Tessarakonteres

Sources

The "forty" was reportedly built by Ptolemy IV Philopator of Egypt in the 3rd century BC. It was first described by his contemporary Callixenus of Rhodes in the lost Peri Alexandreias. In the early-3rd century AD, Athenaeus quotes this in his Deipnosophistae.

Plutarch, writing in the late 1st century AD, also mentioned this immense vessel in his Life of Demetrius, part of his Parallel Lives series, disagreeing or misquoting slightly on the height to top of stern, which he reports as forty-eight cubits:

Note that the translation of "forty banks" is overliteral; see below.

Configuration of the oars

The trireme, a three-ranked galley with one man per oar, was the main Hellenistic warship up to and into the 4th century BC. At that time, a requirement for heavier ships led to the development of "polyremes" meaning "many oars", applied to "fours" (tetre- in Greek, quadri- in Latin) or more and "fives" (penta- in Greek, quinque- in Latin) and later up to "tens", the largest that seems to have been used in battle. Larger polyremes were built, with Ptolemy II Philadelphus eventually building a "twenty" and a "thirty", and Ptolemy IV Philopator building the "forty".

The maximum practical number of oar ranks a ship could have logistically was three (Greek and Latin tri-). Beyond three, the number in the type name did not refer to the number of ranks of oars any more (as for biremes and triremes, respectively two and three ranks of oars with one rower per oar), but to the number of rowers per vertical section, with several men on each oar. it may also have been a bireme with two men on each oar; or it may just have had a single rank with four men on each single oar. Classes of ship could differ in their configuration between regions and over time, but in no case did a "four" ship have four horizontal ranks of oars.

From galleys used in the 16th to 18th centuries AD, it is known that the maximum number of men that can operate a single oar efficiently is eight. Further, Casson writes that the oars were the proper length for no more than eight rowers.

Mention by Callixenus of the "forty's" thranite (the uppermost rowing level of a trireme) oars leads Casson to determine that the "forty" had three ranks. He points to the practical limit of eight rowers to an oar, giving a maximum size class of "twenty-four", as well as to the need for a vastly larger deck than one ship could provide in order to accommodate the reported numbers of marines. Combined with Callixenus's description of the ship having two heads and two sterns, Casson suggests that the "forty" must have been a catamaran made up of two three-ranked "twenties" joined by a deck. Each column or section of the ship would be composed of twenty rowers; perhaps eight rowers on each section's top rank, seven in the middle, and five on the bottom rank.

Specifications

As a catamaran of two "twentys" with 4,000 oarsmen, there would be 2,000 per hull and therefore 1,000 per side. The 130 m length would allow ample room for the 50 vertical sections of three oars each, with each vertical section accommodating 20 rowers (hence the designation "twenty"). Thus there would be 150 oars per side. Casson has suggested that it was possible that the two internal sides were not equipped with oars and that the rowers there acted as reserve crew for those on the outer side, so the "forty" would have had either 300 or 600 oars.

Details

Source:

• Length: 280 cubits, 420 ft
• Beam: 38 cubits, 57 ft (per catamaran hull if Casson is correct)
• Height from waterline to tip of stern: 53 cubits, 79.5 ft
• Height from waterline to tip of prow: 48 cubits, 72 ft
• Length of steering oars (4): 30 cubits, 45 ft
• Longest rowing oars: 38 cubits, 57 ft
• Oarsmen: 4,000
• Officers, ratings, deckhands: 400
• Marines: 2,850

Use

It had seven naval rams, with one primary, However, the "forty" was likely just a showpiece; Plutarch describes the ship as for exhibition only.

Launch

In order to launch the huge ship the engineers devised a – then novel – dry dock construction:

It has been calculated that the dock might have needed around 750,000 gallons of water to lift up the vessel.

Controversy

Even in the 19th century, the fabulous description of the vessel has been questioned. Given the technical problems facing a ship of such size, the vessel would not have existed at all, or the description given was an exaggeration. Frank Boott Goodrich (1858) pointed out several problems of the vessel:

• The vessel was originally stated to be forty tiers (of rowers). The vessel would need oars of some 70 feet in length for the topmost tier, unlikely to be feasible in that era.
• Since the number of oars and oarsmen is stated to be 4000, they would have been hard to manage.
• The size of the complement is fantastical too, 2850 combatant and 4000 rowers, a total of 6850 men.
• The vessel was said to have "double prows"; if this is interpreted as catamaran, the force and pressure of water would separate them due to the great resistance exerted by the huge size of the vessel.
• The huge size of the vessel would prove to be very hard to maneuver, a U-turn requiring about 1 hour in a large radius.

References

Sources

• {{Citation | url-access = registration
• {{Citation | author-link = John Peter Oleson

References

1. Athenaeus. (1854). "The Deipnosophists". [[Henry G. Bohn]].
2. Athenaeus. "The Deipnosophists". Attalus.
3. Plutarch. "Plutarch Lives". [[Loeb Classical Library]].
4. William M. Murray. (2012). "The Age of Titans: The Rise and Fall of the Great Hellenistic Navies". [[Oxford University Press]].
5. Philip de Souza. (2007). "The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare, Volume 1". [[Cambridge University Press]].
6. (2013). "Shipsheds of the Ancient Mediterranean". Cambridge University Press.
7. John Morrison. (1995). "The Age of the Galley". [[Conway Maritime Press]].
8. William M. Murray. (2012). "The Age of Titans: The Rise and Fall of the Great Hellenistic Navies". Oxford University Press.
9. Lionel Casson. (1994). "Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times". [[University of Texas Press]].
10. William M. Murray. (2012). "The Age of Titans: The Rise and Fall of the Great Hellenistic Navies". Oxford University Press.
11. William M. Murray. (2012). "The Age of Titans: The Rise and Fall of the Great Hellenistic Navies". Oxford University Press.
12. Lionel Casson. (1994). "Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times". University of Texas Press.
13. Lionel Casson. (1994). "Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times". University of Texas Press.
14. Lionel Casson. (1995). "Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World". [[Johns Hopkins University Press]].
15. Lionel Casson. (1995). "Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World". Johns Hopkins University Press.
16. Lionel Casson. (1995). "Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World". Johns Hopkins University Press.
17. Lionel Casson. (1995). "Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World". Johns Hopkins University Press.
18. Lionel Casson. (1995). "Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World". Johns Hopkins University Press.
19. {{harvnb. Oleson. 1984
20. [http://www.attalus.org/old/athenaeus5b.html Athenaeus of Naucratis (Yonge, C. D., editor) ''The deipnosophists, or, Banquet of the learned of Athenæus'', volume I, London: Henry G. Bohn, p. 325 (5.204c)]
21. {{harvnb. Landels. 2000
22. Goodrich, Frank Boott. (1858). "Man Upon the Sea: Or, A History of Maritime Adventure, Exploration, and Discovery, from the Earliest Ages to the Present Time". J. B. Lippincott & co..