The Burning Cattle Boat at Tyre

[Nicator]

Hello All,This one caught my eye a few weeks back in Green, and now I'm giving a thorough dissection of it in Arrian. According to Green, the Tyreans loaded a wide, old horse transport to the gunwhales with pitch, and ballasted it heavily towards the aft so that the bow would rise completely out of the water. Then from the bow he attatched to long planks of some sort and placed two large cauldrons of naptha on them. Then two triremes were used to pull the strange looking vessel while soldiers on board held the tow ropes. Gathering up speed and heading for the end of the mole where the two mobile towers were placed the soldiers on board released the tow ropes and lit the pitch on board and in the cauldrons ablaze and jumped overboard as the triremes veered off to both sides of the mole. The transport crunched and ground up onto the end of the mole near the towers and the ropes burned through which held the naptha causing the cauldrons to tip over on the ground presumably and then catching the towers on fire as the wind picked up. Arrian's account is somewhat different. The boat is called a cattle boat. The vehicle is still ballasted heavily to the rear causing the bow to clear the water, but the two cauldrons are hoisted above the ship from two high masts they rigged a yard double the usual length. The purpose of these cauldrons here is to collapse into the boat once their ropes burn through and increase the intensity of the flame. The boat is then towed stern first by a number of triremes to land near the end of the mole. Arrian in my opinion seems more correct on most points, but seems a bit strange on the towing stern first aspect. I'm not sure where Green gets his information on this one, because Green is back at the library. I wonder why they would pull the boat stern first? When it hit the mole, it must have spun around, but I don't see the advantage. With the bow up and going bow first, the boat would likely glide up onto the mole and get further in towards the intended targets. In this regard Green seems to be more well thought out...but that doesn't necessarily mean correct. later Nicator

[marcus]

Hi Nick,I was reading the very same passage in Green at the weekend, although I didn't get as far as comparing it so thoroughly with Arrian. It was one of those things that makes perfect sense - but as you say, when compared with Arrian it doesn't necessarily hold up.I have found generally with Green that he approaches Alexander more as a novelist - he does make statements about how things were done, or even what people are thinking, without always being very clear how he reaches the conclusion. As such, he doesn't tend to argue different possibilities, but engages in polemics instead. Personally, I find that a bit dissatisfying, but his book would otherwise be about 1,000 pages, rather than 450!Ultimately, I would tend to stick more closely to Arrian where he provides enough detail, and refer to Green (and others) where what Arrian says doesn't appear to make sense.Does that in itself make sense? I dunno, it's late and I've had a long day at work :-)All the bestMarcus

[Nicator]

Hi Marcus,I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, I already wrote in Green's passage, so I had to do a time-consuming re-write. I omitted the towing aft first section, and just left it at towed with the bow above water to more easily ride up on the mole. However, the rest of it is back to Arrian. I have added some slight modifications myself to clarify all passages as I saw fit. I have done this here and there but very sparingly, and with care not to alter the story. Thanks for your quick response...later Nicator

[marcus]

Hi Nick,Since starting to read Green again, and having become more comfortable with his style and approach, I'm learning to appreciate the book more and more. But I wouldn't read it without having Arrian (and Curtius) by my side! :-)You're very kind - I shall reserve the first copy of my book for you :-)All the bestMarcus

[Nicator]

...yeah! But I want it autographed. I was more carefully reading Arrian after my initial post, and discovered that the twin masts which held the yard of double length were located "in the bows". So Green is good on this point. Now it makes more sense as to why they ballasted so heavily to the aft. When the ropes burned through and the cauldrons came down, their contents rolled from the front of the boat to the rear, thus more evenly distributing the naptha/oily flammable stuff. With those heavy cauldrons hoisted up above the bows (almost sounds like a pontoon boat with bows being plural) they probably needed to pull the boat from the stern. The Tyreans holding the tow ropes from the stern could easily release them without getting naptha splashed all over themselves and catching on fire. Very smart!

[marcus]

Crikey, Nick, you've *really* studied that, haven't you? I think I'd need to re-read Green and Arrian on this - but I'll print off your notes, too, so I can put them all together.(I'm busy immersing myself in the Gaugamela campaign at the moment, which I think you discussed a little while back. I think I'll have to do a search for the archive on that one - I've only got as far as the disposition of the armies, because at the moment the battle itself is too daunting a task ).All the bestMarcus

[Nicator]

That's kind of funny that the battle is too daunting for you, because for me the disposition of the armies is too daunting. It's a telling difference in the method of our approach. Whenever I have to put a character name in, it gives me fits. Particularly when a name may take up to 5 counts in a line which will not exceed 12 counts. I noticed that Alexander Pope had the same difficulties with his Iliad. Much of his book is condensed too far to intelligibly fit the 10 count line making the story incomprehensible. He makes up for this lack of comprehensibilty by beginning each chapter with a brief summary written in plain prose of the upcoming poetry. Sometimes he breaks into a 12 - 15 count line when ending a section. I also get the feeling that he took liberties and wrote his book with an intended audience in mind. That audience was already familiar with the Iliad, and all or most of the ancient greek writings. I guess this is a luxury which will not necessarily be afforded to me. Though, much of the book will bring in allusions to other works on Alexander which should bring a smile to the face of anyone well versed in all things Alexander. later Nicator