46

HISTORY OP MARINE ARCHITECTURE.'

vessel perfectly straight, or, according to the English term, wall-sided. Theoars of the lower rank too must have been extremely short, so as to act on thesurface of the water at a very small distance from the side of the vessel, inwhich case it must be remarked, that it is very evident they ccmld not be of anyservice except in a dead calm.

Snelling, in his account of the celebrated galley built by Philopater, king ofJEgypt, thus expresses himself, “ Remi longioresad puppim inserti: horum max-imi, cubitorum triginta octo, tractatu et remigio in usu faciles, ob plumbum admanubium additum: The oars, which were near the stern of the vessel, wereconsiderably longer than those in the midships, the largest being thirty-eight cubits,or about fifty-seven feet in length : they were rendered more manageable bv aquantity of lead attached to the handle.” As to the Quadragintiremes, or vessels-usually described as having forty ranks or tiers of oars, we cannot reconcile thereport to our understandings, except by supposing them nothing more thangalleys fitted with as many oars in each rank. Those who pretend to imposethe former interpretation are certainly as ridiculous as an author in future ageswould be, who attempted to prove, that a modern ship of war, mounting eightyguns, had as many tiers of cannon one above the other.

Some persons who imagine they can solve this problem bv supposing the oarsof ancient galleys were disposed in diagonal ranks, or, to speak more intelligibly,that the seats on which the rowers sat, resembled a flight of stairs, (the Frenchcall it en echiquier , like the chequers on a chess board) and that they were not,strictly speaking, one above the other, can understand nothing either of the con-struction of vessels, or the mode of working them. Do they recollect that theoars in the lower tier, or row, being placed as close to each other as is possible tobe effected in any given space, allowing room to work them, it is impossible tointroduce one at the intervallum, in the upper tier, or, according to the Frenchphrase, chequer-wise, without losing the advantage of that first rank, or tier;consequently, nothing would be gained by this pretended discovery. A circum-stance which militates still more strongly against this supposed mode of con-struction is, that such a distribution of the stages, or what may be called thedecks of the vessel, is incompatible both with its strength, and those commu-nications through the several parts of the hull, or body, which are absolutelynecessary.

A third common solution of this perplexing enigma is scarcely more satisfactoryto us, although, perhaps, less unreasonable and contradictory to some particulars

which