Most Korean sources are slient on the role played by the Chinese navy in the Imjin wars, instead focusing on achievement of Admiral Yi and his "turtle ships". I think it should be noted that the Chinese navy was likewise formidable, though of course did not play as larger role as the Koreans. The typical FuChuan warship was heavier equipped than contemporary Korean or Japanese vessels. The armament was as follows...

One heavy cannon, one mortar, six large culverins, three falconets, a number of arrow-firing cannons, and sixty fire-lances.

The following quote is from the Wu Bei Zhi and is quoted by Kenneth swope in his "Crouching Tigers, secret weapons" article. "There was nothing that could match them on the seas, and the Japanese did not dare take them on"

Of course, the larger warships were complimented by smaller vessels, including flat bottomed ships. At the onset of the war the ministry of works built 20 large warships, 100 medium-sized ships, and 50 flat-bottomed vessels. With such a large and well equipped navy, I would imagine that we have some extant accounts of the battles the Ming fleet participated in. I'm looking for both period accounts and modern scholarship on the role played by the Ming fleet 1592-1598. Help would be appreciated.

This is a tricky topic, mainly because I have never been able to get geuinely reliable info concerning the armament of any Far Eastern warships from this period. You mention the "typical FuChuan" warship that was supposedly "heavier equipped than contemporary Korean or Japanese vessels", and this ship carried 1 "heavy cannon" (what size cannon?), 6 "large culverins" (again, what size/caliber?), three falconets (which are small guns), and a "number of arrow-firing cannons" (how many?).

How does this really compare to the armament of contemporary Korean vessels, like the p'anokson (the standard Korean warship of the time) and the kobukson (the celebrated "turtleship")? All I know about Korean guns is that there were apparently 4 types, delineated by size--chonja ("heaven"), chija ("earth"), hyonja ("black"), & hwangja ("yellow"). I don't know what the calibers or ball weights were for these weapons. Nor do I know how many of each were carried on Korean ships.

This must be firmly established before we assume that Chinese vessels were more heavily armed.

Well, Chinese cannons found in Korea have calibre's of 100-120mm or so, naval culverins would probably have been smaller than this, as most cannons were of a lower calibre. The main cannon would of course be bigger. As for the falconets, these were Chinese-style "bowl-size muzzle cannons", meaning of course that they had a muzzle flared outwards like a bowl. Which was convienent for holding a projectile slightly larger than the bore. I have no idea what form the mortar or arrow firing guns would have taken.

Hate to revive a long dead topic, but I have some questions on the vague hope that the two of you are still here and going to answer.

Culverins can mean either musket or cannon, so when you say six large culverins, which one does it mean?

And the "heavy cannon", I am assuming that they are basically larger versions of culverins or falconets? By any chance would this heavy cannon be placed at the front/back of the ship instead of the sides(considering there's only one).

Don't worry. Please cite the original and we will make the situation clear. Chinese hyerogliphs will ease the matter.

Regarding the Chinese navy in Imjin War - it was only auxiliary in these battles. Chen Lin was not independent in his actions and when he tried to make an agreement with japanese he had to report to Yi Sunshin. So you need not to compare Chinese ships to Korean ones.

Regards,

Alexey.