66

HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

As, on account of the great number of person sengaged in the occupations lastmentioned, the passage to and fro was rendered inconvenient, and indeed diffi-cult ; projections, Or as they were whimsically called, decks, were added at certaindistances, for the purpose of facilitating it: they extended on each side thegangway about ten feet, and in breadth, spreading towards the middle of thevessel, seven feet. Although this addition is not particularly mentioned byAthenaeus, it is sufficiently noticed by Plutarch, and other authors, to preventany doubt being entertained of it. The depth of water drawn by these vessels isnot any where clearly ascertained: it is known, however, that jt must to a cer-tainty have been more than twenty feet, for the ship of Hiero, which was offar inferior dimensions and burthen, was of so heavy a draught, as to be incapableof entering the port of Syracuse. Notwithstanding a variety of other particulars(says Vossius) might be collected from Athenaeus and others, it remains atpresent only to consider such points as relate merely to the rowers, and thenumber of tiers in which they were disposed, so that some definitive conclusionsmaybe drawn for the information of posterity, as well in relation to the galley ofPtolemy, as to all other ancient vessels, whether T riremes, or of still superior rate.There are not wanting some persons, who though they possess considerablelearning, and it might be natural to suppose the absurdity of the idea would betoo apparent to admit its being seriously entertained by them for a single moment,are nevertheless tenacious enough of their self-created opinion, to insist, with noinconsiderable degree of peremptoriness, that all oars whatever were workedby a single person. An idea which has generally gone forth, that thosepersons who worked the upper tiers of oars received much more pay than thosedid who were in the lower ranks, because the labour was much greater, hasbetrayed men into the belief of the foregoing absurdity ; but the increased payof the persons alluded to, was given in consequence of the laborious positionin which they were obliged to work the oar: first, by raising it above thehead, as we have seen the rowers in the upper tiers were compelled to do ;and secondly, because it was impossible for them to preserve a sitting, whichwas the more easy posture, as the thalamitie, or lowest rank of rowers alwaysdid. Those critics are also mistaken who found their opinion on the supposition,that no mention is made by any of the ancient writers, of oars worked by morethan one person. They have fallen into the error, in consequence of not recol-lecting, that the word remus, signifying, in its literal sense, an oar, is not only

to