SYRAKOUSIA VII : MY WHAT A BIG ONE!

A most remarkable part of Syrakousia's armament was the great catapult which was designed by Archimedes himself.

A wall with battlements and decks athwart the ship was built on supports; on this stood a stone-hurler, which could shoot by its own power a stone weighing one hundred and eighty pounds or a javelin eighteen feet long. 

The exact nature of the 'wall' with its 'battlements' is difficult to decide. It cannot conflict with the masts and it cannot conflict with the operation of the sails. 

The logical solution is that Moschion is describing a fortified forecastle. 

The first naval application of  artillery we have record of was by Demetrios (soon to be Poliorketes) of Macedon was the mounting of light bolt shooters - probably tension weapons - in the forecastles of his war-galleys. 75years before, on a massive grain freighter, the logical process of where to put such a contraption must have been startlingly apparent to a genius like Archimedes. 

The forecastle was an area easily put off limits to passengers.
 The shooting arc of a weapon mounted there would be more than 180 degrees. 
The weapon would be protected by the forecastle defences and be able to shoot into any vessel barring the passage of the freighter.

CASTLEY FORECASTLES

The best place to see fortified forecastles is on Trajan's Column.

These are light Liburnian-style galleys but they have very decorative forecastles. These cannot have been high or they would catch the wind and block vision. They were bulwarks men could take cover behind.

(see HERE for misinterpretation of these forecastles as being 6 metres or so high!)

This kind of thing would be very practical to mount a catapult behind and be an impressive and decorative addition to the ship. It just needs a Greekised appearance rather than the Roman ornament of the Trajanic ships. Maybe some surviving Greek fortifications could give a good starting point for the model.

The Dipylon gate at Athens

See more 3D reconstructions from Athens HERE at Ancient  Athens 3D. Lots of modelling fuel!

So we have a good idea of the location and positioning of the catapult.

ARCHIMEDES' BEAST

The weapon itself ... was large. The usual pictures of Imperial Roman Legionaries serving their handy ballistae show weapons shooting 1 cubit bolts. Archimedes' catapult shot a bolt TEN times larger. The stock, where the bolt was laid needed to be ten cubits plus ..  meaning the weapon was 7 metres or so long!

By Archimede's time the best catapults were torsion powered. The energy for the shot was stored in wound-up sinew and hair skeins mounted in a massive frame. The limbs were pulled back to create the tension and when they were released they rotated back to their original position - incidentally flinging a deadly projectile at one's foes.

Something in this order..but we shall see not quite the same

It is significant that the machine is described as shooting BOTH a stone ball and a bolt. It was simultaneously an oxybeles - arrow shooter, and a lithobolos - stone-shooter. Only the most advanced types of catapult could do this - here we see the mark of Archimedes again.

The first catapults used simple tension for driving force

The first torsion catapults had limbs which rotated outside of the springs and backwards as they were tensioned. When released they shot outward and forward. These were known as euthytone - straight stretched - machines. The largest arrow they could shoot was about 3 cubits or 1.25 metres long.

The more advanced machines had springs set wider apart and the limbs rotated first forward and inward - and then backward as they were tensioned. They then moved forward and outward as they were released. This method of tensioning allowed a greater angle of rotation and more power to be stored in the tension spring. Palintones, as they were known - meaning backward stretched - could shoot both arrows and stones and could be built to great size.

a palintone stone/arrow shooter

Thus we can decide the machine to be built looks a bit different ot the commonly made type of model and it was certainly not a mangonel or trebuchet-style contraption!

Artillerist's delight : when the arm breaks does it fly towards me or away?

Interestingly, the torsion catapult has no recoil, It does not throw itself across the deck or shake the foundation it stands upon. The mangonel-onager was named after the wild ass for a reason ....

The catapult stood on a secure trestle mounting which allowed it to be rotated and elevated-depressed. The mount was simple but solid. There was no sophisticated ranging apparatus because , despite what a lot of 'experts' spout - there is no evidence that catapults were used at anything but close range where the trajectory of flight was flat and the thing could be aimed. High-arcing shots had ZERO chance of hitting a target in a naval battle. (unles you interpret the Antykythera mechanism as an early rangekeeping and position-prediction device!).

trajectories for a large palintone

A machine of Syrakousia-size would have a flattish trajectory extending out to 200 metres. From the height of Syrakousia's top deck this would be certainly accurate out to 100 metres or so.

The ammunition was a large arrow 18 feet long or a stone ball - not a tatty random rock! - 40 centimetres oe so in diameter! The stone-cranes mounted on the towers could use a 1 talent - 25Kg ball which would be around 30cm diameter. Perhaps the catapult could use these at close range and shoot lighter balls to longer range.

 POINT AND SHOOT

This magnificent device was sitting on a platform on top of the third deck of a ship. It would not necessarily stay put in all weathers. Nor could  it be trained to all angles without being moved.

The usual mounting was a solid adjustable trestle-style thing which was necessarily quite solid.

It could not be easily moved without special arrangements. It could allow aiming in altitude and azimuth.

The best analogy I can find is the deck mounted carronade of Nelsonian date. The massive wooden carriage was made fast against recoiling and adjusted in azimuth by means of various blocks and tackle.

Cannon tackle on USS Constitution

Carronade deck mounting

A similar arrangement was used in Hellenistic artillery defence towers to shift catapults between apertures. It would be perfect to secure a large catapult on a ship's deck and allow it to be trained for shooting.

Archimedes monster could have been on a mounting which was easily shifted to different points on the

artillery deck where it was located. Then from each point it could be accurately trained with some finer adjustment on the weapon itself.

Hellenistic artillery installation

The weapon need be served only by a few men if the block and tackles system was used, say 6 or 8.

This aspect of ancient artillery is often overlooked in illustration. The precision of the action in an ancient catapult was remarkable, and very useful to batter a hole in a wall. But they should also be trainable by some means.

Big cat. No apparent means of aiming it. Actually of the same size as Syrakousia's

EFFECT

The maximum range of ancient catapults was about 700 metres but a heavy type shooting stones of 90 kilos or so would probably have a maximum range half this. But this is not the whole story.

At sea, a maximum range shot, between two moving points would be so unlikely to hit on its necessarily high trajectory that it would be a waste of finely carved stone balls.

The key part of an ancient catapult's range was the distance it could be used with a relatively flat trajectory. This makes the thing easier to aim and the projectile flies faster.

The artillery officer on Syrakousia probably aimed at (Careful! Howerd is having an influence!  Ed.) engaging targets at 200 metres and less. However, the siting of the machine 8 metres or so up on a ship with masts and other structures meant that its field of fire was limited.

The usual siting for catapults on a Hellenistic war-galley was the bow. The ship would shoot at targets it ws running towards or following. It could force enemy vessels out of its path. This is probably how Syrakousia's catapult was mounted too.

ONWARD TO THE CONSTRUCTION!

SYRAKOUSIA VIII : TIPPING THE SCALES

Syrakousia is not forgotten......a word about scale choices.

The common scales for tabletop model ships are 1/1200 1/600 and possible 1/2400.

My idea is to base a game on attacking Syrakousia as she crosses the table to safety. The attackers being a motley crew of pirates on variously sized vessels. Or a Baddies naval flotilla.

Exactly what scale this should take place in is a question to be answered.

Syrakousia is relatively large but we also need to represent the attackers adequately on their smaller vessels. If we take a pentekonter as the typical pirate vessel we can see how big a model will be at various scales.

A 30m pentekonter would be ..so big.. at the various scales...

• 1/2400        12,5mm
• 1/1200        25mm
• 1/600          50mm

These are not very large models, and if we want to represent men...they will be tiny.

Left to Right : 10mm, 6mm, 4mm, 2mm

The only option is to go up a level of magnitude to useable figure scales. 6mm is possible - but still rather fiddly. This is usually accepted as 1/300 scale which gets our pentekonter up to 100mm long. The ship is now a nice size and the figures can be handled but when considering the details of Syrakousia not big enough. Syrakousia at this scale is 65m /300 = 21.6cm. Not a lot of space for detail nor for figures.

4mm scale trieres with
MM 4mm figs

10mm scale is the only solution. And a table larger than a playing card.

10mm is nominally 1/183.. This makes Syrakousia 35cm long. Now that is something you can get your hands on to model. Small details like the cranes and turrets can be done without requiring watchmaker's spectacles. Attacking pentekonters will be 16cm long - and can also be modelled well.

Front to Back :1/1000, Hotz 1/300, 10mm trieres and Syrakousia mock-up in 10mm

I am not getting younger, my hands and eyesight do not improve with the years. The argument for 10mm is irrefutable. Syrakousia will sail on a 10mm seascape.

SYRACOUSIA VI : DON'T GIVE UP THE SHIP!

DEFENDING THE SHIP

 There were also eight turrets on it, of a size proportional to the weight of the ship; two at the stern, an equal number at the bow, and the rest amidships. 
To each of these two cranes were made fast, and over them portholes were built, through which stones could be hurled at an enemy sailing underneath. 
Upon each of the turrets were mounted four sturdy men in full armour, and two archers. The whole interior of the turrets was full of Saracen and missiles. 


TURRETS

These turrets have been interpreted as full height towers. This is not necessary. The meaning is a fighting platform. They were not massive - they housed just 4 men and their ammunition. 4 metres square would give ample fighting space plus some racks for amunition.
 

Ship tower a la Ben Hur. Nice, but practical?

A light wall around them would deflect missiles and they could be furnished with machiolation. Sculptures suggest they could be painted to resemble stone-built structure but this is not definite at this early date.

Maybe more like this..fighting platforms not Rapunzel towers

 The 'Saracen'  mentioned here is, I believe, tow-like fibre which can be easily lit. Presumably for making fire missiles.

STONE-DROPPING CRANES

The crane weapons are interesting. They are designed to prevent smaller craft coming alongside - as pirates are wont to do.

The ammunition must be lifted by 2 men by hand so we must assume the calibre was around 1 or 2 talents  25 or 50 pounds, 12 or 25 kilos.(approx.)

Such stones falling 10 metres would have considerable force to crush men or spring planks in a small hull.


The weapon is interesting because it has some parallel with the Theban 'flamethrower' used at the siege of  Delium in  424BC. This was also made of 'beams' hollowed.

There was plenty of ammunition supplied and it would be a brave attacker who came alongside Syrakousia.


MAST-CRANES AND DOLPHINS

 and as there were three masts, from each of them were suspended two large yards bearing stones, from which hooks and leaden weights were let down upon any enemy which might attack the vessel.

Each mast had men serving lines and pulleys which controlled extra yardarms - cranes - which allowed dolphins to be suspended out beyond the ship's sides. Dolphins were an old weapon, used,  not for the first time, at Syracuse in the Peloponnesian Wars.

The principle was similar to the turret cranes, in that a targetted vessel would suffer a heavy weight smashing vertically down into it in free fall. Dolphins could be random heavy things but, in the absence of grand pianos and ton weights the ancients used torpedo or dolphin-shaped lead castings.

ACME is a Greek word, you know? Doesn't lessen the pain though..

 The dolphin was raised to the top of the yard, the yard steered round to hang over the target - probably aimed using a hanging plumb bob - and then released by pulling a pin or slipping a line. Maybe the dolphin could be hauled up for another shot, otherwise it would be cut away and another hoisted.

The same yard crane could deploy an iron hand / grapnel to catch a target and capsize it or hold it for others to attack at will.


 FIGHTING DECK - AN EXTRA DECK OR 1 OF THE 3 ?

A wall with battlements and decks athwart the ship was built on supports;

 Here we read that there was also kind of combat deck on the ship.

This is added to the 3 decks already mentioned. But as we shall see was not a complete deck.

A question arises as to if this was intended to refer to an extra superimposed structure or a specific part of the uppermost deck.

It seems to be an overlying structure because ..

a) the structures on deck 3 needed roofs and this platform could form their roofs.
b) the structure is described as being supported on trestles/tripods  (rather than the columns/pillars of this translation)

The description of a 'wall' crossing the ship is confusing...maybe it refers to the  fore and aft aspects presenting wall-like balustrades? Difficult to interpret.

The platform - which we can call Deck 3A - cannot have extended over the whole of the area of deck 3 because this would cover the promenades, gardens and gymnasium areas which Moschion was so keen to describe.

Deck fighters at this height on the ship  could only hurl missiles or wait to rush to places where attackers had breached the all-round barrior of  iron railings.

Attackers would not need to climb to the top deck. If they got aboard they would be distracted prior to that by the prospect of plundering cabins cargo and passengers while the deck fighters could be left to stew in the sun.

'Chaps, chaps.. I say..there are some steps just over here....

Each mast base needed an area for the mast and tops to be serviced. The large catapult needed a base to operate on and probably to be moved and trained in different directions.

The stables needed roofing. As did the library and reading room - though the roof of this had a circular hole for a sundial. Areas covered by the towers - 8 of them - would not necessarily need a fighting deck at those locations.

The solution would appear to be that there were katastroma-like  strips of decking located at crucial areas over the hull area. Early galleys were not fully decked, they had a narrow gangway down the mid-line connecting forecastle and poop. It is something like this we could see as Deck 3A on Syrakousia.

early undecked pentekonter, later eikosoros with through-gangway

schematic of fighting platform over Syrakousia's top deck

This is a difficult aspect of the reconstruction but we can be sure it was not a true extra deck.

Archimedes' Catapult
on this stood a stone-hurler, which could shoot by its own power a stone weighing one hundred and eighty pounds or a javelin eighteen feet long  This engine was constructed by Archimedes. Either one of these missiles could be hurled six hundred feet.

..this I will save for next time... plenty to deal with besides this....


After this came leather curtains joined together, suspended to thick beams by means of bronze chains. 

Such screens were a common device to block incoming missiles. They were bronze and heavy leather to avoid damage and absorb the energy of the  missiles. They are mentioned in the surviving treatises on siegecarft and artillery but we do not know exactly how they were made. A flexible and heavy hanging mat would catch flying missiles and absorb their force without itself suffering too much.

If you know what I mean....

An iron paling which encircled the ship also protected it against any who attempted to climb aboard; 

I have searched for surviving iron railings from the period or even Roman times without success. Iron is, alas, too -easily recycled for such mundane items to survive the centuries. One might be put in mind of the abbatis-like cervi of Caesar's circumvallation of Alesia whenh considering how these pailings functioned.

Railings could even be put into offensive action if one is so minded. Kubrick shows us how in his spectacle 'Spartacus'.

Some great railing action with Kirk HERE

also grappling-cranes of iron were all about the ship, which, operated by machinery, could lay hold of the enemy's hulls and bring them alongside where they would be exposed to blows.

These smaller versions of the mast-cranes or perhaps even catapult propelled grapnels made it dangerous for small vessels to approach Syrakousia. I have discussed the harpax, which is otherwise assumed to have been devised by Agrippa, Octavian's admiral, centuries later, in a previous post HERE


Sixty sturdy men in full armour mounted guard on each side of the ship, and a number equal to these manned the masts and stone-hurlers. 

This means there were 120 armed deck fighters manning the ship. There were cabins for them somewhere or else they must have sheltered under awnings on the deck or fighting platforms. It is interesting what the passengers made of 120 plus warriors milling around the place.

Jenkins rued the ticket price for his week on the Zambezi river considering the limited privacy the vessel afforded

Also at the masts, on the mast-heads (which were of bronze), men were posted, three on the foremast, two in the maintop and one on the mizzenmast; these were kept supplied by the slaves with stones and missiles carried aloft in wicker baskets to the crow's-nests by means of pulleys.

Syrakousia's 'fighting tops' were not the large, heavily-manned platforms of the 'age of sail'.

But they surely could deal some damage as the men up there were relatively immune from attack and well-supplied with missiles which would have serious effect when thrown from such a lofty perch.

Sluys 1340. Gravity still a potential threat.

DEFENSIVE STRATEGY

Syrakousia seems to have been designed with the idea of primarily keeping attackers at a distance. It would have been extremely dangerous for smaller craft, less than a trieres in size, to approach Syrakousia. This is consistent with the main threat being piractes rather than warships. Pirates operated with vessels that could be used as fishing boats when the owners cupboards were not bare enough to have their wives place a cutlass or grapnel on the dining table one evening.

Small vessels with clusters of desperate men aboard,  appearing form behind headlands were the pirate's mode of attack. Several vessels could cooperate to corner a victim. The denouement was when a wave of badly dressed expert sailors swarmed onto the cornered vessel and waved very sharp agricultural instrument under the noses of the occupants who had not already had a siezure or jumped overboard.

Who is tractoring who ?

To be taken by pirates meant certain slavery, possible ransoming, rape of all denominations and death or mutilation for the uncooperative or unlucky. Not to mention the loss of the cargo and the ship. Hence defence.

Along each side there were 7 crane weapons which could reach out several metres. There were the tractor beams . the grapnel thrower - which could drag unwary attackers close.

There were 60 deck fighters chucking javelins, stones and shooting arrows on each side.

 

Cruel, yet satisfying.

 If the attackers got alongside they had to climb a spiked iron railing under shot and spear-thrust.

Once aboard, the crew of 600 ( ! ? ) would resist. Added-to the occasional sharpened hairpin or aggressive lapdog of the first class passengers this is a lot of manpower.

  

 

10 or 20 cutthroats would steer clear of Syrakousia. Several boat-loads of pirates would not bother with Syrakousia. It would take a major combined effort  of several settlements or a state-backed episode of privateering to think about tackling Syrakousia! Unfortunately such shady enterprises were usual along the rugged coasts of the Mediterranean. Hence, Syrakousia was such a bonney girl.

Beautiful lines, full form, comfortable ride, but sharp talons and expensive to maintain : Pirate keep your distance!!!

 Had they but world enough and time no doubt Hieron's brains trust could have devised anything. The only way to secure her cargo better would have been to make Syrakousia a U-boat. Looking at the early models such as Turtle and the Holland, and considering Aristotle's observations about snorkels or breathing lines.....


Just then as divers are sometimes provided with instruments for respiration, through which they can  draw air from above thewater, and thus may remain for a long time under the sea,so  also elephants have been furnished with their lenghened nose wherever they have to traverse the water they lift its tip up above the surface and breathe through it. For the elephant's proboscis as already said, is a nose. 
(Aristotle, de partibus animalium, Part ii.16:658b30 f.)

Probably it was the plans for a u-boat which a Roman soldier stood on as he butchered Archimedes.

Alexander is reputed to have gone down in a diving bell, maybe even with Aristotle, at Tyre. Sadly,  this story has no historical foundation. 
But Syrakousia proves, truth is usually stranger than fiction....

SYRAKOUSIA V : THE AMAZING TOP DECK

DECK 3 - THE FLOATING GARDENS OF HEIRON

The top deck as described by Athenaeus-Moschion was a truly amazing conglomeration of facilities that sounds more like a small town than a ship. Here we begin to imagine parallels with the barges of Caligula and the Ptolematic thalamegoi.

Here is the text .. it is difficult to translate and cannot be said to make complete sense.

On the level of the uppermost gangway there were a gymnasium and promenades built on a scale proportionate to the size of the ship; 
in these were garden-beds of every sort, luxuriant with plants of marvellous growth, and watered by lead tiles hidden from sight; then there were bowers of white ivy and grape-vines, the roots of which got their nourishment in casks filled with earth, and receiving the same irrigation as the garden-beds. These bowers shaded the promenades. 
Built next to these was a shrine of Aphrodite large enough to contain three couches, with a floor made of agate and other stones, the most beautiful kinds found in the island; it had walls and ceiling of Cyprus-wood, and doors of ivory and fragrant cedar; it was also most lavishly furnished with paintings and statues and drinking-vessels of every shape. 
"Adjoining the Aphrodite room was a library large enough for five couches, the walls and doors of which were made of boxwood; it contained a collection of books, and on the ceiling was a concave dial  made in imitation of the sun-dial on Achradina.  
There was also a bathroom, of three-couch size, with three bronze tubs and a wash-stand of variegated Tauromenian marble, having a capacity of fifty gallons. 
There were also several rooms built for the marines and those who manned the pumps. 
But beside these there were ten stalls for horses on each side of the ship; and next them was the storage-place for the horses' food, and the belongings of the riders and their slaves.  
There was also a water-tank at the bow, which was kept covered and had a capacity of twenty thousand gallons; it was constructed of planks, caulked with pitch and covered with tarpaulins. 
By its side was built a fish-tank enclosed with lead and planks; this was filled with sea-water, and many fish were kept in it.

Let's take Makintosh et al's plan of Deck 3 as a starting point.

Here they opted for central walkways and keeping the different facilities separate. This is not necessary nor logical.

If we continue with the basic principle of keeping weight central and the gangways peripheral we find a simple layout almost draws itself.

We should bear in mind that gangways need sloped sections communicating with the lower levels.


AGGLOMERATED STRUCTURES

I cannot see how  a ship would be built with disparate structures separated on a deck. It makes more sense to build them together to add stiffness to the structure and save on shared walls. Likewise they should be central as possible.


The temple is rather small - equivalent to a 4-couch cabin in all, maybe.
Likewise, there is no reason for the library and reading room to be of any great size.

This leaves us with the gymnasium and baths.

The gymnasium would be an open area with collonaded surrounds, Exercise would be conducted in the central area of sand or grass and the shade used to relax or prepare.

a  full-size gymnasium had many ancilliary rooms to the exercise area. The quad here is 50m square.

teaching and exercise took place in the open or under cover

 The gymnasium on the ship was probably mostly for exercise. We can forget all the extra rooms and think of a collonade around an open area.

 The baths need not be so large. we are not talking of a Roman bath complex , rather a more simple affair. Greek baths had short bath tubs maybe some massage area.

bathtubs of ceramic or metal or stone - one sat on the step

Greek bath complex at Gela - several dont take up much space

 A 3-couch room with 3 bronze tubs could again be equated with a 4 couch cabin.


The library was 5-couch size - scaling up a 4-couch cabin we have something like 4 by 4 metres. It had a complementary reading room of the same size. The two seem to have shared the same roof which was pierced with a circular hole to allow a sundial to stand . The usefulness of a sundial on a ship is dificult to explain, unless there was no plan it should go anywhere... 

The presence of the stables here is very informative. Horse need to be led up onto the top deck. Stairs dont go well with hooves. There must have been ramps. Unless the horses were put aboard by cranes. Unlikely, I imagine. How would they be disembarked in a pinch?

PEOPLE-CARRIER OR HIPPOGOGOS ?

Makintosh et al make no provision for stairwells or ramps on either deck. How did they imagine people and horses moved between decks?

Peripheral paradoi can have ramped sections or even be accessed by a sloped gangplank from the dock.

There is some possibility of having more than 10 horses on each side. Did each stall or stable house more than 1 horse? We can never know. Makintosh et al decided that there were 100 horse because they drew parallels with a medieval salandria used for carrying horses to Outremer. But such a scale is not necessary - and the dung and urine and flatulence of 100 horses does not marry well with pleasure gardens, temples and library reading roomse etc..

A Roman barrack for  cavalry housed 3 horses in about 12 square metres, 3.6m square,  and the troopers and their gear in an equivalent space alongside. This tallies remarkably well with the 4-couch cabin , note.

Reconstruction of the ‘stable-barracks’ at Chesters Roman Fort © English Heritage (drawing by John Ronayne)

Reconstruction of the ‘stable-barracks’ at Chesters Roman Fort © English Heritage (drawing by John Ronayne)

A small cavalry unit of 20 men is still useful - or the stables could have been for racing horses or even pack horses !?

If there were 100 horses we must assume there were 100 riders and probably 100 grooms. Plus fodder and gear.

If we have 'Roman size' stalls with 30 horse per side then 60 is still a lot but a lot less than 100!
There is no fundamental reason to require the ship to carry 100 horses.

with Roman barrack size accommodation horses com eto dominate the purpose of the top deck. Can this be true?

The ship was not a horse transporter. 20 horse would be enough for commercial transport or protection of the ship if stranded on a coast.

If we take 1/3 size of the Roman stables maybe that is plenty for our purposes.

The horses must have been closed-in for the duration of the trip and led up ramps for embarkation.

All these structures were roofed to some extent and must have been built to share supporting walls.

The Athenian used old trieres as hippogogoi in the Peloponnesian Wars. The horses were in stalls on the main deck and 30 could be housed in the 38 metres length of a trieres.

from Coates - Athenian Trireme. 1st ed.

But there was no extra gear no grooms etc on this type of transporter which would never stay at sea overnight.

Horses COULD be crammed in to Syrakousia. The question is why would they be ?
To put a hundred horse on a deck upon which so much effort had been spent to make it luxurious seems somehwat perverse. The only way I can imagine the two coul dbe combined is to put the stables at one end and the facilities at the other. Even then, the reality of the pleasure gardens would have been somewhat negatively fragrant. But maybe that was why the flowers and bushes were needed ?  ;)

Makintosh et al offered a possible solution..They calculated that 20 horses would occupy 34 square feet. I am not sure what  kind of horse they meant, but even a pony would be hard put to suffer transportation in a trailer-box of just 1.7 square feet. Did you see 'bonsai kittens' ?

Dwarven cavalry as envisaged by METRO.co.uk : still somewhat squished in 1.7 square feet

GARDENS ETC
All the remaining spaces were decked-out as gardens and promenades, watered by a system of pipes. Overhead bowers and palisanders gave shade for the promenders.

Roman garden...

The need for light for the greenery and the function of the greenery as a shade means that Deck 3 was not covered with another structure.

Roman gardens with espaliers and arbor walks.

See also earlier post HERE

THE WATER TANKS

The quantity of water is 20,000 gallons of drinking water plus the aquarium for food fish. A tank for this takes up just 8 by 5 metres if it is 2 metres deep. Maybe the aquarium is smaller.  either way it is not a great space. The tank is supposed to have been in the bows  but it is more sensible to put such a tank close to the centre of gravity of the ship so that it does not begin to move dangerously as the ship pitches. The translation might be off or the amount of water less than we think. But it is also to be remembered that this ship was an exception. An experiment. The tank was closed, so this may have been an attempt to counter movement of the water causing problems.


SUMMARY

Deck 3 was mostly open. It was a pleasure garden type space with greenery and shade against the Mediterranean sun as well as space to walk and exercise. Maybe all structures actually butted up against each other.

Maybe the stables coul dbe at fron tor back, but there is a reason to put them at the centre..see next part.. the horse dung and urine is still somehwat problematic, even for 10 horses. It must have gone over the side.

This open deck would allow for movement of deck fighters and defence of the ship from this level. But there were also extra arrangements for the defence of the Syrakousia. As we shall see.