Quadriremes

[Jim Webster]

Just pondering pulling ships up onto the beach
From Trireme Olympias The Final Report
we have

17. On Slipping and Launching Triremes from the Peiraeus Shipsheds and from Beaches 134
John Coates
After a convincing article, John Coates writes

"As one of the main objects of hauling out would have been to dry out the hull, tighten tenon pegs, clean, stop and re-coat the bottom, the whole bottom would have had to be made accessible on both sides of the ship, only possible if the ship was upright. The crew of a trireme could however raise the unloaded ship upright if she had been hauled out on one bilge by the combination of their weight pulling down on the high side and a smaller number lifting and then pushing up on the low side. When upright, shores would have been set up (Homer Odyssey 2.153 describes an earlier and smaller type of ship supported, when ashore in a trench, by piles of stones confirming also that their bottoms were not then flat).

It is clear from these considerations taken together that beaching a trireme is no light operation and that it
is unlikely that triremes were any heavier than Olympias."

Later in the same volume we have 27. Triremes and Shipworm

Paul Lipke

He goes into considerable detail, and is very convincing. He then quotes Thucydides (7.12.3), where Nicias wrote from Syracuse back to Athens.

"You must none of you be surprised that I say by sea also. They have discovered that the length of the time we have now been in commission has rotted our ships and wasted our crews, and that with the entireness of our crews and the soundness of our ships the pristine efficiency of our navy has departed. For it is impossible for us to haul our ships ashore and careen them, because, the enemy's vessels being as many or more than our own, we are constantly anticipating an attack."

So Nicias seems to think that hauling ships ashore wasn't a major issue if only the enemy would leave them alone.

[Adrian Nayler]

What I cannot find is any data on the dimensions of the ship sheds that have been found, apart from those at Athens.  Does anyone have references?

Further to my previous post, the original summary publication of the excavations of the Ilot shipsheds at Carthage is:

Henry Hurst (1979) 'Excavations at Carthage 1977–8. Fourth Interim Report,' The Antiquaries Journal, Vol. 59, No. 1, pp.19-49.

https://www.academia.edu/121725384/Excavations_at_Carthage_1977_8_Fourth_Interim_Report

Adrian.

[Cantabrigian]

My gut feeling is that the stresses that would be put on an outrigger by the rowers and the movement of the vessel would make a solid structure, integrated into the rest of the hull a necessity in an age that did not have access to the wonders of modern ship construction

I'm not entirely convinced by this - just think of the stresses in a sailing ship, and masts were generally removable - though the larger ones needed cranes to get them out.

But even if it was possible, it doesn't mean it happened.

[DBS]

I reread the chapter in Shipsheds on Carthage last night. Two points I had missed or forgotten. Firstly, the famous 170-220 stone sheds in the military harbour were only built in the second century, not long before the destruction of 146; indeed, they may be a major part of the rearmament of the city which so annoyed Rome. Therefore, they were not the home of the supposed huge quinquereme fleets of the 1st Punic more than a century before. There are faint indications that there were timber sheds before the stone ones, but dimensions are beyond recovery.

Second, at least one of the two best preserved slipways seems to have had inspection and maintenance pits between its sleepers, thus meeting in part Jim's concerns about how one could work on a ship sitting very snug in the shed.

[Jim Webster]

Just one thing, from recent reading, about pulling ships onto the beach.
Whatever the academics thought, Caesar pulled his up onto the beach in Britain, and when the Romans invaded Africa 254BC they beached their ships and surrounded them with a trench and palisade.
I don't think it was something you did when the enemy were near, or when you might want to fight (or have to fight) but certainly if you intended to be there for a while you did it.

I personally suspect that academics underestimate the ability of large numbers of men who have done it before, when equipped with enough rope 

[Erpingham]

This article may be of interest when discussing ship mooring practices.

The author certainly considers it unlikely that it was done regularly.  I think, though, he's mainly thinking about hauling ships completely out of the water, rather than partial beachings in temporary bases.

[Jim Webster]

This article may be of interest when discussing ship mooring practices.

The author certainly considers it unlikely that it was done regularly.  I think, though, he's mainly thinking about hauling ships completely out of the water, rather than partial beachings in temporary bases.

You might find https://honorfrostfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/MAGS2020_Nakas.pdf   Ships and harbours of the Hellenistic and Roman Mediterranean: a new approach 
interesting to read along side it

"Another important aspect of the seamanship and the ships of the period is the ability to deploy alternative methods of using harbours beyond docking. Although a common practice today, docking in antiquity appears to have been a much less popular choice for mariners. Before the introduction of the hydraulic concrete by the Romans in the second half of the 1st century BCE (Brandon et al. 2014: 233-5) most docks and other harbour works were erected on rubble foundations (Rickman 1996; Blackman 2008, 643-7; Wilson 2011: 46-7). Ships of greater tonnage could not approach such structures due to the inclination of the foundation. Wooden piers would have solved the problem, but they appear to have been scarce, as their use is documented in very few sites (Marseille; Hesnard 1994: 209) and in highly stylised Roman frescoes (Votruba 2017: Fig., whereas they are totally absent from written sources. Nevertheless, even when the hydraulic concrete was introduced, this did not affect the configuration of every harbour in the Mediterranean, since its application was costly (its basic material, the pozzolana pumice, was imported from Campania) and technically complex. Thus many areas remained untouched from this new technology (Brandon et al. 2014: 233-4, Fig.3.2; Nakas 2019). The merchantmen of the period were, however, well outfitted and quite advanced and could employ alternative methods easily. Anchoring in the open and using lighters and beaching were the main ones, practices widely employed also by vernacular ships in recent years and even today (Houston 1988: 560-1; Votruba 2017: Figs.5 -6)."

The author goes on to say that beaching was very much restricted but anchoring and lighters were the norm

[Keraunos]

You might find https://honorfrostfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/MAGS2020_Nakas.pdf   Ships and harbours of the Hellenistic and Roman Mediterranean: a new approach 
interesting to read along side it

Thanks very much for the link and the interesting extract.  This, though, addresses the question of docking (or lightering) for the handling of cargo, not the question of maintaining ships in seaworthy condition.

Instinctively I find it difficult to accept that if one is prepared to make a massive investment in large vessel to carry grain from Sicily, North Africa or Egypt to Rome, one would not want to get the best out of that investment by careful maintenance - which would have required getting it out of the water - rather than let it be eaten by toredo worms, but perhaps the economics and logistics of cutting timber and building a new boat every couple of years made more sense the effort needed to careen ships when there is no tide to help you?

[DBS]

Worth noting that Blackman and Rankov's Shipsheds mentions at least one location (might be Sounion but cannot check until tonight) where they think there is a set of military slipways/sheds, and a set of commercial ones, as there are significant ballast deposits next to that group.  I do wonder whether the worm risk is slightly exaggerated - yes, a real ship killer, but merchant ships, with far smaller crews and thus less imperative to find fresh water every couple of days, were able to make reasonably protracted voyages, including across the Indian Ocean to Ceylon or the Indus, without apparently needing constant pitstops to deworm.  Now, it might be that the ships were only good for one or two such trips (and the apparent Tamil quarters in Red Sea ports were constructed from teak probably repurposed from derelict ships), but it seems it was possible to survive a few weeks or even months.  The mention in classical sources of rotten ships do seem to be after arduous campaigns, where risks have obviously been taken and a price paid, but ideally at the end of the season; the problem arises when the campaigns drag on longer than planned (eg Athens vs Syracuse_.

[Jim Webster]

Remember that merchant ships could have their bottoms clad in thin lead, the Kyrenia Shipwreck Excavation https://nauticalarch.org/projects/kyrenia-shipwreck-excavation/

The site extended about nineteen meters in length and ten meters wide. 27 stones for hopper-type grain mills had been stacked in three rows along the axis of the ship to serve as ballast. Early in the season small fragments of thin lead sheets with bronze tacks were also found, and later, larger sheets were uncovered, indicating that the Greek ship had been covered in a sheathing of lead to protect its hull against marine life.  A large portion of the hull was preserved.  The remaining hull was raised, conserved and reconstructed.  The reconstructed hull was 14 m in length and 4.2 m in beam. Conservation of the raised artifacts took place between 1969 and 1974.

Also there is https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230774259_Lead_Sheathing_of_Ship_Hulls_in_the_Roman_Period_Archaeometallurgical_Characterization

Lead Sheathing of Ship Hulls in the Roman Period: Archaeometallurgical Characterization

Abstract
An archaeometallurgical analysis of samples of lead sheathing from five ships from the Roman period was carried out in order to determine their composition and microstructure, and to obtain a better understanding of their manufacturing processes. The examinations included optical microscopy of metallographic cross-sections, microhardness tests, scanning electron microscopy, including energy dispersive spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The results show that the samples were all composed of lead covered with a corrosion layer. The sheet thicknesses, microhardness values and microhardness distribution, as well as the grain size distribution, led to the conclusion that all the sheets were produced by the same technology, using a cold-working (strain-hardening) process, and were probably used for the same purpose. The presence of antimony was observed in the sample from the Roman ship from Caesarea, which may hint at an Italian (Sardinia) origin of the material, and perhaps of the ship.

There is only the abstract, the full article isn't uploaded

Also, Farmers into Sailors: Ship Maintenance, Greek Agriculture, and the Athenian Monopoly on Kean Ruddle (IG II2 1128)

This discusses possible methods of preserving hulls but lead sheeting is mentioned.
But almost by definition, lead sheeting would mean you couldn't beach the ship as it would just rip the lead off