04-15-2005, 02:01 PM
As far as ancient shipbuilding techniques are concerned, we are still somewhat hooked on the 19th century school of thoughts which considered that ancient ships were clumsy, unmanageable and barely seaworthy affairs.
The same school of thoughts also gave us the legend of the roman horse- strangling collar and of the roman four wheeled cart without a swiveling front axle..
Fortunately, since then, things advanced somewhat, thanks to experimentation and some careful observations.
First: steering. The steering oar system, as has been since demonstrated by experimentation, is as efficient, if not more, than the modern system. The shape of the paddle blades, added to the long steering handles providing a lot of leverage, gave a sort of power steering effect which allowed indeed, as stated in the ancient texts, a single man to steer a ship of considerable size. Also: by pushing both bars forward the paddles can be used as brakes, something you can't do with a modern ship.
Second: sailing. The lateen sail, allowing to sail upwind, existed then. Maybe not in its "modern" form, but given the very complex rigging observed on reliefs like the Ostia cargo ship, it is easy to realize that a square sail could be folded and turned into a lateen sail. Some reliefs actually show lateen sails.
Besides, the amount of grain needed to feed the Romans and the general volume of commerce at that times implies necessarily that navigation was a year round affair and that ships we able to sail upwind.
Come to think of it, the Ostia grain ship compares very favourably with Christopher Columbus' "Santa Maria" of fourteen centuries later. Actually the Ostia ship was probably bigger.
Now, on to warships: the trireme was a masterpiece of technology and of the art --it's an art-- of shipbuilding. Its shell-first construction allowed for extremely quick building. In the War of the Gauls, Caesar explains that he had a whole fleet of what were probably two banked galleys --or maybe triremes-- built in about a month.
However the differences were considerable whether you went to this shipbuilder or that shipbuilder. Like the difference between a formula One racing car and a four door sedan. They're both cars..
The galleys Caesar built were certainly quickly built affairs, but the athenian messenger ship --a trireme called the Paralian-- was obviously a very well crafted ship featuring very finely calculated waterlines and capable of impressive speed.
Rough and unrefined as she is, the reconstructed trieres Olympias was able to reach a dash speed of eleven knots.. Imagine what a master naval carpenter was able to achieve.
Experiments with Olympias also show that the oars were also a result of some serious R and D. not only on their shape, but also on their weight and the way they were balanced.
Refinements.. Refinements..
As time passed, the trireme gave birth to other types, the system of rowing changed, with more than one man per oar, and so on, until the appearance of the hellenistic dreadnoughts.
The problem was thus: how to pack as many rowers as you can in a hull. When the maximum reasonable lenght was achieved, the solution was to pack the same number of oarsmen into a shorter, thus wider, hull. That gave a ship as powerful, but more maneuverable, due to its shorter beam lenght.
It seems that this is what happened during the great naval contests between the hellenistic kingdoms. the arms race lead to bigger and bigger ships, capable of carrying a lot of artillery, then to big, but more maneuverable ships.
The Nemi galley may be not a reconstruction of one of those hellenistic dreadnoughts but, according to some scholars, one of those original battleships brought back to Rome as a trophy, like it was customary at the time.
Looking at the Nemi galley's waterline, especially from the front, I can't help but notice that she looks pretty much like one of those single hull sailboats used for transoceanic racing. Minus the keel of course. The flat bottom allowed for a shallow draught, hence good turing ability and the width made it a more stable firing platform.
According to some scholars it is possible that such a ship was able to U-turn on a little more that its lenght.. A warship, and a efficient one, I think.
The same school of thoughts also gave us the legend of the roman horse- strangling collar and of the roman four wheeled cart without a swiveling front axle..
Fortunately, since then, things advanced somewhat, thanks to experimentation and some careful observations.
First: steering. The steering oar system, as has been since demonstrated by experimentation, is as efficient, if not more, than the modern system. The shape of the paddle blades, added to the long steering handles providing a lot of leverage, gave a sort of power steering effect which allowed indeed, as stated in the ancient texts, a single man to steer a ship of considerable size. Also: by pushing both bars forward the paddles can be used as brakes, something you can't do with a modern ship.
Second: sailing. The lateen sail, allowing to sail upwind, existed then. Maybe not in its "modern" form, but given the very complex rigging observed on reliefs like the Ostia cargo ship, it is easy to realize that a square sail could be folded and turned into a lateen sail. Some reliefs actually show lateen sails.
Besides, the amount of grain needed to feed the Romans and the general volume of commerce at that times implies necessarily that navigation was a year round affair and that ships we able to sail upwind.
Come to think of it, the Ostia grain ship compares very favourably with Christopher Columbus' "Santa Maria" of fourteen centuries later. Actually the Ostia ship was probably bigger.
Now, on to warships: the trireme was a masterpiece of technology and of the art --it's an art-- of shipbuilding. Its shell-first construction allowed for extremely quick building. In the War of the Gauls, Caesar explains that he had a whole fleet of what were probably two banked galleys --or maybe triremes-- built in about a month.
However the differences were considerable whether you went to this shipbuilder or that shipbuilder. Like the difference between a formula One racing car and a four door sedan. They're both cars..
The galleys Caesar built were certainly quickly built affairs, but the athenian messenger ship --a trireme called the Paralian-- was obviously a very well crafted ship featuring very finely calculated waterlines and capable of impressive speed.
Rough and unrefined as she is, the reconstructed trieres Olympias was able to reach a dash speed of eleven knots.. Imagine what a master naval carpenter was able to achieve.
Experiments with Olympias also show that the oars were also a result of some serious R and D. not only on their shape, but also on their weight and the way they were balanced.
Refinements.. Refinements..
As time passed, the trireme gave birth to other types, the system of rowing changed, with more than one man per oar, and so on, until the appearance of the hellenistic dreadnoughts.
The problem was thus: how to pack as many rowers as you can in a hull. When the maximum reasonable lenght was achieved, the solution was to pack the same number of oarsmen into a shorter, thus wider, hull. That gave a ship as powerful, but more maneuverable, due to its shorter beam lenght.
It seems that this is what happened during the great naval contests between the hellenistic kingdoms. the arms race lead to bigger and bigger ships, capable of carrying a lot of artillery, then to big, but more maneuverable ships.
The Nemi galley may be not a reconstruction of one of those hellenistic dreadnoughts but, according to some scholars, one of those original battleships brought back to Rome as a trophy, like it was customary at the time.
Looking at the Nemi galley's waterline, especially from the front, I can't help but notice that she looks pretty much like one of those single hull sailboats used for transoceanic racing. Minus the keel of course. The flat bottom allowed for a shallow draught, hence good turing ability and the width made it a more stable firing platform.
According to some scholars it is possible that such a ship was able to U-turn on a little more that its lenght.. A warship, and a efficient one, I think.
Pascal Sabas
