52

HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

execution, except by the addition of some mechanism, the principal of which weare totally unacquainted with. In short, difficulties appear to start up and mul-tiply whenever any attempt is made towards solving them, for, admitting theperpendicular height of the vessel from the keel to have been no greater, and thedeductions already stated, properly calculated, the distance between the center ofone tier of row-ports, and that immediately above it, supposing such to have beentheir disposition, could not have been more than eleven inches, a circumstancethat must completely convince us there is an error in some part either of thecalculation, or description.

Vossius, who, however contemptuously he may be spoken of on account ofsome of his writings, has certainly not failed in his Dissertation on the AncientMarine, bestows considerable pains in attempting to give us such anaccount of this memorable vessel, as shall be reconcileable to our senses, andvery candidly states all the various points which appear to militate for, andagainst his own opinion. “ If we compare,” says he, “ the oars that mustnecessarily have been used on board this vessel, with those by which the moderngalley is worked, and allow for their different proportions in respect to length,we must also keep in view a similar comparison in regard to their size andthickness, and we shall then have a correct idea of their relative dimensions, aswell as their strength.” Having then proceeded to an arithmetical calculation,which is omitted, as being of little use to the present investigation ; he adds,“ Let us now examine in what manner the four thousand rowers, which aresaid to have been employed on board this vessel, were employed or stationed atthe forty banks of oars. It is not my intention (says he) to combat or examinewhat a number of very learned men have already written on this subject,both in France, and in other countries. Their opinion is certainly correct, inrespect to the tiers of oars being placed obliquely over each other. Existingremnants of antiquity convince us clearly of the fact ; but there still remains amuch heavier difficulty to be got over : it is, in what manner the oars ofthe upper tier could be worked and managed by one person only, for it is deniedthat more than one was stationed to each oar, and the perplexity of the enigma isnot a little encreased, by the assertion that a very small part of the oar reachedwithin board. It is well known, that there are no weights whatever, which bythe proper assistance and combination of mechanical powers, may not be movedeven by a single person; but this we are at the same time certain, that the greaterthe weights are, so much the slower can they be moved. Oars, it must be

remem-