The Roman Navy

[Spiridonov Alexander]

Have you already read my paper 'The inswinging theory'?

Aitor

Yes? but i have a problems with transleyting. I have found out about this theory from ildar for a long time. He has come to such conclusion irrespective of you for a long time . He has acquainted me with this theory. I support it too.

[aitor iriarte]

Oh yes, I had problems with writing it in English too! (And that probably accounts for some of your problems in translating it... :lol: )

Aitor

[Robert Vermaat]

Ah, even more inswingers - you're becoming a cult!

[aitor iriarte]

Alexander,
The inswinging theory is very old, (XIXth century) far older than Ildar or myself.

Robert,
Unfortunately, those objects depicted on the ship are far from being clearly artillery pieces, much less inswinger ones...

Aitor

[Spiridonov Alexander]

Alexander,
The inswinging theory is very old, (XIXth century) far older than Ildar or myself.



Aitor

I know The father of thise theory is Prou/

[Spiridonov Alexander]

much less inswinger ones...

The right mashine is wide enough to be inswinging/ But left masine is smaller/ But we could not see the arms becaurse they maybe inside/ but not outside/

[aitor iriarte]

Alexander,
I think that we should first establish, within reasonable limits of doubt, that both objects are catapults. If so, we could then start discussing if they are inswingers or outswingers... 8)

Aitor

[Cornelius Quintus]

Ave omnes,

if there were no tripods, I would think about two racks.

Both 'things' look similar and feature a cut-out on the upper side. Reminds me of Viking ships, which crew could lay down the mast or put the oars/rudders on two or three racks in front of and behind the raised mast (while sailing).

http://www.gov.im/lib/images/mnh/heritage/67.jpg

But why is neither a mast nor oars visible then... Sorry, perhaps a silly thought :roll:

[Robert Vermaat]

if there were no tripods, I would think about two racks.

Hmm, yes, but then why so big and obvious, with no other details on deck? They way this is made, I'd say the two objects were of some importance aboard that ship. Artillery was qualify, rack hardly.

Btw, I have no problem with the 'rounded' details - all the lines of that ship are rounded, there's no straight feature on that ship. I think it's artillery.

[Cornelius Quintus]

if there were no tripods, I would think about two racks.

Hmm, yes, but then why so big and obvious, with no other details on deck? They way this is made, I'd say the two objects were of some importance aboard that ship. Artillery was qualify, rack hardly.

Ave Robert,

I agree. I'm still wondering, why there are no mast or oars (being of some importance, too :wink: ).

- Is the main 'message' just symbolic: battleship with artillery? (So anything else isn't necessary.)

- Or shows the relief a battle-ready ship with mast laid down (but where are the oars then?)

- Thinking about a halfway equipped ship also won't be very likely...

With the words from a car-commercial: The Roman navy - a 'classis' of it's own :wink:

[Robert Vermaat]

How about a floating port defence? Does not need a mast or oars, but has defensive capabilities.

[Praefectusclassis]

Well, look at the plumbob. If this guy wants to show he built warships, he would've built the hull and perhaps artillery as well. Oars could've come from storage.
And I can think of - very few - examples of improvised naval shooting platforms from the Civil War, but why would anyone display them on his tombstone?
Remember this too: Mainz was not a base, nor within the range of the Classis Germanica. This guy was probably a legionary or built ships for the legions there, XXII Primigenia. They certainly had artillery handy!

[Theodosius the Great]

Avete,

I just read from a new book that during the early Byzantine period the Roman Dromons' main color was red. Do we know if this is true for Roman galleys from earlier times ? Is there mention of an official color for the Roman fleet ?

~Theo

[Paullus Scipio]

To my eyes, the ship closely resembles other depictions of river warships -- c.f. Trajan's column, and the two objects look to me like standard vitruvian catapults (wooden framed).....To interpret them as anchors does not seem very plausible.

What other treasures does the Museum hold ? Tell us more !

[Commilito]

just for the record...could the devices be a form of the harpax?