Ancient galley rams discovered - photos

[Louie da fly]

 I found this on the Roman Army Talk forum on Facebook:

 

"Latest news from the maritime archaeologists working at the site of the Egadi Islands (Aegates Insulae) naval battle fought in 241 BC between the fleets of Carthage and Rome during the First Punic War.

Two new naval rams were recovered from the seabed at the Egadi Islands by the Soprintendenza del Mare, RPM Nautical Foundation, and The Society for Documentation of Submerged Sites divers. The total number of rams at the site is now 25. The raising of these rams highlights a successful, collaborative field season. Egadi rams 21 and 22 will be conserved and housed at the Ex Stabilimento Florio delle Tonnare di Favignana e Formica."

 

A post from another contributor - 

"Polybius (1.20.1-16) states that the Roman navy in the First Punic Wars consisted of quinqueremes abd triremes. The Carthaginian navy, which was far more experienced consisted of quadriremes and quinqueremes (though possibly with some triremes)."

 

 

 

 

These rams were hollow, as can be seen from the following two photos:

 

 

 

This would make sense - apart from the amount of bronze you'd need and the effect of all that weight up at the bow, otherwise how could you fix the ram to the ship so it wouldn't come off?

 

For more information on this archaeological "dig" see https://rpmnautical.org/projects/ancient-naval-warfare/?fbclid=IwAR3Em5kxk-2N9LcSGrCN7_--ZCOVRgGKtDbmZmft7llhRYi79AkTOx3hWN8

 

Steven

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Louie da fly

[Tony Hunt]

Fascinating!  That's going to leave a nasty mark when it hits the side of your ship!

[mtaylor]

4 minutes ago, Tony Hunt said:

Fascinating!  That's going to leave a nasty mark when it hits the side of your ship!

You sir, are a master of understatement.

[druxey]

The size of the casting would have been a great technical achievement in its time.

[RichardG]

1 hour ago, Tony Hunt said:

Fascinating!  That's going to leave a nasty mark when it hits the side of your ship!

From the site "The next step will be to cast a 1/4 scale bronze replica and, using digital load cells and stress indicators, ram it into various hull reconstructions and other bronze pieces at a crash test facility".

 

It'll be interesting to how much of a mark it leaves. Hopefully more than just a scratch in the paintwork!

[mtaylor]

Those tests will be interesting to see.  I'm curious how well things will scale down for these tests and do assume (bad idea, I know) they won't use glue on the test targets.

[Louie da fly]

Ancient vessels were built "shell-first" - either without frames or with frames added after the planking was completed, and the planks were held together with tenons in mortises within adjoining planks, pinned in place with dowels.

 

(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_joints )

 

According to Prof John Pryor's book Age of the Dromon the waterline ram was designed to break the tenons so the planks separated, letting the water in. Later (mediaeval) ships were built frame-first, and it is believed this structure was too strong for the waterline ram to have the same effect, and the "ram" moved upward to become a "spur", which it is proposed was intended either to capsize the enemy vessel or break its oars (or perhaps both).

 

I suppose the test model(s) will be constructed the first way.

 

Steven 

[Smile-n-Nod]

On 8/26/2021 at 7:12 PM, Louie da fly said:

This would make sense - apart from the amount of bronze you'd need and the effect of all that weight up at the bow, otherwise how could you fix the ram to the ship so it wouldn't come off?

 

 

Here's a link to a thesis by Asaf Oron of the Texas A&M Nautical Archaeology Program:

 

https://nautarch.tamu.edu/Theses/pdf-files/Oron-MA2001.pdf

 

The title is "The Athlit Ram: Classical and Hellenistic Bronze Casting Technology".

 

The thesis has pictures (page 84) showing how the Athlit ram might have been fitted to the bow of a trireme.

 

The rest of the thesis discussed how such a large hunk of bronze might have been cast in ancient times.

 

[Smile-n-Nod]

On 8/27/2021 at 6:03 PM, Louie da fly said:

waterline ram was designed to break the tenons so the planks separated, letting the water in.  

Really interesting idea. I hadn't thought of that connection. Thanks. 

[Smile-n-Nod]

On 8/27/2021 at 6:03 PM, Louie da fly said:

 Later (mediaeval) ships were built frame-first, and it is believed this structure was too strong for the waterline ram to have the same effect [i.e. to break the frames and separate the planks] 

At the Battle of Hampton Roads, the CSS Virginia rammed and sunk the USS Congress, which certainly was built frame-first. Maybe the Virginia had so much momentum that neither frames nor tenons could withstand it. 

[Smile-n-Nod]

On 8/27/2021 at 4:03 PM, Louie da fly said:

\According to Prof John Pryor's book Age of the Dromon the waterline ram ...

 

Age of the Dromon is here:

 

(Link removed by Moderator.  See my post below as to why).

 

(Please remove this post if the linked file is not in the public domain)

[mtaylor]

It looks like it's not in the public domain per this:   

 

© Copyright 2006 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change.

[Smile-n-Nod]

7 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

It looks like it's not in the public domain per this:   

Thanks for taking care of that.

[RichardG]

Prof John Pryor's book Age of the Dromon

 

That's one big expensive book (aka a Tome). 

 

If anyone's is interested in the subject, Amazon have 2 paperback copies at $47 https://www.amazon.com/Age-Brills-Paperback-Collection-dp-900420590X/dp/900420590X. This is really cheap.

 

[Louie da fly]

26 minutes ago, RichardG said:

If anyone's is interested in the subject, Amazon have 2 paperback copies at $47 https://www.amazon.com/Age-Brills-Paperback-Collection-dp-900420590X/dp/900420590X. This is really cheap.

 

Well worth getting if you're into that kind of thing. Very well and comprehensively researched, and as far as I'm concerned though it was published back in 2006 is still the definitive work on the subject. The discoveries at Yenikapi in Istanbul have made some of it out of date, but it's still the best book out there on dromons.

 

Steven

[Louie da fly]

6 hours ago, Smile-n-Nod said:

Maybe the Virginia had so much momentum that neither frames nor tenons could withstand it. 

 

Yes, much heavier and more powerful vessel than a galley, which was built as lightly as possible because it was moved by muscle-power.

 

Steven

[Roger Pellett]

I highly recommend the book, Gunpowder & Galleys by John F. Guilmartin.  This book covers galley warfare in the age of Lepanto. 

 

In this book, Guilmartin uses a value of 1/8th horsepower per rower.  This is based on hydrodynamic data developed by Admiral W.L. Rodgers USN in the 1930’s.  This would allow a Renascence Galley to be propelled at a speed of 7kts for a distance of about 3 miles.  After that, speed would decline rapidly.  The kinetic energy transferred to the target ramming, (I realize that by this time galleys did not ram) would be velocity squared x displacement x a constant to convert weight to mass and to account for the fact that the target would slide sideways when hit.

 

Although it might seem that damage from ramming could be increased by adding more rowers to increase velocity, this required a larger galley with more hydrodynamic drag to the point where a practical limit was reached.

Guilmartin, therefore makes the point that by the Sixteenth Century, a galley was primarily an infantry assault craft.

 

Jumping ahead to the Mid Nineteenth Century, steam propulsion completely changed the game.  USS Merrimack’s machinery was noticeably poor, propelling her at a speed  of between 5 and 7 knots on a good day.  Author Paul Silverstone claims a speed for CSS Virginia of 9kts which I find hard to believe.  Even at a slower speed her mass must have been an order of magnitude or more than that of a galley from any age.  Since basic wooden frame built ship structures had changed very little from the 1500’s she was during her short life a formidable weapon.

 

Roger

 

 

[Louie da fly]

I've also seen a suggestion that ancient galleys didn't ram other vessels side-on, but on an angle from the stern. This makes sense if the opposing galley was travelling at speed - less likelihood of the ram being torn off by the collision. Unfortunately I've lost the reference.

 

[Edit] I read a book a while ago called (I think) The Crescent and the Cross - The Battle of Lepanto. It basically described the battle as one of a single round of gunfire, followed by soldiers boarding opposing galleys and wiping out the crews in hand-to-hand combat. The galleasses, being much slower (though much more heavily armed),  only figured in the battle at the very beginning after which they were left behind by the ebb and flow of the fighting.

 

And the battle had very little effect on the overall situation - the Ottoman fleet had been completely replaced within a year. It was more of a propaganda victory than a strategic one. [/Edit]

 

Steven

Edited September 2, 2021 by Louie da fly

[Roger Pellett]

That’s a good book too and agrees with Guilmartin’s contention that the heavy guns carried in the galleys’ bow were capable of only one shot before battle was joined at close range.

[Louie da fly]

I'm sure I've read somewhere that the "ram" on renaissance galleys (which by this time was right up at upper deck level)

 

 

was used as a boarding bridge.

 

Steven

[Louie da fly]

Some more photos of rams from the Egadi finds.

 

 

Apparently 26 of these have been found so far, along with helmet cheekpieces, coins and a sword . . .

 

Steven

[Roger Pellett]

Where is Egdi?

[Louie da fly]

That's the modern name. The Ancient name was the Aegates. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Aegates

 

Steven

[Canute]

I believe it was off the west coast of Sicily

[Cristiano]

Another galley's ram found in the site of the Egadi's naval battle....now we are at 27 rams found!

Not anymore rare artifacts...

 

https://tg24.sky.it/cronaca/2024/08/23/rostro-romano-battaglia-egadi

Article is italian written, but can be easily translated by google...

[wefalck]

I have been to the Hellenic Maritime Museum in Piraeus/Athens a couple of days ago. And there, on the room dedicated to the ancient Greek warships, it was noted that the captains of a trireme etc. were obliged to salvage the ram in case their ship went down. It was also noted that the construction of the galleys would mean that they float on the wood and not sink, once pierced, which would explain, why no rams so far have been found at the sites of major seabattles, such as Salamis. Obviously, this did not apply to Roman or Punic ships.

[Jsk]

Do we know if the rams are from triremes? Or, maybe from quadremes or even quints? I wonder if the larger ships typically used more ballast than the triremes, and therefore would have had a more likely chance of sinking when holed rather than just swamping. Of course, that's assuming these wrecks are from the battle site. I seem to recall that much of the Roman fleet was destroyed in a storm after the battle (or am I confusing it with another battle?). Hmm... so many questions!

[wefalck]

I seem to remember that the Roman ships were more heavily built than the Punic ones (or the earlier Greek ones in any case), as the Romans were not a seafaring nation at all and wanted to transfer their land-battle tactics to the sea. Hence they manned their ships heavily with soldiers, fitted them with a sort of drawbridge to grab enemy ships and deploy those soldiers in hand-to-hand fighting. This probably means more ballast to keep the ships stable.

 

Also, I believe, the Roman ships were rowed by slaves, who were kept on board at all times, so that infrastructure for sustaining them was needed.

 

Not sure about the Punic ships.

 

The Greek ships were rowed by free citizens of the respective communities and typically disembarked in the evening, as the ships would be pulled up on the beaches. Greek tactics mainly aimed for ramming the enemy ships or at least break their oars. Very few extra soldiers were on board. These tactical requirements would have resulted in comparatively light ships only.

[Cristiano]

6 hours ago, Jsk said:

Do we know if the rams are from triremes? Or, maybe from quadremes or even quints? I wonder if the larger ships typically used more ballast than the triremes, and therefore would have had a more likely chance of sinking when holed rather than just swamping. Of course, that's assuming these wrecks are from the battle site. I seem to recall that much of the Roman fleet was destroyed in a storm after the battle (or am I confusing it with another battle?). Hmm... so many questions!

Some of the recovered rostrums were considerably larger than the others and are assumed to have belonged to quinquiremes.

In the latter part of the First Punic War the Romans financed the accelerated construction of 200 quinquiremes, to rebuild their decimated fleet.

The Romans employed 300 to 350 ships in the battle, so it is assumed that a significant presence of quinquiremes derived from the 200 recently built.

Just to complete what Wefalck wrote:

The corvus bridge was used only in the Punic Wars, because it was excessively heavy and unbalanced the ships at sea, being about 10 meters long and with a hypothesized weight of around 1000 kg.

After the Punic Wars, the Corvus bridge was no longer mentioned in any document.

It was later replaced by the Harpagon, to be launched with ballistae.