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
Now, while there can be no doubt that all vessels had their ports
placed obliquely in cases where there were more than one tier of oars;
that there were vessels of five tiers of oars thus placed and no more,
and that the Grecian trireme had one hundred and fifty rowers, and
the Persian two hundred, it is clear from the descriptions of ancient
authors that there were many triremes of much smaller dimensions,
especially from the facility with which they were hauled upon the
beach: while there were others carrying even more men than the galleys
he refers to.[399] But presuming Mr. Howell to be correct in his
supposition, that a trireme derived her name from “having three rows of
five tiers and no more,” as he illustrates, then a bireme would derive
her name because she had only two rows of five tiers, thus:—
[Illustration]
No practical man, however, could entertain the idea that ten oars,
arranged as he suggests, would be as efficient as a similar number in
single lines or even in double tiers; nor would a galley of this size
be nearly so efficient as she would be with her ports in a horizontal
line, for she would be much too high in proportion to her length.
Similar remarks apply with nearly equal force in the case of triremes.
[Sidenote: Triremes.]
The perusal of ancient authors, as well as experience, leads to the
conviction that galleys, from the unireme to the quinquereme inclusive,
had their oars arranged not merely in oblique vertical rows, but also
in horizontal rows according to circumstances. Besides, the plan
illustrated on the sculpture from Nineveh is much more practicable than
the one suggested by the theory of Mr. Howell. A galley with only ten
oars on a side would be more efficient if they were placed as follows:—
[Illustration]
than if arranged in the manner suggested by Mr. Howell. Nor would they
occupy more space, the saving of which evidently induced the ancients
to increase the number of tiers.
[Sidenote: Quadriremes.]
[Sidenote: Hexiremes and larger galleys.]
As the galleys of the ancients must have varied very much in their
capacity and dimensions, it would be more reasonable to suppose that,
from the unireme to the quinquereme inclusive, they derived their names
from the number of oars placed horizontally over each other, rather
than from the number of oblique rows as suggested by Mr. Howell. That
is to say, though a trireme bore that name because she had three tiers
of oars placed thus:—
[Illustration]
she was, nevertheless, still a trireme, if she had four, five, ten,
or even twenty oblique rows of oar-ports, only she would be a trireme
of a larger size, just as we have or had frigates—single-decked
vessels, which have varied in size from 600 to 6,000 tons. A trireme
might therefore be a much more powerful vessel than a quadrireme or
quinquereme. On a similar principle, a quadrireme would have four
horizontal tiers of oars, as follows:—
[Illustration]
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