Osprey : Republican Roman Warship

It is a long time since I was impressed by an Osprey book so it is a pleasant surprise to get one that is in an special area of interest of mine that delivers more than expected! The format is always limiting but this example - unusually - makes the most of it.

The confusing situation where Osprey display a different cover to the actual book as shown in Amazon notwithstanding,,,,,

Amazon

Osprey ?

 Rafaelle D'Amato strikes a good balance between packing in as much as he can, along with supporting evidences, but keeping it concise and interesting. It is rare to find him going off on personal interpretations or space-filling digressions in this volume and he covers a lot of detail.

One such rare digression is to discuss a poem, 'Colomban's Celeuma'. I think this can just as easily be seen as the author using a literary device based on an observed rythmic phenomenon - that of rowing oarsmen - rather than an objective record of how oarsmen kept time. Circular argument alert..

The book ranges from considering what Rome's earliest warships may have been, down to the battle of Actium and the demise of larger warships. The Egadi material is included with some nice photos.

One advantage D'Amato may have is that a lot of archaeological evidence is relatively close to him but in contrast to many he gets off his backside and takes new photos or gets them taken and does not rely on stock images. This alone makes the book worthwhile. New pictures of sculpture I know from many books but only from one camera angle are very welcome and very informative as well as items previously unpublished in accessible form. Who buys an edition of archaeological papers to get one image of a pot lid ? (Ok, me , maybe . occasionally, but not many )

D'Amato gallops through a lot of modern writing without pausing to give detailed references but the important thing is he compiles the interesting bits here. A single sentence summarises several dusty numismatic papers- BRAVO! In fact one could say that he deals with almost ALL areas -outside shore facilities and administration - so little we know on this subject ..

The colour plates are a key attraction of the Osprey format. Here they are by G. Rava who illustrated 'Ancient Warship' and his style has not changed. Where is the editorial control over images? The ships depicted here are clunky, massive and often two dimensional. The overall effect of action plates like the siege of Syracuse (E) are reasonable but offset by outrageous scale distortions and wierdness such as Pompey's marines attacking pirates up a beach in a Trajanic testudo formation(C).

Illustration increases relative size of man and figurehead by about 3 and oars shown as thick as telegraph poles. Ram is shown as steel or silver but they were of bronze.

On the positive side, I greet  ANY colourful representations of classical galley warfare with an eye on historical accuracy with a cheer.

With reference to the illustrations, and to illustrate another point, as it were, D'Amato's translation of cærulus as 'dusky p.20 is an editorial omission. There are many, which may be due to the author writing in a second language. I know the problems well myself and it is possible to write something in a foreign language one thinks is passable but which grates immediately on native speakers. There are many oddities in the book , giving an impression of Euro-English. What the hell do Osprey editors get paid for ? Cærulus/cæruleus, by the way , CAN mean darkish blue, but it can also mean black. In reference to ships, the obvious black is pitch or tar, used to protect timber and an obvious detail of any wooden ship. 'Dusky' is not a colour, but an adjective. Could not a junior editor or half-blind proof-reader at Osprey have seen this ? Because of this (?) all the ships illustrated get shown as blue but tar and pitch are nowhere to be seen.

There are no battle plans or tactical diagrams. Maybe a good thing, because they are often done poorly or at least, uninspiringly, and we can all read the ancient accounts ourselves anyway. Many aspects of this topic are open to interpretation but in this book the basic information is often provided rather than only the author's view. This treats the reader as an adult and gives confidence in the author.

It is not necessary to write more because this Osprey, at least, is well worth the money. It has certainly given my Punic Wars ship development a big boost.

ANCIENT WARFARE : FIRST PUNIC WAR SPECIAL

The AW 50th issue special edition arrived friday. It's a bit of a curate's egg. There are articles on naval warfare but rather limited ones. They raise an interesting point about digital versus print media.

 The main naval article deals with the battle of Ecnomus quite well but has a rather uninspiring graphic of the progress of the battle. I think it is here print must try to capture readers, I feel. Lively explanation rather than endless quotation or discussion of scources.  On the other hand there is a splendid double-page colour illustration showing a Punic 4 getting the better of a Roman 5. The drowning Latins in the foreground are horribly convincing but if I was a Punic archer I don't think I would waste arrows on men in the water. The nice thing about this picture is the unusual angle one views the capsizing Roman vessel from.

The other long maritime article is about the Roman decision to expand their maritime capability in the course of the First Punic War. The slight drawback of the article is that it does not seem to take into account the newer ideas that neither fleet was composed mainly of 5's.

Such information has been derived from the RPMN researches at the Ægadi Islands battle site. It is this which graces the cover of the edition with a short accompanying note. There is another article which summarises finds from Ægadi but not in much detail, with references to the RPMN website.

It is welcome to find a publication that deals in some way with galley warfare but the sum of the material here is nothing one could not find on the web quickly and, a little more time would provide so much information that this offering would quickly pale. This is a problem for a periodical. How to compete with the web. For me, the tactile pleasure of a book or magazine - and especially the smell of a newly-printed magazine as one opens the envelope !!! is unmissable. Content is the problem . How to find it and present it cost effectively on paper. Many publishers try quantity over quality and flood-out poorer offerings. The kind of art AW includes is often inspiring but maybe it needs inspiring articles too. Not to tread over to the territory of all blood and sex, but maybe get out of the rut of showing reenactors alongside summarising pieces.  In this issue a piece of historical fiction is presented - this is certainly trying something new, but does it belong in AW ? AW is a little trapped between wanting some academic bona fides but needing broad appeal over a wide time range to get enough readers.

A tall order, but BUY the magazine and hope they continue to work on it. There is not much else out there other than Osprey and Pen and Sword.

LINES VERSUS COLUMNS

Napoleonics, Wars of the Revolution, Renaissance cavalry, Macedonians or Thebans. Whether it is ships, horses or men there is a possibility to arrange them in columns or lines.

The advantage with a column is that it focusses effort at a specific point and also that it is an easier formation for manoeuvre. It is just follow my leader. The column must be led as a whole, however, or the tail can decide to depart while the head takes the strain.

 

The line, however produces a distributed application of force along a front which the enemy must withstand at all points or be engulfed. On the other hand, the elements of the line should be marshalled carefully to maintain a common front or else the formation goes to pieces.

A column will always have a percentage of forces unable to act against the enemy because they have friends in the way, whereas a line uses all its strength so long as they come up against enemies.

Salamis is the Mastadon of ancient sea battles in the age of the trieres. So many ships packed into a small space. A space that funnels the opponents into each other and hinders their escape. The battle that was a long slogging match with a tangled mess of ships fighting a struggle of attrition.

Recived wisdom is that the narrow straits limited the scope for tactics on each side and two masses of ships, the total number of vessels cited by ancient sources must be involved, smashed into each other.

On your marks ! Get set ! ........FIGHT

But is it ?

The most obvious constraint on the battle is the width of the strait. At various points the width from mainland to Salamis is circa 1500 metres. Further up the strait it is split around the island St Georgios and the smaller rocks off the Perama shore. It is easy to fall into the trap of allotting ships to this distance, dividing this number into the total for each side and thus achieve a calculated number of ranks. Calculated from ancient data ... must be true...?

Æschylus and Herodotos both imply the Persians made an offensive move against the Greeks. In any case, the Persian fleet moves from 'between Ceos and Mynichia' to a place inside the strait where the battle took place.

The Greeks had to assemble their battle line before the Persians arrived. They had to launch beached ships and take up anchors and form in their units. They then may have backed water for a while before contact was made.

There is thus no discussion that both fleets moved around a bit. The Persians advanced at least 2 and up tp 4 kilometres - mostly in dark, half-light or mist. The Greeks had to assemble their forces from being beached, advance up tp 3 kilometres and back maybe 1 kilometre before fighting.

The obvious question is, 'column or line?'.  After the above calculation, lines dominate consideration of the battle but if 1600 galleys are to move about in concert are lines a practicable proposition ?

Perfect! ..oh, but they are at anchor in a calm ...

Add to this, the fact that the Persians are moving in the dark or half-light !!!! How on earth could a line be kept in such circumstances ?  The Persians patrolled the entrances to the strait all night - this can not have been in lines. If they tried to maintain station it would be a disaster. They must have rowed - probably at a minimum rate - in columns - probably following a lantern on the stern of the previous ship, to and fro.

My point is that a line of many ships - galleys - needs control to be maintained as any kind of regular formation. Progressing at speed, across disturbed water or around obstacles, or in the dark will lead to a disintegration of the formation ergo the Persian ships were in columns at least as they approached the scene of battle.

"It's Fairyland!" ..Moving in line ahead...

MAPS - PITFALLS

Looking at a lot of accounts of Salamis one is struck by the variability of the topography.
Barry Strauss is not alone in playing fast and loose with the Earth's surface.

I present the fabulous shape-shifting Isle of Psyttaleia as featured in 'Salamis' by Barry Straus. Who has a doctorate in a subjective discipline one assumes.

SALAMIS : MAPS

Easier said than done to get a good map of Salamis battle area.

How reliable is this  re. 480BC ?

 1) Sea level changes. Oft-quoted figure is a relative sea-level rise of 1 fathom since 'antiquity'. As a geologist I am aware this is a debateable figure. Greece is a tectonically active part of the world which means we have to add rising or sinking land-masses.

One calculation of eustatic sea level change - Salamis in red

The site of the battle of Marathon, for example, should by rights, be flooded by now according to the eustatic sea-level change curve ( a kind of base-line for world sea-level changes). BUT because the land has been pushed up at about the same rate then the coastal situation remains similar to what it was 2500 years ago...REF. This means we can never know the exact coastline from 480BC but we must try to get an idea..

Did the sea come up or the land go down ?

2) Human activity in this area where the Greek navy has its main base, there has been unbridled summer-house development and where the recently greatest maritime nation has its main port is unbelievable. One island - Psyttaleia - has become Europe's largest sewage treatment plant and the mainland coastline is obscured by reclaimed ground.

One thing that can be said is that the sea-level change is not catastrophic. A breakwater from antiquity by the ancient Salamis port in Amboulaki bay is still visible in the water rather than high and dry or a long way off the shore-line.

Just to be cruel, the gods have given us a different alphabet from the Greeks so simple web  searches also become more problematic.

Maritime charts are a good and accurate bet, adding depth date - but also including, very accurately all made-ground and obstacles. I want this stuff cleaned off...

Kinosura peninsula complete with deep-water mooring for giant ships and Perama port installation in background.

The solution so far is to use eighteenth century French maps ! These seem to be a good match with sattelite maps and fotos and the engineering tecnicians who supported French fortification science seem to have done a good job with naval charts from the time.

Barbier du Bocage's map of 1785 gives a nice base map.

Notice the north-pointer is the Fleur de Lys..the map was drawn just a few years before Le Revolution.

 Until things obviously awry I will use this base map plus modern depth information.

SALAMIS seanarios

Condensing the possibilities these are the main variants for Salamis.

Next step is to work out which ones give the most enjoyable fights!

Salamis's

There are so many versions of what happened at Salamis ! Every author or scholar must have his 2penn'orth. Researching a scenario for Salamis - inspired by the Melcher painting it turns out to be heavy going. A scenario with up to now 20 variations !