Posts: 1,311
Threads: 194
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
Hello,
This topic won't generate much discussion, I am afraid, since ship armour was very likely absent from ancient naval warfare. Nonetheless I feel compelled to ask for any incidence of wooden, hide, and particularly iron and bronze armour on Greek or Roman war ships. Because - as a matter of fact - metal sheathing of the (underwater) hull was a widespread practice in ancient navigation from the 5th century BC until the end of the 2nd century AD. But this was strictly for preservational reasons, not meant as armour against (fire) missiles. On the other hand, the idea as such was at least not absent in the ancient mind: The Syracusia featured according to Athenaios bronze-clad mast tops holding marines, and an iron palisade on its fighting deck, both clearly meant for defensive purposes.
That ship armour was not entirely impossible resp. practical before the industrialization of the iron industry and the invention of explosive shells, is evidenced by a number of medieval and early modern references I collected on Europe (the Far Eastern section seems a bit dubious):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-indust ... ured_ships
What, for example do we make of the mysterious cataphracts? What kind of armour did they feature? Are there any further reference to ancient galleys featuring (metal) armour than Athenaios?
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 1,311
Threads: 194
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 735
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation:
1
Did you consider the rostra, the ram made out of some kind of metal with wich they tried to pierce the hull of the opponent's ship?
Posts: 13,277
Threads: 102
Joined: May 2006
Reputation:
3
Quote:Did you consider the rostra, the ram made out of some kind of metal with wich they tried to pierce the hull of the opponent's ship?
That was my line of thought too. Fairly hefty piece of metal on a ship.
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Posts: 498
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
0
depends all on the definition of armour. the roman ship just discovered in cologne has/had protective metall shields.
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=24949
... regardless of that, Im not sure if the design of roman ships was suitable to bear much armour. while I'm certainly no expert on ship design, the most types I've seen so far have not much draught compared to their size and much armour would simply make them top-heavy and prone to capsizing.
[size=85:2j3qgc52]- Carsten -[/size]
Posts: 735
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation:
1
I just flipped through the book "Schifffahrt und Schiffbau in der Antike" which I just purchased at Mainz at the Museum of Ancient Shipping and found the following apart from the rostra:
On page 61 is a picture of a ship from a friese at the Giordani necorpole dating from the 1st century BC. It shows a ship with pinnacle like at a castle and something which looks like oval shields underneath the pinnacles.
The reconstruction of ship Mainz Type A which dates from the 4th century AD shows shields as protection on the side reminding me a little of the shields as protection on Viking ships.
For shipfinds check out his link of the Ancient Shipping Museum in Mainz:
http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis/home/frames.htm
For depictions of ships follow this link:
http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis2/Home/FramesE.cfm
And for coins with depictions of ships se here:
http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis3/home/frames.htm
Posts: 2,253
Threads: 31
Joined: Jan 2001
Reputation:
0
Avete!
Cast bronze rams are well known, and at least a couple originals have been found. Those are weapons rather than armor. Considering that ships often have to have several tons of ballast in the bottom of the hold for stability, a bronze ram isn't all that much. And of course, any ship equipped with a ram or heavy armor would likely have been *designed* to do so.
Has anyone seen any photos of that new ship find? The one thread about it mentions "metall shield protection covering the sides", but does that mean iron or bronze sheathing? Plates along the upper railings? Does it mean actual shields made of metal? (That would be a first for Roman stuff!) Is it some sort of translation problem? Or (worse) some sort of wild speculation by the archeologist based on that reconstruction of the Mainz ship? Seems to me that SOMEone involved with such a significant archeological find could come up with a camera...
Mind you, I have no objection to the idea of some kind of armor plating on a ship, I'd just love to know more!
Valete,
Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Posts: 1,311
Threads: 194
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
Quote:The reconstruction of ship Mainz Type A which dates from the 4th century AD shows shields as protection on the side reminding me a little of the shields as protection on Viking ships.
A little? It almost looks like the Romans went Vikings (or vice versa). ;-) ) Apart from the Mainz replica, do modern authors address the subject of protective shields somehwere? I mean, in Vikings books it has almost become a stereotype.
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 1,086
Threads: 72
Joined: Nov 2004
Reputation:
0
Quote:Medusa:4i18a5eo Wrote:The reconstruction of ship Mainz Type A which dates from the 4th century AD shows shields as protection on the side reminding me a little of the shields as protection on Viking ships.
A little? It almost looks like the Romans went Vikings (or vice versa). ;-) ) Apart from the Mainz replica, do modern authors address the subject of protective shields somehwere? I mean, in Vikings books it has almost become a stereotype.
ONe of the early finds - I think it was Gokstad - has shields along the gunwales, so it has become something of a stereotype. Personally, I doubt they were there as armour, at least primarily. All the saga accounts of fighting at sea that I've read speak of hand-to-hand combat. My guess is rather mor prosaic. I've never been on a Viking ship, but I was in the school rowing club and there are a few things that I learned: in any oared vessel, space is at a premium. Any bulky, big thing you don't have on the inside is good. And when you're rowing for extended periods of time, staying dry is a significant comfort factor. Any splashguard is good. The shields along the side might just have killed two birds with one stone here, along with advertising that your ship was a *threat* (plenty of fighting men aboard) I also read that they served to channel engagements to the stern and prow sections by preventing boarders from coming in amidships, but that would require two shields for every man when you think of it unlikely IMO.
Der Kessel ist voll Bärks!
Volker Bach
Posts: 1,551
Threads: 81
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation:
49
I think that iron armour for the hull would have slowed down a galley too much, but some sort of metal cover for the deckcrew could have been practical. Like you say, look at Syracusia! My understanding is that covered/enclosed ("cataphract") warships were those in which the oarsmen were protected by the hull on all sides (which was hot and stuffy but safe) whereas uncovered ("aphract") warships were those in which some of the oarsmen were not protected (which let in air and catapult bolts). Aphracts often carried some type of cloth or leather screen to put up around the banks of oars before battle, but wood must have been more protective.
Nullis in verba
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
|
