Egyptians in the New World?

[Nathan Ross]

what other useful supplies would they have on the ship?

Probably not much. Roman-era sea voyages were not intended to last more than a week or two at most. A ship sailing at 2 knots (average for the times, according to Casson), would take 24 hours to cover 50 sea miles - you can estimate from that, allowing for calms and crosswinds, how many days supply of water etc would be carried.

There wasn't even much crew accomodation aboard vessels of the time. The Byzantine Yassiada shipwreck has a little triangular galley built right up in the bows, with a tiled roof to protect against fire, but other than that it appears the crew were expected to sleep on the deck. The passengers did as well, most likely - even the bigger Roman ships appear to have had only a small deckhouse for the captain and any important passengers to shelter in. Most of the hull space was taken up with cargo.

Regarding fishing tackle, a simple line trailed off the stern, with suitable bait, would probably be more effective than a net, which required special handling. There are many accounts from later ages of sailors pulling up huge sharks using only a big hook and a lump of meat. Fish are attracted the disturbance caused by the wake of a ship.

Water would be the main problem for you deep-sea adventurers then. Turning seawater into fresh was unknown, and would be for centuries to come (think of the Rime of the Ancient Mariner!)

- Nathan

[ruski94]

would it make sense if the main character of my book, who is going to be the son of Gaius Suetonius Paulinos (He was the first roman to cross the Atlas Mnts. and traveled all the way to the Senegal River by land), has ships that are built like Liburnae or Quinquermes but with larger hulls and 2 instead of one sail? He has reasoning behind this because he is intending on embarking on an expedition around the western coast of Africa. As his large fleet reaches the Bay of Guinea they are swept by a current and carried to the middle of the Atlantic. After several weeks they land at the northeastern coast of South America.

[Nathan Ross]

That sounds a lot more possible. I'd be wary about Paulinus reaching the Senegal river, btw - it's quoted as a fact in various places, based on Pliny's Natural History, but the names of the rivers and places in Pliny have not been firmly established, as far as I know. It's a hell of a long way from the Atlas to Senegal, across some major desert! There are several rivers flowing south from the Atlas, and one of these is perhaps more likely - the Draa, for example, in southern Morocco, which has sizeable palm groves (which I've visited myself, although I saw no snakes or elephants!). Pliny is also rather prone to exaggeration...

There were Roman exploration expeditions into Africa, although it's not clear quite how far they went - Nero sent two parties of praetorians to find the source of the Nile, and they possibly reached the great lakes. There was also a civilian explorer around the same time (described by Pliny again, of course!), who may have crossed the Libyan desert to the oases around Lake Chad.

Liburnians, though, are quite plausible - Agricola used them in the seas around the north of Britain, so they were clearly thought to be quite seaworthy and good exploration vessels. Two masts? why not... The only problem here would be that an oared galley is less subject to wind and tide than a sailing vessel, so might be less likely to get carried far from shore. In any case, the crew would certainly make strenuous efforts to haul themselves back eastward - you'd be looking at some seriously blistered oarsmen, at the very least.

[ruski94]

I think Paulinos' son (If you'd like you can think of a name for him :-D ) will have the oarsmen only as back up and not really as the main push of the ship.

And yes I knew that it was qouted from Pliny's Natural History from the wikipedia article about Roman expeditions in Africa, that is where I found out about Paulinos and his expedition as well as Nero's.

[Nathan Ross]

Paulinos' son (If you'd like you can think of a name for him :-D )

The son of Gaius Suetonius Paulinus would most likely be called Gauis Suetonius Paulinus! Naming conventions were getting a bit more complex by the 1st century though, so there might be room for variation in cognomen, perhaps...

Incidentally, if you're interested in fiction you might try finding a copy of George Shipway's novel Imperial Governor, which is a good (if imaginary) portrait of Paulinus himself during the Boudica revolt.

[ruski94]

so could you exemplify what his name could be? cuz if someone is reading this and knows of the original Gaius Suetonius Paulinos it could get confusing

[Nathan Ross]

Well, he would certainly keep the family name (nomen) Suetonius, and the cognomen (individual second name) would probably be passed on too. There are cases of sons getting a different cognomen to their father, and more cases of extra cognomens being added (sometimes taken from the mother's family). Amongst the aristocracy, names could sometimes stack up to ridiculous lengths.

Suetonius is quite rare as a nomen: besides Paulinus, there's the historian Suetonius Tranquillus, his father Suetonius Laetus, plus a Suetonius Claudianus, a Suetonius Rogatus, a Suetonius Taurus and a Suetonius Germanus listed in inscriptions, besides a few others who are clearly freed slaves of the Suetonii. To make things simpler, it might be best to use the name Paulinus and add an extra cognomen to differentiate son from father. You can find a list of cognomens halfway down the page here

Alternatively, if he were the adopted son of Paulinus (quite a common thing), he could have an extra name (taken from the nomen of his birth family) ending with -ianus. So Gaius Suetonius Paulinus Aurelianus, for example, would have been born into the Aurelii family and adopted by Suetonius. That would be another way to make things clear.

[ruski94]

could Paulinus Africanus or Mauretanius or Tingitanus work? seen as in the article that you linked it said that "They could also signify a fondness or connection with a particular region."

[Sean Manning]

would it make sense if the main character of my book, who is going to be the son of Gaius Suetonius Paulinos (He was the first roman to cross the Atlas Mnts. and traveled all the way to the Senegal River by land), has ships that are built like Liburnae or Quinquermes but with larger hulls and 2 instead of one sail? He has reasoning behind this because he is intending on embarking on an expedition around the western coast of Africa. As his large fleet reaches the Bay of Guinea they are swept by a current and carried to the middle of the Atlantic. After several weeks they land at the northeastern coast of South America.

Educated Romans would have remembered Herodotus' story about the Phoenecian trade with the a place in west Africa where the natives had gold (4.196). That (or trying to reach barbarians who the other merchants haven't reached yet) might be another reason to send a fleet in that direction, but you would have to research whether the trade was still in existence.

Proper galleys would run out of food and water in a few days (water jars were heavy and bulks, and rowers need a lot of food and water), but some ships were hybrids between galleys and roundships. Lionel Casson's books on ancient ships are a good place to start.

[Epictetus]

If you are worried about fresh water, have it rain. This would be specially relevant if they are blown off course by storms.

[Robert Vermaat]

It's a hell of a long way from the Atlas to Senegal, across some major desert! There are several rivers flowing south from the Atlas, and one of these is perhaps more likely - the Draa, for example, in southern Morocco, which has sizeable palm groves (which I've visited myself, although I saw no snakes or elephants!). Pliny is also rather prone to exaggeration....

Perhaps, but of course the desert between Marocco and Senegal was not what it is today. There would have been far less pure desert and the grazing area would have been a lot wider. As to elephants, the Carthaginians had access to those. If getting them North would have been an extremely arduous task, I doubt they would have been able to sustain their number..

[M. Demetrius]

have it rain.

And have them catch the water by using sailcloth, for example, into amphorae that may have held something else (now discarded overboard). In just a very few days, they'd all be dead without water.

[Nathan Ross]

but of course the desert between Marocco and Senegal was not what it is today.

Maybe so, but there's still about 1180 miles between the Atlas and the Senegal, and that's more or less in a straight line. Equivalent to marching from Constantinople to the Rhine - and then they'd have to do the same distance back again! Unless they had some pressing reason to do so, I doubt a Roman commander would take his men so very far.

Your point about the Carthaginians having elephants also suggests that elephants were found much further north - in southern Morocco perhaps? - and that Paulinus wouldn't have had to go quite so far to find them.

[ruski94]

what kind of things would they keep in the amphorae that they would discard? What other things do they keep on a ship?
Also, what would they do as they sail? i mean eventually they'll have to give up trying to push against the current so what would they do instead?

[Jona Lendering]

Is it possible to have some a load of wine amphorae on board? In other words, have the people drink wine during the first three days, suffer from thirst for another three days, experience rain, and reach the New World on, say, day 12?