Physical constraints capped ancient galley size like they limit animal weapons
Evidence
What unfolded was one of the grandest naval arms races of all time, as shipwrights struggled to add speed and power to their vessels, and each new innovation from one side was instantly copied and then bested by the other. Early galleys such as the penteconter had roughly 25 oarsmen per side, and the first attempts to add speed and power involved lengthening the hull to add more oars. But ships rapidly reached a maximum at roughly 130 feet, beyond which the hulls buckled in rough seas. By around 600 BCE modifications to the hull permitted greater height, and a second tier of rowers was added above the first, doubling the power. These new ships could pack their power into shorter hulls, which were stronger and more maneuverable than longer ships. The bireme had a wooden hull just 80 feet long and 10 feet wide, but it now housed 50 oarsmen per side, for a total of 100 oars. Triremes soon followed, with the addition of still greater height and a third tier of oars. Triremes grew to 130 feet long and 20 feet wide, propelled by 180 oars. The trireme reached a maximum, however, since increases in ship length meant buckling, and increases in ship height (for additional rows of oars) meant tipping. — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 262
Categorization
- XREF: The buckling/tipping caps are the naval analog of the biomechanical limits on animal weapon size from earlier chapters. — connects to: Ancient naval arms races ran to oversized, nonfunctional ships and collapsed; Animal weapons evolved to extremes far beyond practical size — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 2; Predator weapons stay small because larger ones hinder hunting — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 83 (+4 more)
Related
- Ancient naval arms races ran to oversized, nonfunctional ships and collapsed (similarity 0.89)
- Animal weapons evolved to extremes far beyond practical size (similarity 0.81)
- Species with huge weapons often show weak current selection on them. (similarity 0.81)
- Balanced selection keeps most animal weapons modest rather than extreme. (similarity 0.81)
- Weapons innovations trigger arms races in ships just as in animals (similarity 0.80)
- Extreme weapon size faces stabilizing, not open-ended, selection in real populations (similarity 0.80)
- Weapon size in animal species is under stabilizing selection, not open-ended directional selection (similarity 0.79)
- Predator weapons stay small because larger ones hinder hunting (similarity 0.79)
- Balancing selection normally curbs weapon size until some lineages escape into runaway arms races (similarity 0.79)
- Early human weapon points shrank rather than grew over time (similarity 0.78)
- Weapons shrink when predator pressure falls and armor gets costly. (similarity 0.78)
- Pushing siege weapons to longer range only drove artillery growth (similarity 0.78)
- Natural selection usually favors modest weapon size because cost offsets benefit (similarity 0.78)
Broader Connections
- Animal weapons evolved to extremes far beyond practical size
#contradicts(0.80) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 2 - Predator weapons stay small because larger ones hinder hunting
#expands(0.70) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 83 - Terrain and logistics prevented Mesoamerican empires from developing siege weapons
#exemplifies(0.70) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 511 - Balancing selection normally curbs weapon size until some lineages escape into runaway arms races
#expands(0.60) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 22 - Natural selection usually favors modest weapon size because cost offsets benefit
#contradicts(0.60) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 21 - Modern naval weapons cost billions and thus only wealthy nations can field them
#exemplifies(0.60) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 396