First, what type of ships would be used to transport infantry, cavalry, siege equipment, etc. and what was the carrying capacity of each type? Second, for a great naval power like Athens, what would it spend on its navy and how quickly could it scale up in preparation for war?
Questions about Hellenic ships and navies of the Classical Era
- Thread starter cincpac overboard
- Start date
I actually intended to answer to this one but alas exams hit me until now.
Well to answer this the main ship to transport soldiers were specially adapted for the job.
"In addition to ships of the Line, navies had at least two types of service triremes. One was the 'soldier-vessel', a troop transport, which was rowed by the thranites alone, thereby leaving the benches of the zygites and thalamites free for passengers. The other was the 'horse-transport'. These were made out of old triremes by removing the two lower levels of seats and converting the space into stalls for thirty horses; as in the troop transports, the rowing was done by the thranites." - Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times by Casson, Lionel
The 'soldier-vessel' would only be rowed by the uppermost row of rowers that was made up of 62 rowers, which left 108 seats for the soldiers being transported, while, as stated by Casson, the "horse-transport" could transport 30 horses. On siege equipment it would usually be built on site.
On the expenses, thanks to Thucydides we have some insight into it thanks to this passage from the Athenian expedition to Sicily during the Peloponnesian War
"The present expedition was formed in contemplation of a long term of service by land and sea alike, and was furnished with ships and troops so as to be ready for either as required. The fleet had been elaborately equipped at great cost to the captains and the state; the treasury giving a drachma a day to each seaman, and providing empty ships, sixty men-of-war and forty transports, and manning these with the best crews obtainable; while the captains gave a bounty in addition to the pay from the treasury to the thranitae and crews generally "
One drachma a day for the expedition for the crew, which is very expensive (to give an idea during the final phase of the Peloponnesian War, Athens hired 1300 Thracian swordsmen and ended up sending them home because they found their pay, one drachma a day, to be too expensive), and on top of the salary they still received a maintenance allowance, and this was while charging four hundred and sixty talents from the Delian League, which was later increased to six hundred talents, and while having, at the start of the war, 6000 talents in the treasury. These paid seamen were a necessary part of the Athenian navy, while the poor citizens would usually serve their military service as seamen there just weren't enough citizens for the navy and the athenian army. Still despite the costs associated to having to keep, according to Thucydides, "an army of thirteen thousand heavy infantry, besides sixteen thousand more in the garrisons and on home duty at Athens. This was at first the number of men on guard in the event of an invasion: it was composed of the oldest and youngest levies and the resident aliens who had heavy armour. " which is a very considerable force and despite this at the start of the Peloponnesian War, according to Thucydides, Athens had three hundred service ready triremes, this number does not includes the triremes from their allied states in the Delian League, and from their alliance Corcyraea, that fielded 110-120 triremes, Athens had a min of 410-420 warships, the real number is without a doubt bigger thanks to the remaining fleets of the Delian League.
But how many could Athens actually afford, well to turn to Thucydides again
"Indeed this armament that first sailed out was by far the most costly and splendid Hellenic force that had ever been sent out by a single city up to that time. In mere number of ships and heavy infantry that against Epidaurus under Pericles, and the same when going against Potidaea under Hagnon, was not inferior; containing as it did four thousand Athenian heavy infantry, three hundred horse, and one hundred galleys accompanied by fifty Lesbian and Chian vessels and many allies besides." afterwards on top of this force, Athens sent more men into Sicily "In the meantime, while the Syracusans were preparing for a second attack upon both elements, Demosthenes and Eurymedon arrived with the succours from Athens, consisting of about seventy-three ships, including the foreigners; nearly five thousand heavy infantry, Athenian and allied; a large number of darters, Hellenic and barbarian, and slingers and archers and everything else upon a corresponding scale."
So sending 100 of their own ships, 4000 infantry and 300 horse was a substantial strain to the Athenian treasury, that was even more strained by the reinforcements.
Hope I managed to answer this.
Well to answer this the main ship to transport soldiers were specially adapted for the job.
"In addition to ships of the Line, navies had at least two types of service triremes. One was the 'soldier-vessel', a troop transport, which was rowed by the thranites alone, thereby leaving the benches of the zygites and thalamites free for passengers. The other was the 'horse-transport'. These were made out of old triremes by removing the two lower levels of seats and converting the space into stalls for thirty horses; as in the troop transports, the rowing was done by the thranites." - Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times by Casson, Lionel
The 'soldier-vessel' would only be rowed by the uppermost row of rowers that was made up of 62 rowers, which left 108 seats for the soldiers being transported, while, as stated by Casson, the "horse-transport" could transport 30 horses. On siege equipment it would usually be built on site.
On the expenses, thanks to Thucydides we have some insight into it thanks to this passage from the Athenian expedition to Sicily during the Peloponnesian War
"The present expedition was formed in contemplation of a long term of service by land and sea alike, and was furnished with ships and troops so as to be ready for either as required. The fleet had been elaborately equipped at great cost to the captains and the state; the treasury giving a drachma a day to each seaman, and providing empty ships, sixty men-of-war and forty transports, and manning these with the best crews obtainable; while the captains gave a bounty in addition to the pay from the treasury to the thranitae and crews generally "
One drachma a day for the expedition for the crew, which is very expensive (to give an idea during the final phase of the Peloponnesian War, Athens hired 1300 Thracian swordsmen and ended up sending them home because they found their pay, one drachma a day, to be too expensive), and on top of the salary they still received a maintenance allowance, and this was while charging four hundred and sixty talents from the Delian League, which was later increased to six hundred talents, and while having, at the start of the war, 6000 talents in the treasury. These paid seamen were a necessary part of the Athenian navy, while the poor citizens would usually serve their military service as seamen there just weren't enough citizens for the navy and the athenian army. Still despite the costs associated to having to keep, according to Thucydides, "an army of thirteen thousand heavy infantry, besides sixteen thousand more in the garrisons and on home duty at Athens. This was at first the number of men on guard in the event of an invasion: it was composed of the oldest and youngest levies and the resident aliens who had heavy armour. " which is a very considerable force and despite this at the start of the Peloponnesian War, according to Thucydides, Athens had three hundred service ready triremes, this number does not includes the triremes from their allied states in the Delian League, and from their alliance Corcyraea, that fielded 110-120 triremes, Athens had a min of 410-420 warships, the real number is without a doubt bigger thanks to the remaining fleets of the Delian League.
But how many could Athens actually afford, well to turn to Thucydides again
"Indeed this armament that first sailed out was by far the most costly and splendid Hellenic force that had ever been sent out by a single city up to that time. In mere number of ships and heavy infantry that against Epidaurus under Pericles, and the same when going against Potidaea under Hagnon, was not inferior; containing as it did four thousand Athenian heavy infantry, three hundred horse, and one hundred galleys accompanied by fifty Lesbian and Chian vessels and many allies besides." afterwards on top of this force, Athens sent more men into Sicily "In the meantime, while the Syracusans were preparing for a second attack upon both elements, Demosthenes and Eurymedon arrived with the succours from Athens, consisting of about seventy-three ships, including the foreigners; nearly five thousand heavy infantry, Athenian and allied; a large number of darters, Hellenic and barbarian, and slingers and archers and everything else upon a corresponding scale."
So sending 100 of their own ships, 4000 infantry and 300 horse was a substantial strain to the Athenian treasury, that was even more strained by the reinforcements.
Hope I managed to answer this.
I think drachinifel did a video about ancient navies fairly recently. If I find it I will post a link.
Although not a transport, there's a trireme, Olympias, in teh Greek navy.
en.wikipedia.org
Olympias (trireme) - Wikipedia
So the Athenians had access to ~400 warships, but there might be no more than 100 active at a time (at least in any one theater?) Just a quick glance at the naval battles of the era makes it seem like this checks out (86 triremes at Cyzicus, 76 at Cynossema, 50 at Pylos, etc.)
From Thucydides we know they had 300 of their own triremes at the start of the conflict, plus the hundreds more from their allies in the Delian League. The limitation seems to be financial, having all the triremes in service would mean 60,000 crewmen, at 1 drachma a day that makes it so that each month the athenian treasury would have to pay a talent per ship, 300 talents a month, in only one year they would empty around half their treasury, without counting with the wages to the rest of the athenian forces and the maintenance allowance given to each sailor. Financially makes more sense to just keep enough sailors for around 100 ready for battle triremes at any given time, a 100 talents a month is more bearable.
For comparison in Wages, Welfare Costs, and Inflation in Classical Athens, William T. Loomis mentions that the Athenian cavalry costed 40 talents a year, based on Xenophon's writings, and that the monthly wages were for infantry 10 drachma a month and for the cavalry 30 drachma, which Demosthenes states wasn't the full pay, they would get the extra from looting, which really shows how expensive the athenian fleet was in comparison.
It seems to me, and this is just from what I gathered from researching the wages so take it with salt, that it was tied to supply and demand, in comparison Athens found 1 drachma a day for mercenary swordsmen to be too expensive which seems to indicate that there were cheaper alternatives for experienced mercenary forces. The Athenian fleet could recruit, and indeed it did recruited, rowers from their poorest citizens but it takes time to train them, and the rest of the crew, to be well trained to be able to put in place Athenian naval tactics, based around ramming, during battle.
Another point may have been looting, the soldiers could accept lower wages as they would make the difference via keeping whatever they could loot from their enemies, while the sailors couldn’t count with this so Athens had to offer some extra financial incentives to keep their crews employed, and 1 drachma was a lot but in comparison from Xenophon we get that the average pay for the Peloponnesian crews was 3 obols, later increased to four, per day which is around half a drachma (1 drachma = 6 obols).
Last edited:
formion
Banned
There are some that believe that the Athenians had 300 triremes in total at the start of the war. I subscribe to the school that believes there were 400 triremes, 100 of which were set aside as a reserve to be used only when Pireaus was in peril. Dont forget that in the 431 order of battle, Thucidides mentions specifically 1,600 archers just enough to man 400 ships.
Before the plague the Athenians could man at least 200 triremes at a time: in 431, 100 were sent to raid the Peloponnese, 30 were sent to raid the Opuntian Locris and 70 were in Potidea. One can assume that they could man a reserve fleet while the main armada went on raiding: the Corinthians, Megarians, Epidaurians, Sicyonians, Troezenians and Ermoionians could equip a sizeable fleet (around a 100 in an all out effort) in the Saronic Gulf. So, at the very least the Athenians had a sizeable reserve to protect Pireaus and the trade lines.
Only hoplites received a drachma per day. Three obols was the standard pay for athenian rowers. Rowers were quite cheap as there was a huge manpower pool: athenian thetes, metics, and all the subject cities most of which were either islanders or port cities. A trireme in campaign cost 1 talent per month, but that included all costs not just the rowers. The helmsman, sailors, marine hoplites and archers received higher payment. I believe the highest salary would go to the helmsman.
The core of athenian maritime training was the annual cruise of 60 triremes, to show the flag and train.
Thucydides specifically states that a drachman "the treasury giving a drachma a day to each seaman" "The winter following, Tissaphernes put Iasus in a state of defence, and passing on to Miletus distributed a month's pay to all the ships as he had promised at Lacedaemon, at the rate of an Attic drachma a day for each man " he also gives us the rate Athens at Potidaea was paying its heavy infantry "If, at the time that this fleet was at sea, Athens had almost the largest number of first-rate ships in commission that she ever possessed at any one moment, she had as many or even more when the war began. At that time one hundred guarded Attica, Euboea, and Salamis; a hundred more were cruising round Peloponnese, besides those employed at Potidaea and in other places; making a grand total of two hundred and fifty vessels employed on active service in a single summer. It was this, with Potidaea, that most exhausted her revenues—Potidaea being blockaded by a force of heavy infantry (each drawing two drachmae a day, one for himself and another for his servant) " that is also a drachma a day, plus an extra drachman per servant at Potidaea
Professor Lionel Casson in Ships and Seafaring in Ancient Times supports the drachma a day per rowers and points out the issues with gathering rowers that forced the Athenians to go hire rowers.
The three obols a day is from this Thucydides quote "Alcibiades in his alarm first withdrew to Tissaphernes, and immediately began to do all he could with him to injure the Peloponnesian cause. Henceforth becoming his adviser in everything, he cut down the pay from an Attic drachma to three obols a day, and even this not paid too regularly; and told Tissaphernes to say to the Peloponnesians that the Athenians, whose maritime experience was of an older date than their own, only gave their men three obols, not so much from poverty as to prevent their seamen being corrupted by being too well off, and injuring their condition by spending money upon enervating indulgences, and also paid their crews irregularly in order to have a security against their deserting in the arrears which they would leave behind them. "
Admiral Alcibiades tells the Satrap of Lydia, Tissaphernes, to tell to Peloponnesians to reduce from Attic drachma, further showing that the drachma was the standard pay, to three obols a day and then goes to tell him to pay irregularly in order to hurt the Peloponnesian cause.
formion
Banned
@Karolus Rex you are right and thank you for the detailed reply! I double checked my sources and indeed, the wages (misthos) were 1 drachma before 412 and only then reduced to 3 obols for the athenian fleet.
I am happy to be corrected with citations in such a manner, well done!
The Greek State at War
The volumes of The Greek State at War are an essential reference for the classical scholar. Professor Pritchett has systematically canvassed ancient texts and secondary literature for references to specific topics; each volume explores a unique aspect of Greek military practice.
books.google.com
Hecatee
Donor
I come late to the battle, but I come bearing gifts 
N. Morpeth, Thucydides’ War : Accounting for the the Faces of Conflict, Spudasmata 112, Zurich-New York, 2006, p. 102-4
J.N. Corvisier, Guerre et société dans les mondes grecs, Paris 1999 pp. 185-188 (references to Xenophon are to the Hellenica)
With around 200 men/ship all included, a 100 ships fleet is a larger amount of men than many land armies, a very large scale battle such as Arginusae (250 ships according to Xenophon) is thus around 50 000 men fighting, we are on a scale with the greek forces deployed against the Persians, and what then of the battles around Sicily which seem to have had battles of upward of 500 ships ! (although I'd have to check but I think a number of those were transports and not fighting ships...)
Given that building a ship does not come cheap, those amounts also reprensents massive investments. Building a ship ex-nihilo cost around 1 talent according to ancient sources, but they hide another major cost : that of naval infrastructure. Here we have much less information, but Isocrate tells us (Aréopagitique 66) that those at Athens were worth a thousand talents !
Running a ship at sea also cost 1 talent a month as has been previously stated, and this does not seem to have taken into account the cost of repairing battle damages. In Athens this was done thanks to the state's supplies kept in the arsenals, including one on the Acropolis itself (which seems strange given how far it is from the sea, but that's what ancient sources tells us...) in which it seems a not small part of the material had in fact been looted on captured ships or taken from enemy camps after victories (see for instance IG II² 1607 l. 44 ; IG² 1610 l. 23 Cf. Pritchett, Greek States at War III p. 279 ; don't forget that often the mast, sail, etc. would be left on land prior to a battle).
To manage its public fleet Athens had special institutions, created sometime between 493 and 480 BCE, but remember that such institutions did not contral all the availlables ships. Thus Cleinias, the father of Alcibiades, would arm and captain his own ship, fighting with it at the Artemision (no this is not a call to read my story Athena's arrows, but if you want to the link is in my signature ). Similar behaviour is seen when his son launches the Sicilian expedition. We do not know how many of the ships present during the large battles were public and how many were private.
Getting a fleet is great, keeping it in shape is better yet. We know that Themistocles instituted a public production of 20 ships a year, but this number seems to have varied. It would however allow for a permanent fleet of 400 ships, 20 years being seen as the age limit of such a warship.
The production of secondary equipment (sails, rope, ...) must have been much greater. For instance we know that a modern sail has a life or around 5 years and it seems reasonable to take similar duration for ancient ones. While the state arsenal provided a lot, it was not always of good quality : it would then be the trierach who would, from his own money, pay for refurbishing the equipment needed for safe sailing.
The Boule (assembly of 500 in charge of day to day management of Athens) designated 10 trierophoroi to manage everything related to the fleet, and those men had help from elected officials called the epimeletes of the arsenals. It is interesting they are elected and not choosen by sort as other magistrates, but it is normal because it was a military job and thus followed similar rules as those in use for the strategos (generals).
About the cost of sailors, don't forget that the daily rate of the rowers was used as a war instrument by the ancient greeks : Alcibiade got Tissapherne to under pay in order for the Spartan ships to be undermaned, but later in the war the strategy is reversed and Persian gold is used to over pay the rowers so that they may defect to the Spartan fleet. But the 1 drachma price was probably the basic price as it is aligned with a lot of other payments including those for participating to Athens' political assemblies and to its judiciary courts.
All those elements are of course for the ships of the classical era. In the hellenistic era new types of ships, much larger than previously, started to appear. Their cost made them out of reach of most states, and for instance I don't recall any mention of Athens building any of the larger ships for her own city fleet. Rhodes also kept mainly to the classical types of ships, as did Carthage with a few exceptions. Ptolemaic Egypt, the Seleucids or Rome would however build larger ships, but could call on massively more ressources than anyone else...
N. Morpeth, Thucydides’ War : Accounting for the the Faces of Conflict, Spudasmata 112, Zurich-New York, 2006, p. 102-4
| Year | Athenians and allied ships mentionned | Potential total amount of ships mobilized | Spartan and allied ships mentionned | Potential total amount of ships mobilized |
| 433 | 140 | 150 | ||
| 432 | 70 | - | ||
| 431 | 180 | 40 | ||
| 430 | 180 | 100 | ||
| 429 | (100) 46 | 140 | 130 | |
| 428 | 250 | 4 | ||
| 427 | 165 | 53 | ||
| 426 | 105 | - | ||
| 425 | 174 | 90 | ||
| 424 | 117 | - | ||
| 423 | 50 | - | ||
| 422 | 32 | - | ||
| 421 | - | - | ||
| 420 | - | - | ||
| 419 | - | - | ||
| 418 | - | - | ||
| 417 | - | - | ||
| 416 | 88 | - | ||
| 415 | 267 | - | ||
| 414 | 43 | 310 | 17 | |
| 413 | 160 | 137 | ||
| 412 | 104 (?) | 150's-160's | ||
| 411 | 108 (?) | 112;154 |
J.N. Corvisier, Guerre et société dans les mondes grecs, Paris 1999 pp. 185-188 (references to Xenophon are to the Hellenica)
| Year | Battle/Siege/Expedition | Source | Loosing force | Winning force |
| 494 | Ladè | Hér., VI, 7 | 600 | |
| 490 | Grèce | Hér., VI, 95-115 | 600 | |
| 490 | Paros | Hér., VI, 132 | 600 | |
| 487 | Egine | Hér., VI, 89-92 | 70 | |
| 480/79 | Himère | Diod., XI, 20-24 | 5000 | |
| 470/69 | Chypre | Thuc., I, 100 | ||
| Diod., XI, 60 | 340 | 350/250 | ||
| 463/2 | Egypte | Diod., XI, 71 | 200 | 300 |
| 450/49 | Chypre | Diod., XII, 3 | 300 | 200 |
| 436/5 | Action | Thuc., I, 28 | 70 | 80 |
| 436/5 | Sybota | Thuc., I, 48-52 | 150 | 110 |
| 429/8 | Patrai | Thuc., II, 80 | 47 | 20 |
| Naupacte | 57-77 | 20 | ||
| 427/6 | Lesbos | Thuc., III, 2, 16 | 40 | 55 |
| 427/6 | Carie | Thuc., III, 19 | 12 | |
| 426/5 | Thuc., III, 76 | + 25 | 53 | |
| 425/4 | Pylos | Thuc., IV, 2 | 45/70 | 90 |
| 425/4 | Rhégion | Thuc., IV, 24 | 30 | 24 |
| 425/4 | Corinthe | Thuc., IV, 42-45 | 80 | |
| 424/3 | Mendè | Thuc., IV, 129, 2 | 50 | |
| 416/5 | Sicily | Thuc., VI, 30/43 | 130 | |
| 415/3 | Sicily | Thuc., VII, 17-20 | 65 | |
| 414/3 | Erineos | Thuc., VII, 34, 5 | 30 | 33 |
| 413/2 | Spéraion | Thuc., VIII, 7-12 | 21 | 37 |
| 412/1 | Chios | Thuc., VIII, 19 | 30 | 16 |
| 412/1 | Spéraion | Thuc., VIII, 20 | 20 | 20 |
| 412/1 | Cap Malée | Thuc., VIII,35 | 12 | 27 ? |
| 412/1 | Thuc., VIII, 39 | 10 | 27 | |
| 412/1 | Symè | Thuc., VIII, 42 | 20 | 100 |
| 411/0 | Erétrie | Thuc., VIII, 94 | 36 | 42 |
| 411/0 | Abydos | Thuc., VIII, 103 | 86 | 76 |
| 410/9 | Cyzicus | Xén., I, 1, 14-20 | 20 | |
| Diod., XIII, 45-46 | 60 | 86 | ||
| 409/8 | Epheseus | Diod., XIII, 64 | 30 | |
| 409/8 | Thrace | Diod., XIII, 66 | 70 | |
| 408/7 | Orient | Xén., I, 5, 11 | 100 | |
| 408/7 | Nôtion | Xén., I, 5, 11 | ||
| Diod., XIII, 69-71 | 100 | 70 | ||
| 407/6 | Sicily | Diod., XIII, 80 | 40 | 40 |
| 406/5 | Méthymna | Xén., I, 6, 4-16 | ||
| Diod., XIII, 76 | 70 | 140 | ||
| 407/6 | Sicile | Diod., XIII, 88 | 40 | |
| 406/5 | Arginuses | Xén., I, 6, 25 | 120 | 150 |
| Diod., XIII, 97 | 104 | |||
| 405/4 | Aigos Potamos | Xén., II, 1, 20 | 180 | 171 |
| Diod., XIII, 104-105 | 173 | 170 | ||
| 396/5 | Sicily | Diod., XIV, 54 | 400 | 30 |
| 396/5 | Catania | Diod., XIV, 59-60 | 180 | 500 |
| 396/5 | Syracuse | Diod., XIV, 64 | 40 | |
| 395/5 | Cnide | Xén., IV, 3, 10-14 | 85 | 80 |
| Diod., XIV, 79, 83 | + 170 ? | |||
| 392/1 | Orient | Diod., XIV, 94 | 40 | |
| 389/8 | Orient | Xén., V, 1, 6-8 | 13 | 12 |
| 389/8 | Caulonia | Diod., XIV, 105/5 | 10 | 30 |
| 386/5 | Chyprus | Diod., XV, 2-3 | 200 | 300 |
| 377/6 | Naxos | Xén., V, 4, 61-62 | 65 | 83 |
| Diod., XV, 34 | ||||
| 376/5 | Alyzeia 1 | Xén., V, 4, 65 | 50 | 60 |
| Alyzeia 2 | Xén., V, 4, 66 | 60 | 56 | |
| 368/7 | Eryx | Diod., XV, 73 | 130 | 200 |
| 356 | Social war | Diod., XVI, 21 | 120 | 100 |
| 345 | Sicily | Diod., XVI, 67 | 150 | |
| 344 | Sicily | Diod., XVI, 69 | 140 |
With around 200 men/ship all included, a 100 ships fleet is a larger amount of men than many land armies, a very large scale battle such as Arginusae (250 ships according to Xenophon) is thus around 50 000 men fighting, we are on a scale with the greek forces deployed against the Persians, and what then of the battles around Sicily which seem to have had battles of upward of 500 ships ! (although I'd have to check but I think a number of those were transports and not fighting ships...)
Given that building a ship does not come cheap, those amounts also reprensents massive investments. Building a ship ex-nihilo cost around 1 talent according to ancient sources, but they hide another major cost : that of naval infrastructure. Here we have much less information, but Isocrate tells us (Aréopagitique 66) that those at Athens were worth a thousand talents !
Running a ship at sea also cost 1 talent a month as has been previously stated, and this does not seem to have taken into account the cost of repairing battle damages. In Athens this was done thanks to the state's supplies kept in the arsenals, including one on the Acropolis itself (which seems strange given how far it is from the sea, but that's what ancient sources tells us...) in which it seems a not small part of the material had in fact been looted on captured ships or taken from enemy camps after victories (see for instance IG II² 1607 l. 44 ; IG² 1610 l. 23 Cf. Pritchett, Greek States at War III p. 279 ; don't forget that often the mast, sail, etc. would be left on land prior to a battle).
To manage its public fleet Athens had special institutions, created sometime between 493 and 480 BCE, but remember that such institutions did not contral all the availlables ships. Thus Cleinias, the father of Alcibiades, would arm and captain his own ship, fighting with it at the Artemision (no this is not a call to read my story Athena's arrows, but if you want to the link is in my signature
). Similar behaviour is seen when his son launches the Sicilian expedition. We do not know how many of the ships present during the large battles were public and how many were private. Getting a fleet is great, keeping it in shape is better yet. We know that Themistocles instituted a public production of 20 ships a year, but this number seems to have varied. It would however allow for a permanent fleet of 400 ships, 20 years being seen as the age limit of such a warship.
The production of secondary equipment (sails, rope, ...) must have been much greater. For instance we know that a modern sail has a life or around 5 years and it seems reasonable to take similar duration for ancient ones. While the state arsenal provided a lot, it was not always of good quality : it would then be the trierach who would, from his own money, pay for refurbishing the equipment needed for safe sailing.
The Boule (assembly of 500 in charge of day to day management of Athens) designated 10 trierophoroi to manage everything related to the fleet, and those men had help from elected officials called the epimeletes of the arsenals. It is interesting they are elected and not choosen by sort as other magistrates, but it is normal because it was a military job and thus followed similar rules as those in use for the strategos (generals).
About the cost of sailors, don't forget that the daily rate of the rowers was used as a war instrument by the ancient greeks : Alcibiade got Tissapherne to under pay in order for the Spartan ships to be undermaned, but later in the war the strategy is reversed and Persian gold is used to over pay the rowers so that they may defect to the Spartan fleet. But the 1 drachma price was probably the basic price as it is aligned with a lot of other payments including those for participating to Athens' political assemblies and to its judiciary courts.
All those elements are of course for the ships of the classical era. In the hellenistic era new types of ships, much larger than previously, started to appear. Their cost made them out of reach of most states, and for instance I don't recall any mention of Athens building any of the larger ships for her own city fleet. Rhodes also kept mainly to the classical types of ships, as did Carthage with a few exceptions. Ptolemaic Egypt, the Seleucids or Rome would however build larger ships, but could call on massively more ressources than anyone else...
formion
Banned
Check the great work danish archaeologists did regarding Piraeus:
I think in the 5th century, athenian infrastructure dwarfed the Tyrians and Carthaginians.
Hecatee
Donor
In the fifth century certainly. I mean, the main persian fleet was mainly made of Phoencian ships of three main cities which together started to rival Athens alone. However I'm not sure of that for the later 4th BCE (Syracusae is certainly a rival to Athens in this regard) and 3rd century BCE (Carthage), and a big question to me is the Roman fleet between the two Punic wars : how much was centered around Ostia, and where was this infrastructure ? Because I can't recall any Republican shipyard finds in that area.
The infrastructure in Alexandria must also have been colossal from the 3rd BCE century onward, and I have to look where the Macedonian and Seleucid infrastructures were based.
What is also impressive is how much trees must have been cut and carried all around the Eastern Mediterranean to build those fleets, for each trirem cost dozens if not hundreds of trees so we are speaking of whole forests here (and the ancient knew it as for instance Hadrian's effort in the 2nd century CE to reforest Lebanon's mountains show)
formion
Banned
@Hecatee, you are quite right, Carthage, Syracuse and later Alexan
"It is a narrow space, which produces shipbuilding timber. In Europe, it is
found in Macedon and in parts of Thrace and Italy, while in Asia, in Kilikia
and in Sinope and Amisos.There is also timber in the Mysian Olympos and
in Mount Ida, but not a lot. In Syria, there is cedar, and that they use for
triremes."
The most accessible silver fir in the Balkans, based on current distribution, should have been in the mountains of the upper Strymon valley. The upper Nestos valley should have been heavily forested with silver fir, but Nestos with its many canyons was not navigable. In contrast, Strymon was navigable up to Lake Kerkinitis, so it was a far better trade artery.
Greeks prefered silver fir for their triremes, being rather a light timber. Theophrastos mentions:
"It is a narrow space, which produces shipbuilding timber. In Europe, it is
found in Macedon and in parts of Thrace and Italy, while in Asia, in Kilikia
and in Sinope and Amisos.There is also timber in the Mysian Olympos and
in Mount Ida, but not a lot. In Syria, there is cedar, and that they use for
triremes."
The most accessible silver fir in the Balkans, based on current distribution, should have been in the mountains of the upper Strymon valley. The upper Nestos valley should have been heavily forested with silver fir, but Nestos with its many canyons was not navigable. In contrast, Strymon was navigable up to Lake Kerkinitis, so it was a far better trade artery.
formion
Banned
Fellas, check this paper on athenian triremes, it has almost anything you need to know, even the number of spare oars and all the office-holders involved.
Athenian Naval Finance in the Classical Period
www.triremetrust.org.uk