The International Journal of’Xautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration (1981), 10.

3: 187-220

The ships of the Sea Peoples

S. Wachsmann
israel Department of Atitiquities and Museums, PO Box 586, Jerusalem, Israel 91 000
--
The textual evidence suffers from raids on his coastal settlements.
The various ethnic groups comprising the Sea In the k b Addi correspondence of the El
Peoples are known primarily from Egyptian, Amarna texts mention is repeatedly made of
Hittite, North Syrian texts and the Bible the mi3i-People (Note 1). While this group is
(Wainwright, 1939, 1960; Kitchen, 1973; enigmatic, their connection with ship-based
Sandars, 1978). Egyptian representational art warfare is clear (Linder, 1970: 93 -4). It has
permits the identification of several of these been suggested that they are to be considered
peoples while significant advances have been early forerunners of the Sea Peoples (Save-
made in the study of the material culture of Soderbergh, 1946: 65-6, n. l ) , although this
those groups that settled in the southern view has not gone uncontested (Lambdin,
coastal region of Palestine (Dothan, 1967). 1953).
Here the discussion is limited to the maritime Of particular interest is EA 101: 36 in w h c h
aspects of these peoples which appear in the rnit’i ships are described as having penetrated
con temporary textual remains. into Amurru, a clear allusion to a task force
The Sea Peoples begin to be felt as an entity using a navigable river (the Orontes?) to attack
in the eastern Mediterranean as early as the an inland target.
14th century. From the beginning they appear In an fittite tablet containing an inscription
as sea raiders or mercenaries. Nowhere do the of Shuppiluliuma 11, mention is made of an
texts portray them in the r8ie of traders. In AlaSian fleet (Guterbock, 1967: 78):
this they were following an age-old Aegean My father [ . . .] I mobilized and I ,
tradition. Thucydides (1:5: l), describing the Shuppiluliuma 11, the Great King immediately
state of affairs of Aegean seafaring prior to [crossed/reached (?)I the sea. The ships of
Minos’ thalassocracy, writes: Alasiya met me in the sea three times for
For in early tirnes the Hellenes a n d the battle, and I smote them; and I seized the
barbarians of the coast and islands, as com- ships and set fire to them in the sea.
munications by sea became more common, Guterbock (p. 80) has already brought attention
were tempted to turn pirates, under the con- to the apparent disagreement between this
duct of their most powerful men; the motives document and the kiln texts from Ugarit in
being to support their own cupidity and to which Alalia is depicted as an ally of Ugarit
support the needy. They would fall upon a and hence of the Hittites; the implication
town unprotected by walls, and consisting being that the AlaSian fleet referred to by
of a mere collection of villages, and would Shuppiluliuma I1 did not belong to the indi-
plunder i t ; indeed this came to be the main
source of their livelihood, no disgrace being genous population but rather to the enemies
yet attached to such a n achievement, even (Sea Peoples) of the Ugaritic texts. An alternate
some glory. explanation suggested by Lionel Casson (private
In EA 38 i t seems that people of the land of communication) is that these documents may
Luki had molested Egyptian territory and the indeed reflect actual hstory, that is. a change in
Pharaoh apparently thought that the Alazians alliances between the principal actors in this
were in collusion with them. The king of AlaSia drama.
denies these charges and claims that he also A similar sea battle appears to have taken

0305-7445/8 1/030187+34 $02.00/0 @ 1981 The Nautical Archaeology Trust Ltd.

 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAlJTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

place between ships of the Shardanu and Important information concerning the tactics
Egyptian contingents during the reign of used by the Sea Peoples in their sea-going ships
Ramses I1 (Sandars, 1978: 50 and n. 14 for and the make-up of their fleets is to be found
additional bibliography; the reference to in a group of texts from Ugarit. These relate
Tariis I1 there should be t o pl. 2 no. 78). to the very last days of that great Late Bronze
These texts are also of prime importance Age maritime centre. Five texts [UT 2062, RS
inasmuch as they are the earliest recorded 20.238, RS 20.18, RS 20.162 and RS L.l
evidence for battles taking place between ships (Virolleaud, 1965: 88-9; Nougayrol, 1968:
at sea. The battle between the Egyptians under 87-9, 83-5, 115-6, 85-6)] which had been
Ramses 111 and the Sea Peoples portrayed at in the process of being fired in a kiln when
Medinet Habu (discussed below), apart from Ugarit was sacked include maritime aspects of
being chronologically later, appears to have the deteriorating situation because of the
taken place at the entrance to the Nile Delta, advance of the Sea Peoples (Astour, 1965).
not in the open sea (Nelson, 1943: 43-4). Two are of particular interest.
In the Mycenaean kingdom of Pylos over RS 20.238 is a copy of a dispatch sent by
800 ‘watchers’ assigned to guarding the coast the king of Ugarit to the king of Aldia. In it
against a possible attack from the sea are the latter is informed that cities belonging to
recorded on five Lnear B texts (An 657, 654, Ugarit have been destroyed by a flotilla of
519, 656, 661; Ventris & Chadwick, 1959: seven enemy ships. In another letter, RS 20.18,
187--94; Chadwick, 1976: 175-79). The the ‘Great Minister of Alalia’ writes to the king
attack, when it did come, in the spring of that of Ugarit informing hlm that some of the
same year, was successful-the site of Pylos latter’s ships have apparently been surrendered
was pillaged and burned. Chadwick (pp. 178-9) to the enemy. He also includes a report on
considers the raiders to have probably been enemy movement-20 enemy ships have
seafaring contingents of the Sea Peoples. escaped, departing hastily and taking cover in a
Following their settlement on the southern mountainous coastal area. Their present position
coast of Palestine it seems likely that the Sea is not known.
Peoples more or less gave up piracy. Nowhere is These texts seem to allow several relevant
there written proof for this assumption; how- conclusions. First, the number of enemy ships
ever, it may be inferred from the following in any given group is relatively small (seven and
considerations: 20), particularly when compared to the 150
(1) The Syrian ship upon which Wenamon ships that Ugarit is requested to provide in
travelled put in at Dor, a city which belonged UT 2062. Second, on occasion, Syrian s h p s
to the Tjekker (BAR IV: 565). Had the latter were pressed into service in the Sea Peoples’
been engaged in brigandage at that time, it naval complement suggesting that their fleet
seems unlikely that the ship would have stopped was more polygot than one would assume
there. from the Egyptian evidence. Thud, the tactics
(2) In fact, Dor of the Tjekker seems to have used by the Sea Peoples take the form of
been a port of ‘good repute’. Wenamon had no piratical coastal raids by small flotillas of ships.
trouble in having his case heard before Beder, They arrive at a seaside settlement, pillage it,
their king. Anson Rainey has pointed out t o me and then set it to the torch, disappearing
(private communication) that Beder was know- without a trace before the local military can
ledgeable in maritime law: when Wenamon engage them in a pitched battle. Finally, ships
demanded that he repatriate the gold and silver w h c h functioned in the manner just described
w h c h had been stolen from him by a crew must have been able to move when necessary
member of his own ship, the Tjekker king under their own propulsion-that is, they must
pointed out to him that the t h e f was not one have been oared galleys. Since the entire
of his nationals and he was, therefore, under no method of attack was based on hit-and-run
obligation to make amends. Indeed, when later tactics, it is inconceivable that these ships were
Wenamon ‘liberated’ 30 deben of silver from dependent solely on the vagaries of the wind
the Tjekker he was clearly acting outside the for locomotion. Apart from this, we would
law (BAR 1V: 566-8). expect ships used in this manner to be swift,

188
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

189
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS 01.'THE SEA PEOPLES
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
The scene of the naval battle with the figures of the floating bodies removed. After Nelson (1943:

Ship E.1. After Nelson et a/. (1930: pl. 39).

Figure 3.
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

fig. 4).
Figure 2.

190
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

probably with a relatively high beam/keel ratio. painting, rather treating them both as part of
While there must have been some room for the the same art. In fact, the plastic representations
storage of plunder it is reasonable to assume appear to have been subordinate to the painting
that cargo space was at a minimum. (Nelson et af., 1930: 7). Thus many details
which appeared only in paint have been lost;
Medinet Habu this explains why some elements are not always
Let us now consider the iconographic evidence represented consistently. Note, for example,
for the study of the indigenous craft used by that in ship N.2 (Fig. 4) the brails appear on the
the Sea Peoples. Undoubtedly the single most left side of the mast only- -not on the right.
important representation is the relief of the The Sea Peoples’ ships lack oars in the relief.
naval battle in which Ramses 111 defeated a This seems particularly incongruous if they
coalition of Sea Peoples including the Peleshet, were indeed oared galleys. Casson (1959:
Tjekker, Denyen and Sheklesh in his eighth 41-2, 1971: 38) has suggested that, since the
regnal year c. 1186 BC. The relief appears on a texts indicate a surprise attack sprung by the
wall of his temple at Medinet Habu (Fig. 1). Egyptians (Nelson, 1943: 43; BAK IV: 77).
Nelson (1943) has shown that the scene is they may have caught the enemy at anchor or
organized on the basis of three conceptual before they could run out their oars. In any
elements: spatial, ideological and temporal. The event the northerners’ ships are clearly por-
last of these is expressed by three groups of trayed as being stationary at the time of the
two ships, each comprising one phase of the battle - -lacking oars and with sails brailed up.
battle (Fig. 2); thus ships E.ILN.1 indicate the However, a close re-examination of the Sea
beginning of the battle, ships E.l-N.2 signify Peoples’ ships on the relief indicates that they
the middle stages of the battle, while ships were indeed oared galleys, as we would expect
E.3-N.3 represent the conclusion of the from the pirate raids recorded in contemporary
battle in which a s h p of the Sea Peoples has texts.
capsized. The fourth and final temporal element
of the battle is shown by a single Egyptian ship, The ships of the Sea Peoples
E.4, which is leaving the area of the battle and The Sea Peoples’ craft have a gently curved hull
bringing bound captives to the shore. Ships ending in angular vertical stem- and sternposts.
N.4 and N.5 are not included in the temporal both culminating in bird-head decorations. At
element; rather they come to take the place of bow and stern the ships have raised fore- and
the fleeing enemy in the normal land battle after-castles.
scenes. Their purpose is to represent the ideo- Something of the structure of these ships
logical concept of the Pharaoh as a frightening may be learned from a close study of the hori-
and irresistible might. zontal parallel lines which appear on the ships
It is to be expected that the artists stereo- and the manner in which the live warriors and
typed the Sea Peoples’ ships into one form only, dead bodies are placed in relation t o them. Care
in keeping with their generalizing portrayal of must be taken when interpreting this evidence,
the naval battle. We need not assume that this however. The relief appears to have been carried
WAS the only ship type in their service; the same out by artists of varying capabilities (Nelson
is true of the Egyptian ships- -even though an et al., 1930: 9-10); some of the artists were
accompanying inscription indicates that at least not above making errors in relation to the ships’
three types of craft took part in the battle on construction. Note, for example, the figure in
the Egyptian side (BAR IV: 65) only one ship ship E.l (Fig. 3A) bending over to grasp a
type appears in the relief. It would perhaps be sword from the floating body of an enemy
more correct to say that we are seeing five warrior. Unlike the two other soldiers plausibly
representations of the same ship rather than portrayed leaning over the screen, the upper
five different ships. body of the former is placed in an impossible
When studying the reliefs at Medinet Habu manner, leaning over the line which represents
we must keep in mind that they were originally the gunwale and the screen.
painted and that in a r t o f this type the Egyptian The hulls of four of the Sea Peoples’ slups
artist did not distinguish between relief and (Figs 4--7) are defined ty three haiizontal

19 1
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Ship N.2. After Nelson et al. (1930: pl. 39)
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Figure 4.

192
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

193
Ship N.5. After Nelson er al. (1930: pl. 39).
Ship N.4. After Nelson el al. (1930: pl. 39).
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

Figure 7.
Figure 6.
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
EU’AUTICALARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

(Casson, 1971: 37). A closer study, however,

indicates that this is not the case. The following

Figure 9. Ship N.3. After Nelson e t a l . (1930: pi. 39).

from shin to thigh level (Figs 4-7) while dead

bodies bent over line A cross lines B and C
(Figs 4C, 5A, 6A; note also 7C and F), thus
indicating, if there was any doubt in the matter,
that lines A , B and C all represent the profile
of the side of the ship facing the viewer and not
the area between the gunwales.
Second, line B appears as a baseline with
bodies appearing directly above it. In ship N.?.
I the warrior being skewered on the left (Fig. 4A)
C is resting on line B. That this is not accidental is
Figure 10. The horizontal lines on ship N.3. indicated by his left foot being placed on the

194
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMRNN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

same line. To the right of A his companion, B, rowers’ benches at a point that was not covered
is falling head first. His body crosses line A by the raised deck (Fig. 1 1 ) and that the part
but his left arm seems to disappear behind left undecked must have been along the sides
line B. In ship N.4 the helmsman and a dead where the rowers sat. Figures 12A and B are
warrior (Fig. 6B and D) appear directly above tentative isometric reconstructions of a Sea
line B. The dead man is being held by a com- Peoples’ ship illustrating the basic elements
panion (C) standing above him and behind discussed above.
line A. The Sea Peoples’ ships carry two (Figs 5
These considerations in themselves indicate and 7), one (Figs 4 and 6), or no (Fig. 9)
that the craft must have had two levels, apart steering oars. Of the s h p s with two steering
from the raised areas in the castles; or in other oars N.l has both placed on its starboard quarter
words, that it must have been at least partially (the side of the ship facing the viewer) while
decked. This negates Casson’s assumption N.5 appears to have one on either quarter. The
(1971: 38) that these craft lacked a deck oar on the near (starboard) side is held in a
entirely. support (Fig. 7B). Apparently the normal
Ship N.3 differs from the other Sea Peoples’ complement was two steering oars and those
ships by having an additional horizontal line lacking are to be attributed to loss during
between lines A and B (Fig. 9). We shall term battle.
this line X (Fig. lo). The key to understanding The steering oars on the invaders’ s h p s now
the three horizontal areas formed by these four lack tillers. Originally they did have tiller bars;
lines (AX, X B and BC) is the way in which the however, these were represented in paint only
floating bodies are arranged in relation to them. and have long since disappeared. This seems
The ship has capsized. One figure (C) lies on clear from the manner in which the helmsman
keel line C. Its left leg disappears behind the of ship N.4 (Figs 6Dand 13)is holding the loom
hull in area BC, but its foot (D) reappears in of the steering oar in .his right hand whde his
area X B ! Similarly another body (A) is ‘folded left hand is clenched around a now non-existent
over’ area A X ; its abdomen is visible in area tiller bar. Compare t h s to the two handed
X B while the torso emerges below line A . The manner in which the helmsman on the Egyptian
leg of another body (B) disappears behind area craft are manoeuvring their steering oars. All
A X and reappears in area XB passing outside four hold the tiller with their Ieft hand; two
the ship’s hull over lines B and C. also hold the loom with their right hand.
These three independent clues indicate that At the junction uf stempost and keel a small
area XB must have been an open space; the pointed projection appears on two of the ships
only logical reason for such an open space is (Figs 6E and 7A). Their position and form
that it served as an open rowers’gallery between invite comparison with the stern device which
a raised screen and the gunwales through which appears earlier, apparently with cultic connota-
oars were worked. If line X is added to s h p s tions (Wachsmann, 1980), on Aegean craft.
N.2 and N.4 the positioning of the figures in The rigging of the Sea Peoples’ ships is
relation to them becomes immediately clear. identical to that carried by the Egyptian craft
Originally line X was probably painted on ships with which they are engaged. Both carry the
N.1-2,4 and 5 as nodoubt were the stanchions newly introduced brailed rig. Indeed, this is one
which must have supported the screen. of the earliest appearances of this type of loose
While the upper deck apparently ran the full footed sail (Casson, 1971 : 37 and69:concerning
length of the ship from the fore to the after the probable originators of this rig, see below).
platform, the intertwining of bodies in the The mast is topped by a Crow’s nest. The
manner shown in ship N.3 would be precluded yard curves downward at its extremities and is
if it had run the entire width of the ship. Plank- raised by twin halyards, which appear only on
ing must have been left out along the sides. ship N.3 (Fig. 9). The block through which
’ h s was also the case on later Greek galleys they must have been worked is not represented,
appearing on Geometric pottery. Casson has nor are other details of the rigging with the
noted (1971: 51, n. 58) that in some fighting exception of the brails.
scenes warriors are portrayed standing on the Turning now to representations of ships of
195
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Figure 11. The deck structure of Greek Geometric galleys. (A) Figures stand on the rowers’ benches in an area
which is not coveredby a deck; (B) the legs of a figure sitting at deck level appear through a ‘window’
of the open rowers’ gallery. (A) After Morrison & Williams [ 1968: pl. l e (Geom. 2)] and Casson
(1971: fig. 68). (B) Morrison & Williams [ 1968: pl. 7b (Georn. 38)].

Aegean tradition it becomes apparent that, galleys existed n o later than the 17th century,
while there is at present no exact parallel to the several relevant questions arise. Chief among
Sea Peoples’ ships as portrayed at Medinet these are:
Habu, all the elements, both decorative and
(1) What is the relationship between the ships
functional, which have been enumerated on
of the Sea Peoples and contemporary Aegean
these craft are to be found on ships appearing
craft?
in contemporary Helladic art.
( 2 ) What is the relationship between Aegean
Contemporary ships in the Aegean craft at the close of the Late Bronze Age and
Having ascertained that a deck and hull struc- the later Geometric warships?
ture very similar to that of later Geometric war In order to attempt to answer these questions

196
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

Figure 12. (A and B) Tentative isometric reconstructions of a Sea Peoples’ ship illustrating the basic elements
discussed. In B the bodies of the fallen warriors in ships N.3 (Fig. 9A-D) have been added. The
bodies are drawn to a larger scale than the ship.

i t is necessary to rewew those Aegean ship that which existed on the galleys of the Sea
representations which ma?/ illustrate oared Peoples and of the Geometric Period.
galleys. In the Bronze Age. a time when the ram As we shall see, although material is not
does not seem t o have yet been introduced as a lacking, its interpretation is very problematic in
naval weapon (see below), the best fossife many cases. Most representations of ships in
directeur would seem to be the existence of an this period are little more than rough graffiti in
open rowers’ gallery below deck level similar to paint and/or terracotta. There does not seem to

197
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

temporary with the Medinet Habu relief. These

craft form an important link between the
Aegean ships of the third and second millenia
and the Geometric war galleys of the 9th
century and later. They show certain charac-
teristics of the former classes wlule introducing
new elements that will flower in the later age.

Theochares (1958: 18) identified some painted

sherds from a transitional Middle-Late Helladic
pot found at Iolkos as bearing a series of oared
craft. While this reconstruction has been
accepted uncritically by some (Vermeule,
1964: 259, fig. 43a; Morrison & Williams,
1968: 7, 9 , pl. Ia), the ships are reconstructed
on insufficient evidence, as Casson (1 97 1; 42,
n. 4) has shown. Bass (1972: 20) has noted that
the decoration has been compared convincingly
with fish painted on a contemporary vase now
in the Archaeological Museum at Nauplion.
A Middle Helladic sherd from the island of
Aegina is decorated with a matt painted draw-
ing. In it a figure wearing a horned helmet
stands in the bow of a ship with a bird-head
stem ornament (Fig. 14B). If they are integral
ro the ship, two parallel vertical lines behind
Figure 13. The helmsmen of ships E.l-E.4 and N.4. the figure apparently indicate a very t h c k
After Nelson et al. (1930: pl. 39). single mast rather than a bipod one. The hori-
zontal lines above the figure may indicate a
have been any rigid artistic convention binding yard, but this is questionable since no boom
the artists who created these works; each ship, appears nor do the crosshatched triangles lend
or group of ships, therefore, must be con- themselves to interpretation as an element of
sidered on its own merit. It is important t o the ship's rigging.
remember that we are dealing here with icono- Two ships appear on a Late Helladic IIIB
graphic representations of ships-not with krater from Enkomi (Fig. 14A; Gjerstad et al.,
actual ships, scale plans or scale models. The 1934: 484, no. 262, pl. LXXVII--top row
artist illustrated the ship as seen through his centre; Sjoqvist, 1940: fig. 20:3; Fururnark,
qw. Because of this, some elements of the 1941: 335 and 333, fig. 56:40:1; Casson, 1971 :
ships' architecture are occasionally telescoped, fig. 59). They are represented as having rounded
others expanded or otherwise exaggerated, hulls. Ths detail has led some scholars to con-
while others are disproportionately small or clude that they are merchantmen (Vermeule,
ignored entirely. The ability to interpret 1964: 258; Morrison & Williams, 1968: 1 1 , n o .
correctly the craft portrayed is directly propor- BA8; Casson, 1971 : 36). The area of the stem-
tional to our ability to identify the various post is missing in the ship on the right but the
elements and reconstruct their relative stempost of the left ship is curved and sur-
Jimensions. mounted by a bird-shaped decoration. The
Ships appearing in Helladic art, or of a clearly sternpost is a curved line with three sets of
similar tradition found farther afield, date for volutes. The ships are at least partially decked
the most part to the Late Helladic IIIC Period and have a structure in the prow. The mast
(17-00-1050 BC), after the demise of the rises amidships and is drawn in a bumpy line,
Mycenaeans. They are thus more or less con- probably to indicate that it was composite and

198
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

held together with wooldings (Casson, 1971 : (Furumark, 1941: 237-42, fig. 25) and there-
69, 231, 1975: 5). The masthead carries three fore does not elucidate this point.
pairs of rings indicating that these s h p s were While several of the ships under discussion
still using the old type of sail with a boom here are shown carrying oars [Figs 14D, 20C(?)
along its foot. The rings held the multiple lifts and F] , representations of rowers working their
that supported the boom and the halyards. oars are rare. The only representation of a ship
[Compare them with those topping the mast of in which rowers are definitely portrayed appear
a ship in the Miniature Frieze at Thera on a sherd found during the Italian excavations
(Marinatos, 1974: colour pl. 9 top centre and at the Serraglio in Cos (Fig. 15A; Morricone,
line drawing).] 1975: 360-1, fig. 358; Sandars, 1978: 135,
Four men appear below the deck. They all fig. 92). The scene is unfortunately very frag-
stand in the same manner but face each other in mentary. Two rowers and parts of a third
pairs. Standing above them on the deck are two (mainly the oar, lower arms and part of the left
warriors wearing helmets and mantles. They leg) are shown pulling on their oars whde facing
carry swords in scabards which end in wavy left. Thus the galley must be facing right. The
lines. In all these elements, down to the fringes entire hull is drawn as a single broad hori-
o n the scabards they are like the warriors in the zontal band. The two bands beneath it, accord-
Thera frescoes (Marinatos, 1974: colour pl. 7). ing to Morricone, encircle the wider part of the
These figures also face each other. On either jar and are, therefore, not related to the ship.
side of the ship on the left is a warrior dressed To the left of the rowers are remains of an
in the same manner. The helmeted head and angular structure with a vertical line rising from
sword pommel of the warrior on the left are all it. To the right of t h s vertical is a line in the
that remains of that figure. form of a compound curve. These elements are
The ship on the right is identical in all best understood, in my opinion, as the galley’s
aspects except that its hull is narrower and the aftercastle and sternpost topped with a stylized
sternpost has an additional pair of volutes; it is bird’s head facing the prow. The aftercastle, if
less well preserved and the figure to the left is it is indeed such, is clearly shown as an open
dressed like the men below deck but wears a frame. It should be compared with the castles
helmet, indicating that all these figures also had appearing on a ship of like date from Pylos
a military function. (Fig. 20A) and, to a lesser degree, with the
The preponderance of fighting personnel, closed castles on the ships of the Sea Peoples
lack of any cargo in the hull, and the similarity from Medinet Habu.
of certain elements of these ships (such as the Another sherd from the same excavation
bird insignia and stern decoration) with those (Fig. 15B; Morricone, 1975: 358-9, fig. 356),
appearing on representations of LH IIIC galleys and also of LH IIIC date, carries remains of a
discussed here strongly suggest to me that the second s h p . All that remains of this craft
cratt represented are to be identified as oared today is part of the sail with a wavy line running
galleys, the hulls of which have been signi- diagonally from the mast top towards a figure
ficantly altered by the artist. who faces it and a semicircular element with a
Since the men standing in, on, and next to reserved dot at its centre. The sail seems to be
the ships all face each other in conventionalized billowing towards the left suggesting that the
heraldic patterns, it is clear that the men below ship faced that direction. The wavy diagonal
deck are facing each other due to artistic line, obviously representing a (slack?) rope of
considerations and not necessarily because the the ship’s rigging, finds an exact parallel in a
action in which they are involved requires them later ship drawing from Cyprus (Fig. 26A).
to be arranged in that position. Thus the artist The semicircular element may represent part of
may very well be representing a row of men the head and eye of a bird-head ornament
facing in one direction. If so, one may ask in decorating the craft’s stem(?)post.
what work could a row of men, facing in one The figures on these sherds, as well as those
direction and positioned below deck level, be on several others from Cos (Fig. 16). wear
involved? crudely represented helmets which have been
The posture of the men is conventionalized likened quite convincingly by Sandars (1978:

200
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S . WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

Figure 15. Fragments of yhips on LH IIIC sherds Figure 16. Figures wearing (feather?) helmets reminis-
from the Seraglio, Cos. Note the (feather?) cent of those worn by contingents of the
helmets worn by the figures. After Sea Peoples in the Medinet Habu reliefs.
Morricone (1975: 360, fig. 358, 359, After Morricone (1975: 360, fig. 357a-c).
fig. 356).

135, fig. 92, 137) to the feather helmets worn element may represent an open rowers’ gallery.
by elements of the Sea Peoples portrayed at The ship carries a mast with a double collar
Medinet Habu. The implications of this will be through which the twin halyards were worked.
discussed below. This indicates that it is carrying the newly
A representation of a ship from Skyros introduced loose footed brailed sail similar to
(Fig. 14E; Sandars, 1978: 130, fig. 85) w h c h is that seen on the ships of buth sides at Medinet
painted on a LH l I l C stirrup jar displays a long Habu. This double collar fitting continued in
narrow hull with an elongated, almost vertical use along with the new rig for over a millenium.
stempost ending in a zoomorphic figurehead Standing rigmg represented on the Skyros s h p
usually identified as a bird’s-head (Vermeule, include a single forestay and backstay.
1964: 258; Bass, 1972: 22). This stempost with Parts of two other ships, also of LH IlIC
bird-head ornament is practically identical with date, appear on several sherds from Phylakopi
the stem- and sternposts of the invaders’ galleys on the island of Melos (Fig. 14D).The upper
at Medinet Habu. Its origin may be in the ship faces left. It consists now only of a zoo-
angular, high prows of third millenium Aegean morphic (bird’s-head) figurehead in which the
‘long ships’ (Casson, 1971: fig. 22). A narrow stempost culminates, the palmette-like stern
unpainted line horizontally bisects the craft and decoration, and the upper tip of the mast with
continues up the stem- and sternposts. This its rigging. The rigging shown includes a single

20 1
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

forestay and three lines running from the tip of been partial to vertical lines for some reason.
the mast to the sternpost. These are probably Those connecting the lowest pair of diagonals
to be identified as a single backstay, as on the with the uppermost horizontal of the ship
Skyros ship and two halyards tied to cleats cannot be explained in terms of contemporary
astern and thus acting as additional backstays. ship architecture or rigging. This latter vertical
Again, as on the Skyros ship, the rigging here element is at present unique to the Gazi ship
seems to be of the new, brailed type. and one receives the impression that it is purely
Of the lower galley there remains only part decorative in nature.
of the hull with five oars and a single steering The stempost rises at an angle from the keel
oar. Above the hull is a vertical line which is and is surmounted by a stylized bird-head with
probably meant to represent a mast. a number of vertical lines rising from it. This
A ship is engraved on a stone seal found in figurehead is prolonged over the horizontal bow
T.6 a t Enkomi (Fig. 14C). Schaeffer (1952: projection precluding its functioning as a ram.
71 ) defined it as ‘un sujet difficile a interpreter The sternpost rises in a curve and blends into
(bateau)’. The object represented appears to be the painted frame. Asingle steering oar stretches
an extremely schematic attempt to portray an out horizontally behind the craft.
equal ended ship under sail. The hull is narrow At the top of the mast are two additional
and curved. The seal is of Late Cypriote 111 straight horizontal lines with three wavy lines
date. Schaeffer (1952: 87-8, 412) has already beneath them on either side of the mast. These
pointed out that t h s s h p finds its closest elements represent the yard, boom and (furled
parallel in the Sea Peoples’ galleys at Medinet or billowing) sail, respectively. In other words,
Habu. tlus ship, like the Enkomi ships (Fig. 14A) of
Parallel to the appearance of these ships one similar date, still carries the old boom bottomed
finds representations of oared ships dating from rig. Below the sail are three sets of diagonal
the 13th century and later, alike in many lines which connect the mast to the stem- and
details to the ‘class’ just studied-but with one sternpost.
significant difference; they all have a horizontal This manner of representing the rigging on
projection or cutwater at the junction of the ship from Gazi is very reminiscent of that
stempost and keel. used to show the rigging on s h p s appearing on
The earliest appearance of a ship with such a Minoan seals of Late Minoan date (Fig. 19).
horizontal projection is on a Late Minoan IIIB Here also one finds a very broad sail between a
larriav excavated at Gazi, on the island of yard and a boom placed high up on the mast
Crete, and now in the Archaeological Museum with two or three diagonals descending from
of Iraklion(Figs 17-18; Alexiou, 1970: 253-4, the mast or the boom to the ships’ extremities.
1972: 90-8, 1973; Sakellarakis, 1979: 110). The identity and purpose of these diagonal lines
This also happens to be the largest known is enigmatic.
representation of a Late Bronze Age craft from Another, better known representation of this
the Aegean area extant today. The ship is subclass is a ship painted on a LH lIICl pyxis
painted on the long side of the larnax. It is from Pylos (Fig. 20A; Furumark 1941: 335,
facing left. The hull structure is composed of 333, fig. 56:40:2). A continuous thick line
three horizontal lines. The lowest of these is forms the hull from the sternpost to the hori-
thicker than the other two and appears to zontal spur at the prow. Above this appears a
represent the ship’s hull up to the gunwales. At narrower horizontal line with short vertical
the prow it is elongated into an upcurving spur lines at fixed intervals connecting the two
forward of the stempost. Above it, vertical horizontals. The prow consists of two vertical
lines combine with the other horizontal lines to lines rising above the spur and joined by a zigzag
form two superimposed ‘horizontal ladder line. Behind it a forecastle nestles in the bows
designs’. One central vertical line continues and is surmoilnted by an emblem, now partially
upward forming the mast. The probable inter- missing, which has usually been identified as a
pretation of these designs will be discussed fish (Svoronos, 1914: 97; Evans, 1928: 242-6,
below. fig. 142; Kirk, 1949: 118; Vermeule, 1964:
The artist of the Gazi ship seems to have fig. 43; Morrison & Williams, 1968: 9 , BA?;

202
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

203
Figure 1 7 . Ship painted on the side of a LM IIlB Zurnux from Gazi.

Figure 18. Line drawing of the Gazi ship.

S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS 01,'THE SEA PEOPLES
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Figure 19. Ships on Late Minoan seals carrying rigs similar to that on the Gazi ship. After Casson (1971: figs
31 -40).

Bass, 1972: 22). Sakellarakis (1971: 210) has of LH IIIC date (Fig. 20C). There is a lack of
shown, however, that it actually portrays a agreement among scholars as to which side of
bird--agreeing thus with the bird ornament on the ship is its prow and which the stern. Kirk
the prow of the Enkomi ship. The sternpost (1949: 1 17) and Williams (Morrison & Williams,
rises from the keel in a curve as on the Gazi 1968: 10, BA3) consider the long thick pro-
ship, but is terminated in an acorn-shaped jection to the left to be a ram with the ship
decoration. The stern compartment has a balis- subsequently facing left. Casson (1971 : 32) and
trade below which juts a single steering oar. As Bass (1972: 22) believe the ship to be facing
Morrison and Williams have noted, the rudder’s right. In support of the latter view the following
tiller bar is held in place by a curved lynch pin considerations may be noted:
connected to the loom. The ability t o remove
the tiller from the loom was no doubt desirable (1) in primitive representations of ships the
for facilitating the steering oar’s storage when steering oars are occasionally strung out directly
not in use. behind the ship in the manner seen here (Fig.
The sail is stylized into a flattened oval. 18; Palmer, 1871: pl. opposite 29; Jaussen
Other rigging includes a single forestay and et al., 1905: pl. VI-VII; Rahmani, 1980: 117,
three lines aft as on the ship from Phylakopi fig. 2);
(Fig. 14D). The rig portrayed on the Pylos ship
seems to also be of the new brailed type. (2) if the thick vertical line in the centre of the
A ship with certain similarities to the Pylos hull is the mast, as Williams has logically con-
vessel is portrayed on a stirrup jar from Asine cluded, then the sail is bellying toward the right;

204
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S . WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

Figure 20. Ships with a horizontal stem projection or cutwater. (A) Ship on a LH IIIC pyxis from Pylos; (B)
LC Ill terracotta ship model from Cyprus, provenance unknown; (C) ship on an LH IllC vase from
Asine: (I)) LC 111 terracotta ship model from Lapithos; (E) S h p painted o n a funerary urn found at
Llama c. 1200- 1075 BC; (1:) ship on an LM IIIC sherd from Phaistos. (A) and (C) After Casson
(1971: figs 28 9); (B) and (D) Buchholz & Karageorghis (1973: 470, figs 1720-1); (E) lngholt
(1940: pl. XXlI:2); (F) Laviosa (1972: 9, fig. lb).

(3) the horizontal projections on the inboard

side of the ship’s stempost (if facing right)
correspond to those painted on the stempost of
a contemporary ship model (Fig. 20B).
A projection, apparently a cutwater, juts
from the keel at keel level. Eleven short vertical
strokes that begin around the centre of the hull
and bisect the keel line are probably meant to
signify oars.
At Hama in Syria a funerary urn bearing a
Figure 2 1 . 4skas in the form of a shtp. Note the bird- drawing of a s h p was found by the Danish
head ornament that tops the stempost and
faces inward toward the stern. From excavators [Fig. 20E; Riis, 1948: 48, fig. 25,
Lapithoc, LC Ill. After Gottlicher (1978: 97, fig. 130B: 1 12,105-6, pl. 12C-no. G VIII,
Taf. 9 : 149). 551 (5B902)]. It belongs to Period 1 of the

205
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

cremation cemeteries there (= Hama F, early nance (Fig. 20B). There can be little doubt that
phase) which was dated by Riis (1948: 202) to this is a three-dimensional representation of the
c. 1200-1075 BC. The long narrow hull ends in same ship type seen on the Pylos pyxis (Fig.
a spur. Above this the stempost is surmounted 20A). Note particularly:
by a bird-head identical, down to the raised (1) the latticed prow which reaches down to
beak, with the bird-heads on the Sea Peoples the spur;
and Skyros shps. Above the hull is a horizontal
line connected to it by short vertical lines (2) the horizontal ladder design which stretches
which form a horizontal ladder design, probably the length of the model and up the sternpost;
indicative of an open rowers’ gallery. Below this (3) the prow which ends in a projecting spur;
the hull is crossed by 10 vertical lines which do (4) the unpainted rear side of the stempost is
not seem to represent oars as none of them crossed by six horizontal lines as on the Asine
cross the lower horizontal line of the keel. The ship (Fig. 20C). Similar lines are found in the
area of the stern is not entirely clear but it same place on later ships (Fig. 26C; Morrison
appears to be taken up by a balustrade. The &Williams, 1968: pl. 4b).
sternpost rises straight in the rear, as on the While these are familiar decorations on
Asine s h p . A vertical line beneath it may Proto-Whlte Painted Ware, in this specific case
represent a steering oar. they can plausibly be explained as representing
A LM IIIC oared ship appears on a sherd actual ship elements. The manner in whch the
from Phaistos (Fig. 20F) which was published horizontal ladder decoration continues up the
by Laviosa (1972: 9-10). The craft’s hull is a sternpost is reminiscent of the way that it is
single thick horizontal line from which rise a portrayed on the Skyros ship and on Greek war
curving stempost and an angular sternpost. galleys of later times (Fig. 14E; Morrison &
The line of the hull continues past the junction Williams, 1968: pls 6a-b, d-e, 1 la, c-d, 26a).
with the stempost apparently indicating a hori- A second model of this series, from Lapithos
zontal spur. A diagonal descending from the (Fig. 20D), bears a cutwater-like prow rather
sternpost is best understood as a steering oar. like that on the Asine ship. Here also the prow
At the junction of the sternpost and the hull is covered with a slightly different lattice
is a small pointed projection. Unfortunately, decoration, although all the other elements
all the extremities of the vessel are missing. seem to be purely ornamental.
Beneath the hull are five or possibly six lines, This latticed prow reappears in still another
which widen at their lower ends, representing variation on a third model of this series which is
oars. A mast is stepped in the centre of the hull also from Lapithos (Fig. 21; Gottlicher, 1978:
with four lines leading from it. They are best 35, no. 149). This terracotta is of particular
understood, in my opinion, as a yard with interest in that the bird-head insignia which
extremities curving downward and a single tops the stempost has been turned around arid
forestay and backstay (compare Fig. 26A and nowfaces the stern. This reversal in direction of
B 1. the ubiquitous bird-head decoration is a key
We are fortunate in having terracotta models clue to understanding the relationship between
of this ship type. Though these models were the ships of the Sea Peoples and later Greek
found in Cyprus they clearly represent ships Geometric ships, as we shall see below.
that were common in the Aegean at this time. Another Cypriote ship representation is an
As Catling (1964: 52) has noted although extremely crude graffito engraved on a stele
‘apparently a very high proportion of it is of from Enkomi (Fig. 22A; Schaeffer, 1952:
Cypriote manufacture, the shapes and orna- 102-4). It also dates to the LC I11 Period.
ments are so clearly related to Greek originals I f the ship is facing right then it can be con-
that the closest association between the two vincingly shown to be patterned after the same
must be supposed’. Askos forms, to w h c h these type of craft as the other representations des-
ship models belong, are popular in Proto-White cribed above. It also has a narrow pointed spur
Painted Ware although they usually portray at the prow. The bows are taken up by a fore-
birds or other zoomorphc shapes (Yon, 1971: castle. A horizontal line juts out forward of the
5 1 - 2). The first model is of unknown prove- castle. It is crossed by a diagonal line while

206
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

bigure 22. (A) Ship graffito on a stele from Enkomi. LC 111. (B) Detail of the ship’s rigping. ( C ) Detail of the
rigging on Phoenician ships c. 700 BC. (A) After Schaeffer (1952: 102, fg. 38); (C) Casson (1971 :
fig. 7 8 ) .

two other vertical lines rise from it. This F] and curving (Figs. 14A, C, E; 18; 20A, B,
schematic element invites comparison, because D) sternposts appear on contemporary repre-
of its position on the stempost, with figure- sentations of s h p s of this class. Several lines
heads in the form of a bird on the wing situated in the stern apparently indicate a castle, as on
atop the stempost on an earlier ship from the Pylos ship.
Enkomi (Fig. 14A) and on the Pylos ship (Fig. But is the ship facing right? As Casson (1 97 1 :
20A). The mast is stepped in a massive triangular 31) has noted, the ship seems to be under
tabernacle; this element appears first on the sail-and the sail is bellying to the left. If this
ships from Enkomi just mentioned and later is correct then the s h p itself also must be
becomes a prominent element on Cypriote facing left and we are consequently left with a
Iron Age ships (Fig. 2 6 A ~ - B )The
. ship’s stern rather odd craft reminiscent of Aegean ‘long-
was first finished off with a vertical sternpost ships’, a type of craft not otherwise recorded
whch was subsequently altered into a curving in the eastern Mediterranean since the end of
sternpost by the addition of several lines. As we the third millenium (Wachsmann, 1980).
have seen, both angular [Figs 5, 20C, E(?) and To attempt a solution t o this problem let us

207
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTlCAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Figure 23. Terracotta ship models. (A) From

Phylakopi. LH. (B) From Asine. LH 111.
(C) Model from Cyprus, now in the
Maritime Museum, Haifa. LC HI(?).
(A) After Marinatos (1933: pl. XV:26);
(B) Gottlicher (1978: Taf. 25: 332);
(C) Stieglitz (1972-75: 44, fig. 1).

re-examine the ship’s rigging in detail. First

note that several lines seem t o be incomplete
or entirely lacking to the right of the mast.
Also, we must keep in mind that since this ship
is dated to the 12th century it must be carrying
I
the newly introduced, loose footed, brailed
C
sail. With this in mind I suggest that the ship is
indeed facing right and i s shown carrying a Figure 24. Minoan ships bearing vertical stripes on
brailed rig with the sail furled. Thus line A their hulls. (A) On a steatite lentoid seal.
(Fig. 22B) would be the mast; B the yard; C LM IIIB. (B) Votive ship carried by a
a single forestay; D and E afterstays; F and G mourner on the limestone sarcophagus
from Hagia Triada. LM 11. ( C ) On a gold
brails and the triangle formed by lines B, H ring from Tiryns. c. 1300 BC. (A) and
and I would be part of the furled sail. (C) After Casson (1971: figs 47 and SO);
The resultant rigging is practically identical (B) Marinatos (1933: pl. XIII:18).

208
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

to that appearing on shps of later date shown cotta to the mid-1 l t h century on the basis of
with their sails brailed up (Figs 22C and 26B), the ware and decoration of the model.
Notice particularly how the stays and brails These last two models are so alike that it
intersect forming large crosses as does the seems the artists intended to portray the same
rigging on the ship under discussion. class of s h p in both cases. The model from
A small Mycenaean ship model of terracotta Phylakopi is also very similar in profile yet
from Phylakopi has a vertical cutwater a t its much beamier.
prow (Fig. 23A). The stempost is missing. Do these last three models represent oared
Oculi appear on either side of the bow and fighting ships? In profile they are very similar
should be considered the forerunners of the to the ships from Hama, Skyros and Phylakopi
bowpatches mentioned by Homer which appear (Figs 20E and 14D-E), as well as the ships of
on Geometric shps (Fig. 11A; Morrison & the Sea Peoples from Medinet Habu. However,
Williams, 1968: 37; Casson, 1971 : 49). Vertical on the other hand, they lack any evidence for a
bands are painted on the inside and the outside deck, open rowers’ gallery, oars or oarports.
of the hull. The former may represent ribs or Therefore, for the present this question must be
benches (Morrison &Williams, 1968: 11, BA 7). left open.
The latter apparently indicate some form of Little can be deduced from the decoration
vertical stripes decorating the hull. on a sherd from Mycenae which has been
The use of vertical stripes, apparently of a purported to represent a ship (Marinatos,
decorative nature, seems to have been adopted 1933: 172, n. 15; Casson, 1971 : fig. 49).
from a Minoan tradition. W l e none of the In summary, although there is a tendency to
craft of the Thera frescoes bear these markings interchange the various elements of these ships,
they do appear on a ship engraved on a steatite when taken all together they form an extremely
lentoid seal which, like the Gazi ship, dates to cohesive class of craft. As they appear in the
the LM IIIB Period [Fig. 24A; on the date of 13th-I 1th centuries these galleys are in a stage
the seal see Boardman (1970: 106, pl. 196)]. of experimentation which will eventually
It appears also on the hull of a votive model stabilize into Greek Geometric war galleys.
ship seen in the hands of a mourner on the
famous limestone sarcophagus from Hagia
Triada (Fig. 24B) as well as on a Minoan ship Discussion
etched on a gold ornament from Tiryns (Fig. The Sea Peoples’ ships: the Aegean connection
24C). The striking similarity in construction tech-
Another small terracotta ship found during niques exhibited on the galleys of the Sea
the Swedish excavations at Asine and now in Peoples and those of the later Geometric Greeks
the Archaeological Museum of Nauplion (Fig. has been noted above. Now the horizontal
23B; Gottlicher, 1978: 63, no. 332) also ladder design w h c h is common on many of the
illustrates the ship’s inner construction. The Late Bronze Age ships discussed above may be
stempost is surmounted by a zoomorphic interpreted in a number of ways (Hale, 1980:
(bird?)-head. A horizontal line runs the length 122-3). The most likely interpretations, in my
of the hull on its outer side, as on the ship opinion, are that they are either vertical hull
from Skyros (Fig. 14E). decorations, as is probably the case with the
A very similar terracotta ship model, appar- terracotta from Phylakopi (Fig. 23A), or open
ently of Cypriote origin but of unknown rowers’ galleries below deck level intersected
provenance is now in the possession of the by vertical stanchions to support the screen, as
National Maritime Museum in Haifa (Fig. 23C; on the Sea Peoples’ galleys and later Geometric
Stieglitz, 1973, 75). ln profile t h s model is oared ships. However, in cases where two super-
strikingly similar to the f-tama ship (Fig. 20E) imposed horizontal ladder designs appear on a
but lacks the horizontal bow projection. The ship, as on the Gazi and Hama s h p s it would
model has a narrow, gently curved hull with a seem that we are seeing both of these elements
vertical stempost ending in a zoomorphic one above rhe other. Thus on the basis of the
(bird?)-head. There is no evidence for mast or Gazi ship one may suggest that the s h p structure
rigging. Stieglitz has tentatively dated the terra- which existed on the Sea Peoples’ galleys

209
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 103

E F

Figure 25. Bird/bird-head steinpost decorations on Late Bronze Age ships of Aegean tradition. (A) From
Enkomi. LH IIIB. (B) Enkomi. LH 111. (C) Pylos. LH IIIC. (D) Aegina. MH. (E) Medinet Habu.
C. 1186 BC. (F) Phylakopi. LH IIIC. (G) Skyros. LH IIIC. (H) Gazi. LM IIIB. (I) Hama. c. 1200-
1075 BC.

already was to be found on Aegean ships by the we have data during the second millenium.
13th century and that it appears to be an They are entirely lacking on representations of
Aegean innovation. The Enkomi s h p s (Fig. indigenous Minoan, Cypriote, Syrian and
14A) which, like the Gazi ship, are of 13th Egyptian seagoing craft.
century date, may show this same architectural To comprehend how truly close is the
detail in an artistically different manner-if relationship between the ships of the Sea
they are indeed galleys, as I believe probable. Peoples and the Aegean tradition it is necessary
Another indication of the close relationship to understand the role these bird devices had in
of the Sea Peoples’ galleys to the Aegean the creation of ship decorations surmounting
tradition of ship-building is the bird-head the stem- and sternposts of later ships. A com-
devices atop their stem- and sternposts. Bird prehensive study of this fascinating subject is
ornaments on seagoing ships up to the end of beyond the scope of this paper (Note 3 ) ; how-
the Late Bronze Age are typical of Aegean ever, even a cursory examination is sufficient to
ships -or of ships related to the Aegean spread considerable light on the problem
tradition (Fig. 25). They appear as devices at hand.
shaped as actual birds poised on the stempost First, we must note several generalities about
facing forward (Enkomi and Pylos) or the bird devices. There seem to be two directions in
stempost ends in a bird-head, generally with a the development of these insignia. On the one
slightly upturned bill, facing forward (Aegina, hand, the bird device undergoes a process of
Gazi, Skyros, Phylakopi and Hama), (Note 2). stylization and then of almost total abstraction.
It is important to emphasize here that these On the other hand, there is a second trend to
bird/bird-head devices are totally foreign to return to the naturalistic source of an actual
seagoing ships of the other nations for which bird or bird-head. This cycle of naturalism-

210
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

n the naturalistic bird-head finishing off the stern-

post and facing the bows in A. In B the eye has
disappeared and the head has become somewhat
stylized. In ship C the bird-head and beak has
become an abstract compound curve-
r‘
We are witnessing a like cycle in the Aegean-
Sea Peoples-Geometric group; although in this
case the middle stylizing stage seems to be
missing. On the one hand there are the natura-
listic birds and bird-head devices on the Late
Bronze Age Aegean and Sea Peoples’ ships, and
on the other hand we see the same bird-head,
now totally abstracted into a compound curve
and pointed inward from the extremities of
Geometric galleys (Fig. 27). These are the
‘straight horns’ referred to in Homer (Morrison
& Williams, 1968: 38, 45, 47; Casson, 1971:
B 45, n. 16); it seems that the poet was not
aware of their original source, which is not
surprising given the degree of abstraction. The
middle phase of this cycle. that of stylization,
seems to be lost in the mists of the ‘Dark Ages’.
However, the turnabout of the bird-head device
from facing outward to facing inward appears
already on the Late Bronze Age terracotta
model from Lapithos (Fig. 21) and perhaps on
r
L the ship from Cos (Fig. 15A). Thus we may
Figure 26 Ships on 7th century Cypriote jugs illus- conclude that the Geometric s h p s are heir to a
trating the progressive transformation of a tradition of bird-heads on both extremities of
naturalistic bird-head device (A) to a the c r a f t - e x a c t l y like those on the Sea
stylized ( B ) , and then abstract (C) stern- Peoples’ shps, with the sole difference that the
post ornanient in the form of a compound former face inward, whde the latter face out-
curvc. After Karageorghis & des Gagniers
(1974: 1 2 2 - 3 , nos X : 1-3). ward. And, as we have just seen, thus turnabout
in direction took place at about the same time
as the Sea Peoples in their highly mobile galleys
stylization-abstraction--naturalism was re- were savaging the eastern Mediterranean.
peated again in ancient times. These devices, Apart from the above, the Sea Peoples’
whether naturalistic, stylized or abstract appear galleys seem to have carried two steering oars;
on the stem- and sternposts of ships of the in this manner they differ from contemporary
ancient and classical Mediterranean cultures. representations of craft from the Aegean but
They may point inward, outward or even seem to herald the use of the double steering
upward in practically all possible permutations. oars which were to become common equipment
These bird devices, in their stylized and abstract on Geometric craft (Morrison & Williams,
forms may be shown to be the original proto- 1968: 5 2 - 3 , pls 3c, 4c, e, 7d; Casson, 1971:
types of many sfeni and stern ornamental 46).
devices, including the classical uphlustotz and A final element of comparison which con-
volute. nects the ships of the Sea Peoples to the Aegean
The dearest example of this process taking tradition is the small stern projection which
place is on three ship representations on appears on ships N.4 and N.5 (Figs 6E and 7A)
Cypriote jugs. all of which date to the 7th and on the LM IIlC galley from Phaistos
century (Fig. 26). Note the transformation of (Fig. 20F).

21 1
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

Geometric warships (8th century). (A) After Gottlicher (1978: Taf. 2 5 : 338-9); (B-D) Casson
Figure 27. Abstract bird-head ornaments in the form of a compound curve topping the stem and sternposts of
C

(1971: figs 6 2 , 6 5 and 72).

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

213
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES

W l e the ships of the Sea Peoples are un- Near East of central European peoples, with the
doubtedly related to the mainstream of Aegean Aegean migrations that brought the Mycenaean
galley development, no conclusions concerning world to ruin and with the contemporary
the ethnic identity of the Sea Peoples may be threats to Egypt at the hands of the Sea Peoples
deduced from this. Ship types can be and were (Hencken, 1968: 627). Elements of the material
adopted and adapted by peoples having no equipment of thu newly introduced culture, in
ethnic connection with the traditional users of particular their urnfield burials, flange-hilted
the craft. The later Romans, for example, were swords and fibulae, were considered to be
particularly notorious in adopting foreign s&p European (Riis, 1948: ZOO). Therefore, all
designs for their own craft (Casson, 1971: things considered, the Hama ship may also be
105, n. 41, 141--2). patterned after a Sea Peoples’ slip. For the
In fact, a basic problem at this stage is to remainder of the craft discussed above, however,
determine the ethnic identity of the other it must be admitted that sufficient evidence is
ships/galleys studied above whch, for con- lacking at present to differentiate them into
venience sake I have termed till now as ‘of Mycenaean or Sea Peoples’ ships. Our lack of
Aegean tradition’. Are these to be identified as knowledge as to the ethnic composition of the
Mycenaean or Sea Peoples’ slips? If Sandars is Sea Peoples following the decline of the
correct in identifying as feather helmets the Mycenaean world makes their identification
headgear of rowers on sherds from Cos (Figs particularly problematic.
15-16) then the rowers and their craft may be
of the Sea Peopla. The slightly earlier ‘northern On the size of oared ships and fleets
bronzes’ found in the Laganda tomb at Cos Evidence for the size of these galleys may be
certainly suggest the presence there of northern derived from a Linear B text from Pylos which
adventurers (Sandars, 1978: 9 2 , 9 3 , fig. 54b, d, lists the number of roweres to be provided by
94). various towns for a military expedition to
Whether the craft depicted on the sherds Pleuron (Ventris & Chadwick, 1959: 183--6,
from Cos were Sea Peoples’ ships or not, they text 5 3 = h 12). In all, 30 men are specified,
certainly introduce sufficient doubt to neces- which as Ventris and Chadwick have noted,
sitate a reconsideration of the ethnic identity of may have been the complement of a Mycenaean
all the other ship representations ‘of Aegean galley, i.e. a triaconter. Homer mentions 20-
tradition’. The problem is compounded because oared ships, 50-oared penteconters and larger
these ships appear for the most part at a time craft. He does not include triaconters, however,
(LH/LM I I I B ~C) and in regions (Greece, Crete, Herodotus mentions that they were used in the
the Aegean, Cyprus, the Levant) where both early colonization of Thera (Casson, 1971 :
fleeing Mycenaeans and bands of Sea Peoples 44-5, n. 10).
are believed to have roamed. I f the horizontal ladder design on the Pylos
I f we assurne that the nationality of a ship S ship (Fig. 20A) represents an open rowers’
crew indicates the rzationality of’their ship (and gallery and not simply vertical stripes on the
even this assumption is wide open to argument) hull, which seems probable, then its 25
then the warriors on the Enkonii ships (Fig. ‘windows’ identify it as a penteconter (Morrison
14A) would allow us to infer that the craft & Williams, 1968: 8). The Gazi ship has 28 such
represented there, however distorted, must be ‘windows’ and is also probably intended to
Aegean (Mycenaean). The s h p s of the northern represent a penteconter.
invaders portrayed at Medinet Habu, all five of For the size of Mycenaean war fleets one
which are probably patterned after a single shlp must turn to a larger list from Pylos (An 610)
captured in battle, belong, of course, to the Sea which has the word ‘rowers’in its badly damaged
Peoples. The ships from Cos may also have title (Ventris & Chadwick, 1959: 186---7;
belonged to the Sea Peoples and the ship from Chadwick, 1976: 173). Five hundred and sixty-
Hama (Fig. 2 0 E ) may be of similar identity. nine men are enumerated on its preserved part
The excavators connected the new culture but the total is more probably between 600-
to which the ship belongs and which appeared 700 since there are lacunas in the text. Assuming
at Hama c. 1200 BC to the appearance in the c. 700 rowers we would have the complement

213
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

boom-bottomed rig. The Gazi ship, of similar

13th century date, clearly carries a boom-
bottomed rig. Only in the 12th century is there
evidence for the use of the new brailed type of
rig. It appears that both Egypt and the Aegean
adopted this rig from elsewhere. But from
where?
On both the Egyptian and Sea Peoples’
galleys, along with the brailed rig, there are two
A additional elements which may hint at its
source.
First, the yards are downcurving, and
second, the masts are surmounted by crow’s
nests. These elements are also foreign to both
Egypt (Casson, 1971: 35, n. 15) and the
Aegean but they are characteristic of earlier
Syrian Late Bronze Age craft.
Downward curving yards appear on repre-
sentations of Syrian ships from the tomb of
Nebamun (Fig. 28A), on a 13th century scarab-
oid seal from Ugarit (Fig. 28B) and on a
Figure 28. Syrian ships with downcurving yards: schematic graffito of a ship incised on the outer
(A) from the tomb of Nebamun (T. 17). surface of a bowl fragment from Tel Abu
Amenhotep 111; (B) on a scaraboid seal Hawam, Stratum V (Fig. 29; Hamilton, 1935:
from Ugarit (13th century). (A) After 53, no. 310C, 38,no. 233), (Note 4).
Casson (1971: fig. 58); (B) Schaeffer
(1962: 134, fig. 114). Mast tops are carried by the Syrian ships
portrayed in the tomb of Kenamun (Fig. 30).
of’ slightly over 20 triaconters (Chadwick) or The mast of the Syrian ship from the tomb of
14 penteconters; as we have just seen both Nebamun is surmounted by a rectangle w h c h
types of oared ships appear to have been known also may represent a crow’s nest; however, it
at Pylos. It is of interest to note that fleets of may alternatively be a schematic representation
this size parallel those of the Sea Peoples of a mast block (compare Landstroin, 1970:
recorded at Ugarit. 138, fig. 405).
Assuming that the seven Sea Peoples’ ships Barnett (1958: 226) has suggested that the
that are mentioned in RS 20.238 as having Sea Peoples may have been influenced in their
ravaged the Ugaritic coast were penteconters, ship-building by the Syrians. Considering:
triaconters, or a combination of both, then
the total fighting contingent that caused so very (1) the evident adoption by the Sea Peoples
much damage to Ugarit consisted of no more and Egypt of the manner of rigging which
than between 2 I 0-350 fighterlrowers plus a caused the yard to droop at its ends and the use
haridful o f officers. of crow’s nests-apparently from Syrian
prototypes, and
On the origins o f the brailed rig (2) the close maritime interconnections these
The source of the new rig which appears on the peoples had with Syria at this time, it would
Egyptian and Sea Peoples’ s h p s is somewhat seem that Syria is the natural candidate for the
problematic. Casson has noted that this rig does region in which the brailed rig developed and
not seem to have developed in Egypt (1971: from where it diffused to the surrounding
37 8). Nor does it seem to have originated in maritime cultures.
the Aegean either. The Enkomi ship representa- The fact that Syrian ships portrayed in the
tions of LH IIIB date (Fig. 14A), while depicted tomb of Kenamun, and perhaps also in the
laclung sail and yard, carrys a mast tip with tomb of Nebamun(?) carry boom-bottomed rigs
multiple rings for carrying the lifts of the old, does not necessarily negate this thesis. These

214
10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
E
f
3

E
e c

215
S . WACHSMANN: SHIPS OF THE SEA PEOPLES
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

appears show any hint of the hull strengthening

necessary for a ramming ship to be able to
withstand the shock of impact.
(b) During the 13th-1 Ith centuries some
galleys carry the projection, others do not.
Were the projection indeed a ram, one would
expect its rapid adoption on all craft. As Casson
(1971: 42, n. 4) has noted, the ram ‘was a
weapon like the naval gun-once one fleet had
it, all had to have it’.
(c) The Pylos ship (Fig. 20A; Cohen, 1938:
Figure 30. Crow’s nest attached to the mast of a 402-3), the Enkomi ship graffito (Fig. 22A),
Syrian ship from the tomb of Kenamun and the Gazi s h p (Figs 17-18) carry stem
(T. 162). Amenhotep 111. After Davies & decorations wtuch overhang the horizontal
Faulkner (1947: pl. VIII). projection considerably. Such overhanging
rigs may be explained as one more in a long line ornaments would be inconceivable if the
of intrusive Egyptianizing elements with which projection was intended as an effective ram.
the Egyptian artists infused their representations (2) Concerning the true function of the hori-
of Syrian ships [Casson, 1971: 35-6;inaddition zontal bow projection in the Late Bronze Age
to those elements listed by Casson note that the the following thoughts are relevant:
ships at the upper right of the Kenamon scene (a) It is apparently not a ram.
(Davies & Faulkner, 1947: PI. VIII) have lacing (b) It seems to appear at this time only on
along part of their gunwales; similar lines of ships that we may be reasonably sure are oared
lacing positioned at the extremities of the craft galleys.
are known from Egyptian wooden models of (c) There is contemporary historical evidence
river craft (Glanville, 1972: frontispiece, 1, to indicate that galleys such as these were
n. 1 , 14, fig. 13, pls Ia, IIIB)] . used for war/piratical purposes by both the
Mycenaeans and the Sea Peoples.
Or1 the horizontal bow projection on Aegean (d) It is reasonable to assume that, when
Late Bronze Age oared ships attacking coastal settlements, these ships were
The existence of a horizontal projection at the rowed bow first straight up on to the beach in
junction of keel and stempost on a number of order to conserve time and thus sustain the
representations of Late Bronze Age ships element of surprise. Earlier, at Thera, t h s form
raises several pertinent questions. Foremost of beaching is clearly illustrated in the Miniature
among these are: Frieze (Marinatos, 1974: colour pl. 7) and it is
( I ) Does this projection at this time represent subsequently described by Homer (Od. 13:
a nautical weapon-a true ram? 113-5).
( 2 ) If it is not a true ram, then what was its With these considerations in mind, it is
function? worthwhile to reconsider the following scenario
for the gradual invention of the ram which was
(3) What is its relationship to the ram appearing suggested by Kirk (1 949: 126-7):
on Geometric war galleys? When the Bronze Age shipbuilder first
While definite conclusions are precluded turned from the constructicin of the
until more substantial evidence comes to light it merchant-ship type, with its curved stem and
is worthwhile, I believe, to consider the tenta- stern formed b y a direct prolongation of a
tive conclusions to be derived from existing curving keel, to the building of narrow,
in formation. shallow-draught vessels which, to reduce
(1 ) The horizontal bow projection, in all
water-resistance, had to have a narrow
upright cutwater, he must have found that
likelihood, does not represent an actual ram on a simple joint between the ends of two
Bronze Age ships. This seems apparent from the timbers set more or less at right angles--
following considerations: keel and stem----was too weak to stand the
(a) None of the craft on which the spur shock of a head sea or of beaching at speed.

216
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS O F THE SEA PEOPLES

To protect this joint from horizontal shocks, No doubt, at first, when the ramming ships
and to prevent damage to the base of the still lacked additional strengthening it was
stem the keel and sometimes other longi- anybody’s guess which of the two shps-the
tudinal timbers were continued ahead of the one doing the ramming or the one being
stem, and slightly pointed to reduce water rammed-was more likely to sink first.
resistance. The underside of the ram so
formed was given a pronounced upward When did the transition from ‘proto-ram’ to
curve . . . so that even on the steeply shelving full fledged ram take place? Consider:
beaches common in the Aegean there would (a) The transition must have taken place
be n o jarring impact, but a gradual sliding over an extended period of time, based to a
up on to the sand, with the main longitudinal large measure on trial and error.
timbers taking any strain. Thus the ram, far (b) Up to the end of the Late Bronze Age,
from preventing stem-first beaching, actually at which time there is an iconographic hiatus,
aided it, according to this theory of its there is no indication of this metamorphosis.
origin. Doubtless its use as a method of (c) When representations of ships begin to
holing an enemy ship in a head-on attack . . . reappear in the mid-9th century Greek Geo-
ensured the preservation of what was from metric art the bows generally end in a massive
the constructional point of view perhaps a projection which is usually accepted as a true
rather clumsy device.
ram serving the function of a naval weapon
In Kirk’s reconstruction the ram seems to [Morrison & Williams, 1968: 37; Casson, 1971 :
have developed on ships that were already 49, 80; Basch (1975: 202) appears, however, to
being used for functions of war; however, the prefer a date in the mid-7th century for the
origins of the projecting forefoot may have introduction of the ram].
been considerably more diverse. Lionel Casson The transition, therefore, would seem to
has suggested t o me that the projecting forefoot have taken place during the intervening h a t u s
may have been a standard manner for handling of the ‘Dark Ages’. Lionel Casson has suggested
the prow-keel join on ships of all types and (private communication) that the economic
sizes. Most of the evidence for this is much aspects of the ram’s introduction may be
later, in Classical times, when similar projec- connected with the widespread piracy of the
tions, far from being restricted to war galleys, ‘Dark Ages’ and that it was aided and abetted
are a prominent prow feature on craft of all by the taking over, on the part of the poleis, of
sizes and purposes- --from tiny rowboats to the expenses of outfitting ships.
large seagoing merchant craft (Casson, 1971 :
331). The pointed prows on these craft clearly Acknowledgements
lack any military function. I wish to thank the following persons for their
Evidence for the existence of horizontal kind assistance during the preparation of this
bow projections on craft of a definitely non- article: Professors Trude Dothan and Lionel
military nature is scanty during the Bronze Age; Casson, Mr Avner Raban and Mr Paul F.
however, the t h r d millenium clay model from Johnston for their many constructive comments
Mochlos, which is generally assumed to repre- on the material presented here; Professor Anson
sent a small craft (Casson, 1971: 34-5, fig. 54; Rainey for reviewing with me the Egyptian and
Bass, 1972: 17, 79, PI. 14; Basch, 1975: 201, Ugaritic texts; Professor Stylianos Alexiou for
fig. 1) carries horizontal projections at both permission to publish a photo of the ship
stem and stern (Note 5). representation uncovered by him at Gazi (Fig.
(3) The bow projections on Late Bronze Age 17); Mr Avraham Eitan, Director of the Israel
oared slips might best be termed ‘proto-rams’ Department of Antiquities and Museums for
since they were no doubt the immediate pre- his permission to publish a photo o f the ship
decessors of the true ram. As tlus shipwrights graffito from Tel Abu Hawam (Fig. 29); Mr
feature was found useful ad hoc for the ram- Baruch Brandel for bringing to my attention
ming of enemy ships gradual changes and the ship representation from Hama (Fig. 20E)
additions were made in the projections and and Ms Tirza Castle for assisting in the prepara-
ships’ architecture in order to enable the galley tion of the isometric reconstructions of a Sea
to sustain the shock of impact when ramming. Peoples’ galley (Fig. 12).

217
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Notes
[ I ] Previously read mi-lim. They appear in EA 101:4, 33; 105:27; 108:38; 110:48(?); l l l : 2 l ( ? ) ; a n d 126:63.
[ 2 ] Hencken (1968: 568-70, 625-8) has suggested that there may be a connection between the Sea Peoples
and the European urnfield cultures. Apart from the evidence from Hama (see below), and the ‘northern
bronzes’, the ships of the Sea Peoples portrayed at Medinet Habu recall the ‘birdboats’ of the urnfield art
(Hencken, 1968: 516, fig. 478a-b) and also an undated boat-shaped pendant of bronze from the Somes
River in northern Rumania (Gottlicher, 1978: Taf. 33: 439) in that they also carry bird-head insignia at
stern and stern. If the Sea Peoples included elements originating in the urnfield cultures one wonders how
such inland peoples could have taken t o the sea with such ease. Hencken (627-8) offers an duminatinp
historical parallel:
The Vandals had long been inland migrants in Europe when they crossed over from Spain to Africa in
A D 429. But a mere eight years later, in 437, Vandal pirates were scouring the Mediterranean and attack-
ing the coasts of Sicily. In 440 Gaiseric, the Vandal king, fitted out a powerful fleet t o attack not only
Sicily but Sardinia, and in 455 he sailed t o Italy and plundered Rome. His fleet commanded the whole
Mediterranean and by 468 was attacking Greece. Native North Africans are sometimes mentioned as
accompanying him, and they may well have taught seamanship to their masters. But if the Vandals could
take to the sea so quickly and so effectively, there is little need to doubt that the urnfielders could have
done the same.
While the urnfield ‘bird-boats’ are apparently chronologically later than the Medinet Habu reliefs this is not
necessarily the case with the double bird design (Hencken, 1968: 516, fig. 4 7 8 0 on which they are based.
131 I plan to discuss this subject in depth in a future monograph.
[ 4 ] Tlus stratum is thought now t o have originated in the 14th century as Hamilton (1935: 11) had originally
suggested (Anati, 1959: 98-9, 1975: 11) and was destroyed by the Sea Peoples at the end of the 13th
century. The graffito should be dated accordingly.
151 Another bifid fragment from Phylakopi may belong to a similar model (Marinatos, 1933: 175, pl. XV: 27).
As Basch (1975: 202-3, fig. 4) has pointed out, the closest modern parallel to this craft is found in the
canoes from the island of Aua in the Bismark Archipelago. These canoes, which range in size from 3.5 to
18 m, are dug-outs in which the bow and stern are prolonged into a very long, thin point. Vertical end
pieces are connected t o the hull (Haddon & HorneU, 1975: 177-8). In addition t o these Hornell (1970:
210) reported a number of types of modern double-ended bifid craft in Mindinao, Bali, northern Celebes,
the islands in Geelvink Bay, New Guinea and Java. The doubleended bifid form is characteristic of vessels
of various dimensions ranging from the smaller types of outrigger canoes to coasting vessels of considerable
size. I n Hornell’s opinion the bifid extremities were due t o the inability of the early shipwrights to curve
up the ends of the keel into a stem- and sternpost (1970: 202). Because of this the keel was continued in a
long ram-like projection at either extremity.

References
Alekiou, S., 1970, Mikrai Anaskaphai kai Perisulloge Arxaion eis Kreten. Praktika tes en Athenais Archaiologikes
Etaireias: 252-5, pls 354-5. (In Greek.)
Aleiiou, S.. 1972, Larnakes kai Aggeia ek Taphou Para to Gazi Irakleiou. Archaiologiki Ephemeris: 86-98.
(In Greek.)
Ale\iou, S., 1973, Nea Parastasis Ploiou epi Minoikis Larnakos. In Anatupon ek tou a Tomou ton Pepragmenon
m u Gama Diethnous Kritologikou Sunedriou, ‘En Rethumno, 18-23 September 1971, Athens: 3 - 12,
pin. 1-2. (In Greek.)
Anati. E., 1959, Excavations at the cemetery of Tel Abu Hawam. Atiqot, 2 : 89-102.
Anati, E., 1975, Tel Abu Hawam. In M. Avi-Yonah & E. Stern (Eds). Encvclopedia of archaeological excavations
in the Holy Land, Vol. 1 : 9-12. Oxford: English edition.
Astour. M. C., 1965, New evidence on the last days of Ugarit.Arn. J. Archaeol, 69: 253-8.
BAR, Ancient records of Egypt. J . H. Breasted (Ed.), vols I-V. Chicago, 1906-7.
Barnett, R. D., 1958, Early shipping in the Near East. Antiquity, 3 2 : 220-30.
Basih, L., 1975, Another Punic wreck in Sicily: its ram, 1. A typological sketch. IJNA, 4: 201-28.
Ba\\. G . F., 1972, The earliest seafarers in the Mediterranean and the Near East. In G. F. Bass (Ed.), A history of
seafaring based on underwater archaeology: 12-36. New York.
Boardman, J . , 1970, Greekgemsandfinger rings. London.
Buchholz, H . G . & Karageorghis, V., 1973,Prehistoric Greece and Cyprus. London,
Ca\son. L., 1959. The ancient mariners. New York.
C a w n , L.. 1971, Shipsand seamanship in the Ancient world. Princeton.
Ca\\on. L.., 1975, Bronze Age ships. The evidencc of the Thera wall paintings.IJNA, 4: 3-10.
Calling. t l . W., 1964, Cvpriote bronzework in theMycenaean World. Oxford.

218
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
S. WACHSMANN: SHIPS 01: THE SEA PEOPLES

Chadwick, J . , 1976, T/7e Mycenaean World. London.

Cohen, L., 1938, tvidence tor the ram i n the Minoan Period.Am. J. Archaeol., 42: 486 - 9 4 .
Davies, N. de G. & I-aulkncr. R . O . , 1947, A Syrian trading venture to Egypt. J. Egypt. Archaeol., 33: 40-6.
PI. VIII.
Dothan. T.. 1967, The Philistines and their material culture. Jerusalem. ( I n Hebrew.)
EA, The Tell el-Amarna Tablets. S . A. B. Mercer (Ed.). 2 vols. Toronto, 1939.
Evans, A., 1928. The palace ofllfirios, vol. 11, part I . London.
Fururnark. A., 194 I , The hljfcenaeanpottery: analysis and classification. Stockholm.
Gjerstad, E . et al., 1934. The Swedish Cj’prus expedition: finds and results of the excavations in Cyprus 1927-
31, vol 1, t e \ t and plate\. Stockholm.
Glanville, S. R . K.. 1972, Catalogue of Egyptian antiquities in the British Museum, II: wooden model boats.
London.
Gottlicher. A., 1978, Materialien fur ein Corpus der Schiffsmodele i m Alterturn. Mainz am Rhein.
Guterbock, H. G., 1967, Thc Hittite conquest of Cyprus reconsidered./. NearEastern Stud., 26: 73 81.
Haddon. A. C. & Horncll. J., 1975, Canoes of Oceania, parts 1-111. Honolulu.
Hale. J . R., 1980, Plank-built in the Bronze Age. Antiquity, 54: 118--27.
Hamilton. R . W.,1935. Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam. The Quarterly of the Dept. OfAntiquities in Palestine,
4: 1L69, pls I XXXIX.
tkncken. H.. 1968. Tarqitinia, Villanovans and Early Etruscans. Bull. Am. School of Prehistoric Res., 23 ( 2
vols). Cambridge.
Hornell, J., 1970, Water trunsport. Newton Abbot.
Ingholt, H. 1940, Rapport prelirriinaire sur sept campagnes de fouilles a Hama en Syrie ( I 932-38). (’openhagen.
J a u s e n , A., Savignac, R . & Vincent, H . , 1905, ’Abdeli. Rev. Biblique: 74-89.
Karageorghis, V. & dcs Gapniers. J., 1974, La ceramique chypriote de style figure, Age du Fer (1050-500Av.
~J. C.), text and ill u 5 t ra t i on s . Rome .
Kirk,C. S.. 1949, Ships on Geomctric vases.Ann. Br. Schoolat Athens, 44: 93-153, pls 38 -40.
Kitchen. K. A,, 1973. The Philistines. I n D. J . Wiseman (Ed.),Peoples of Old Testament times: 53-78. O\ford.
Lanibdin. T. 0.. 1953. The MiSi-peoplc of the Byblian Aniarna letters. J. Cuneiform Stud.. 7: 75.- 7.
Landstrom. B., 1970. Ships of the Pharaohs. Garden City.
Laviosa. C., 1972. La Marina Miccnea. Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene: 47-8 (1969-70; N.S.
31 2): 7- 40. Komr.
Linder. E., 1970, The maritime texts of Ugarit: a study of Late Bronze Age shipping. Dissertation Hrandcis,
Ann Arbour. (Ilniverbit> microfilms.)
Marinatos. S . : 1933, La iiiarine ireto-niycenienne. Bull. de Correspondence Hellenique, 57: 170-235.
Marinatos. S., 1974. Excavations at Thera VI ( I 972 season), text and plates. Athens.
Morricone. L . , 1975. Coo Scavi e scoperte nel ‘Serraglio’ in localita niiiiori (1935-43). Annuario delfa Scuola
Archeologica diAtene: 50 1 (1972--73; N.S. 34-5): 139-396. Rome.
Morrison. J . S . & William>. R . 1..1968, Greek oared ships: 900-322 BC. Cambridge,
Nelson. H . H.,1943, Thc naval battle pictured a t Medinet Habu. J. NearEastern Stud., 2: 40-5.
Nel.;on. H. H. et al.. 1930. Medinet Habu, vol. I : earlier historical records of Ranises 111. Oriental Inst. Publ.,
VIII. Chicago.
Nougayrol. J ., 1968, l-e\tc.\ wrnCro-accadiens des archives et biblioth6ques privkes d’Ugarit. IJgaritica, V :
1-371.
Palmer. f . H.. 187 1, The dcscrt of tlis T i h and thc country of Moab. The Palestine Exploration Fund Quarter1.y
Statetnent. 3: 3 73.
Rahmani. L . Y . . 1980, Palestinian inccnse buriicrs of the sikth to eighth centuries C,t Israel Explur. J . , 30:
1 I6 --22.
Kiis, P. J . , 1948, Hama: Ies c-itncbfiPresa cremation. Copenhagen.
Sakellarakis. J. A., 1971. Ivor) boats from Mycenae. Archaiologiki Ephemeris; 188-233. IIn Grcck.)
Sakellarakis. J . A., 1979. Iferakleion Museum: illustrated guide to the museum. Athens.
Sandarc. N . K., 1978. The Sea Peoples, London.
Shvc-Soderbergh. T.. 1946. Tl7e rial??, of the eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. Uppsala.
Schaeffer. C. E’. A , . 1952, Enkotni-Alasia. Paris.
Schaeffer. C . F. A.. 1962. Fouillcr e t decouvcrtes des XVIIle e t XlXe campagnes, 1954-55. Ugaritica. IV:
1 150.
Sjiiqvist. E., 1940. Prohlerns o f t h e Lute Cypriote Bronze Age. Stockholm.
Stieglitz. K . K . , 1973- 75. 4 1 1 ancient terra-cotta ship from Cyprus. Sefunim, 4: 44--6.
Svoronos. J . N . , 1913, S t ! Iides. ancrc\ hierae, aphlasta. stoloi, akroctolia. embola, proeiiibola et totem\ marin
J. Int. d’Archeol. .Vumismatique, 16: 81 - 152.
Theochares, D., 1958, IoIkos. whence \ailed the .4rgonauts. Archaeology, I I : 13-8.
Tliucydida. The iwnplcre writings of Thucydides: the Peloponnesian War. Translated by J . H . F,ir~le>J r . ( 1 95 1
New York.
\/rntric, .V. & C h a d w i ~ ~Jk. ,. 1959, Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Cambridge.
Vermeule, t.,1964, Greece in the Bronze Age. Chicago.

219
 10959270, 1981, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-9270.1981.tb00030.x by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Wiley Online Library on [12/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 10.3

Virolleaud. C . , 1965, Testes en cuneiform alphabetiques des archives sud, sud-oest et du Petit Palais. Le palais
royal d’Ugarit, V. Paris.
Wachsmann, S . , 1980. The Thera waterborne procession reconsidered. IJNA, 9: 287-95.
Wainwright, G. A., 1939, Some Sea Peoples and others in the Hittite archives. J. Egypt. Archaeol., 25: 148-53.
Wainwright, G. A., 1960, Some Sea Peoples. J. Egypt. Archaeol., 46: 71-89.
Yon. M..1971, Salamine de Chypre II: La tomb T. I du XIe S. Av. J.-C. Paris.

Periodical notes
The articles listed below have been brought to the Editor’s attention as being of interest to readers
ofNautica1 Archaeoloa). The abstracts have been prepared by Ben Booth and Jane Weeks.

Armitage. P. and McCarthy, C., Turtle remains from a Forssell, H., A boat find at Mekrijarvi. a preliminary
late 18th century well at Leadenhall Buildings. report. Maritime Museum of Finland Annual
London Archaeologist, 4. 1, 1981. Report, 1980.
Evidence for the 18th century turtle trade with Gottlicher, A., Noahs arche in Alten Bibeldrucken,
the East Indies. part 2. Das Logbuch (Heidesheim), 1981 ( l ) ,
Arnold. B., Navigation sur le lac de Neuchitel, une 1981.
esquisse i travers le temps. Helvetia Archaeologica, Gronhagen, J . V., A wreck at Jussaro from the 18th
43/44, 1980. century. Maritime Museum of Finland Annual
Cavalier. M., Ricerche preistoriche nell ‘Arcipelago Report, 1980.
coliano’. Revista di Scienze Preistoriche, XXXIV. Ilkjaer, J. and LQnstrup, J., Ankeret. Skalk, 1981 -82.
1-2, 1979. 1981.
Cederlund, C. O., Bulverletbaten - en model1 f o r Parker, A. J., Relitto da una nave del terzo secolo d.c.
dokumentation av bot-och fortygslamningar. Forn- scoperto a Plemmirio, nei pressi di Siracusa. Sicilia
vannen Tidskrift f o r Svensk Antikvarisk Farskning, Archaeologica, XIII, 1980.
7 5 . 1980. Regueyra, E. M., et al., El buque en la Amada
Cunliffe. B. W. and Haselgrove, C. C., Excavations at Espagnola.Pub. by Filex, 1981.
Hengistbury Head, Dorset. University of Durham Ressmann, C., I1 museu delle navi romane del porto di
Archaeological Reports, 19 80. Claudio. RivistaMarittima, March 1981: 43-60.
The project is t o examine the site in its maritime Robinson, W., The wreck laws - a guideline for con-
contest. servators. The Conservator, 5 , 1981.
Ellniers. D., Eine Rudergabel aus dem Rhein bei Ruoff, U., Der ‘Kleine Hafner’ in Zurich. Archuologie
Wiesbaden Mainz-Kastel.
~ Fundberichte aus der Schweiz, 4.1, 1981.
Hessen, 17/18, 197711978, Seyer, H., Germanic and Slav finds from wells in the
Faber. A,, Osor - das Apsoras aus Aspekte der Antiken settlement at Berlin-Marzahn. Zeitschrift fur
schiffahrt. Diadora, 9, 1980. Archuologie, 1980 (2), 1980: plate 12.
Oak oarblade.

220