Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Giant Ships of Rome
#16
There has been recently made at Wikipedia a comprehensive and rather well-researched list of the largest wooden ships ever:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wo ... oden_ships

As for Caligula's Giant Ship, Lionel Casson, though, has made rather dismissive attitude towards the methodology employed by the Italian archaeologist. Has there been done more recent research on these ships by now?

Also, do you think the list of ancient giant ships is complete (Caligula's Giant Ship, Syracusia, Nemi Lake ships, Isis, Tessarakonteres)?
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Reply
#17
Quote:There has been recently made at Wikipedia a comprehensive and rather well-researched list of the largest wooden ships ever:

As for Caligula's Giant Ship, Lionel Casson, though, has made rather dismissive attitude towards the methodology employed by the Italian archaeologist. Has there been done more recent research on these ships by now?

It seems quite a complete list. Casson may be right, the work by Testaguzza seems somewhat dubious. I've seen no decent documentation of that obelisk-carrier buried at Fiumincino, and at present, no further study has been published. On the other hand, there's no absolute proof to dismiss the reported size of the ship either.
Reply
#18
There is one more potential candidate: Vettor Fausto's Quinquereme of 1522. 75 m long, 10 m beam, 300 cannons
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Reply
#19
I saw the same program on the History Channel. I thought it was very informative and their conclusions were well thought out. I have a hard time believing that the ships were just a hoax for propaganda purposes. We all know that the Romans, and Greeks before them, were amazing engineers and I have no doubt that they were capable of building ships that large, despite the technical details that say such ships aren't possible. Of course, if there is a lot of skepticism regarding the finding of the ships, then I'm curious what evidence is used to support such conclusions. Caligula was over the top anyway, so the fact that he would use state funds to build major ships isn't such a stretch. Still, I think the debate will continue for a long time until more evidence can be uncovered.

Just a thought!
Gaius Tertius Severus "Terti" / Trey Starnes

"ESSE QUAM VIDERE"
Reply
#20
Quote:Nemi ships were in my opinion one of the most important finds in terms of Roman maritime archeology. They were evidently built to highest standard and they did reveal several interesting and surprisingly advanced technical details:

- So-called "admiralty type anchors", first adopted in 1836-1852 in the British Navy
- Copper nails made of almost pure electrolytic copper. I would very much like to hear from a person acquainted with metallurgy, how this was achieved.
- Ball bearings. Possibly originating from a rotating platform?
- Piped water.

Add a 14 m long stern rudder ( see: http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/forschak/515375/ ).

Do you know by chance scientific articles which cover the subject?
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Reply
#21
Does anyone know what people from Mainz Museum fuer Antike Schiffahrt say about these ships?
Stefan Pop-Lazic
by a stuff demand, and personal hesitation
Reply
#22
Quote:There has been recently made at Wikipedia a comprehensive and rather well-researched list of the largest wooden ships ever:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wo ... oden_ships

There are glaring omissions from this comprehensive list. It doesn't even mention the Spanish ship of the line Santísima Trinidad which was far larger than Nelson's HMS Victory. Not to mention other larger French ships of the line Bretagne, Ocean, and Orient. Anglo-centric history still pervades Wikipedia.

~Theo
Reply


Forum Jump: