The Roman Rudder

[Endre Fodstad]

As far as I know there were several different rudders being used in medieval and early modern east asia: one was a rope-supported system that could be raised and lowered, and was typically used with larger, ocean-going vessels, another a system where the rudder is directly fastened to the hull in a socketed area at the rear. I am uncertain as to their efficiency vs the pintle-and-gudgeon arrangement; probably this differs between ship designs as well. Previous though was that the chinese system was somehow transplanted to Europe during the 12th century and inspired the european rudder, but evidence for this is non-existent - considering that the p&g system differ so much from any of the chinese ones, the hypothesis is probably wrong.

As with the previous discussion about the lateen sail, a sternpost rudder does not automatically equate with better steering verseus the quarter rudder either. Quarter-rudders were the preferred rudders of galleys until these faded completely from the scene, as far as I know.

[Eleatic Guest]

I think archaeologists don't like calling a single steering oar at the rear "a stern rudder" because that would confuse the two technologies.

The question is why? Actually Mott (see link above) does not make such a distinction very strictly:

p.2f: The term stern-mounted rudder is too broad a definition. The Chinese for centuries used a rudder mounted on the stern, but they did not utilize pintles and gudgeons and, in fact, their ships did not have a sternpost to which to attach them. The term could equally apply to a steering oar hung from the stern of a boat.

Here, Mott makes it abundantly clear that he also regards the Egyptian version as a stern mounted rudder:

p.92: It has been argued by Needham (1971:651-52) that the concept of mounting the rudder on the stern came from China and was transmitted to the Arabs by Chinese sailors. He has also suggested that the idea may have been carried to the Baltic by Russian traders (Needham, 1971:651). Concerning this last suggestion, the problem is one of transmission. As was noted in the last chapter, verbal transmission is not very reliable, and the simple idea of mounting a rudder from the stern was not new in itself. With regards to the transmission of the sternpost-mounted rudder to the Indian Ocean, while the concept of mounting the rudder on the stern may have come from Chinese traders, it was so modified and changed that it hardly resembles its origins except in the grossest sense. As noted by Needham (1971:653), Chinese vessels did not have a sternpost to which the rudder could be attached. Instead, it was suspended and held in place by an elaborate system of tackle. The idea of attaching the rudder to the sternpost in a relatively permanent fashion, therefore, must have been an Arab invention independent of the Chinese. Also, whereas the Chinese used tillers, Arab vessels used lines to control the rudder and did not adopt the tiller until the arrival of the Portuguese (Bowen, 1963:304; Ministry of Info, of Oman, 1981:112). This raises the question as to why the Arab sailors did not adopt the more effective tiller and yet borrowed the idea of a stern-mounted rudder. The above shows that the only actual concept which can be claimed to have been transmitted from the Chinese is the idea of a stern-mounted rudder, and not its method of attachment nor the manner in which it was controlled. Since that idea of putting a rudder on the stern can be traced back to the models found in Egyptian tombs, the need to have the concept brought into the Middle East is questionable at best. There is no evidence to support the contention that the sternpost-mounted rudder came from China, and no need to call on exterior sources for its introduction into the Mediterranean. While there is virtually no evidence to suggest that the sternpost-mounted rudder was introduced from China,…

Here he mixes both stern mounted rudders and stern mounted steering oars:

p.95: Clearly, the reason for the sternpost rudder not evolving in the Mediterranean is not due to a problem of developing the concept. Models with single steering oars mounted on the stern have been found in Egyptian tombs dating to 2000 B.C., and Roman river craft are known to have employed a similar systern. Mediterranean sailors had been using single, stern-mounted steering oars to control small vessels since Roman times and were commonly employing them on light war galleys in the 12th and 13th centuries (Fig. 8.3)

Finally, it should be noted that only in English there seem to be this confusion. In other languages, only a single word denotes both steering oar and rudder.

[Eleatic Guest]

Now, I do not want to overdo the topic, but I have spend some time thinking about this news:

"An diesem See befand sich wahrscheinlich eine Werft der römischen Marine, in der die Kriegsschiffe technologisch verbessert werden sollten. Die antiken Ingenieure testeten hier strömlinienförmigere Bug- und Heckflächen, um die Schiffe schneller zu machen. Hier wurde unter anderem auch ein 14 Meter hohes Heckruder entwickelt. Wir haben die ältesten Beispiele dieser Ruder im Wasser gefunden. Sie machten die Kriegsschiffe der Römer besonders lenkbar."

The source is fairly reliable: http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/forschak/515375/

Now did the Nemi ships actually feature stern mounted rudders? Who is this Antonio Lisi anyway and where has he published his findings (Google has nothing about him)?

[Eleatic Guest]

Could someone explain the following riddle to me? Why do some English commentators call the ancient steering oar at the stern of the ship steering oar, when they conventionally call in the same breath steering oars at the side of the ship quarter rudders? This makes no sense at all, since ancient steering at the side and the stern of the ship are similar both in terms of their shape and their mounting system.

In fact, other languages such as French (gouvernail) and German (Heckruder) do not distinguish at all between stern mounted steering oar and stern mounted rudder. Which is a sensible thing to do, because once you take a closer look at the method attachment of the different types of stern mounted rudders to the ship hull - medieval, Arab, Chinese -, then you quickly realise that the differences between each of them are no less pronounced than between them and the so-called stern mounted steering oars of the Egyptians and Romans:

- The medieval stern mounted rudder was fastenend the entire length to the sternpost by four or more sets of iron hinges (pintle-and-gudgeons).
- The Arabs also attached their stern rudder to a sternpost, but by the way of tackles, that is in a less permanent fashion.
- The Chinese, in turn, used like the Arabs lashings, but their junks featured no sternpost to which to attach them, that is in an even less permanent fashion. Instead their rudder shaft was suspended from high above.

Opinions?

[Alan E]

Probably because English frequently has more than one word meaning the same thing - it's the advantage of amalgamating a number of languages into one, but causes confusion to modern, compartmentalising, minds who seek a different, definitive meaning to every term. Essentially because English evolved as a language to communicate between people speaking several different tongues, it has not the characterisitcs of an idealised technical lexicon; it is more nuanced.

In any case, the word rudder is related etymologically in English (and German) to 'row'.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O27-rudder.html
"rudder
The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology | Date: 1996
rudder †steering oar OE.; steering-gear mounted in a boat or ship XIV. OE. roðer = MLG., MDu. rōder (Du. roer), OHG. ruodar, (G. ruder):- WGmc. *rōþra-, rel. to ROW2. "

Originally it may well have simply meant a thing with which you row, as opposed to oar
"oar
The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology | Date: 1996
oar OE. ār = ON. ár :- Gmc. *airō. "