Voyages | Designing the Matthew | Building the Matthew

Designing The Matthew

All that is known about the ship is her tonnage, the approximate dates and times of her voyage, and that she had a crew of eighteen in addition to Cabot himself. We also know that she set out for a voyage to Japan and back which might last for a year.

Tonnage, being a function of keel length and beam, can be fairly confidently turned into hull dimensions for a conventional vessel of the period. This works out to a keel length of approximately fifty feet, an overall hull length of about 64 feet and a beam of the order of 20 feet. These dimensions can be cross checked against the capacity required to carry the crew, stores and provisions for a voyage to Japan and to return with the anticipated cargo of treasures.

We can also be fairly confident that she was square rigged in that such a rig can be handled easily by a crew of eighteen, whereas the alternative lateen rig would need the watch below on deck for most manoeuvres and become more difficult to manage if any crew were to be lost on such a long expedition. Square rig would also, we think, be the first choice for a voyage of this kind where the ship needs to be quickly and confidently manoeuvred when standing in to strange coasts.

The design of ships was in a period of development and the Caravel would seem to be the right generic type for an explorer with its general characteristics of speed and manoeuvrability. The type had been well tried and tested for long voyages of exploration, principally by the Portuguese with whom Cabot is believed to have spent some time.

Cabot, we think, would have required a first rate and strong vessel. We also think that he would have been conservative in his choice and on this basis we have aimed the design a little earlier than, for instance, the majority of the recent Columbus ship reconstructions.

The Matthew reconstruction is double ended. The transom stern may have been seen at the time but would still be a novelty. The fastening of the planking to a transom depends heavily on the use of bolt fastenings which were then hand wrought and given to "sickness", whereas the housing of the hood ends of the planks in a stern post was basically secure.

Another area of design in transition was in the rudder. We have chosen to start with the earlier form of stern rudder which shows its descent from the side rudder by not being set close to the stern post for its full depth and by incorporating some balance in the blade profile. This makes some technical sense in reducing the tiller loadings but was prone to gathering weed, etc. on the leading edge of the blade; within perhaps ten years rudders were set to a deadwood. We plan to try the earlier form first but are making provision to change to a deadwood should it be necessary after trials.

The Matthew, as it appears when these parameters are put together, becomes an extremely interesting ship offering a link between the Norman ships and the Elizabethans. The poop cabin, for instance, is essentially a shelter deck of the Norman aft castle type but fitted with rising and lowering window shutters, making sense of the otherwise idiosyncratic location of the steering tiller. The "fore castle" can also be seen as the Norman equivalent with some light cladding to give additional protection to the crew working forward, much as has happened to the modern trawler.

Perhaps as interesting as her historical importance in terms of trade and empire is her position in the development of ship design. Matthew represents the last period when important ships were designed and built by the builders without any outside design intervention by naval architects. Within a few years the subsiding of the construction of ships over a certain tonnage meant that reliable mathematical design systems had to be introduced and the outline designs were accomplished away from the building yard. As always, such a communication link involves a considerable simplification of the design. We have found this design for Matthew to illustrate this point with such a close interlinking of detail as to make her much more complex than any modern vessel. Many details of her are of the kind a builder would choose rather than a designer, as, for instance, the extensive use of parallel hull planking.

There is always some conflict in the areas of authenticity in such a reconstruction. We have opted for appearance and performance first, coupled with a closely authentic style of construction. The latter is exceptionally interesting in that the main wood components are largely self locking into place with the main stresses taken by woodwork joints, and fastenings used only as securings.

We think that some of the craft skills of the period are largely lost and therefore we have to make use of modern equivalents. For example, nowadays timber is generally chosen not at the tree but at the timber merchants and is now steam bent rather than fire and water bent. We have had to compromise on timber. We have used oak where we can but the keel is opepe as no oak of this size could be found. We saw no point in using hand wrought iron bolts with a short life and so have used bronze. For the same reason we use modern timber preservatives and coatings, but these do not compromise the bright medieval colours in which she is finished.

We also have to take account of modern flotation and safety requirements and our Matthew is fitted with bulkheads and hatch coamings to meet stability criteria. She has to carry modern navigation and safety equipment and has an engine. 

Overall, however, the ship is presented as a bright new sailing vessel of good quality ready to be manned by young explorers bound for adventures in the 15th century equivalent of the modern space age.