History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 1 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 1 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
The oars varied in size according to the bank on which they were used,
of course increasing in length as they ascended. Their length in a
trireme is stated at from 9 to 9¼ cubits, but no mention is made of the
part of the vessel to which they belonged. An oar, however, of only
fourteen feet in length could have been of no service unless used on
the lowest rank and almost on a level with the water. Those employed in
the smallest wherries of the Thames are from twelve to fourteen feet
long. Thucydides,[383] in describing the attack of the Peloponnesian
commanders on the Piræeus, the harbour of Athens, remarks, “The plan
was that each sailor should take with him his oar, his cushion and his
thong, and go by land from Corinth to the sea over against Athens,
and, proceeding with all speed to Megara, should put off with forty
triremes which happened to be at Nisæa, their naval station, and sail
immediately for Piræeus.” From these remarks it may be inferred that
none of the oars belonging to a trireme were of greater weight than one
man could carry for a distance of four or five miles; and that only
one man was stationed at an oar, unless “his oar” might be construed
as meaning the oar under his charge. But though no mention is made of
different-sized oars having been used on board of a trireme, there can
be no doubt that the oars of the ancients differed far more in size
than those of the river barge or man-of-war sweeps as compared with the
sculls of the Thames wherry of modern times.
[Sidenote: Mode of rowing.]
This is clear from the fact that while various ancient writers mention
oars of 9½ cubits in length, Athenæus distinctly states that the
oars belonging to Ptolemy Philopator’s large ship were thirty-eight
cubits long.[384] Here we have a specific account of oars varying
from fourteen to fifty-seven feet in length, the latter requiring to
have lead embedded in their handles as a counterpoise to the weight
outside the rowlock.[385] Besides, it is clear that the oars must have
increased in size according to the banks on which they were employed.
In the case of the oar fifty-seven feet in length, if worked from a
great height a large portion of it would require to be inboard—say
nineteen feet against thirty-eight; and even the one-third would
not, at a line of nine feet above the water, be sufficient as a
counterpoise, unless the shoulder of the oar were of unwieldy thickness
or heavily weighted by lead. In all single-banked vessels the oar
worked on the gunwale, and was kept in its place by means of a leather
thong. In larger galleys it passed through an oar-port. Various ancient
writers assert that there was only one man to each oar, and add, that
he sat, when rowing, on a single bench or small stool attached to the
ribs of the vessel, and within a very short distance from the _scalmus_
of his oar.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account