Dear Ted, Bahr-i Zafer was brand new at the time of Kerch and Tendra, so I think her armament of 82 guns (as also indicated in the 1793 Russian report) was quite correct. I think she was of the same class and type not only as Melek-i Bahri but also as the three flagships at Chesma; with 86 gunports. With the first pair of gunports from the fore being vacant on each deck according to the Ottoman practice, again 82 guns also seem correct. There is another point which I want to discuss also. After I discovered that document and saw its contents, I am convinced that Russian accounts about the size and composition of Ottoman squadrons encountered in the Black Sea are basically correct and reliable.  In that light, if we believe to the Russian count of 17 battleships and 8 "frigates" at Tendra, it looks like Mukaddeme-i Nusret was repaired enough after Kerch to stay with the fleet. But then how to explain the fact that Kapudane Said Bey shifted his flag to Mansuriye after Kerch? I think, Bahr-i Zafer was fleet flagship under Giritli Hüseyin Pasha's banner all through 1790 campaign and Mukaddeme-i Nusret was Kapudane and not Kapudan-ı Derya ship. After she get so much damaged at Kerch, Said Bey shifted to the undamaged Mansuriye.

richie написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #593468
Поясните, пожалуйста, это бывший наш корабль или мы его захватили у турок?

Kapudan Emir Efendi написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #589541
Peleng-i Bahri 58 (captured at Tendra and became Ioann Predtecha)

По турецким данным, при Керчи 1790 г. у турок было 14 ЛК, 18 ФР и 3 бригантины. При Тендре были те же силы, только флагман был заменен, как уже сообщалось.

Эд написал:

#593593
General-Admiral’s ship is Mukaddeme-I Nusret, Vice-adm. - Melikul-Bahr, Rier-Adm.

The establishment of the navy described in "Hadika-i Vakayi".

Ships sent to the Black Sea before Kaptanpaşa on March 17, 1790: 3 Galleons, 8 frigates, 1 Şehtiye, 2 Nevicad (new model Kırlangıç), 4 Kırlangıç and 10 Shalopes Total of 28 ships. On May 10, 1790, 8 galleons were waiting to be completed on the Beşiktaş coast. These galleons went to the Black Sea on 16 June 1790. When the Black Sea expedition started, the navy going to the Black Sea; It consisted of 11 galleons, 8 frigates and 36 other auxiliary ships. Total 55 ships.

The navy, consisting of 55 sails in total, took anchor from the Sunne Strait on July 7, 1790 and reached the shores of Hocabey (Odessa) (11 July), Tendra Islands, advanced from there by firing artillery against the enemy fortresses on the coast of Crimea, and reached the Anapa fortress on July 17, 1790, as the enemy navy was not seen.

The Battle of Kerch Strait is described in detail in "Hadika-i Vakayi". Both the Kaptanpaşa's report and the report of the Palace spies on the Kaptanpaşa ship were written. In these reports, the number of cannonballs hitting the Kaptanpaşa galleon is around 100, and the number of cannonballs hitting the Riyale galleon is around 800. According to this calculation, if the Kaptanpaşa ship is Mukaddem-i Nusret. it cannot be said to have been heavily damaged. It seems that the Riyale galleon took the heaviest damage.

It seems that from the beginning, the flagships have always remained the same.

1-Bahr-i Zafer (1789). K.Paşa Giritli Güseyin Paşa.
2-Melik-i Bahri (1778). Kapudane Seyyid Said Kaptan.
3-Mukaddeme-i Nusret (1787). Patrona Hamamcı zade Ahmet Bey.
4-Feyz-i Hüda (1789). Riyale Kurt Mehmed Kaptan.

If Mukaddem-i Nusret didn't participate in the tendra war, it could not be because he was heavily damaged. Also, let's say that in the battle of Tendra, the Patrona galleon was changed and the Mansure galleon became the Amiral ship. Didn't this ship sink in battle? When did Amiral, the commander of this ship, return to his old ship and come to Istanbul to attend the award ceremony on behalf of his ship and receive the awards given to the galleon personnel who did not participate in the war?

I think the Mukaddem-i Nusret galleon also participated in the Tendra war. Perhaps Fethü'l Fettah, who was thought to have participated in the Tendra war, did not participate in the war and stayed in Istanbul. Because it is written in this book that he was in Istanbul 2 weeks before the war and greeted the sultan with cannon shots. Perhaps this ship was never taken on a voyage, or it had to leave the voyage unfinished and return.

So why might this ship have returned to Istanbul? The answer to that is in this book too. According to the narrative,  after battle of Kerc The Ottaman Navy came to Sunne Bay. Repairs were made here, the missing ammunition was completed, the soldiers were reinforced, and when the preparations were completed the Navy sails again on the 13th of August from Sunne Bay. The goal was to find the Russian navy. For this purpose, the coasts of Crimea were reached, but on 17 August, the navy was caught in a storm again and 6 of the 30 navy ships were in danger of sinking because they took too much water. These ships left the navy and tried to reach a beach. Maybe a few of these ships may have returned to Istanbul for repairs.

There is also another interesting piece of information in this book. The book reads: "Said Kapta's galleon sank into the waters, but was dragged by the sea current to the shores of Sinop, and 2 cannons weighing 96 kantar were brought out." However, the book does not name the galleon. How a galleon that sank off Tendra drifted to the shores of Sinop is another question. If this information is correct; Fighting with the enemy until late at night and receiving heavy blows, the ship had to fight the storm after the war. The personnel had to abandon their almost completely sunken ship at dawn and it appears that some of the personnel at sea may have been rounded up by the Russians. If there was an event such as the fire or explosion of the ship, the ship would not have drifted that far.

Again, according to the Russian version, 733 sailors were captured. According to Captain Said, the number of sailors taken prisoner from the "Melik-i Bahri" was 100 (17 people together with the captain, another 83 people were collected from the sea), Peleng-i Bahri 600 sailors and the remaining 33 the sailors were from 3 other small vessels. In other words, there seems to be no war with the "Mansuriye" galleon.

The author may have confused the ships. maybe it is not the Melik-i Bahri that drifted to the shores of Sinop, but probably the Mansuriye galleon. Mansuriye may have sunk to the water level by taking excessive water in the night storm and drifted towards the shores of Sinop and ran aground. In other words, there are probably no events that resist for hours, explode, burn, and reveal heroic stories.

This is what I understand from both Captain Pasha's narrative and the Russian narrative: There is a victory for the Russians, as a result, we lost 3 ships. It is clear that there was no great victory on the battlefield for writing heroic tales, as in the Russian version. I think the real defeat of our navy is to be caught in the open sea by a storm. Because on the night of the storm, the navy disperses due to the storm. There are galleons that go all the way to the shores of Sinop. Kaptanpaşa wrote in his report that Riyale's ship, out of necessity, went to the shores of Sinop with three or four galleons during the night storm and then returned to the navy.

While 19 galleons and frigates were mentioned at the beginning of the war, 13 galleons and frigates were featured at the award ceremony. 3 galleons lost in battle and storm. The remaining 3 galleons probably took shelter after the storm. We can say that a commemorative victory celebration was held in Istanbul in order to hide this defeat from the public. The other 3 ships, which took shelter in different places, must have returned to Istanbul after a while. Quietly...

I think, Ottoman Galleons and Frigates in the Battle of Tendra.

GALLEON.

1-Bahr-i Zafer (1789). K.Paşa.
2-Melik-i Bahri (1778). Kapudane.
3-Mukaddeme-i Nusret (1787). Patrona.
4-Feyz-i Hüda (1789). Riyale.
5-Anka-yı Bahri (1772).
6-Mansuriye (1772).
7-Peleng-i Bahri (1777).
8-Polad-ı Bahri (1782).
9-Mesudiye (1772).
10-Nüvid-i Fütuh (1776).
11-Kerem-ı Bari (1787).

FRIGATE.

1-Ukab-ı Bahri (1783).
2-Ba’is-i Nusret (1785).
3-Inayet-i Hakk (1781).
4-Tevfikü’llah (1780).
5-Burc-i Zafer (1778).
6-Dad-ı Hakk (1785).
7-Mazhar-ı Saadet (1778).
8-Mazhar-ı Hidayet (1778).

Perhaps this was the way the Ottoman navy was established throughout the entire campaign.

BALANCE OF POWER

Ottoman Navy: 11 galleons, 8 frigates and 11 auxiliary ships. Firepower. (Except for stone throwing cannons) 4.113 kg.
Russian Navy: 5 galleons, 11 frigates and 21 auxiliary ships. Firepower. 3.660 kg.

fiwe of the Russian frigates were ships with a firepower as strong as the 51.5 zira galleons of the Ottomans. Russian Frigates have very high firepower. If only the frigates are compared, the Russian side has a clear advantage. In terms of the number of galleons and firepower, the Turkish side has a clear advantage. If we do not take the stone-throwing cannons into account by following the popular opinion in this forum, we can say that the two navies have close strength.

Отредактированно HILMI (17.06.2021 23:19:55)