to keep a large reserve of light galleys. In 1525, the reserve was set at 50 galleys ready to be equipped. During the 1537-1540 war, this was increased to 100 light galleys and 12 great galleys, to which six galleasses were added in 1565—a deployment that was maintained until 1633.[1635] The arsenal's performance proved excellent during the sixteenth century, when it achieved its peak production levels. Thanks to the reserve, Venice was able to launch 100 galleys, fully equipped, in less than 50 days. The next century, though known conventionally as the century of Venice's naval decline, nonetheless saw considerable activity in the arsenal, which built about seven new light galleys a year.[1636]
The arsenal's greatest problems concerned supplies of raw materials, in particular timber, gunpowder, and hemp.
It has been estimated that in the sixteenth century the annual need for timber for galley construction fluctuated between 50,000 and 60,000 cubic meters.[1637] The appointment of proveditors with jurisdiction over state forests in Veneto and Istria from the mid-fifteenth century onward reflected the government's concern about the availability of timber suitable for shipbuilding. Unauthorized tree-felling in these woods was strictly forbidden, and the control exercised seems to have become tighter in the sixteenth century, when there emerged severe difficulties in finding timber. The problem was common to the whole Mediterranean basin, and one sign can be seen in the rise in the price of oak for shipbuilding that was recorded at Genoa: prices tripled between the 1460s and 1546-1555, and by 1577-1581 had grown to 12 times their worth in the 1460s.[1638]Trees in the state forests were chosen for use by officers of the arsenal. Felling and transport toward the lagoon were assigned to local rural communities, a burden that naturally fell more heavily on mountain areas than lowland villages. In cases of need, however, the latter were also required to contribute. The arsenal's timber requirements were therefore responsible for both extensive government action to defend the forest resources of the republic, and corvees that were demanded of its rural subjects. Venetian policy in this area can be considered one of the most precocious examples of a state exerting control over its environment. Though certainly prompted by military need, this form of state control would obviously come to represent an important relation between government and governed, in the future.
As a fiber of strategic importance, hemp was also subject to state control.[1639] Hemp production centered on an area in the southeast of the Republic's mainland territory, and was run on a monopoly system. The quality of Venetian hemp fiber, however, remained inferior to Bologna's, which continued to fulfill the majority of the arsenal's purchases.
In the seventeenth century, with the navy incorporating new “northern” sailing ships, the arsenal's demand for hemp grew.Natural resources, in relation to their available quantity but also their cost, were one of the Venetian authorities' major concerns. As far as timber was concerned, the Republic managed to establish a fairly effective supply system. Despite the increasing general difficulties in obtaining timber, the arsenal obtained abundant supplies for galley construction. The system's efficacy, however, meant negative consequences for many rural communities that were heavily burdened by the obligation to fell and transport ship timber. As for hemp, the farmers who grew it were subject to strict government control, both in terms of production levels and pricing. Overall, it appears likely that the Republic succeeded in trimming some raw material costs for its state shipbuilding, and that it therefore enjoyed an advantage in this respect over other Mediterranean powers.