was built. Ptolemy Philopator's ship would have required two thousand oar-ports on each side, to afford employment to her rowers. There is, however, another equally valid objection to the General's scheme: a bank of oars means something whereby one class of galleys could be clearly distinguished from another class. Ships of war, up to a comparatively recent period, were rated as mounting so many guns, just as ancient galleys were rated by their banks of oars; the one measured the fighting, the other the propelling power. But if, according to the General's plan, triremes or quinqueremes were known by the number of banks, what was the measure of vessels of the larger size? for he does not profess to work any galley on his plan with more than five tiers; nor does he maintain that the size of his galley was measured by the number of her oars, which would depend upon her length. In whatever way this scheme is examined it will be found to be altogether untenable.
Charnock's theory. Charnock, in his "History of Marine Architecture,"[1] has evidently devoted more space than thought to the elucidation of this intricate subject. While he, with all other writers on the subject, accurately describes "uniremes" as "those galleys or vessels which had only one row of oars extending between their masts, or perhaps the entire length of the vessel," he breaks down at the first step beyond a unireme, when he says that "the biremes had one tier of oars between their masts, and another abaft the main or principal mast." Indeed, all theories must necessarily fail which cannot be made applicable to vessels of every
- ↑ Vol. i. p. 47.
