I'm Clueless, Roman Navy Help needed

[Guest Allah]

Hello, everyone. I hope I posted this in the right place! (I'm new, sorry)

 

I play on Ultima Online, a MMORPG based in a midieval realm known as Sosaria. I have a guild on there, based off of the Roman Imperial legion, detailed as much as possible provided the restraints the game provides. Currently, the legion is inactive, but I have the ranks and military order established for when it does become operational. Fortunately, I chose the fort's location next to the ocean, and I already have a small sailing ship planned to be used, however I'm faced with one problem:

 

I don't know what the Roman marines were called! I don't even know how to rank them. I'm a horrible Legate, I know, but could anyone help me out?

[Primus Pilus]

Hello, everyone. I hope I posted this in the right place! (I'm new, sorry)

 

I play on Ultima Online, a MMORPG based in a midieval realm known as Sosaria. I have a guild on there, based off of the Roman Imperial legion, detailed as much as possible provided the restraints the game provides. Currently, the legion is inactive, but I have the ranks and military order established for when it does become operational. Fortunately, I chose the fort's location next to the ocean, and I already have a small sailing ship planned to be used, however I'm faced with one problem:

 

I don't know what the Roman marines were called! I don't even know how to rank them. I'm a horrible Legate, I know, but could anyone help me out?

 

Well, I admit my own inadequacies on the Roman Navy, but here is a rough historical overview. Roman Navy.

 

Fleets were called Classis in Latin and were designated by their port of origin. As an example, the main imperial fleet for the western Mediterranean was located at Misenum near Pompeii in Italy and was called Classis Misenensis.

 

Sander Van Dorst's Legion pages provide a little more information as to the crew and command structure (essentially it was auxilia). Just scroll down a bit for the fleet.

 

Additionally, you may want to contact Jasper Oorthuys over at http://www.romanarmy.com/cms/.

[Guest Allah]

Thank you, I appreciate the help. If only UNRV had coverage like thwy do in the army organization, I'd be fine. I use you guys for all my Roman history needs. It's because this site is so reliable, you know?

 

So the marines on board were organized like typical auxillary? From what I've gathered ( http://www.crystalinks.com/romenavy.html ) The Roman fleet had older Republican legionnaire organization. I'm not sure how I can include this (ranks are indicated by a title seen over the player's name) and I'll also need to know the Latin word for "desolation" if anyone knows Latin very well. If I'm to name it after the area it's stationed, that is. So if each ship is commanded by a centurion, does he fight as well? Is there trierachs like in the Greek navy?

 

Once again, thanks for the help. It's greatly appreciated on my end.

[Prometheus]

Hmm, an UO player.

 

Sadly most PC games often totally ignore ancient warfare, limiting to dark ages and medieval warfare.

 

I know nothing of the topic so I won't say anything more.

Edited April 3, 2006 by Prometheus

[Pantagathus]

It's funny, Casson's research brings to light that the Roman Navy was comprised much more of professional seamen than many give them credit. It's true that a lot of the fleet personel were fighting men, but it took constantly drilled, professional crewmen to get the ships anywhere in an efficient mannor.

 

Without having my "Ships & Seamanship of the Ancient World" at hand, here is an incomplete list of terms of note (from notes & memory). Most rankings are quite direct loans words from Greek which is to be expected:

 

Prorates -

[Primus Pilus]

To all the references I've seen which state that the Roman Navy did not employ slave labor... there is every evidence to the contrary at least in the early period and definitely from the 2nd Punic War. For instance, both Polybius & Livy tell us that the enslaved from Carthago Novo were given to Laelius to augment the fleet with the captured Carthaginian quinqueremes...

 

Absolutely, the incorporation of enemy combatants into the land based auxilia certainly applied in a similar fashion with the navy. Did slaves man the oars at some point or another? Assuredly, but the hollywood myth of the galley slave under the whip in the imperial fleets is incorrect. The standard practice at that time (when the fleet was maintained in consistent size, application and uniformity) was that the rowers were professional. I make the dangerous assumption that this practice (professional rowers) must have been understood to have been better for the fleet than the use of slaves were and would have been carried forward from the earlier eras, or in theory the Romans would've continued using slaves.

[Pantagathus]

the hollywood myth of the galley slave under the whip in the imperial fleets is incorrect.

 

Oh I know that was the point of your disertation P-P! And your assumptions are good ones & I think sums up the sitiuation well. Other sites are a bit more black & white in their statements about slavery on ships and leave no room for it in the Roman Navy. It is those that I was highlighting.

 

The other important thing that some (a lot) get wrong is the assumtion that if they weren't slaves and Romans used marines then their crews were all fighting men on the oars until pitched battle. The key is in your statements that the majority of the rowers were professional. Meaning their first duty was to be the engine of the ship and not fight.

 

But back to the slave issue, it is my understanding that folks in this status were usually assigned to the lower banks of oars. That was probably your 'jugum'....

Edited April 3, 2006 by Pantagathus

[Primus Pilus]

The other important thing that some (a lot) get wrong is the assumtion that if they weren't slaves and Romans used marines then their crews were all fighting me on the oars until pitched battle. The key is in your statements that the majority of the rowers were professional. Meaning their first duty was to be the engine of the ship and not fight.

 

Absolutely, if there's one thing we can be assured of, its the professionalism/organization of the Roman military. Whether it be a rower, which couldn't have been all that glamorous of a position regardless of whether or not one was paid for it, or a legionary, we can be fairly certain that each man/job/rank had a defined set of duties and priorities.

[Pantagathus]

Whether it be a rower, which couldn't have been all that glamorous of a position regardless of whether or not one was paid for it

 

Hey, you'd be ripped!

 

In a way, I have a sneaking suspicion that it actually was a pretty cool job to have. At least on the upper banks.

[Rameses the Great]

I think the most interesting Roman navy battle is Actium. Allah I think you'd like this battle if you want interesting facts on the Roman navy.

[Guest Allah]

Thank you, everyone. My question's been partially answered, though. I'm focused almost entirely on the fighting men. I will admit I'm influenced by my own curiousity. It seems to be a subject not well-documented as I can't seem to get any sort of definite answer. Though, the list Pantagathus gave is helpful, as to incorporate some new lingo (to impress the l337 r0x0r d00ds) but to get a good understanding. You know, it's a shame Romans were never potent sailors... They were good at just about everything else.

[Pantagathus]

You know, it's a shame Romans were never potent sailors... They were good at just about everything else.

 

That is not a correct statement by any means...

 

When they had actual naval adversaries they got along quite well. Thing was that by the time the Empire was in full swing there weren't any worthy naval adversaries left...

 

The shear fact that during the Republican era the Rostra was decorated with the beaks of enemy ships should tell you something...

[Primus Pilus]

You know, it's a shame Romans were never potent sailors... They were good at just about everything else.

 

That is not a correct statement by any means...

 

When they had actual naval adversaries they got along quite well. Thing was that by the time the Empire was in full swing there weren't any worthy naval adversaries left...

 

The shear fact that during the Republican era the Rostra was decorated with the beaks of enemy ships should tell you something...

 

Indeed, and one should also consider that rival fleets were virtually eliminated from the Mediterranean and European waters for several centuries. In fact the single greatest naval threats post Carthage were pirates (which were handled fairly easily when a concerted effort was made) and rival Romans. (the fleets of Agrippa vs. Sextus Pompey, the fleets of Agrippa vs. Antonius/Cleopatra, etc.)

 

And if Carthaginians/Phoenicians were the master sailors but were defeated by Rome, then it surely must indicate some sense of skill and ability among Roman fleets. Some of the victory can be credited to Roman persistency rather than greater ability, but as Pantagathus says... this should tell us something.

 

Granted, once the Romans dominated the Mediterranean, there aren't many indications that they were interested in the sort of seafaring exploits of their naval predeccesors, but one would've been hard pressed to challenge a Roman fleet at any time.

[Rameses the Great]

Guys I know the Romans were active sailors along the Mediterranian. Well how about along the English channel and along the coasts of Germany and Denmark. Were the Romans active in that part of the sea? Did Germans and Britains take after the seafaring skills of the Vikings and made ships like Rome or Carthage did?

[Primus Pilus]

Guys I know the Romans were active sailors along the Mediterranian. Well how about along the English channel and along the coasts of Germany and Denmark. Were the Romans active in that part of the sea? Did Germans and Britains take after the seafaring skills of the Vikings and made ships like Rome or Carthage did?

 

The Romans were very active in the northern waterways as well. They maintained large organized fleets based at Gesioracum in Belgica and Colonia Agrippina on the Rhine in Germania Inferior. Later resources were shifted to eastern Britannia to provide support to the Saxon shore defense as Roman power waned.

 

As for the Norse and later Vikings... certainly they were fantastic sailors but the style was completely different. Their ships (the predecessors to the traditional longships) were essentially enormous canoes built for compact crews for speed and maneuverability. The Germanic/Norse intention was not to engage a Roman fleet at sea but to use stealth and speed to outmaneuver them and attack targets on land, certainly resulting in terrible frustration by the larger and well structured Roman fleets.

 

Some excellent examples of pre mast norse ships Nydam Boats

 

Pictures of Roman (and Greek) triremes. The quadrireme was actually more common in the later period but looked and functioned in much the same way except for the additional 4th rower per oar (hence quad vs. tri).