vessels enumerated. Men-of-war, though not wholly destitute of
sails, were chiefly managed with oars, that they might be more
able to tack and manœuvre in light or contrary winds, and to lay
themselves alongside the enemy to advantage; while the other two
species were commonly governed by sails, and vessels of transport
were towed, when it was practicable, with ropes. All three modes of
government (by sail, oar, and tow-rope) were, however, occasionally
adopted by each of the classes. The rowers were not placed, as some
have imagined, upon the same level in different parts of the ship,
nor perpendicularly above each other’s heads; but their seats,
being fixed one at the back of another, ascended gradually in the
manner of stairs. The most usual number of these banks was three,
four, and five, composing what are called trireme, quadrireme,
and quinquireme galleys; the second of these having a range of oars
more than the first, and the third a range more than the second—the
height of the vessel always increasing in proportion to the number of
ranges. In primitive times, the long ships had only one bank of oars;
and therefore, when we find them called πεντεκοντοροι (fifty-oared),
and εκατοντοροι (hundred-oared), we are not to suppose they were rowed
with fifty and an hundred banks, but only with so many oars. The ship
Argo, invented by Jason, was rowed with fifty oars, and, according to
some writers, was the first of the long ships; all vessels, till that
time, having been of a form much more inclining to oval. Others carry
the invention of long ships somewhat higher, referring it to Danaus,
who sailed from Egypt to Greece in a ship (we are told) of fifty oars;
and even if Jason be allowed to have been the first who introduced the
long ships into Greece, yet he cannot be considered as the original
contriver of them, but rather an imitator of the Egyptian or African
model, the latter of which was constructed some time before by Atlas,
and much adopted in that part of the Mediterranean. The first who
used a double bank of oars were the Erythræans, and Aminocles of
Corinth added a third, as Herodotus, Thucydides, and Diodorus have
reported; although Clemens Alexandrinus attributes this invention
to the Sidonians. A fourth bank was added by a Carthaginian
called Aristotle; and Nesicthon of Salamis (according to Pliny),
or Dionysius the Sicilian (according to Diodorus), increased the
number to five; Xenagoras of Syracuse added a sixth; and Nesigiton
increased the number to ten. Alexander the Great and Ptolemy Soter
had vessels of twelve and fifteen banks of oars; and Philip, the
father of Perseus, is said to have had one of sixteen.
[Sidenote: Extreme bulk of some of the vessels.]
As the method of erecting one bank above another came to be generally
known, it was easy to make further additions; Demetrius, the son of
Antigonus, built a ship of thirty banks; and Ptolemy Philopator,
that he might outdo his predecessors, enlarged the number still
further to forty; which, as all other parts were necessarily in
proportion, raised the vessel to such an enormous size, that it
appeared at a distance like a floating mountain or island, and on
a nearer view took the form of a huge castle in the midst of the
waves. This enormous structure contained four thousand rowers, four
hundred sailors employed in other services, and a body of nearly
three thousand soldiers! But this, and such like fabrics, (says
the author of the Archæologia, from which we have extracted these
particulars,) served only for show and ostentation; being by their
great bulk rendered unwieldy and unfit for ordinary use. Athenæus
(he adds) has informed us, that these vessels were commonly known
by the names of Cyclades and Ætna; names of islands and mountains,
to which they appeared almost equal in size—consisting, as some
report, of materials sufficient for the construction of at least
fifty triremes.
Besides those already mentioned, there were other vessels fitted with
half banks of oars, which seem to have been between a unireme and
a bireme, and consisting of a bank and a half: also some between a
bireme and a trireme, having two banks and an half of oars. These,
although perhaps built in other respects after the model of the
long ships, or men-of-war, are seldom comprehended under that name,
and are sometimes mentioned in opposition to them.
[Sidenote: Various descriptions of ancient vessels.]
Several other kinds of ships are enumerated by different authors,
which varied from those already described; being fitted for particular
uses, or seas, or employed upon urgent occasions in naval fights,
but more commonly as υπηρετικαι (or tenders), and as victualling
ships for supplying the principal fleet.
Some were built for expedition, to carry expresses, or to observe
the enemy’s motions, without incurring the danger of being taken
by the heavier, and armed vessels; these were distinguished from the
former by the manner of their construction and equipment, being in
part like men-of-war, and partly resembling ships of burthen, while
in some things they differed from both, as the various exigencies
for which they were fitted might seem to require.
[Sidenote: Mode of rigging.]
Every ship in later times had several masts; but we are told by
Aristotle, that at first there was only one mast, which was fixed
in the middle of the ship. On landing, the mast was taken down, as
appears everywhere in Homer, and placed on a thing called ιστοδοκη,
which according to Suidas, was a case wherein the mast was deposited;
but Eustathius will have it to be nothing more than a piece of wood,
against which it was reared. About the mast was constructed a kind of
turret for soldiers to stand upon and cast darts.
Sails are by some thought to have been first invented by Dædalus,
and to have given rise to the fable of his using wings; others
refer this invention to Icarus, making Dædalus the contriver of
masts and yards. There was originally only one sail in a ship;
but afterwards a greater number was found convenient; the names of
which are enumerated by Potter.
[Sidenote: Oars and anchors.]
Sails were commonly of linen; but sometimes of any other material fit
for receiving and repelling the wind. We occasionally find mention of
leathern sails; and it was usual with the ancients, when none were
at hand, to hang up their garments for this purpose: whence arose
(continues our author) the fable of Hercules, who is feigned to
have sailed with the _back of a lion_, because he used no other sail
but his garment, which was a lion’s skin. Occasionally the ropes
and rigging were for the most part composed of leathern thongs;
afterwards cordage of hemp and flax came into use, as well as of
broom, palm-leaves, philyry, and the bark of trees, such as cherry,
vine, maple, &c. The oars were usually covered with brass in the
blade, or broad part of the oar, to make them stronger and more
durable; the oars of the lowest bank were shorter than the rest,
and those of the uppermost ranges were necessarily the longest,
being at the greatest distance from the water, for which reason
it was customary to load their handles with lead, lest the bottom
should outpoise the top. The row-locks, and the seats of the rowers
were generally covered with hides.
The most ancient anchors are said to have been of stone, and
occasionally of wood, to which a quantity of lead was attached. In
some places, baskets full of stones, and sacks filled with sand,
were employed for this purpose. In later times they were composed
of iron, and furnished with teeth (arms,) whence οδοντες and
_dentes_ are frequently used for the anchors themselves in the Greek
and Latin poets. Originally there was only one tooth; but a second
was added by Eupalamus, or by Anacharsis, the Scythian philosopher.
The Scholiast on Apollonius confidently asserts, that this species
of anchor was used by the Argonauts; but herein (says Potter) he
appears to deserve no great credit, for his assertion is contrary
to the testimony of other writers, and his own author, Apollonius,
makes mention of none but those of stone. The anchors with two
teeth appear, from ancient monuments, to have been much the same
with those which are used in the present day, except that the
transverse piece or anchor-stock is found to be wanting in all of
them. Every ship had several anchors, one of which surpassed all
the others in point of size and strength, and was never used but in
cases of extreme danger; for which reason it was termed ιηρα,
in Latin, _sacra_; and _sacram anchoram solvere_, is proverbially
applied to such as are forced to their last refuge. The instrument
which answered to the _lead_ of modern days was also composed of
lead or brass, and lowered by a chain instead of a line.
Cables were sometimes called καμιλοι, or καμηλοι, (cámili, or camēli,)
whence, in the passage of St. Matthew, where our Saviour remarks, that
“it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for
a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven,” Theophylactus, and
some others, have interpreted the word καμηλος, (camēlus) not as
meaning the animal, but the cable so called.
[Sidenote: Equipment of vessels.]
[Sidenote: Ships’ companies.]
With regard to the equipment of the vessels of the ancients, we
are told by Thucydides, that there was originally no distinction
of rank among their crews; but that the same persons were employed
indiscriminately in those duties which in later ages were executed
by separate orders of men, that is to say, by rowers, mariners,
and soldiers. The same men originally filled these three offices;
they laid down their arms to labour at the oar, and to do, perhaps,
what was necessary in other respects for the management of the vessel
they belonged to; but resumed them as often as occasion required,
to assault, or defend themselves from, their enemies. At these
periods no extraordinary preparations were made for the equipment
of ships of war, but the same vessels were thought sufficient to
answer the purposes of fighting and transport indiscriminately.
As the arts of navigation and of naval warfare improved, it was
found that any one of the occupations we have enumerated was enough
to engross the whole time and application of the persons employed
in the performance of it; and it then became customary to furnish
ships of war with three distinct orders of men; _viz._, rowers,
mariners, and soldiers. The rowers were divided into three classes;
those of the upper, the middle, and the lower ranges. Each person
had a separate oar, for, except in cases of necessity, one oar
was never managed by more than one person; but the labour and pay
of the several classes of rowers were not at the same time equal:
they who were stationed in the uppermost banks, by reason of their
distance from the water, and the consequent length of their oars,
underwent more toil and labour than those in the inferior banks,
and their pay was on that account greater.
The crew took their rest upon the deck, or upon the seats where
they rowed; and the officers only, or persons of more than ordinary
rank on board, were permitted to have clothes spread under them;
of which the following instance is quoted by the author of the
Archæologia from Homer:—
But clothes the men for great Ulysses spread,
And placed an easy pillow for his head;
On these he undisturb’d, securely slept,
Lying upon the _stern_.
They who could not content themselves with the accommodation here
afforded to the son of Laertes, were looked upon as effeminate, and
unfit to endure the toils and hardships of war: we find accordingly,
that Alcibiades was censured by the Athenians, for having allowed
himself the luxury of a “bed hung on cords,” or, in other words,
a cot or a hammock.
The class termed mariners were exempt from drudging at the oar,
but performed all the other duties of the ship; and in order
that every thing might be carried on without tumult or confusion,
each had his peculiar office assigned to him, as appears from the
Argonautics of Apollonius and Flaccus. We there find one employed in
rearing the mast, another in fitting the yards, a third in hoisting
the sails, and the rest employed fore and aft in the ship, each in
his proper place. Hence, they had different titles to distinguish
them, taken from the parts of the ship where they were stationed,
and the offices which they were in the habit of performing.
There was a class of men inferior to the rest of the crew, which
was not confined to any particular station or duty, but was ready
on all occasions to attend the other seamen, and supply them with
whatever they wanted.
“_The whole ship’s crew_,” says Potter, “were usually _wicked and
profligate fellows, without any sense of religion or humanity_, and
therefore reckoned by Juvenal among the _vilest of rogues[14]!_”
It does not, however, follow, because Juvenal here alludes to sailors
of the worst description, that he considered every ship’s company
in the light of thieves and deserters.
The soldiers who served at sea were armed after the same manner
with those designed for land service; only that among them there
seems to have been a greater number of heavy-armed men than was
considered to be necessary on shore; for we find in Plutarch,
that of Themistocles’ ships, four only were light-armed. Indeed,
it highly imported them (says Potter) to fortify themselves in the
best manner they could, since there was no possibility of retiring,
or changing places: but every man was obliged to fight hand to hand,
and maintain his ground till the battle was ended; wherefore their
whole armour, though in form usually the same with that employed
on land service, yet exceeded it in strength and firmness. Besides
[Sidenote: Instruments of war.]this, we find also some instruments of
war used at sea, which were never employed on shore; the principal
of which were:—spears of an unusual length, sometimes exceeding
twenty cubits; instruments of iron crooked like a sickle and fixed
to the top of a long pole, wherewith they cut in sunder (continues
our author) the cords of the sail-yards, and thereby letting the
sails fall down, disabled the light ships. Not unlike this, he adds,
was another instrument, armed at the end with a broad iron head,
edged on both sides, wherewith they cut the cords that made fast
the rudder of the ship.
There were also engines to cast stones into the enemy’s vessels;
and another engine is mentioned by Vegetius, which hung upon the
mainmast, and resembled a battering ram; it consisted of a long beam
with a head of iron, and was pushed with great violence against the
sides of adverse ships. Besides these, there were grappling irons,
which were cast out of an engine into the vessels of the enemy;
these are said to have been first used in Greece by Pericles the
Athenian, at Rome by Duilius; hooks of iron were also used, which
were hung on the top of a pole, and being secured with chains to
the masts or some other lofty part, and cast with great force into
the enemy’s ship, caught it up into the air[15].
The means used to defeat this extraordinary engine, were, (it is
said) to cover the ships with hides, which cast off, or blunted
the stroke of the iron.
With regard to the naval officers employed by the ancients, we find
that in all fleets there were two superior to the rest; one took
the command of the vessels and seamen, the other of the soldiers;
[Sidenote: Officers.]but this latter had also some power over the
_ship-masters_ (as Potter calls them) and their crews.
The commission of admiral varied according to the exigency of times
and circumstances, being sometimes held by one alone, sometimes in
conjunction with others; as happened to Alcibiades, Nicias, and
Lamachus, who were sent with equal power to command the Athenian
fleet in Sicily. The period of command was also limited by the
people, and shortened or prolonged as they pleased. We read of
Epaminondas (continues our author), that, finding his country would
probably be exposed to great danger upon the resignation of his
office, he held it four months longer than he was commissioned to do;
during which time he put a new face upon the affairs of the Thebans,
and by his skilful management dispelled the fears under which they
laboured: this done, he voluntarily laid down his power; but had
no sooner relinquished it, than he was called to account for having
held it so long, and narrowly escaped being condemned to death! It
was feared, it seems, that a precedent of this nature might at some
future time be dangerous to the commonwealth, and facilitate the
views of ambitious persons intrusted with so high a command, who
might avail themselves of it to enslave their fellow-citizens. For
the same reason, probably, by the Lacedæmonian law, no person
could be admiral more than once, a regulation which nevertheless
(continues Potter) stood them in no good stead, it thereby often
happening that they were forced to commit their fleet to raw and
inexperienced commanders.
Next in rank to these were what may be termed vice-admirals, who
acted under the admirals.
The captains of vessels took their names from the rate of the ships
they commanded; and, without enumerating all the different persons
intrusted with commands of various kinds, we may observe that the
duty of master appears to have been split into several parts, and
each person holding a portion of it (whom we may call master’s
mate) to have been distinguished by a different appellation.
The master himself (properly so called) took charge of the helm as
well as of the ship, and sat at the stern to steer; he was obliged,
at the same time, to be an accomplished pilot, and familiar with
all the harbours, rocks, quicksands, &c., which were likely to
present themselves in the voyage.
The labour of the rowers, which must have been excessive, was
cheered by a musician appointed for the purpose, who at the same
time contributed, by his voice and his instrument, to make the
rowers keep time and pull together. This office could have been no
sinecure; and the lungs of the musician must have been formed of
no ordinary materials.
[Sidenote: Steering by fixed stars.]
[Sidenote: Which were the chief stars observed by the ancients.]
[Sidenote: Reliance upon omens of various kinds.]
[Sidenote: Exclusive course by the sun practised in early times.]
The heavenly bodies (continues our author) were observed by sailors
on a twofold account; being of use to them in prognosticating the
seasons, and as guides to direct their course. The chief stars
observed in foretelling the weather were Arcturus, the Dog-star,
Aræ, Orion, Hyades, Hædi, Castor and Pollux, Helena, &c. It
was likewise customary to take notice of various omens offered by
sea-fowl, fishes, and divers other things, as the murmuring of the
floods, the shaking and buzzing noise of trees in the neighbouring
woods, the dashing of the billows against the shore, and many more,
in all which good pilots were nicely skilled. As to the direction
in their voyage, the first practitioners in the art of navigation,
being unacquainted with the rest of the celestial motions, steered
all the day by the course of the sun, betaking themselves at night
to some safe harbour, or making fast their vessel to, and sleeping
on, shore; not daring to venture to sea till their guide had risen
to discover the way: that this was their constant custom, may be
observed from the ancient descriptions of those times, whereof,
says Potter, I shall only give the following instance:
Sol ruit interea, et montes umbrantur opaci,
Sternimur optatæ gremio telluris ad undam,
Sortiti remos, passimque in littore sicco
Corpora curamus, fessos sopor irrigat artus.—_Æneid_, iii. v. 508.
Afterwards the Phœnicians, who some will have to be the first inventors
of navigation, discovered the motions of other stars, as may be
observed in Pliny (lib. vii.), and Propertius (lib. ii. v. 990). We
find the Phœnicians to have been directed by Cynosura, or the Lesser
Bear (which was first observed, in the opinion of some, by Thales the
Milesian); when the mariners of Greece, as well as of other nations,
steered by the Greater Bear, called Helice. For the first observation
of this they were obliged to Nauplius, if we may believe Theon; or,
according to the report of Flaccus (Argonaut 1), to Tiphys, the pilot
of the celebrated Argo. But of these two, we are told by Theon, the
former was the securer guide, and therefore was followed by the
Phœnicians, who for skill in marine affairs outstripped not only all
the rest of the world, but even the Grecians themselves.
RATES OF SAILING OF ANCIENT VESSELS.
The general rate of sailing of the vessels of the ancients appears
to be even lower than we might naturally expect from their clumsy
and imperfect construction. This will be sufficiently evident from
the examples collected of their voyages, by the justly-celebrated
author of the Illustrations of Herodotus, a work which we are sorry
to say has become extremely scarce, since there are few books whose
circulation would be more advantageous to those who value historical
and geographical research.
It will be seen, from a view of the examples in question, that the
mean rate of sailing of the best-equipped vessels of antiquity,
was no more than thirty-five and thirty-seven geographic miles
per day, equivalent to two and a half or three geographic miles an
hour, taking the day at twelve hours. We will give them in Major
Rennell’s own words.
“Miltiades, under favour of an easterly wind, passed in a single
day from Elæos, in the Chersonese of Thrace, to Lemnos (Herod. Erato
40); the distance is thirty-eight geographic miles only.”
“The fleet of Xerxes sailed in three days from the Euripus to
Phalerus, one of the ports of Attica (Urania 66). This is about
ninety-six geographic miles, or thirty-two per day. The fleet was
unusually great.”
“Nearchus reckoned the promontory of Maceta a day’s sail from
him when he first discovered it; and it is shewn by circumstances
that the distance was about thirty-eight geographic miles (Arrian’s
Voyage of Nearchus).”
“Scylax allows seventy-five days and a quarter for the navigation
between Canopus and the pillars of Hercules; equal to about
thirty-two per day (Periplus of Scylax, p. 51)[16].”
“The Red Sea is forty days’ navigation (Eut. 11), and the track
which a ship must necessarily make through it is about thirteen
hundred geographic miles, or less; so that the rate must be taken
at thirty-two per day.”
“The Euxine is said by the same author (Melp. 186) to be sixteen
days’ navigation from the Bosphorus to the Phasis; producing
about thirty-eight per day; he says, indeed, nine days and eight
nights, which, according to his own rule given in the same place,
is equal to sixteen days.”
“The Caspian Sea is said by the same author (Clio, 203) to be
fifteen days’ navigation for a _swift-rowing_ vessel; and being
about six hundred and thirty miles long, this allows a rate of
forty-two.”
“Pliny says (lib. vi. 23), that it was forty days’ sail from
the outlet of the Red Sea to the coast of India (Malabar), which
is about one thousand seven hundred and fifty geographic miles,
equal to forty-four.”
“He also reckons it thirty days’ sail from Berenice to the
outlet of the Red Sea; this would give about thirty per day only.”
“It will be seen that the mean rate of sailing, resulting from
these examples, is thirty-seven geographic miles per day; and that
of the six first, which Major Rennell considers to be the fairest,
no more than thirty-five such miles in the same time.”
“We may add (continues our author), that the mean rate of Nearchus
was no more than twenty-two and a half during his voyage; and less
than thirty through the Persian Gulf. But we regard his rate as
unusually low, for the reasons above stated[17].”
“It appears from Procopius (Vandal. lib. i. c. 12), that the fleet
of Belisarius was sixteen days on its passage from Zante to Caucana
in Sicily. The distance being three hundred and twenty geographic
miles, gives twenty such miles per day, or about two hundred and
fifty stadia. This must be regarded as the effect of oars generally;
there being very little wind, or almost a continued calm.”
“Diodorus (lib. v. c. 2) says, that tin was carried across in
four days from Britain to Gaul, where it was landed, and carried
across the Rhone in thirty journies. From the descriptions and
the circumstances altogether, it appears to have been embarked at
St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall, and landed near the other mount
of the same name in France; perhaps at St. Maloes.”
“This would give a rate of about forty miles per day: but he says
(Diodorus) that the western promontory of Britain is four days’
sail from the opposite continent.”
“It is conceived (Major Rennell continues) that the slow
progress of the vessels of the ancients will be readily admitted;
since in addition to so many other examples, we have the reports
of Herodotus and Nearchus,—of the latter respecting the length
of a day’s sail; of the former, as to the space actually sailed
through in the course of a day, and remarked as an uncommon _long
run_ in those days: as also the time required to navigate the Red
Sea and the Euxine, the latter of which appears to be reported from
Herodotus’s own experience.”
“In effect none of these differ materially from the rest:—the
mean rate of _all_, then, being so low as thirty-seven geographic
miles, we are naturally led to inquire (continues the Major) why
there should be so great a disproportion between the sailing of
ancient and modern ships; since a day’s sail (of four-and-twenty
hours) of a modern ship cannot be reckoned at less than three times
that of the ancient ones?”
“Even the worst description of modern vessels of which we have
any knowledge seems to be superior to the antient ones in respect
of their daily progress. And therefore we suppose that some cause
is to be looked for, besides that of dulness of sailing.”
“That this had a considerable share in the delay is evident,
by the circumstance mentioned by Pliny (if we may depend upon the
numbers), of the Roman Ships sailing no more than about forty-four
geographical miles per day across to open sea between Arabia and
India, in which we cannot suppose them to have absolutely stopped
at night, as in their coasting voyages and in soundings.”
“We may reckon, at a medium, from thirteen to fourteen hours of
daylight throughout the year in that parallel; so that three miles
per hour for the daylight makes up the whole sum (bating three or
four miles), which is a very slow rate of sailing before the brisk
monsoon that prevails in that sea, and leaves little or nothing for
the night; and although it is possible, and even probable, that they
may have _lain to_ during this interval, yet ten or eleven hours
_drift_ must amount to something. Hence we shall not lay so great
a stress on this instance, being a solitary one of the kind, as on
the others in the coasting navigation. In these it appears almost
certain that the ordinary mode of sailing was confined to daylight;
for without a compass, or a substitute for it, great danger must
have been incurred in the night, when a small error in the angle of
the course would be fatal. Lighthouses, on prominent parts of the
coast, would doubtless direct them; but this could not be a general
arrangement, and must have been confined to particular coasts
only. Notwithstanding, sailing by night was doubtless practised
occasionally, as in clear moonlight, or at other times when necessity
pressed, or the nature of the shore (as at the mouths of the Tigris
and Euphrates) prevented his coming to an anchor or landing. Sailing
by night is also implied, when Scylax admits nights as well as days
in his calculation of the distance between Carthage and the columns
of Hercules; a navigation by no means intricate, and perhaps assisted
by lighthouses or signal fires. It must also have been occasionally
practised in the Euxine. (See Note to p. 678, article 6.)”
“In effect, then (Major Rennell continues), we must suppose a
rate of sailing of only two and a half sea, or geographic, miles
per hour, or less than three at the utmost. The cause must either
have been the defective form of the ships’ hulls, or the faulty
disposition of the cargo and ballast, which might not permit them
to spread sail enough[18]. Certainly the sails of ancient ships
are represented, on medals, as being remarkably small, and do
not seem to be on a par in that respect even with Chinese junks,
which, like the others, have generally _lower_ masts only. If we
reject the examples given by Herodotus on the Caspian Sea, and by
Pliny in the open sea, as being out of rule, we have thirty-five
(miles) only for the mean rate per day of the Grecian, Egyptian,
Phœnician and Carthaginian ships, between the times of Darius,
Hystaspes and Alexander, generally; and in which none rise above
thirty-eight, or fall below thirty-two sea miles.”
“It appears (continues our author) that the principal difficulty
to be surmounted in antient voyages, arose from the impracticability
of storing the ships with provisions adequate to the vast length
of time required for their navigation, when the rate of sailing
was so remarkably slow. They were ill adapted to distant voyages,
which indeed they seldom, it appears, undertook, but did very well
in situations where they could land and command provisions almost
at pleasure; or, at any rate, by compulsion, when they sailed
in fleets. But, on the other hand, they were better adapted to
those coasting voyages which constituted almost the whole of
their navigation. The flatness of their bottoms required much
less depth of water than modern vessels of the same tonnage:
whence arose an incredible advantage over ours in finding shelter
more frequently; and indeed almost everywhere, except on a steep
or rocky shore—since, in default of shelter afloat, they drew
their large ships upon the beach, as our fishermen do their large
boats. And we may certainly conclude, that vessels of a construction
and size best adapted to the service of discovery and long voyages
were chosen on occasions like the present.”
In addition to the instances selected by Major Rennell, as proofs
of the slow rate of sailing of the vessels of the ancients, we here
submit a few examples of a contrary tendency; and from these it will
appear (if the numbers of Pliny may be relied upon), that navigation
under the Romans had made rapid strides, and that voyages undertaken
by the vessels of the empire must have been performed under other
disadvantages than those resulting from a slow rate of sailing, when
they are found to be so bad as those which we have instanced above.
The Præfect Galerius is stated by Pliny (lib. xix, Proemium) to
have employed no more than seven days in the voyage from Sicily to
Alexandria; and Babilius is said, immediately afterwards, to have
made the same voyage in six.
We cannot reckon less than one thousand Roman miles for the distance
between the Faro of Messina and Alexandria; which performed in the
space of seven days (as first mentioned), would give a rate of one
hundred and forty-three M. P. per day; and being reckoned at six (as
in the latter instance), a rate of one hundred and fifty such miles.
In the same place we find that Valerius Marianus accomplished
the voyage from Puteoli to Alexandria in the space of nine days
(lenissimo flatu), under the disadvantage of extremely light
winds. This may be reckoned at two hundred and fifty M. P. more than
the voyage above stated, or one thousand two hundred and fifty Roman
miles; and from it will be found to result a distance of nearly
one hundred and forty M. P. per day—differing very little from
the instance first mentioned, and much less from the latter than
might reasonably be expected, from the circumstances under which
it was performed.
We also find, from what follows, in the passage alluded to, that
the voyage from the Straits of Gibraltar to Ostia was accomplished
in the course of a week; and as it cannot be reckoned at less than
one thousand three hundred Roman miles (supposing it to have been
a coasting voyage), or at less than one thousand two hundred and
twenty-five M. P., in straight course to the southward of Sardinia,
we must conclude that the vessel in which it was performed actually
sailed at the rate of more than one hundred and eighty-five M. P. in
the first instance, and one hundred and seventy-five in the latter.
Other examples follow, of the coasting voyage just mentioned in
detail—viz. from Ostia to the Provincia Narbonensis (say, the
south-east point of the Gulf of Lyons), the Gallicus Sinus of the
Romans, a distance of four hundred and fifty M. P., performed in
the space of three days; this gives a rate of one hundred and fifty
miles per day.
From Ostia to the coast of Spain (Hispania Citerior), say the
south-western point of the same Gulf, which is the nearest that
can be taken, is four days; this would give a rate of more than
one hundred and sixty M. P. per day.
Again, from the same port (Ostia) to the coast of Africa, in two
days; which, taken at the nearest points, Carthage, or Utica, on
the extremity of the Hermæum Promontorium, could not be less than
three hundred and fifty Roman miles in straight course. This will
afford us a rate of one hundred and seventy-five M. P. per day, the
exact rate of the sailing from Ostia to Gibraltar, in the straight
course imagined above.
[Sidenote: Allow current 2½ miles per hour.]
It does not appear that there is any mistake in the numbers here
mentioned by Pliny; for the instances are all of them consistent
with each other; one only being a little below one hundred and
forty M. P. per day, and another one hundred and forty-three; two
examples afford one hundred and fifty, one hundred and sixty, two one
hundred and seventy-five, and one one hundred and eighty-five. The
lowest of these rates of sailing may be reckoned at between six and
seven M. P. per hour, and the highest at something less than eight;
giving a mean of seven M. P. per hour, which would be reckoned a
good one for ships of the present day.
[Sidenote: Mean rate.]
One of the reasons to which this great improvement in ancient vessels
may be attributed, appears to be clearly stated by Pliny himself,
in the Proemium from which we have selected the examples here[19]
adduced: we allude to the increased number and size of the sails
in use, at the time when the historian flourished, as noticed in
the preface in question attached to the nineteenth book.
Before entering upon the dissertation on flax, with which this book
opens, the Roman naturalist indulges himself in calling to mind some
of the extraordinary effects resulting from the various applications
of that humble and unassuming plant; and gives way to his feelings
with so much enthusiasm and good sense, that it will not, we think,
be considered tedious or superfluous, if we extract the greater
part of the preface from the old English translation of Holland[20].
It seems evident from the remarks here quoted below, that the rate
of sailing in Pliny’s time was greatly superior to that which has
been given (from the Illustrations of Herodotus) down to the time of
Alexander the Great; and when we find that other voyages described by
this author (as well as those which various writers of his time have
recorded) fall short of the rate of sailing deduced from the last
mentioned instances; we may probably be allowed to make the following
conclusion—that the difference did not really so much consist in
the faulty construction of the vessels themselves, or the little
sail which they were able to carry, as in circumstances which would
equally contribute to retard ships constructed in modern days. At the
same time we may suppose that the voyages here enumerated by Pliny
were performed under the most favourable circumstances which could
be commanded. They were government vessels, and probably equipped
in the most liberal and judicious manner possible at the time;
they were navigating a sea which long habit must have rendered
familiar to them, and where they must have known the best courses
to be steered under every change of weather and season. The voyages
were not sufficiently long to be retarded by want of provisions, and
the confidence resulting from experience and comparative security
would have induced them to carry all the sail they could command
without hesitation or dread. Under these circumstances we may also
suppose that the day intended was twenty-four hours, and indeed,
in the passage to Alexandria, and other parts of the African coast,
it could scarcely have been any other.
OBSERVATIONS ON ROAD MEASUREMENTS DEDUCED FROM THE ORDINARY WALKING
PACE OF HORSES AND CAMELS.
Independent of the operations for laying down the coast, an account
of the various windings of the road travelled by the camels was
regularly kept by Lieutenant Coffin as far as Bengazi.
This was done by observing the direction of their route by compass,
and noticing the time they were on the road; proper deductions being
made for stoppages, &c. At the end of each day the courses and
distances were collected into a traverse-table, and the latitude
and longitude deduced therefrom, as is usual with the D.R, on
board ships at sea. If the latitude by these means differed from
the observation, a proper correction for error in course, distance,
or both was made, and the result noted accordingly.
A more favourable opportunity of proving the dependance that may be
placed on such a reckoning on land, could not, in all probability,
have offered itself; as the extent of each day’s progress was
accurately determined by the means adopted for carrying on the
survey. And it may be useful to future travellers, as well as to
those persons who may have to compile maps from camel journeys, to
insert an abstract of the different days’ works, compared with the
latitude and longitude by observations, which will be found annexed.
By this Table it will be seen that the average rate of travelling
has not exceeded two miles and a half per hour, and that at the
end of the journey from Mesurata to Bengazi, a distance of four
hundred and twenty-two miles, there is only a difference of 9′
in the longitudes. This is an error so small, that there are few
persons who would object to the accuracy of the places laid down by
the means employed, and yet there are many who would feel inclined
to dispute the accuracy of the average rate. But the truth is that,
in travelling through countries in general, there are so many things
to obstruct a _direct_ track, that, though an animal may actually
pass over the ground at the rate of three or three and a half
miles per hour, as the camel in reality does, yet, in estimating
the distance for a traverse-table, great deductions must be made,
or our reckoning will far exceed the truth[21].
The journey round the Syrtis having satisfied us with respect to
the rate which might be allowed, and the accuracy that was to be
expected under _general circumstances_, we determined to ascertain
what precision we could arrive at when the direction of the road
and nature of the ground were the _most favourable_. For this
purpose we kept a track from Bengazi to Ptolemeta; and having
occasion to go over the same ground a second time and return, we
had three measurements between the places independent of that of
the chronometers[22], which, as well as those of the intermediate
stations, agree together and with the truth, to an exactness which
we did not expect; and will serve to show that, under favourable
circumstances, and when attention is paid to the rates of the
camels, the topography of a country may be laid down sufficiently
accurate for most purposes. We should have informed our readers,
that the track from Bengazi to Ptolemeta is particularly straight,
and encumbered with as few obstructions as are likely ever to occur
in a country where, properly speaking, no road exists.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| TABLE OF DISTANCES MEASURED BY CAMEL AND HORSE PACE. |
+---------------+---------------+--------+-----+---+--------------+
| | | | | | |
| Left. | Arrived. | |Rate | | |
| | |Interval| per | D.| REMARKS, &c. |
+---------+-----+---------+-----+ |hour.| | |
| Place. |Time.| Place. |Time.| | | | |
+---------+-----+---------+-----+--------+-----+---+--------------+
| | H. ′| | H. ′| H. ′ | M. | | |
|Teuchira |10 10|Wady |12 00| 1 50 | 3½ |6¼ |}These |
| | | | | | | |}distances |
|Wady |12 00|Wady | 1 00| 1 00 | „ |3½ |}are by horse |
| | | | | | | |}pace. |
|Wady | 1 00|A Fort | 3 10| 2 10 | „ |7½ |} |
| | | | | | | | |
|Fort | 4 00|Ptolemeta| 6 25| 2 25 | 2½ |6¼ | This by |
| | | | | | | | camel pace. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| | |Whole | | | = |23½| From |
| | |distance | | | | | Teuchira to |
| | | | | | | | Ptolemeta. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
|Bengazi | 7 00|Aziana | 9 15| 2 15 | 3 |6¾ |} |
| | | | | | | |} |
|Aziana | 9 15|Birsis | 5 08| 7 53 | 3 |23¾|}Camel pace. |
| | | | | | | |} |
|Birsis | 6 10|Teuchira | 8 30| 2 20 | 3 | 7 |} |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| | |Whole | | | = |37½| From Bengazi |
| | |distance | | | | | to Teuchira. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
|Teuchira | 8 30|Wady El |11 25| 2 55 | 3 |8¾ |} |
| | |Assa | | | | |} |
| | | | | | | |}Horse pace. |
|Wady El |11 25|Ptolemeta| 4 10| 4 45 | 2¾ |13¼|} |
|Assa | | | | | | |} |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| | |Whole | | | = |22 | From |
| | |distance | | | | | Teuchira to |
| | | | | | | | Ptolemeta. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
|Ptolemeta| 7 10|Wady El |11 07| 3 57 | 3¼ |13 |} |
| | |Assa | | | | |}Horse pace; |
| | | | | | | |}camels |
| | | | | | | |}arrived an |
| | | | | | | |}hour after. |
|Wady El |11 07|Teuchira | 1 45| 2 38 | „ |8⅛ |} |
|Assa | | | | | | |} |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| | |Whole | | | = |21⅛| From |
| | |distance | | | | | Ptolemeta to |
| | | | | | | | Teuchira. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
|Teuchira | 7 00|Birsis | 9 10| 2 10 | 3 |6½ |} |
| | | | | | | |} |
|Birsis | 9 10|Handoola | 4 00| 6 50 | 3 |20¼|} |
| | | | | | | |}Single camel.|
|Handoola | 7 00|Aziana | 8 00| 1 00 | 2¾ |2¾ |} |
| | | | | | | |} |
|Aziana | 8 00|Bengazi |10 25| 2 25 | 2¾ |6¾ |} |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| | |Whole | | | = |36¼|Teuchira to |
| | |distance | | | | |Bengazi. |
| | | | | | +---+ |
| From To | | |
|Teuchira Ptolemeta |23½|By first |
| | |measurement. |
| | | |
|Ditto Ditto |22 |By the |
| | |second. |
| | | |
|Ditto Ditto |21⅛|By the third. |
| +---+ |
|Ditto Ditto |22⅕|Mean. |
| +---+ |
| Actual distance |22 |By |
| | |observations |
| | |of latitude |
| | |and |
| | |longitude. |
| +---+ |
|Teuchira Bengazi |37½|By second |
| | |measurement*. |
| | | |
|Ditto Ditto |36¼|By third. |
| +---+ |
| |36⅜|Mean. |
| +---+ |
| Actual distance |34½|By latitude |
| | |and |
| | |longitude. |
| +---+ |
| | | |
| And by these the whole distance, | | |
| From To | | |
|Bengazi Ptolemeta |59½|By one |
| | |measurement. |
| | | |
|Ditto |Ditto |57⅜|By the other. |
| +---+ |
| |58½|Mean. |
| +---+ |
| Actual distance |56½|By latitude |
| | |and |
| | |longitude. |
| +---+ |
| *The first measurement from Bengazi to Teuchira is omitted, in |
| consequence of the camels having deviated a little from the |
| road afterwards travelled. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
[D.: Distance.
M.: Miles.]
POSITION OF PLACES BY OBSERVATION.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TABLES OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE. |
+-----------------------------+------------+-----+------------+-----+
| Names of Places. |Latitude N. | |Longitude E.| |
+-----------------------------+------------+-----+------------+-----+
| | ° ′ ″ | | ° ′ ″ | |
| | | | | |
|Bashaw’s Castle, Tripoli | | | 13 10 42 |4 Im.|
| | | | | |
|Mergip Tower | 32 39 11 | R | | |
| | | | | |
|Tabia Point | 32 33 41 | + | 14 22 20 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Mersa Zeliten | 32 30 20 | ☉ | 14 33 18 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 14 31 18 | + |
| | | | | |
|Town of Zoraig | 32 26 48 | R | 14 52 20 | R. |
| | | | | |
|Cape Mesurata | 32 25 01 | ☉ 2 | 15 10 19 |3 Im.|
| | | | | |
|Date-tree at Aara | 32 10 15 | ☉ | 15 24 49 | + |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 15 25 14 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Melfa Sand-hills | 32 03 43 | ☉ | 15 29 08 | + |
| | | | | |
|Soolub | 31 45 40 | ☉ | 15 29 29 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 15 28 08 | + |
| | | | | |
|Maháda | 31 31 57 | ⚹ | 15 40 45 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 15 37 58 | + |
| | | | | |
|Jebba Ruin | 31 33 23 | + | 15 32 18 | + |
| | | | | |
|Jaireed | 31 23 27 | ⚹ 2 | 15 52 26 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 15 50 21 | + |
| | | | | |
|M’Had Hassàn | 31 16 53 | ⚹ | 16 06 40 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 16 04 40 | + |
| | | | | |
|Jiraff | 31 13 27 | ⚹ 3 | 16 23 31 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Mersa Zafferan | 31 12 48 | ☉ | 16 41 29 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Jedeed | 31 12 43 | ⚹ 3 | 16 47 40 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Shwaisha | 31 10 42 | ⚹ 4 | 17 02 18 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Medina Sultan | 31 07 25 | ⚹ ☉ | 17 15 18 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Nahim | 31 04 23 | ⚹ 2 | 17 26 58 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Boosaida | 30 59 39 |⚹ ☉ 5| 17 39 15 |5 Im.|
| | | | | |
|Shedgàn | 30 55 30 | ⚹ 2 | 17 51 27 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Howyjer Rock | 30 55 37 | ☉ | 17 57 46 | + |
| | | | | |
|Shegga | 30 49 17 | ⚹ 2 | 18 4 47 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Hoodea | 30 44 13 |☉ ⚹ 3| 18 17 55 | „ |
| | | | | |
|Mahirrīga | 30 34 21 | ⚹ 3 | 18 30 38 | „ |
| | | | | |
|Linoof | 30 23 51 | ⚹ 3 | 18 44 18 | „ |
| | | | | |
|Muktarr | 30 17 43 | ⚹ 3 | 18 59 18 | „ |
| | | | | |
|Bushaifa (Rock) | 30 17 40 | ⚹ | 19 12 05 | + |
| | | | | |
|Sechereen (Bottom of the | 30 16 00 | ⚹ 3 | 19 18 33 | Ch. |
|Gulf) | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Gartubba | 30 18 48 | ⚹ 3 | 19 32 15 | „ |
| | | | | |
|123 | 30 22 22 |☉ & ⚹| 19 32 31 | + |
| | | | | |
|Braiga Sand-hills | 30 23 39 | ⚹ 2 | 19 39 45 | „ |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 19 39 19 | + |
| | | | | |
|Oorartow | 30 25 59 | ☉ | | |
| | | | | |
|Tabilbey | 30 28 53 | ⚹ 3 | 19 46 06 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ishaifa Rock | 30 36 18 | + | 19 52 56 | + |
| | | | | |
|Ain Agan | 30 33 57 | ⚹ 3 | 19 50 42 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Allum Limàrish | 30 35 88 | ☉ | | |
| | | | | |
|Shiebah | 30 38 35 | ⚹ 3 | 19 58 23 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Gara Island (N. E. end) | 30 47 20 | + | 19 57 24 | + |
| | | | | |
|Rhowte Elassouad | 30 50 00 | ⚹ 3 | 20 05 51 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 20 06 28 | + |
| | | | | |
|149 Rock | 30 53 32 | + | 20 06 20 | + |
| | | | | |
|Shawhan | 31 02 44 | ⚹ 3 | 20 12 26 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Carcora Sand-hills | 31 26 23 | ⚹ 2 | 20 02 50 |Ch. 2|
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 20 02 45 | + |
| | | | | |
|Point of Mersa | 31 28 25 | + | 20 00 30 | + |
| | | | | |
|Amara Marabot | 31 54 57 | ⚹ 2 | 19 58 19 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Bengazi Castle | 32 06 54 | ☉ 4 | | |
| | | | | |
|Tochira (S. E. end of the | 32 31 44 | ⚹ 2 | 20 33 23 |Ch. 2|
|town) | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Ditto (Mean) | | | 20 34 10 |R. 3 |
| | | | | |
|Tomb at Ptolemeta | 32 42 12 | ⚹ 2 | 20 55 08 |Ch. 2|
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 20 54 57 |R. 3 |
| | | | | |
|Cyrene (Tents near small | 32 49 38 | ⚹ 3 | 21 49 05 | Ch. |
|Theatre) | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Mersa Suza (or W. end of the | 32 54 53 | ⚹ 4 | 21 55 57 |Ch. 2|
|Town) | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Castle at Derna | 32 46 18 | ⚹ 3 | 22 40 48 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|El Hilàl (small Ruin on the | 32 55 48 | ⚹ 2 | 22 11 00 | Ch. |
|Cape) | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 22 11 45 | + |
| | | | | |
|Bujebara (Cape), or Ejeburni | 32 53 13 | ⚹ 3 | 22 24 52 | Ch. |
| | | | | |
|Ditto | | | 22 23 30 | + |
| | | | | |
|Cape Rasat | 32 56 50 | — | | |
| | | | | |
|Cape, N. E. Ptolemeta | 32 46 38 | | | |
| | | | | |
|Rock off El Hyera | 32 50 20 | + | 22 34 12 | R. |
| | | | | |
|Cape N. E. | | | | |
+-----------------------------+------------+-----+------------+-----+
|NOTE.—Ch. stands for chronometer; + intersections of bearings and |
|latitudes, or ∠’s; Im. for observations with satellites of |
|Jupiter; R. reduction by camel pace, or otherwise; and the figures |
|denote the number of observations, of which the results are a mean.|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| OBSERVATIONS FOR VARIATION. |
+--------+-------------+---------+----------+---------+------------+
| Date. | Place. |Latitude.|Longitude.|Variation|Remarks, &c.|
| | | | | W. | |
+--------+-------------+---------+----------+---------+------------+
| | | ° ′ ″ | ° ′ ″ | ° ′ ″ | |
|Oct. 8|Tripoly |32 54 00 | 13 10 27 |17 07 40 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Kater’s |
| | | | | |Compass. |
| | | | | | |
|Nov. 10|Sidi Abdelati|32 42 25 | |16 31 00 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Nov. 17|Zeliten |32 29 04 | |16 43 52 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Nov. 24|Mesurata |32 22 41 | 15 10 35 |16 57 00 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Dec. 1|Mesurata |32 22 41 | 15 10 35 |17 12 36 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Dec. 6|Soolup |31 45 40 | |16 19 40 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Dec. 14|Zafferan |31 12 21 | |16 39 04 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Dec. 26|Hoodea |30 44 24 | |15 26 45 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | | |
|Dec. 31|Braiga |30 23 40 | |14 21 20 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Theodolite. |
| | | | | | |
|Jan. 3|Braiga |30 23 40 | |14 28 53 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Kater’s |
| | | | | |Compass. |
| | | | | | |
|Feb. 16|Bengazi |32 10 18 | 20 03 00 |14 44 13 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Theodolite. |
| | | | | | |
|March 26|Bengazi |32 07 07 | 20 03 00 |14 51 0 |Amplitude. |
| | | | | |Kater’s |
| | | | | |Compass. |
| | | | | | |
|July 25|Bengazi |32 06 41 | 20 03 00 |15 13 40 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Kater. |
| | | | | | |
|June 20|Apollonia |32 54 53 | |14 12 40 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Ditto. |
| | | | | | |
|June 11|Apollonia |32 54 53 | |14 29 00 |Amplitude. |
| | | | | |Ditto. |
| | | | | | |
|June 12|Apollonia |32 54 53 | |14 33 00 |Amplitude. |
| | | | | |Ditto. |
| | | | | | |
|June 19|Apollonia |32 54 53 | |14 27 30 |Amplitude. |
| | | | | |Ditto. |
| | | | | | |
|June 1|Derna |32 46 24 | |14 30 10 |Azimuth. |
| | | | | |Ditto. |
+--------+-------------+---------+----------+---------+------------+
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: In justice to Mr. Arnold, we must say that these two
watches gave results beyond our most sanguine expectations.]
[Footnote 2: We had no opportunity of ascertaining the height of
this range.]
[Footnote 3: Neither of these afford shelter for shipping.]
[Footnote 4: Monsieur Lauthier informs us that there is good
anchorage in this bay in six fathoms water, muddy bottom, at a
quarter of a league distance from the shore.]
[Footnote 5: This distance is by estimation.]
[Footnote 6: A large rock cod was taken alive among the rocks,
by one of our party.]
[Footnote 7: This was ascertained from several observations of the
depression of the visible horizon, corrections for spheroidal figure
of the earth, and northern deviation being made, and ¹⁄₁₁
allowed for terrestrial refraction.]
[Footnote 8: The height of this range is ascertained trigonometrically.]
[Footnote 9: See Wilkins’s Vitruvius.]
[Footnote 10: The following remarks on the ports and vessels of
the ancients are drawn from the Archæologia of Potter; and we have
thought it not irrelevant to the subject to bring them together on
the present occasion.]
[Footnote 11: Diodorus, lib. xii.]
[Footnote 12: The harbour at Ptolemeta presents an example of works
of this description.]
[Footnote 13:
——— Gemuit sub pondere cymba
Suctilis, et multam accepit rimosa paludem.—_Æneid_, vi. 414.
]
[Footnote 14:
Invenies aliquo cum percussore jacentem,
Permixtum nautis aut furibus aut fugitivis.—(Sat. viii.)
]
[Footnote 15: This engine appears to have been invented by Anacharsis
the Scythian, and although one somewhat similar is said to have
been employed by Archimedes against the enemy’s fleet at Syracuse,
it is difficult to conceive how it could be used with advantage at
sea; except, perhaps, by a vessel very considerably heavier than
that against which it might be employed.]
[Footnote 16: The rate given by Scylax between Leptis Magna and
Abrotonum, is even lower than this,—being under thirty geographic
miles per day; that is, supposing Tagiura (which is fifty-eight
miles from Lebida) to occupy the site of Abrotonum.]
[Footnote 17: Because his fleet was composed, in a great part of
vessels ill calculated for long voyages; and the sailing of the
slow-goers would naturally regulate that of the rest.]
[Footnote 18: The constant yawing to which the vessels of the
antients must from their build have been necessarily exposed, in a
far greater degree than even our light colliers, (their upper works
being lofty, sails small, and floor flat,) would also materially
contribute to retard their progress.]
[Footnote 19: Jam vero nec vela satis esse majora navigiis. Sed
quamvis amplitudini antemnarum singulæ arbores sufficiant, super
eas tamen addi velarum alia vela, præterq; alia in proris, et alia
in puppibus pandi, ac tot modis provocari mortem.]
[Footnote 20: “And here I cannot chuse but marvell much at some
men, who making such profession of learning, and namely, in the
skill and science of agriculture, as they have done; yea, and
seeking thereby to win all their credit and name of erudition and
litterature; have, notwithstanding, omitted many things requisite
thereunto, without any mention made, or one word spoken of so many
hearbes and simples, which either come up of themselves, or grow by
meanes of man’s hand: considering that the most part of them are
in greater price and reputation, yea, and in more use and request
for the maintenance of this our life, than either corne or pulse,
or any fruits of the earth whatsoever.”
“And to begin first at those that are knowne commodities, and
so notorious, as that the use thereof not only reacheth all over
the maine and continent, but extendeth also to the very seas,
and overspreadeth them: what say we to line or flax, so commonly
sowed as it is? yet may it not be raunged either among the fruits
of the field, or hearbes of the garden. But what region (I pray you)
or part of the earth is without it? and what is there so necessarie
for this life of ours in all respects? Againe, is there any thing
in the whole world more wonderfull and miraculous, than that there
should be an hearbe found of this vertue and propertie as to bring
Egypt and Italie together? Insomuch, as Galerius, Lord Deputie in
Egypt under the Romanes, was knowne to set saile from the firth of
Messina in the Streights of Sicilie, and in seven daies to arrive at
Alexandria: Babilius also governour there likewise, in six; and that
by the meanes of the said hearbe? Moreover, what say you to this,
which was seen no longer since than the summer past; when Valerius
Marianus a Senatour of Rome, and late Lord Pretour, embarked and took
ship at Puteoli, and in nine daies sailed to the said Alexandria,
and yet he had but a very mild and still wind to helpe him in that
voiage? Is not this a strange and sovereign hearbe thinke you,
that in a seven-night space can fetch Gades from as far as the
Streights of Gibraltar, or Hercules’ pillars, into the harbour
of Ostia in Italie? can shew (I say) the kingdome of Catalogne in
Spain before the said port-town in foure daies, Provance in three,
and Barbarie in twain? For C. Flaccus, lieutenant under Vibius
Crispus the Pro-consull, did as much as I speak of, and that with no
great forewind, but a most gentle and mild gale. Oh the audacious
boldnesse of this world, so rash, so full of sin and wickednesse,
that man should sow and cherish any such thing as might receive and
swallow the winds, stormes, and tempests; as if the float and tide
alone were not sufficient to carrie so prowd a creature! But now
are we growne to this passe, that sailes bigger than the ships
themselves will not serve our turnes. For albeit one must be
sufficient to carrie the biggest crosse-yard that can be devised,
yet are not we content with a single maine-saile thereupon, unlesse
we set up saile upon saile, top and top-gallant: unlesse (I say)
wee have foresailes and sprit-sailes in the prow, misns also hoisted
up and desplaied in the poupe; and all to set us more forward upon
our death, and to hasten our end. Finally, is there ought againe
so admirable, as that of so small a graine as the lini-seed, there
should grow that which is able to carrie too and fro in a moment,
this round globe of the earth; the same being so slender a stalke as
it is, and not growing high from the ground? considering withall,
that twisted it is not entire and whole in the stem: but before
it can be occupied it must bee watered, dried, braked, tew-tawed,
and with much labour driven and reduced in the end to bee as soft
and tender as wooll: and all to doe violence to nature and mankind
even in the highest degree, in such sort, as a man is not able to
proceed so farre in execration as is due unto this invention. The
first deviser whereof I have inveighed against in convenient place
elsewhere, and not without desert: as who could not bee content that
a man should die upon the land, but he must perish upon the sea,
to feed hadockes there, without the honour of sepulture.”
“In the booke but next before this, I gave warning and advertised
men, that for to enjoy corne and other victuals necessarie for
this life and suffisance and plentie, we should beware of wind
and rain. And now behold, man is so wicked and ungracious, his wit
so inventive, that he will be sowing, tending, and plucking that
with his own hand which cals for nothing else at sea but wind;
and never rests till burning bee come. See moreover how well this
unhappie hand of his speeds, for there is againe commeth up sooner,
or thriveth faster than this flax? And to conclude, that wee may
knowe how nature her-selfe is nothing well pleased therewith, and
that it groweth maugre her will, it burnes the field wherein it is
sowed; it eateth out the heart of the ground, and maketh it worse,
wheresoever it comes; this is all the good it doth upon land.”]
[Footnote 21: In caravans where the road lies over a wide expanse
of desert, and where it is the interest of every man to accomplish
as much distance in a day as he can, the average will of course
far exceed that which was made good by our party.]
[Footnote 22: See the Table annexed.]
Transcriber's note:
The changes indicated in the Errata have been done.
pg 18 Changed: he tells “us, are of to: tells us, “are
pg 28 (footnote 14) Changed: degli _antrichi_ geografi to: _antichi_
pg 110 Changed: they invaribly choose to: invariably
pg 119 (footnote 6) Changed: Buonaccinoli to: Buonacciuoli
pg 133 Changed: to built the rude tombs to: build
pg 229 (footnote 23) Changed: circuit o the coast to: of the coast
pg 237 Changed: similiarity of the names to: similarity
pg 296 Changed: to which which we had to: to which we had
pg 378 Changed: which appeas to have to: appears
pg 397 Changed: from Barca to Angela to: Augela
pg 477 Changed: from Derna to Appollonia to: Apollonia
pg xv of Appendix Changed: firing a salnte to: salute
pg xxxiii of Appendix Changed: fifity geographic miles to: fifty
pg xxxvii of Appendix Changed: Rabilius to: Babilius
Minor changes in punctuation and quotation mark placement have
been done silently.
Other spelling errors or inconsistencies have been left unchanged.
☉ symbols also include an underline, originally.