Comprehensive coverage

Fleet Management in Antiquity - Part I

A field of activity that had a bearing on political activity, military activity, and civil activity is the maritime field, and this refers to the set of ships that sailed in the Mediterranean Sea and the rivers, mainly in Europe

Until the 20th century, Gothic writing was mainly focused on philosophy, religion and the state. Focusing on organizational bodies as frameworks that stand on their own and in which it is right to invest even an iota of thought did not exist and this is for the reason that organizations of their kind almost did not exist. Excluding the state institutions, the only organizational bodies that operated in antiquity were the army and the religious institutions.
A field of activity that had a bearing on the political activity, the military activity and the civil activity is the maritime field and it refers to the set of ships that sailed in the Mediterranean Sea and the rivers mainly in Europe. Extensive evidence of this can be found in the writings of the historians of the time. This reference of these writers is historical. Description of various events related to maritime activities including reporting on various technical details such as engineering, logistical and financial aspects. This corpus of descriptions and reports spans a wide time span of hundreds of years and gives the reader a very broad perspective on the movement of ships in the Mediterranean countries.
A possible way to deepen this perspective is to use concepts taken from the managerial theories developed in the 20th century. Let's not forget that the organizational theories are anchored in reality and that in essence they serve as work tools that come to serve different organizations to optimize work processes and improve the quality of their products. Even the fleets in ancient times were meant to give a certain product. This product is essentially a service, whether it is the transfer of goods from one place to another or whether it is warships designed to protect the interests of the countries in whose service they operated. An intelligent use of these concepts will clarify many things regarding the management of fleets in antiquity, such as organizational level, communication channels, storage and financing methods.
The information from antiquity can be divided into four types, and they are direct information about a given period provided by historians of the time or about a previous period based on records they had, references to previous periods that amount to a few lines or several sections, archaeological evidence of ships and paintings on urns and On top of coin illustrations. Although the written knowledge has a wide spread of time, it is not continuous from a documentary chronological point of view. Considering this constraint, an attempt will be made, even if it is minimalist, to characterize the fleet management patterns of this period. The countries we will refer to are Egypt, Carthage, Greece and Rome. From a methodical point of view, the different components will be described, touching on the different aspects of seafaring, and from this whole, the administrative conclusions will be derived.
Ship types
The ships that served in the navies of the countries we are researching can be classified according to 3 types. Sailing areas, targets and propulsion. When talking about sailing areas, we mean the places where the ships are planned to operate, and here a distinction must be made between ships planned to operate on rivers and ships planned to operate on days such as the Mediterranean Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean. The reason why the designated sailing place requires a different design of ships. Let's not forget that the nature of the body of water in the river is different from that of the sea in terms of wind directions, waves and depth. The countries that used naval ships only were Greece and Carthage. The settlement areas of Greece were Greece, the islands of the Aegean Sea, the region of Thrace (western Turkey) and Syracuse, which necessitated the construction of an array of naval ships to create a continuous connection between the settlements. Carthage as a country that was based on trade between itself and the Mediterranean countries had to be based on a naval fleet in order to be able to transport goods from place to place, including importing goods from various places west of Gibraltar (Herman 1963: 183-184). The bulk of ancient Egypt's traffic was focused on the Nile, the eastern Mediterranean and the western Indian Ocean. The Nile crossed Egypt along its entire length and for this reason served as a convenient channel of communication between the south of the country and the north, which necessitated the construction of ships whose job it was to cross its entire length for the country's internal needs (Herman 1979: 117). To import various raw materials, they built ships that moved across the Mediterranean Sea to Lebanon and ships that moved along the eastern shores of Africa. Rome needed a large naval fleet that operated in the Mediterranean Sea and in various rivers to transport raw materials and was also designed to guard its borders through local naval fleets (Tacitus 1965: 63,97) and fleets that sailed along rivers such as the Rhine River (Tacitus 1965: 42).
In terms of the purposes for which the ships were built, two basic purposes must be distinguished, which are civilian purposes and military purposes. This division finds its place already in Egypt. The Egyptian ships sailed in the Nile, the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, including the Gulf of Aden. The first evidence of such a large sea voyage is found in Sahoura (Brested 1963: 95). The civilian ships mainly sailed on the Nile and were used to transport grain and agricultural produce. In addition, there were heavy cargo ships designed to transport particularly heavy loads such as cattle (Brested 1963: 71) and building blocks (Brested 1963: 196). It is likely that these ships required special planning since the transport of such cargoes requires a different form of storage than the transport of food. Ships that sailed across the seas engaged in the import and export of products and raw materials, such as the ships of Thutmose III that brought various products from Phoenicia (Brested 1963: 225) and on the other hand ships that exported goods to greater distances in the Mediterranean Sea and reached as far as the Hittite kingdom (Brested 1963: 328). As for imports, it is known that Ramesses III imported construction materials - cedars of Lebanon from Phenicia and copper from the Sinai Peninsula, and for this purpose a special fleet was built (Brested 1963: 353).
Military ships were mainly intended for transporting soldiers to various destination areas such as Phenicia. There are also reports of naval battles, but the details regarding them are very scarce (Brested 1963: 352,350,100). The temples of Rea and Petah had their own naval fleets that operated in the Mediterranean and Red Seas and were intended to bring the treasures of the gods produced in Phoenicia, Syria and Pune (Brested 1963: 353).
Carthage had a wider horizon than Egypt's since its line of thought was mainly commercial and economic and therefore it had a large civilian fleet which was actually its merchant fleet. As mentioned, its ships sailed throughout the Mediterranean Sea and the eastern basin of the Atlantic Ocean. Alongside this fleet was a military fleet. It was not an offensive fleet like the Roman fleet, but a defensive fleet designed to protect its trade routes with the aim of maintaining its economic monopoly as the dominant supplier of products. This is actually the reason why Carthage was more than a military power, it was an economic power. Carthage had two types of ships: the military ships which were long and driven mainly with the help of oars and the second type were more rounded which were extended by means of sails and were intended for the transport of heavy loads (Charles Pica Z and K 1964: 138).
Greece and Rome had larger fleets than Egypt and Carthage due to their geographical character and imperial depth, which necessitated the construction of larger fleets. A regular ship service was needed to transport food and raw materials throughout the empire. As for the military side, the Greeks built different types of ships such as the Burma and the trireme (Herman 1963: 32,96) which were adopted by the Romans.
The ships in the archaic period in Greece were multi-purpose and were used both as warships and as ships for transporting goods (Cabrielsen 1994: 25). In Rome, multi-purpose was used only by the civilian ships. They were used both to transport passengers and to transport cargo, especially grain (Rouge 1981: 179-180). The transportation of the grains was in the hands of the central government since they were used as a form of tax that the conquered countries had to transfer to Rome (Casson 1971: 297). Due to the multi-purpose nature of transport, these ships can be considered as an acceptable standard.
Specialized ships were very few. One type of ship is intended for the transport of unusual cargo such as the transport of animals, in particular horses that were used as land transport vehicles and animals for circuses and ships for the transport of unhewn stones. These ships by their nature had to be particularly strong and stable (180 Rouge 1981:). Ships of a different nature are river ships designed to transport Roman government officials on the Nile. Ships designed to transport mail of this administration also operated in this river (Casson 1971: 334,341). In the waters of the Rhine, the Danube and other rivers, ships also operated to transport cargo both for the military and for civilian needs (Casson 1971: 332).
In Greece, alongside the warships, there were ships that provided food, water and tools to the warring naval forces (Cabrielsen 1994: 119) and coast guard ships that sailed on the Rhine and Danube (Casson 1971: 333-334)). In each port small ships sailed that served as a link between the naval ships and the ports and they were mainly used for two purposes. One purpose was to route the large ships into the harbors and a second purpose was to unload cargo and transfer it to storage on the beaches Casson 1971: 335)).
In terms of propulsion, ships in ancient times were based on two forms of propulsion. One propulsion is based on rowers and the second propulsion is based on wind and for that they were equipped with one or more sails. For the most part, the ships were powered by oars and sails. Few ships were based on rowing only or wind only. From the surviving records it appears that the ships that sailed the Mediterranean Sea and probably also the Phoenician ships that crossed the Straits of Gibraltar were large ships and this for two reasons. The ships that are supposed to transport cargo must have a large load and the battleships were manned by a large number of oarsmen which made it possible to propel them. The usual battleships were the Burma and the Trireme. The Burma is propelled with the help of 50 oarsmen and a sail with 25 oarsmen sitting in two tiers on each side and the trireme in which the number of oarsmen can exceed 100 and rowers are seated in three tiers on each side (Herman 1963: 32,96). The trireme was very common in the Athenian navy in the 4th and 5th centuries BC and had 120 rowers (Casson 1971: 305).
From paintings that have survived and which are found on coins, on urns and on wall reliefs it appears that there were cargo ships that moved by the power of the wind alone without oarsmen. This can be explained by two reasons. One reason is that a large number of rowers take up a lot of space both for their seating and for food storage and prolonged stay at sea. A second reason is the weight of a cargo ship for its contents, which can reach dozens and hundreds of tons, far beyond the ability of rowing-based propulsion. Transporting small loads of tens or several hundreds of kilograms in ships that are also driven by rowers seems to be possible. What is the numerical ratio between cargo ships driven by the wind and between ships driven by rowers and wind is difficult to estimate since the numerical data regarding the extent of the movement of ships in antiquity is very little.

The duration of the voyage and the climatic factor
Since the propulsion was based on oars and wind, the cruising speed was low, a few kilometers per hour (Casson 1971: 281-296). The result was that the voyage could last from several days to several months. Here a distinction must be made between ships that were used to transport cargo and military ships. The cargo ships were driven by the force of the wind and the voyage was very slow. The cruising speed basically depended on the wind speed. The higher the wind speed, the higher the cruising speed and vice versa. Sailing in the winter was extremely dangerous, so the voyage was reduced to the period between 14.09-27.03 (Casson 1971: 270). In the winter, sea traffic was minimal for the transfer of urgent products that could not be postponed, such as essential missions, the transport of urgent supplies and the transport of military forces, which were most essential to activate as quickly as possible.
The problem with winter cruises originates from very strong storms that the ships could not withstand and in particular difficult to impossible visibility conditions both due to full cloud cover and due to the height of the waves which significantly reduced the visibility conditions. No ship could steer itself. It was impossible to use the stars as reference points and it was impossible to see a coastline such as rocks, plateaus and mountains. Another factor that ship captains took into account is the interwoven sea currents and tides. The sea currents in the Mediterranean are naturally weak and so are the tides. They are mainly felt in the Hellespons and Bosphorus gulfs and small gulfs such as the entrance to the Adriatic Sea and Syrtes or in certain channels such as the Euripus and the Gulf of Messina (Casson 1971: 273).
The direction of movement was a factor that accelerated or slowed down the direction of the voyage. Ships moving south either out of Italy or Greece towards Africa, Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt sailed quickly because they relied on a wind coming from the mountain slopes. But the return voyage was slower because they moved against the direction of the wind. In the Aegean Sea, the dangerous Etesian winds blow in August and force ships to anchor behind islands until the fury passes.
The Roman ships operated according to two patterns. Ships departing from Alexandria and ships departing from Rome. The Roman grain ships arrived in Alexandria at the end of the summer, were parked here throughout the winter and when the summer came they were quickly loaded and set off at the first possible moment, with the beginning of April. They moved in two paths. On the northern route they passed by Cyprus, Myra, Rhodes or Cnidos which is south of Crete and continue to Crete, Malta, Messina and Rome. The southern route ran along the northern coastline of Africa as far as Cyrene. In both routes the ships had to deal with the north-west wind. Such a voyage would last one to two months. Upon arriving in Rome the ships would unload their cargo, load goods destined for Alexandria and return to this city quickly. This voyage was short and lasted two or three weeks. The ships that wintered in Rome, with the arrival of spring in April, would sail to Alexandria, arrive there in May, be loaded and return to Rome in August - which would have allowed them to quickly return to Alexandria for winter parking there (Casson 1971: 297-298).
The journey of the military ships was very short, a few days. It must be remembered that these ships did not carry cargo and therefore their load was relatively low. Except for the rowers themselves, their cargo included food for staying at sea and combat equipment. These ships were propelled by the force of the wind and with the help of their oarsmen. This was usually used in the sails with the aim of maintaining the strength of the oarsmen for emergencies, in order to reach different destinations as quickly as possible and during the battles themselves. For example, a voyage from Alexandria to Rhodes took at least 4 days and a fast voyage from Potioli, which is south of Rome, to Carthage lasted 10 days. The duration of a normal voyage was 1982 days (Lutwak 104: 105-XNUMX).

maintenance and logistics
A basic and universal concept that accompanies any transportation system is logistics, and this was understood already in ancient times. The establishment of a fleet requires a continuous supply of raw materials for the construction and maintenance of ships, otherwise the ships fall apart and all the investment in them goes down the drain. At the time of planning, natural wear and tear must be taken into account, which requires the maintenance of an appropriate inventory of spare parts.
The main resource needed to build ships was wood. In the construction of ships in ancient times, a distinction must be made between the hull of the ship and the other parts, since different types of trees and plants were required for this. The woods that were massively used to build ships were fir trees, pine trees and oak trees. The first priority was given to the fir trees because they are light, strong, long and without knots. These trees were used in the construction of the ship itself and in the production of oars. In case of a shortage of these trees, pine trees were used (Cabrielsen 1994: 140). Another use made of oak is in the construction of the stern of warships and this is due to their ability to withstand the blows of enemy battleships (Rouge 1981: 37), the ram of these ships is made from copper and tin casting (Cabrielsen 1994: 139-140). A less massive use of these trees is made in the construction of commercial or fishing ships which by their nature do not need to withstand such harsh conditions. Another use of the fir trees was in the production of the mast (Rouge 1981: 38). Spiny pronus was used to strengthen the connections of the bow and buccion was used to make those parts of the ship submerged in water (Rouge 1981: 37).
The hull of the ship had to be protected from water seepage at the various joints of its parts and from the shipworm, crabs and shells that gnaw on the wood. This protection is done in two stages. In the first stage, the seam lines were sealed using materials based on vegetation with an effective sealing capacity, such as papyrus, the first to use it for this purpose were the Egyptians. Another material used for this purpose was the linen which is also used by other navies. In the second step tar is used. From the literary sources it is known that it was used at least in the Hellenistic period and in the Roman period. In those parts of the ship submerged under water, copper and lead were used to prevent water seepage and decay (Rouge 1981: 38). When the construction of the ship was completed on all its components, the hull of the ship was painted red or resin (Cabrielsen 1994: 139).
As for sails, it is known that in the classical period they were made of linen because it is both light and strong. The linen fabrics used to make the sails were sewn together and reinforced with horizontal sheets made from hides. Ropes were made from a wide variety of trees and plants such as flax, palm fiber, papyrus, linden bark and certain types of reed (Rouge 1981: 54,66-67).
The sources of supply of these materials came from different places in the Mediterranean region. For example, the main supply of fir trees for Athens in the fifth and fourth centuries BC was from Macedonia, papyri were imported from Egypt and the pine trees of Greece in the fifth and fourth centuries BC were imported from Macedonia (Cabrielsen 1994: 140). Wood tends to absorb water, which increases its weight, And a ship that is too heavy will not function properly whether it is a merchant ship or a warship, therefore it was necessary to maintain its "dry" integrity. The trees from the moment they were felled underwent a prolonged drying that could last two years or more (Cabrielsen 1994: 142), which means that they were kept in optimal conditions in closed places to protect them in both summer and winter. An obvious conclusion is that special storage places were built for this purpose. In Greece and Rome, warships returning home after the war would be taken out of the water and put into hiding places and kept dry until they were returned to service (Casson 1971: 363).
Regarding the navy in Athens in the fifth and fourth centuries BC, it is known that the triremes had the function of a carpenter (Casson 1971: 304). In today's terms, this is a maintenance man. The carpenter would make necessary repairs during the voyage. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that his equipment included work tools and a warehouse where he kept ready spare parts and, if necessary, he would improvise from all the materials he had. Since the ship's building materials were wood, it is possible that, if necessary, less essential parts of the ship's hull were "cut off" in order to deal with urgent matters such as plugging holes in the ship to prevent water from entering. It is not known if he had his own staff. If not, he would have helped the ship's crew, for example rowers, and during the repair work they obeyed his command. It is possible that this function also existed in other warships and cargo ships.

Storage in cargo ships
Cargo ships were designed to transport different types of cargo and the form of storage was derived from the type of cargo being transported. Sometimes ships were also built according to unique requirements. In terms of the size of the cargo transported, two types of ships must be distinguished. Ships with a load of tens of tons and ships with a load of hundreds of tons. In rare cases, ships were built with a load of over 1000 tons. The ships with the smallest load had a capacity of 70-80 tons. From the 5th century BC onwards, particularly common ships had a load of 100-150 tons. Besides them, ships with a load of 350-500 tons also operated. And as for transporting passengers, there were those that could carry up to 600 people (Casson 1971: 171-172).
In a document from the time of Ptolemy from 171 BC there is a mention of 22 ships for transporting grain, the smallest of which had a load of 225 tons. Most ships had a load of 250-275 tons and the largest ship had a load of 450 tons (Casson 1971: 164). During the Hellenistic period, particularly large ships were built and they probably had an influence on commercial fleets. There is evidence that shortly after the beginning of the 3rd century BC a ship with a load of 1700-1900 tons operated (Casson 1971: 172).
As for the storage location, a distinction must be made between storage on decks and storage inside the interior of the ship. In ancient Egypt, storage was done on board because the inner space was filled with sand. For this reason, the goods had to be tied well to avoid shaking due to the movement of the ship or due to strong winds (Rouge 1981: 69-70). In the Greek and Roman period, storage was done in the interior space. It is likely that unusual cargo such as marble was stored on board itself. Since the marble is heavy, ships were built especially for this purpose so that it could withstand the weight and the design of the zaburit was done accordingly.
The method of storage depended on the nature of the transported cargo. Grain was transported in containers and in bulk. If a small quantity was transported, they would put it in baskets, leather sacks, or clay jars with a large opening, and if a large quantity was transported, Epsona was in bulk. Since grain tends to be scattered around, several preventive measures were taken. One way was to put "roofing surfaces" on the grain to fasten it in place without being able to escape to the sides. A second way was to put the grain into cells separated from each other by partitions. This technique was used when the grain was sent from different suppliers and it was also used to transport other types of cargo, which made it possible to accurately mark the cells from the point of view of the suppliers and from the point of view of their consumers these goods were intended (Rouge 1981: 70-71).
Other products were stored in jars and they included, for example, liquids, olives, nuts and small and fragile cargo such as statues, lanterns and candlesticks. A distinction must be made between two types of jugs, elongated and round. When the cargo is inserted into them, the openings are sealed with a cork covered with a plaster cast and on which the sender's name is written. In order to prevent the jars from chipping and breaking, they were stacked on top of each other with a layer of straw separating them, or they were packed in wicker baskets or rope baskets and covered with carefully sewn fabrics. In any case, each jar was covered with a lead seal on which the sender's name was written. Textiles were packed in cubic bundles so that they could easily be stacked into piles (Rouge 1981: 71-72).

Registration of shipments
As we saw on the jugs, the name of the sender was written for identification purposes. It is likely that also for other types of cargo, compatible techniques were used to stamp the sender's name. In the same way, there should also be the name of the consignee who receives the cargo at the port after unloading it. There is also evidence, albeit indirect, that the jugs were also inscribed with the name of their maker and sometimes also the name of the ship on which the shipment was made and the name of the captain (Rouge 1981: 72).

ship crews
The evidence regarding the aging of ships in antiquity must be drawn from two sources. One type of sources refers to illustrations that appear on coins and urns, and a second type of written material found in historians' writings, legal material and references in literary works. In principle, two types of teams must be distinguished. Crews of military ships and crews of commercial ships because of the different nature of their duties. The most detailed report that has come down to us is from the Roman period since written material with a larger textual volume survived (Rouge 1981: 182-183). From these inscriptions it appears that there were different types of those who filled these positions and they will be mentioned here in their original terms.
The earliest detailed report regarding military ships is from the 4th and 5th centuries BC (Casson 1971: 302-306). This is a trireme manned by 200 people. This team consisted of 170 rowers and 30 different positions. These roles included, in descending order:
1. The Trierachous - the owner of the ship and its commander, a person with experience and a desire to command himself.
2. Kybernetes – Acting manager of the ship When the Trierachous is on the actual ship and the latter is inexperienced, he filled the role of the ship's commander. In emergency situations, he operated the steering wheel himself. He was usually in charge of the stores.
3. Keleustes - responsible for the oarsmen. He took care of their training and kept their spirits up. He was near the Kybernetes, received orders from him and passed them on to the rowers.
4. Pentekontartos – was in charge of subgroups of oarsmen. His place was in the lower benches - the first rowers' floor. He would convey to them the instructions of the Keleusstes. In addition to this he had administrative duties such as paying, making purchases and recruiting oarsmen for the ship.
5. Prorates - a person with extremely sharp vision who sat on the foredeck and had to warn ahead of time about the direction and strength of the winds and notice rapid changes in these characteristics of the winds. This position in terms of hierarchy is below the three previous positions mentioned and it was a necessary step for any rower who wanted to advance in the job ladder.
The professional roles included:
1. Naupegos - the ship's carpenter.
2. Awletes - a piper of the ship who gave a signal to the oarsmen to row when the Keleustes gave the signal to set off.
3. Toicharchoi - "side commander" was responsible for the rear oarsmen, those near the rear bow and those on the right side of the ship and for those facing the front bow.
The fighting force usually consisted of 10 men, although other navies had a 40-man crew aboard the ship that included archers and mace operators that were used intermittently on other ships.
During the Hellenistic period, large military ships were built and manned by more skilled warriors and catapults were placed on them, which necessitated placing a new type of professional warriors on board. The informative source regarding the crews of these ships comes from Rhodes, which from the third century BC to the first century AD had a large and magnificent fleet and operated mainly quadriramas. The staff included the following office bearers (Casson 1971: 306-309) in descending order:
1. Trierarchos - the commander of the ship. This rank holder operated on a small ship and could command a small fleet of ships.
2. Epiplous – Deputy of the ship's commander and was acting commander when the Trierarchos decided not to take personal command of the ship, or commanded several ships, or stayed aboard a fishing vessel of a small fleet of ships.
3. Grammateus – the ship's secretary and had a close relationship with the ship's commander.
4. Kybernetes - actual manager of the ship and responsible for navigation.
5. Prorates – one rank below Kybernetes and responsible for the bow of the ship.
6. Keleustes – in charge of rowers.
7. Pentekontarchos - probably helped the person in charge of the oarsmen.
The professional positions included:
1. Hegemon ton ergon - a type of officer in charge of the deckhands in the front and back of the ship.
2. Naupego - the ship's carpenter.
3. Pedaliouchos – in charge of the ship's operation.
4. Elaiochreistes – supplier of olive oil to the team. With this oil the crew members would anoint their skin for refreshment.
5. Kopodetes - responsible for the integrity and function of the oars.
6. Iatros - the ship's doctor.
In the group of sailors there are two subgroups. First subgroup - Ergazomenoi en prora - those found on the front deck, and second subgroup - Ergazomenoi en prymne - those found on the back deck. Both groups handled the sails. The fighting crew included the catapult operators, the archers and the naval soldiers and finally the oarsmen.
Relatively detailed information about the Imperial Roman Navy refers to the first three centuries AD (Casson 1971: 310-312). Basically, the Romans adopted the Greek concept and added typical Roman characteristics to it.
Regarding officers and professionals, no change will be made. The team included:
1. Trierarchus - the commander of the ship who stayed on it regularly.
2. Governor - actual commander and responsible for navigation.
3. Proreta – one rank below the Governor and responsible for the bow of the ship.
4. Pousarius – equivalent to the Greek Celesta. The professionals included the Veloroii in charge of the sails, equivalent to the Ergazomenoi in the fleet of Rhodes.
5. Faber - the ship's carpenter.
6. Subunctor – equivalent to Elaiochreistes.
7. Medicus – the ship's doctor.
8. Pitulus - gives the rhythm to the oarsmen parallel to the Greek flutist and worked at the same time as the flutist himself and sometimes also in his place.
9. Symphoniacus – the flutist.
10. Naufylax - the ship's guard.
Merchant ships operated on a different hierarchical basis (Casson 1971: 314-321). At the top of the hierarchy was the owner of the ship or the lessee or a group of lessees, since a ship could have more than one lessee, who wanted to transport different cargoes on the same ship. He or they could be on the ship and supervise the cargo or have his or their representative perform this role. The owner of the cargo could act as the person in charge of the ship, although in most cases and especially in large ships, a professional ship captain was hired who was responsible for its day-to-day operation. This hired commander would see to the recruitment of the rest of the ship's crew, including a professional sailor. The duties of the ship's commander also included arranging the cargo and taking care of the passengers' well-being.
A distinction must be made between coastal ships and ships that sailed on the high seas. In coastal ships he was responsible for the full operation of the ship, and in ships that sailed on the open sea he delegated this authority to the Governor. The captain of the ship had two captains under his command: one captain, the Prorus, was responsible for the maintenance of the ship and would take the captain's place if the latter was prevented from doing so for any reason. The captain of the two Toichachos responsible for the administrative aspect of the ship. He was the treasurer, responsible for the luggage and the passengers. The cargo clerk and other assistants were subordinate to this captain. On large ships there were shipwrights, carpenters, guards and oarsmen for the aging of the ship's boats.

Staff recruitment and training
The manpower needed for the aging of the ships is done in several ways. In Athens the fighting force was provided by the state through compulsory conscription or on a voluntary basis, usually from the warrior class which was considered the highest social class (Casson 1971: 304, Cabrielsen 1994: 106). In extreme cases the recruitment was wider and came from the avenues of society as a whole. Xenophon notes that in 406 an emergency order was issued for the aging of 110 ships and both free and slave people were recruited. In this case, 18,700 people were recruited, many from the lower classes due to an acute shortage of recruits from the classes that were used to providing this manpower. (Cabrielsen 1994: 107).
Another recruiting method that was common in Athens in the 4th and 5th centuries BC was hiring people from the market. Recruiting through negotiation. Since it was a workers' market, they set the prices. If they did not receive the required wages they would turn to the owners of other ships who were willing to pay more, and the triarchs had to compete among themselves who would be willing to pay more for highly skilled oarsmen (Cabrielsen 1994: 122-123). In Greece and Rome there were those who received double wages such as the Velarii and Duplicarii - oarsmen and sailors with special skills (Casson 1991: 311-312). In the Hellenistic period and in Rome, the ships' doctors were hired from among the inhabitants of the island of Cos (Casson 1971: 308). The island seems to have been awash with doctors of high professional reputation and it is likely that because of this they had a monopoly on the market for doctors, which probably allowed them to command high prices for their services.
Alongside the direct recruitment mechanism, there was also a mechanism of subcontractors. In merchant ships, a captain would be hired for the ship and he in turn would recruit the other workers (Casson 1971: 316-317). Regarding the Roman period, the duration of the recruitment is also known. Some workers were recruited for one season and released in the weak season and some were hired for a whole year. In terms of social status, the recruits included ordinary citizens and workers alike (Rouge 1981: 183-184).
As for the rowers, it is known that they underwent appropriate training. Those who were destined to be rowers and who lacked suitable skills learned the art of rowing. Usually the study is done under real conditions on ships. If there were no ships available for this purpose, the training would be carried out on land on platforms and then move to real exercises on ships. In the last stage they would learn how to perform combat maneuvers. Experienced rowers would improve their professional ability through regular practice and racing competitions (Casson 1971: 278-280).

The organizational structure of the fleets
From the description given regarding the obsolescence of the ships, it can be seen that the organizational level is relatively limited compared to what happens today in ships, and this is due to the simplicity of operating the ships in ancient times. At the same time, we must not forget that these ships also required great professional skill. The main mass of the crews in the military ships included mainly the oarsmen and the rest were people with other professions including the senior officials responsible for the operation and functioning of the ship. Other functionary groups included those in charge of sails and the group responsible for storing goods on merchant ships. If the ship was a passenger ship, there were those who handled the service of these passengers, which required a professional skill in itself.
Comparing merchant ships to military ships it is easy to see that the military ships had a more complex organizational structure because the total number of people operating them was greater. Military ships have another element and that is the combat power. Regarding the Roman military fleet, it is known that it was larger and better organized than that of the Greeks, and in all ships, two different organizational patterns were simultaneously used, one for the ship's crew and one for the fighting force (Casson 1981: 312,314).
In terms of orders of magnitude, the Greek navy had hundreds of ships. For example, in Athens in the 5th century BC there were 300 ships. At the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, Athens had 300 serviceable triremes at its disposal. The largest number of ships that set out at the same time included 200 ships that reached Artemision and Salamis. At the end of the Samian rebellion in 440/39 BC, it had 160 ships at its disposal. In the summer of 428 BC, 250 ships operated and in the spring of 413 BC, more than 218 ships operated. These are mainly triremes. Very little is heard about tricontours and pentacontours. About the 4th century BC there is less information. From those few data it seems that the order of magnitude of hundreds of ships is still preserved although there is a more detailed reference regarding larger ships. Regarding the year 29/330 BC it is known that there were 410 ships, of which 18 were tetrarias. In the year 325/4 BC there were 417 ships of which 50 tetrarias and 7 pentariaras and in the year 323/2 BC there were probably 365 ships of which most likely 315 triars and 50 tetrars (Cabrielsen 1994: 126-127).
In light of the fact that Rome was stronger than Greece in terms of military strength and controlled larger areas, it is likely that more ships served in it and let's not forget that Rome had extensive territories in Europe, which required her to have ships on the big rivers instead. And although Rome had several naval fleets that included a fleet in the Tyrrhenian Sea, a fleet in the Adriatic Sea, near the coast of Gallia sailed warships captured by Augustus in his victory at Actium (Tacitus 1962: 120) and a fleet in the Black Sea (Tacitus 1965: 97) and fleets within Europe included a fleet on the Rhine (Tacitus 1965: 42). As you can see some of these fleets operated geographically very far from Rome and their role was to guard the country's borders and it is likely that the commanders of these fleets had a great deal of freedom of action. They were delegated many powers by the ruling center in Rome.
A special facet that accompanies Rome is the function of the engineer-managers. An allusion to this is found in Plutarch who refers to two important administrative functions and they are the chief engineer of the state and the chief engineer of the army (Plutarch: 253,248). It seems that according to them it had a lot of weight in everything related to fleet planning and ship production both from the engineering side and from the organizational side, subject to the decisions of Rome's leaders. Their role may have been similar to the main role of chief ministerial scientists nowadays.
As you can see, the merchant ships were operated by functionaries, which were not needed in military ships, which required a lot of professional knowledge that stands on its own. But even in them the organizational level was relatively flat. As for the overall ownership of the ships, it is known that in the archaic period in Greece, the ownership of the ships as a whole was in the hands of the aristocratic families since in this way they were given military, political, social power and the possibility of extensive economic involvement (Cabrielsen 1994: 24-25). In the 4th century BC, the aristocratic families still owned commercial fleets and military fleets, but military naval conflicts were already managed by the state and it was also responsible for their logistics (Cabrielsen 1994: 26,108).

Building fleets, recruiting crews and operating the ships require large financial investments. It is necessary to take care of the development of financing channels since the fleets in ancient times, especially in Greece and Rome, included hundreds of ships and large amounts of funds were required for this. And it is true that many efforts were made to raise this capital. The two main financing channels were the triarchies - the wealthy families - whose share in this funding was dominant and which gradually decreased over the years, and in the fourth century BC this dominance was in the hands of the state, although the share of the triarchies was still significant (Cabrielsen 1994: 26-27). The source of state funds is the taxation mechanism (Cabrielsen 1994: 105).
In Athens, there were quite a few cases where the budget set aside by the state for the operation of the fleets was not sufficient and it was necessary to use other means such as robbery, looting and seizure of funds from the cities of the member states in common alliances (Cabrielsen 1994: 114,117). Naval officers had to act to obtain the necessary financing by turning to the private market and requesting loans for this purpose, even if it involved pledging private property (Cabrielsen 1994: 117,124).

To the second part of the article

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.