what was the earliest variety of ship that would’ve been able to reliably make a transatlantic voyage? What are the most basic components that are required for such a vessel?
What counts as 'reliable'? The Vikings could do it, under certain climatological conditions and with a little luck.
I mean some luck can be involved, we’re going barebones here, but yeah if you can get there you should have a reasonable expectation of being able to return
Realistically there is not much that a ship needs to be capable of a transatlantic voyage in terms of vessel design. You want a ship with decent buoyancy, sturdy construction, it needs to be stable and handle well in rough seas, while also carrying enough supplies for several months worth of sailing. Really a fairly minimal ship could accomplish it, take for instance the simple rafts of the various peoples of the Pacific islands. Even some Roman and Greek ships fit this bill quite well (I'm not talking the galleys. Rather the larger grainships could likely do it, as could I imagine Chinese vessels from the same period.what was the earliest variety of ship that would’ve been able to reliably make a transatlantic voyage? What are the most basic components that are required for such a vessel?
Theirs was far more "transarctic" than "transatlantic". They didn't have to go the same distances as the Spaniards did. The Arctic ocean, if we're allowed to separate it from the Atlantic, is smaller, and I don't think the very cold climate is an argument to make both feats comparable.What counts as 'reliable'? The Vikings could do it, under certain climatological conditions and with a little luck.
The Polynesian voyages were impressive feats and are very relevant for this thread. The Spanish did cross the Pacific many times, though.The very first true ocean-going ships are definitely those of the Polynesians. Traversing the Pacific ocean, and even reaching the Americas, is a feat that is even superior that of the Spaniards. Even if they didn't reach the Americas, travelling to and settling the various Polynesian islands (including Melanesia and Micronesia) of the Pacific ocean, the biggest of the planet, is still the superior naval feat and means that a Polynesian ship should be have been able to cross the Atlantic, whether from America or from Europe.
Until the 16th century, centuries after the Polynesians.The Polynesian voyages were impressive feats and are very relevant for this thread. The Spanish did cross the Pacific many times, though.
Also seaworthy can be a vague term. Against a big storm one of their ships would fall apart. And the Atlantic isnt exactly a picnic to sail through.Is the goal just to get there, or do you want to actually take anything along? Or back? AIUI, the Polynesian canoes were seaworthy, but not heavy on payload.
They only sailed close to the coast, which is not ocean-going.If my memory serves, Hanno and the earlier Phoenicians used primarily galleys in the African voyages. Despite this, both voyages had access to adequate technology to accomplish the feat. The knowledge of Atlantic winds and currents was their limiting factor. Steering oars were adequate for the job. Note the Polynesians, the Arab and Indian sailors of the Indian Ocean, and the Vikings used steering oars successfully. I doubt the Roman grain ships would be able to handle very rough weather successfully. They were essentially sailed barges, whose seaworthiness was adequate for the Mediterranean. The Parisi and Britonic ships which faced Julius Caesar were certainly adequate for the job.
The major issue with early trans-Atlantic voyages is any reason to attempt a westward voyage. Should the Britons , Carthaginians or Romans develop regular seafaring lines out of sight of land in the Atlantic, I could see one of these groups having ships driven out to sea by storms. You may see an early Henry the Navigator sponsor exploration westward out to sea. Fishermen may learn of the the various small islands far out at sea.
They only sailed close to the coast, which is not ocean-going.