Ancient and Modern Ships Part 3

6 in.; height of stem ornament, 72 ft.; length of the longest oars, 57 ft. The oars were stated to have been weighted with lead inboard, so as to balance the great overhanging length. The number of the rowers was 4,000, and of the remainder of the crew 3,500, making a total of 7,500 men, for whom, we are asked to believe, accommodation was found on a vessel of the dimensions given. This last statement is quite sufficient to utterly discredit the whole story, as it implies that each man had a cubic s.p.a.ce of only about 130 ft. to live in, and that, too, in the climate of Egypt. Moreover, if we look into the question of the oars we shall see that the dimensions given are absolutely impossible--that is to say, if we make the usual a.s.sumption that the banks were successive horizontal tiers of oars placed one above the other. There were said to have been forty banks. Now, the smallest distance, vertically, between two successive banks, if the oar-ports were arranged as in Fig. 14, with the object of economizing s.p.a.ce in the vertical direction to the greatest possible degree, would be 1 ft. 3 in. If the lowest oar-ports were 3 ft. above the water, and the topmost bank were worked on the gunwale, we should require, to accommodate forty banks, a height of side equal to 39 ft. 1 ft. 3 in. + 3 ft. = 51 ft. 9 in. Now, if the inboard portion of the 57 ft. oar were only one-fourth of the whole length, or 14 ft. 3 in., this would leave 57 ft. - 14 ft. 3 in. = 42 ft.

9 in. for the outboard portion, and as the height of gunwale on which this particular length of oar was worked must have been, as shown above, 51 ft. 9 in. above the water, it is evident that the outboard portion of the oar could not be made to touch the water at all. Also, if we consider the conditions of structural strength of the side of a s.h.i.+p honeycombed with oar-ports, and standing to the enormous height of 51 ft. 9 in. above the water-line, it is evident that, in order to be secure, it would require to be supported by numerous tiers of transverse horizontal beams, similar to deck-beams, running from side to side. The planes of these tiers would intersect the inboard portions of many of the tiers of oars, and consequently prevent these latter from being fitted at all.

If we look at the matter from another point of view we shall meet with equally absurd results. The oars in the upper banks of Athenian triremes are known to have been about 14 ft. in length. Underneath them, were, of course, two other banks. If, now, we a.s.sume that the upper bank tholes were 5 ft. 6 in.[10] above the water-line, and that one-quarter of the length of the upper bank oars was inboard, and if we add thirty-seven additional banks parallel to the first bank, so as to make forty in all, simple proportion will show us that the outboard portion of the oars of the uppermost bank must have been just under 99 ft. long and the total length of each, if we a.s.sume, as before, that one quarter of it was inboard, would be 132 ft., instead of the 57 ft. given by Callixenos.

Any variations in the above a.s.sumptions, consistent with possibilities, would only have the effect of bringing the oars out still longer. We are therefore driven to conclude, either that the account given by Callixenos was grossly inaccurate, or else that the Greek word, [Greek: tessarakonteres], which we translate by "forty-banked s.h.i.+p," did not imply that there were forty horizontal _superimposed_ tiers of oars.

The exact arrangement of the oars in the larger cla.s.ses of galleys has always been a puzzle, and has formed the subject of much controversy amongst modern writers on naval architecture. The vessels were distinguished, according to the numbers of the banks of oars, as uniremes, biremes, triremes, quadriremes, etc., up to s.h.i.+ps like the great galley of Ptolemy Philopater, which was said to have had forty banks. Now, the difficulty is to know what is meant by a bank of oars.

It was formerly a.s.sumed that the term referred to the horizontal tiers of oars placed one above the other; but it can easily be proved, by attempting to draw the galleys with the oars and rowers in place, that it would be very difficult to accommodate as many as five horizontal banks and absolutely impossible to find room for more than seven. Not only would the s.p.a.ce within the hull of the s.h.i.+p be totally insufficient for the rowers, but the length of the upper tiers of oars would be so great that they would be unmanageable, and that of the lower tiers so small that they would be inefficient. The details given by ancient writers throw very little light upon this difficult subject. Some authors have stated that there was only one man to each oar, and we now know that this was the case with the smaller cla.s.ses of vessels, say, up to those provided with three, or four, to five banks of oars; but it is extremely improbable that the oars of the larger cla.s.ses could have been so worked. The oars of modern Venetian galleys were each manned by five rowers. It is impossible in this work to examine closely into all the rival theories as to what const.i.tuted a bank of oars. It seems improbable, for reasons before stated, that any vessel could have had more than five horizontal tiers. It is certain also that, in order to find room for the rowers to work above each other in these tiers, the oar-ports must have been placed, not vertically above each other, but in oblique rows, as represented in Fig. 14. It is considered by Mr. W. S.

Lindsay, in his "History of Merchant s.h.i.+pping and Ancient Commerce,"

that each of the oblique rows of oars, thus arranged, may have formed the tier referred to in the designation of the cla.s.s of the vessel, for vessels larger than quinqueremes. If this were so, there would then be no difficulty in conceiving the possibility of constructing galleys with even as many as forty tiers of oars like the huge alleged galley of Ptolemy Philopater. Fig. 15 represents the disposition of the oar-ports according to this theory for an octoreme.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 14.--Probable arrangement of oar-ports in ancient galleys.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 15.--Suggested arrangement of oar-ports in an octoreme.]

It appears to be certain that the oars were not very advantageously arranged, or proportioned, in the old Greek galleys, or even in the Roman galleys, till the time of the early Caesars, for we read that the average speed of the Athenian triremes was 200 stadia in the day. If the stadium were equal in length to a furlong, and the working day supposed to be limited to ten hours, this would correspond to a speed of only two and a half miles an hour. The lengths of the oars in the Athenian triremes have been already given (p. 42); even those of the upper banks were extremely short--only, in fact, about a foot longer than those used in modern 8-oared racing boats. On account of their shortness and the height above the water at which they were worked, the angle which the oars made with the water was very steep and consequently disadvantageous. In the case of the Athenian triremes, this angle must have been about 23.5. This statement is confirmed by all the paintings and sculptures which have come down to us. It is proved equally by the painting of an Athenian bireme of 500 B.C. shown in Fig. 9, and by the Roman trireme, founded on the sculptures of Trajan's Column of about 110 A.D., shown in Fig. 16.[11] In fact, it is evident that the ancients, before the time of the introduction of the Liburnian galley, did not understand the art of rowing as we do to-day. The celebrated Liburnian galleys, which were first used by the Romans, for war purposes, at the battle of Actium under Augustus Caesar, were said to have had a speed of four times that of the old triremes. The modern galleys used in the Mediterranean in the seventeenth century are said to have occasionally made the pa.s.sage from Naples to Palermo in seventeen hours. This is equivalent to an average speed of between 11 and 12 miles per hour.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 16.--Roman galley. About 110 A.D.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 17.--Liburnian galley. Conjectural restoration.]

The timber used by the ancient races on the sh.o.r.es of the Mediterranean in the construction of their s.h.i.+ps appears to have been chiefly fir and oak; but, in addition to these, many other varieties, such as pitch pine, elm, cedar, chestnut, ilex, or evergreen oak, ash, and alder, and even orange wood, appear to have been tried from time to time. They do not seem to have understood the virtue of using seasoned timber, for we read in ancient history of fleets having been completed ready for sea in incredibly short periods after the felling of the trees. Thus, the Romans are said to have built and equipped a fleet of 220 vessels in 45 days for the purpose of resisting the attacks of Hiero, King of Syracuse. In the second Punic War Scipio put to sea with a fleet which was stated to have been completed in forty days from the time the timber was felled. On the other hand, the ancients believed in all sorts of absurd rules as to the proper day of the moon on which to fell trees for s.h.i.+pbuilding purposes, and also as to the quarter from which the wind should blow, and so forth. Thus, Hesiod states that timber should only be cut on the seventeenth day of the moon's age, because the sap, which is the great cause of early decay, would then be sunk, the moon being on the wane. Others extend the time from the fifteenth to the twenty-third day of the moon, and appeal with confidence to the experience of all artificers to prove that timber cut at any other period becomes rapidly worm-eaten and rotten. Some, again, a.s.serted that if felled on the day of the new moon the timber would be incorruptible, while others prescribed a different quarter from which the wind should blow for every season of the year. Probably on account of the ease with which it was worked, fir stood in high repute as a material for s.h.i.+pbuilding.

The structure of the hulls of ancient s.h.i.+ps was not dissimilar in its main features to that of modern wooden vessels. The very earliest types were probably without external keels. As the practice of naval architecture advanced, keels were introduced, and served the double purpose of a foundation for the framing of the hull and of preventing the vessel from making leeway in a wind. Below the keel proper was a false keel, which was useful when vessels were hauled up on sh.o.r.e, and above the keelson was an upper false keel, into which the masts were stepped. The stem formed an angle of about 70 with the water-line, and its junction with the keel was strengthened by a stout knee-piece. The design of the stem above water was often highly ornate. The stern generally rose in a graceful curve, and was also lavishly ornamented.

Fig. 18 gives some ill.u.s.trations of the highly ornamented extremities of the stern and prow of Roman galleys. These show what considerable pains the ancients bestowed on the decoration of their vessels. There was no rudder-post, the steering having been effected by means of special oars, as in the early Egyptian vessels. Into the keel were notched the floor timbers, and the heads of these latter were bound together by the keelson, or inner keel. Beams connected the top timbers of the opposite branches of the ribs and formed the support for the deck. The planking was put on at right angles to the frames, the b.u.t.ting ends of the planks being connected by dovetails. The skin of the s.h.i.+p was strengthened, in the Athenian galleys, by means of stout planks, or waling-pieces, carried horizontally round the s.h.i.+p, each pair meeting together in front of the stem, where they formed the foundations for the beaks, or rams.

The hulls were further strengthened by means of girding-cables, also carried horizontally round the hull, in the angles formed by the projection of the waling-pieces beyond the skin. These cables pa.s.sed through an eye-hole at the stem, and were tightened up at the stern by means of levers. It is supposed that they were of use in holding the s.h.i.+p together under the shock of ramming. The hull was made water-tight by caulking the seams of the planking. Originally this was accomplished with a paste formed of ground sea-sh.e.l.ls and water. This paste, however, not having much cohesion, was liable to crack and fall out when the vessel strained. A slight improvement was made when the sh.e.l.ls were calcined and turned into lime. Pitch and wax were also employed, but were eventually superseded by the use of flax, which was driven in between the seams. Flax was certainly used for caulking in the time of Alexander the Great, and a similar material has continued to be employed for this purpose down to the present day. In addition to caulking the seams, it was also customary to coat over the bottom with pitch, and the Romans, at any rate, used sometimes to sheath their galleys with sheet lead fastened to the planking with copper nails. This was proved by the discovery of one of Trajan's galleys in Lake Riccio after it had been submerged for over thirteen centuries.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 18.--Stem and stern ornaments of galleys.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 19.--Bow of ancient war-galley.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 20.--Bow of ancient war-galley.]

The bows of the ancient war galleys were so constructed as to act as rams. The ram was made of hard timber projecting beyond the line of the bow, between it and the forefoot. It was usually made of oak, elm, or ash, even when all the rest of the hull was constructed of soft timber.

In later times it was sheathed with, or even made entirely of, bronze.

It was often highly ornamented, either with a carved head of a ram or some other animal, as shown in Figs. 8 to 11; sometimes swords or spear-heads were added, as shown in Figs. 19 and 20. A relic of this ancient custom is found to this day in the ornamentation of the prows of the Venetian gondolas. Originally the ram, or rostrum, was visible above the water-line, but it was afterwards found to be far more effective when wholly immersed. In addition to the rams there were side projections, or catheads, above water near the bow. The ram was used for sinking the opposing vessels by penetrating their hulls, and the catheads for shattering their oars when sheering up suddenly alongside.

Roman galleys were fitted with castles, or turrets, in which were placed fighting men and various engines of destruction. They were frequently temporary structures, sometimes consisting of little more than a protected platform, mounted on scaffolding, which could be easily taken down and stowed away. The use of these structures was continued till far into the Middle Ages.

CHAPTER III.

ANCIENT s.h.i.+PS IN THE SEAS OF NORTHERN EUROPE.

Outside the Mediterranean it is known that some of the northern nations had attained to very considerable skill in the arts of s.h.i.+pbuilding and navigation. Caesar gives a general description of the s.h.i.+ps of the Veneti, who occupied the country now known as Brittany, and who had in their hands the carrying trade between Gaul and Britain.[12] As might be expected from the stormy nature of the Atlantic, the Veneti were not able to place any reliance on oars as a means for propulsion. According to Caesar's account, they trusted solely to sails. Their vessels were built entirely of oak of great thickness. He also mentions that the beams were as much as 12 in. in depth. The bottoms of these vessels were very flat, so as to enable them the better to be laid up on the beach.

The hulls had considerable sheer, both at the stem and stern. The sails were of dressed hide, and the cables were iron chains. It is evident from this cursory description that the s.h.i.+ps of the Veneti were not based upon Mediterranean models, and it is highly probable that they, rather than the oar-propelled galleys, may be regarded as the prototypes of the early sea-going vessels of Northern Europe.

Although the art of s.h.i.+p construction had attained to great importance amongst the Veneti, their neighbours, the Britons, were still very backward in this respect at the time of the first Roman invasion. Caesar states that their vessels were of very slight construction, the framework being made of light timber, over which was stretched a covering, or skin, of strong hides. Sometimes the framework was of wicker.

The ancient Saxons, who were notorious as pirates on the North Sea, made use of boats similar to those of the ancient Britons. At the time of their invasion of Britain, however, their vessels must have been larger and of more solid construction, though we must dismiss, as an obvious absurdity, the statement that the first invading army of 9,000 men was carried to this country in three s.h.i.+ps only. It is much more probable that the expedition was embarked in three fleets.

The Saxon kings of England often maintained very considerable fleets for the purpose of protecting the coast from the Danes.

Alfred the Great is generally regarded as the founder of the English Navy. He designed s.h.i.+ps which were of a better type and larger size than those of his enemies, the Danes. They were said to have been twice as long as the vessels which they superseded. The Saxon Chronicle says, "They were full twice as long as the others; some had sixty oars, and some had more; they were swifter and steadier, and also higher than the others; they were shaped neither like the Frisian, nor the Danish, but so as it seemed to him they would be most efficient." In 897 Alfred met and defeated a Danish squadron, in all probability with his new s.h.i.+ps.

Edgar (959 to 975) is stated to have kept at sea no less than 3,600 vessels of various sizes, divided into three fleets, and the old historian William of Malmesbury tells us that this king took an active personal interest in his navy, and that in summer time he would, in turn, embark and cruise with each of the squadrons.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 21.--Anglo-Saxon s.h.i.+p. About 900 A.D.]

Fig. 21 is an ill.u.s.tration of an Anglo-Saxon s.h.i.+p taken from an old Saxon calendar, which is, or was, in the Cottonian Library, and which is supposed to have been written about half a century before the Norman Conquest. It is reproduced in Strutt's "Compleat View of the Manners, Customs, Arms, Habits, etc., of the Inhabitants of England, from the arrival of the Saxons till the reign of Henry VIII.," published in 1775.

The proportions of the boat as represented are obviously impossible. The sketch is, however, interesting, as showing the general form and mode of planking of the vessel, and the nature of the decorations of the bow and stern. We see that the vessel was a wars.h.i.+p, as the keel prolonged formed a formidable ram. We also may notice that the sail was relied on as a princ.i.p.al means of propulsion, for there are apparently no notches or rowlocks for oars. The steering was effected by two large oars, in a similar manner to that adopted by the ancient Egyptians and other Mediterranean peoples. The extraordinary character of the deck-house will be observed. It is, of course, purely symbolical, and may, at most, be interpreted as meaning that the vessel carried some sort of structure on deck.

In the seventh and eighth centuries of the Christian era the scene of maritime activity was transferred from the Mediterranean to the North of Europe. The Nors.e.m.e.n, who overran the whole of the European seaboard at one time or another, were the most famous navigators of the period immediately preceding the Middle Ages. Any record connected with their system of s.h.i.+p-construction is necessarily of great interest. The fleets of the Nors.e.m.e.n penetrated into the Mediterranean as far as the imperial city of the Eastern emperors. In the north they discovered and colonized Iceland, and even Greenland; and there are good grounds for believing that an expedition, equipped in Iceland, founded a colony in what are now the New England States five centuries before Columbus discovered the West Indies. Unfortunately, the written descriptions extant of the Norse s.h.i.+ps are extremely meagre, and if it had not been for the curious custom of the Nors.e.m.e.n of burying their great chiefs in one of their s.h.i.+ps and heaping earth over the entire ma.s.s, we should now know nothing for certain of the character of their vessels. Many of these s.h.i.+p-tombs have been discovered in modern times, but it happened in the majority of instances that the character of the earth used was unsuited to their preservation, and most of the woodwork was found to be decayed when the mounds were explored. Fortunately, however, in two instances the vessels were buried in blue clay, which is an excellent preserver of timber, and, thanks to the discovery of these, we have now a tolerably complete knowledge of the smaller cla.s.ses of vessels used by the Vikings. One of them was discovered, in 1867, at Haugen, but by far the most important was found in 1880, at Gogstad, near Sandefjord, at the entrance of the Fjord of Christiania. Though this vessel is comparatively small, she is, probably, a correct representative of the larger type of s.h.i.+ps made use of by the renowned adventurers of the North in their distant expeditions.

In view of the great interest attaching to this find, a detailed description of the vessel is given. The ill.u.s.trations (Figs. 22 to 26), showing an end elevation, longitudinal and cross-sections, and the half-plan with her lines, are taken from the "Transactions of the Inst.i.tution of Naval Architects."[13] The boat was clinker-built and wholly of oak. Her princ.i.p.al dimensions are: length, 77 ft. 11 in.; extreme breadth, 16 ft. 7 in.; and depth, from top of keel to gunwale, 5 ft. 9 in. The keel is 14 in. deep, the part below the rabbet of the garboard or lowest strakes of the planking, being 11 in. deep, and 4-1/2 in. thick at the bottom. The width across the rabbet is 3 in., while the portion above the rabbet and inboard is 7 in. wide. The keel and stem and stern-posts run into each other with very gentle curves. The keel itself is 57 ft. long, and to it are connected, by vertical scarves and a double row of iron rivets, the forefoot and heel-pieces, which latter are fastened in a similar manner to the stem and stern-post. These posts are 15 in. deep at the scarf, gradually tapering upwards. The framing of the bottom is formed of grown floors resting on the top of the keel, and extending in one piece, from shelf to shelf, as shown on the transverse section (Fig. 23). There are nineteen of these floors in all, s.p.a.ced in the body of the boat, on the average 3 ft. 3 in. apart. They are 4 in.

in diameter at the garboard strake, and taper in both dimensions, so that they are less than 3 in. at the shelf. They are not fastened to the keel. The planking is put on clinker fas.h.i.+on. There are sixteen strakes a side, the breadth of each, amids.h.i.+ps, being on the average 9-1/2 in., including the land of 1 in., and the length of planks varies from 8 ft. to 24 ft. The thickness is generally 1 in. The tenth plank from the keel is, however, 1-3/4 in. thick, and forms a kind of shelf for the beam-ends. The third plank from the top is 1-1/4 in. thick, and is pierced with 4-in. holes for the oars, of which there are sixteen on each side. The two upper strakes are only 3/4 in. thick, and inside the top one is placed the gunwale, which is 3 4-1/2. The planks are fastened together by iron rivets s.p.a.ced from 6 in. to 8 in. apart. The heads of the rivets are 1 in. in diameter, and the riveting plates 1/2 in. square. The planks are worked down from thicker slabs, and a ledge 1 in. in height is left on the inboard surface of the middle of each plank. The planks bear against each floor at two points, viz. the upper edge and the projecting ledge. Fig. 24 shows a section of a floor and of the plank, with its projecting ledge. The fastenings of the planking to the floors are very peculiar. Two holes are bored transversely in the ledge, one on either side of each floor. There is a corresponding hole running fore and aft through the floor, and through these holes are pa.s.sed ties made of the tough roots of trees barely 1/4 in. in diameter, crossed on the ledge and pa.s.sing once through each hole. The only iron fastening between the planking and the floors is at the extreme ends of the latter, where a single nail is driven through each, and riveted at the ends of the floors. The beams rest on the shelf strake and on the tops of the floor-ends. They are 7 in. deep and 4 in. wide. They are connected with the planking by knees (see the section, Fig. 23), fastened to their upper faces and to the side of the s.h.i.+p as far up as the oar-strake, or "mainwale," by means of oak trenails. The knees are not so wide as the beams, and consequently a ledge, or landing, is left on each side of the latter which supports the flooring, or bottom boards. The top strakes are connected to the body of the vessel by short timbers, shown in the section, Fig. 23. These are placed in the s.p.a.ces between the knees. The beams are supported in the middle by short pillars resting on the throats of the floors.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 22.

FIG. 25.

FIG. 26.

FIG. 24.

FIG. 23.

Viking s.h.i.+p.]

The vessel was propelled by sails as well as oars. It was fitted with a single mast; the arrangements for stepping and raising and lowering the latter were peculiar. A beam of oak, 11 ft. long, 19 in. wide, and 14 in. deep, formed the step. A side elevation of this is shown at _s_, in the longitudinal section, Fig. 25, and a cross-section in Fig. 23. The step, as may be seen, is countersunk over the throats of the floors; it is tapered towards the ends, and a piece (_c_) nearly 12 in. thick, immediately forward of the mast, rises vertically out of it. This piece is fastened to a huge log of oak, 16 ft. long, 38 in. broad, and 14 in.

deep in the middle, marked _f_ (Figs. 25 and 26), which rests on a sole-piece about 4 in. thick. The sole-piece is countersunk over the beams. The large log is called by Mr. Colin Archer the "fish," partly because its ends are fas.h.i.+oned to represent the tails of two whales, and partly because the mast partners of modern s.h.i.+ps, which take the place of this heavy piece, are to this day called _Fisken_ in Norway. The fish contains a slot (_h_) nearly 6 ft. long, and the same width as the mast, 12-1/2 in. The mast goes through the forward end of the slot, and when it is in use the slot is filled up with a heavy slab. When the mast is lowered for going into action, or when going against a head-wind, the slab is removed, and the fore-stay slacked off, thus permitting the mast to fall aft. The sail used was a solitary square one. The rudder resembles a short oar. It is hung by a rope pa.s.sing through a perforated conical chock on the starboard side of the s.h.i.+p. There is an iron eyebolt near the bottom edge, through which a rope probably pa.s.sed for the purpose of raising the rudder when not in use. The rudder was worked by means of a tiller fitted into the socket at the upper end.

Unfortunately, the two extreme ends of the s.h.i.+p have decayed away, so that it is not possible to determine with accuracy what was the appearance of the bow and stern. It is, however, probable, from the direction taken by the planking towards the ends, that the vessel possessed very considerable sheer. As may be seen from the plan, the character of the lines was extremely fine, and it is probable that the boat was capable of high speed. The remains of the ropes which have been discovered prove that they were made from the bark of trees.

This vessel may be considered as a connecting link between the ancient and mediaeval types of s.h.i.+ps. Her proportions and scantlings prove that her builders had a large experience of s.h.i.+pbuilding, that they fully understood how to work their material and to adapt it properly to the duty it had to fulfil, and also that they understood the art, which was subsequently lost, to be revived only in modern times, of shaping the underwater portion of the hull so as to reduce the resistance to the pa.s.sage of the vessel through the water. The only part of the structural design to which any serious exception can be taken is the very slight character of the connection between the top sides and the body of the boat, and even this defect was probably not very serious when we take into account the lightness of the loading, and the fact that it probably consisted chiefly of live cargo, so that there was little dead weight to cause serious straining.

Vessels of the type of the Viking s.h.i.+ps were built in Denmark at a very early date. In 1865 three boats were discovered buried in a peat bog in Jutland. Danish antiquaries consider that they were built about the fifth century of our era. The largest is 70 ft. in length and of such an excellent type that boats of somewhat similar form and construction are in universal use to this day all round the coasts of Norway. Such an instance of persistency in type is without parallel in the history of s.h.i.+pbuilding, and is a wonderful proof of the skill of the Nors.e.m.e.n in designing and building vessels. The boat in question is clinker-built, the planks having the same peculiarities as those of the Viking s.h.i.+p just described. It is of the same shape at both ends, and has great sheer at both stem and stern. The rowlocks, of which there are thirty, prove that the vessel was intended to be rowed in either direction. This also is a peculiarity of the modern Norwegian rowboat. The steering was effected by means of a large oar, or paddle. There is no trace of a mast, nor of any fitting to receive one; nor was the vessel decked. The internal framing was admirably contrived. In fact, it would be difficult, even at the present time, to find a vessel in which lightness and strength were better combined than in this fifteen-hundred-year-old specimen of the s.h.i.+pbuilder's art.

CHAPTER IV.

MEDIaeVAL s.h.i.+PS.

In the times of the Norman kings of England both the war and the mercantile navies of the country were highly developed. William the Conqueror invaded this island without the a.s.sistance of a war navy. He trusted to good luck to transport his army across the Channel in an unprotected fleet of small vessels which were built for this purpose, and which were burnt by his order when the landing had been effected. We possess ill.u.s.trations of these transport vessels from a contemporary source--the Bayeux tapestry, which was, according to tradition, the work of Queen Matilda, the Conqueror's consort. Fig. 27 represents one of these vessels. It is obviously of Scandinavian type, resembling in some of its features the Viking s.h.i.+p shown in Figs. 22 to 26. Apparently, oars were not used in this particular boat; the propulsion was effected by means of a single square sail. The mast uns.h.i.+pped, as we know from other ill.u.s.trations on the same piece of tapestry. The steering was effected by a rudder, or steering-board, on the starboard-side. In all the ill.u.s.trations of s.h.i.+ps in this tapestry the main sheet was held by the steersman, a fact which shows that the Normans were cautious navigators. Another s.h.i.+p is represented with ten horses on board.

We possess confirmatory evidence that the s.h.i.+p shown in Fig. 27 represents a type that was prevalent on our coasts in the eleventh and two following centuries, for very similar boats are shown in the transcript of Matthew Paris's "History of the Two Kings of Offa" (now in the Cottonian Library), the ill.u.s.trations in which are supposed to have been drawn by Matthew Paris himself. The history is that of two Saxon princes who lived in the latter half of the eighth century, and was written in the first half of the thirteenth. We may fairly suppose that the ill.u.s.trations represented the types of vessels with which the historian was familiar. They were all of the type depicted in the Bayeux tapestry. They are of the same shape at both ends, just like the Viking s.h.i.+p, and it may be added, like the boats to this day in common use along the coasts of Norway.