HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

41

Aiuuov SevSpov, the everlasting, the eternal tree or wood ; and there was a strangetradition among the ancients, that an house at Utica, roofed with cedar, had beenbuilt twelve hundred and seventy-eight years without ever needing repair in thatparticular part *. It was nevertheless found but little applicable to the purposesof ancient Marine Architecture, on account of its not holding well togetherwith nailing only, and being apt to become what is now called iron sick. Itis said, notwithstanding, to have been occasionally much used by the ^Egyptians,as well as the Syrians, owing to a scarcity of fir; and one particular tree is reportedto have been felled in Cyprus, for Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, about threehundred years before the Christian aera, which was an hundred and thirty feet inlength and seven in diameter.

The Cypress wood also was held in very high estimation, not only as beingvery durable, but because it shrunk, or contracted so little, after being felled,that vessels built with it, very seldom, if ever, became leaky.

The pine by no means stood in the lowest repute; to which we may in thesame class add the elm, particularly for such portion of the hull as was constantlyunder water. The larch and the beech on the other hand were by no means infavour, being found little capable of resisting the force and agitation of the sea,as well as that they were liable to very quick decay : nevertheless the celebratedvessel, called the Argo, is said to have been principally built of the latter wood.

- Among those which modern practice and experience has proved most appli-cable to this great purpose are the oak and the fir. The former, excellent as itis universally known to be at the present day, was not much approved amongthe ancients, because, though extremely strong and durable, it was found ex-ceedingly difficult to be worked. This circumstance swelled prejudice to such anheight, that it was held in disrepute among the ancient artizans on two grounds,both of which, unfortunately for the science and candour of antiquity, are ex-tremely futile, and, indeed, totally destitute of foundation : the first was, that itwas extremely liable to shrink and let in the water .; and, the second, that it wasvery subject to early decay. On the other hand, the fir, which is far from beingso well adapted to the purpose, was, as being lighter and easier of application, inmuch higher request and estimation. A vessel is said to have been built in thetime of Caius Caesar solely of this material; it was that in which the celebratedobelisk was conveyed to Rome, and is reported to have been of such extraor-

Vol. I.

* Cadii Calcagnani commentatio de Re Nautica, cap. 3.

G

dinary