More discussion,
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46633574 ("Found: Medieval Cargo Ship – Largest Vessel of Its Kind Ever (smithsonianmag.com)", 54 comments)
edit: Also, I think this domain (medievalists.net) is suspect. This article has no author byline; and its text is highly similar to other published articles (like [0]), with only minor word changes. Here's an A/B of an excerpt:
> [vikingeskibsmuseet.dk] "Dendrochronological analysis shows that Svælget 2 was built around 1410 using timber from two regions: Pomerania, which is modern-day Poland, and the Netherlands. By comparing tree-ring patterns with reference data, researchers were able to date the wood and determine its origin. The planks were made of Pomeranian oak, while the frames – the ship’s ribs – came from the Netherlands. This construction pattern suggests that the heavy planking timber was imported, while the frames were cut locally at the building site, reflecting a practical approach and a complex trade network where large quantities of timber moved across Northern Europe."
> [medievalists.net] "One of the most striking results so far comes from dendrochronology (tree-ring dating). Researchers report that Svælget 2 was built around 1410 using timber sourced from two different regions: Pomerania (in modern-day Poland) and the Netherlands. The planks were made from Pomeranian oak, while the ship’s frames (ribs) came from the Netherlands—an arrangement the team interprets as evidence of complex material supply and specialised shipbuilding capacity."
[0] https://www.vikingeskibsmuseet.dk/en/news/archaeologists-rev... (author byline Rikke Tørnsø Johansen)
It took me way longer than is reasonable to realize that a cog in this context is a type of ship. It does not contain gears of any size, giant or small.
They have the same etymological root, from a Proto-Germanic word for a lump, which is the tooth (cog) on a cogwheel, or the round bulky lump of a cog ship.
So they're cognates.
But "cognate" is not.
Nice
Godammit
No... Cog, damnit.
Yes, I also thought it was some kind of mechanical discovery.
I thought they were talking about one of their coworkers
/s
I wish people didn't use headline superlatives so much. If you compare this ship to the pleasure craft of Caligula which was destroyed in ww2, you have to start qualifying things by open water vs lake-bound. Caligula had two of them, in Roman times. One was 20m wide and 70m long. They were "carnival cruise line" party boats.
It's a big ship. It's an important find. It's not a supership or a supercog, or a beast, or a behemoth.
It's 9m wide, 6m high and 28m long.
Compare it to these: https://www.google.com/search?q=example+of+a+30m+commercial+...
This class of ship was a significant component of middle age trade and presages even larger ships, which in turn increased carrying capacity. Transport on water is bound by displacement to surface area so a small increase in surface area bounds a larger volume, where drag is bounded in surface area so as ships increase in volume the energy cost per unit carried drops significantly and thus the crewing and sail burden. Bigger ships mean cheaper goods.
Carrying 300 tonnes of cargo in 1400 was pretty good.
But according to the article and other sources, it strictly is the biggest cog. Why wouldn't it be right for them to announce it that way?
> They were "carnival cruise line" party boats.
I agree Roman ships were large and cogs were not in comparison. But Caligula’s were more like floating party platforms that could be sunk even in a lake.
That museum was one of the highlights of my trip to Norway years ago.
Looks like it's closed now and being merged into a new museum:
Wrong country, wrong museum.