Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Pomey - Principles and Methods of Construction in Ancient Naval Architecture

    Uploaded by

    utvrda
    8 views12 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    8 views12 pages

    Pomey - Principles and Methods of Construction in Ancient Naval Architecture

    Uploaded by

    utvrda

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 12
    CHAPTER THREE PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION IN ANCIENT NAVAL ARCHITECTURE “The problem of ancient Mediterranean ship construction, Jong neglected in studies of nautical archaeology, was not really addressed until the beginning of the 1960s: An es- sential step was taken by O. Hasiéf, who abandoned the then-traditional notions of “carvel” and “clinker” con- struction, and replaced them, in a series of studies essen Gally based on the analysis of traditional Nordic ship con- struction, with the new, much richer ideas of “shell” and “skeleton” construction. Lionel Casson, who adopted the new concepts developed by Haslif, deserves the credit for their application to ancient ship construction.? In demonstrating thatthe ships of the Greco-Roman pe~ riod were consenicted according to 2 “shell-first” tech- nique, Casson directly posed the problem of ancient ship constructign in terms breaking with the traditional view. ‘The theory of “shell-fist” construction in ancient ships, which took account of the particular characteristics of these vessels, therefore caused great excitement and was widely adopted. Acting as a catalyst, this new theory profoundly reinvigorated the study of msticalarchacol- ‘gy and led to work ofthe greatest importance on ancient naval architecture, ‘A dozen yeas late, in an article both celebrated and fandamental to fatute studies, Lucien Basch objected to an excessively simplistic vision of shell and skeleton con struction (which increasingly fine analysis of ancient wrecks and numerous ethnographic examples had shown to be flawed) as wel a the risks of too schematic an op~ position to these two notions. Still, without repudiating these two fundamental notions, he bypassed them in in- troducing the more complex notion of intermediary techniques and in producing the new concept of frames that are “active” or “pasive,” according tothe role played by the frames in the construction of the vessel. With this latter concept, which he proposed to support with erite- PATRICE POMEY ria of preferential classification rather than idea of hell or skeleton construction, he revived the problem of ancient ship construction in new terms. Nevertheles, inthe de- bate that followed, Ame Emil Christensen reaffirmed the importance of the notions of shel and skeleton construc~ tion and emphasized the importance of phenomena of contamination between the ewo in numerous intermedi- ate techniques* Recently, certain authors, going beyond Basch’s ideas, have begun to reconsider the ides of hell construction in ancient naval architecture as ealy asthe Roman Republi- an period, Jean-Marie Gassend and Jean-Pierre Cuomo, 2s a result oftheir study of the Roman ship from the Boune of Marseilles (end of the second, beginning of the third century 4.0), propose anew theoretical method of ancient ship constsetion that chey call “tnsution alterée” (“alternating construction”) In order vo tecon- cile the fundamental characteristics of ancient Medi sanean ships (asembly of planking with pegged mortse- and-tenon joins and a lack of homogeneity in internal framing), the authors, who have taken up a resolutely frame-based postion, imagine 2 original method of con- struction in which the vessel is assembled gradually on partial framing elements and in which, in fic, all the feames play an active roe ‘Thus the problem of ancient Mediterranean ship con- struction, long ignored, has become, over the last forty year, the object ofa partcuitly rich debate, which has caused the perception ofthe problem to evolve and which has often led to increasingly detailed analyses of archaco- logical finds. The later have clearly demonstrated that ancient ship construction was much more complex and much richer than it had a ist appeared, I is 20 jus df= ferent processes of construction (meaning the order and ‘manner in which the diffrent components ofthe hull are assembled and the means used to realize the shape of the ‘bull and the existence of mixed technigaes that is under consideration, but the entire problem af the evolution of nto new tech= ancient ship construction and its eransit niques, which appeared at che end of antiquity and the beginning of the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, iFeach new theory permits the advancement of the thought of ts time by elucidating different aspects ofthe process of construc- tion, none permits 2 germine interpretation of the en- semble of complex phenomena of ship construction 2538 integrated whole. In fact, if considered solely from the viewpoint of eonsteuction sequence, as has been the case up to the present, the ideas of shell and skeleton, con- struction are cleatly insufficient to account for the diver- sity of mixed processes of construction. By considering the later, Basch demonstrated the limits of the original shell and skeleton notions, which do not exist except in extreme cases, Conversely the idea of mixed construction, proposed by Basch and complemented by the idea of ac- tive frames, even if i offers the advantage of sccommo- dating the extreme variety of methods of construction, proves insufficient for explaining the general principles that governed the elaboration (design and construction) of the ship, Therefore, none of these notions, if strictly incerpreted, will reveal the characteristics of the whole of ancient ship construction or permit us to understand is true nature and grasp the sense ofits evolution, That is why it appears necessary (0 me to propose a new theoret~ ical approach that accounts for the entirety of phenaoi~ ena, from conception through the realization of the ves- sel, md that permits the integration of the fundamental advantages of the diferent existing theories, despite their apparent opposition Current debates are essentially focused on the inter- pretation of the processes of construction more than on the conception of the vessel” There isa need to return to 42 more global vision, one that takes account on the one hhand of the problems connected to the conception of the vessel (it structure as much as its form), which constitute what Iwill call the principles ofconstnuction, and on the other hand the problems connected to the procses of construc- tion employed in the practical realization of the vesst, which are the concer of the methods of construction * CONCEPTION In the first place, the builder conceives, in a global fash- ‘on, the vessel to be realized according to the demands to ‘which itis subject, that is, according co the function and: usage of the ship, and following from the builder’ own ‘experience, This wsion i then translated on the one hand sm terms of form, on the other in terms of stctuge” At this initial stage, the concept of the shape may not take concrete form at all, or may be extremely elementary in the form of a simple sketch, or may be particularly de- tailed, as in plans showing three views af the hull, Be- ‘econ these extremes, all sorts of intermediate stages are possible, such as the establishment of praportions among the different parts of recourse £0 three-

    You might also like