HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

49

sea ; or that Greece and jEgypt, who have left us such evident and irrefragableproofs of their perfection and ingenuity in every other art and science, shouldhave made no progress in that of Naval Architecture ? Have we, because theart of navigation was imperfect, and that in consequence of the non-discoveryof the compass the ancients seldom ventured out into the open sea, any justreason to conclude their vessels were bad sailers, and difficult to be worked withpromptitude and exactness ? Their peculiar exigencies rendered well-constructedvessels indispensably necessary to them, for to say nothing of the qualities orrequisites capable of resisting hurricanes or tempests, the neighbourhood of thecoast is much more subject to be affected by sudden gusts of wind than the opensea, and the shore continually attended by shoals and shelves, which are exceed-ingly dangerous, not to say destructive to shipping. It is an absolute certainty,that the ancients adapted a number of wonderful machines to the use of theirmarine, the very name and form of which we have, in many instances, totallylost. The character of Archimedes, to whom they were principally in-debted for their mechanical discoveries and inventions, is too firmly establishedto render their powers, wonderful as they were, a matter even of doubt. It is awell-known fact, that the Romans transported by sea, from Aigypt to Rome,obelisks, formed out of one single piece, of a length and weight so enormous, thatit would be impossible to put them on board any modern ship whatever. It cannotmoreover be denied, that, in aid of their naval wars, they had a variety of resources,and the greatest industry in providing curious expedients, which have becomeneedless, since the discovery of gunpowder, and the invention of cannon.

No author, Vegetius excepted, has afforded us any scientific information, at allsatisfactory relative to the ancient marine. He too wrote in a time * when thehistory of it w'as nearly lost ; for it is evident to all, that it does not enjoy thesame advantage with other sciences, and is incapable of being transmitted, Avithperspicuity, to posterity, on account of that peculiarity of language, and theabstract terms, unknown in every other branch of mechanical art which, by cus-tom, have become indispensably necessary in explaining this. We can neverthelesscollect enough from this author to impress us with a favourable idea of theirextensive knowlege and skill in it: to his evidence we cannot refuse joining thetestimony of a crowd of ancient historians, and the descriptions, vague as theymay in some instances be, which they afford us of the vessels of their times.I hese accounts, exaggerated as they certainly are in sundry respects, incontestibly

* The reign of die emperor Vaientinun, about the year 380 of the Christian aera.

VOL. I. II

prove,