Romans cross the Atlantic

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

a couple of people have mentioned coffee now. How does coffee get from Ethiopia so much earlier? and why would that have any bearing on Atlantic exploration?

 

[Herzen's love-child]

a couple of people have mentioned coffee now. How does coffee get from Ethiopia so much earlier? and why would that have any bearing on Atlantic exploration?

A poster brought up the existense of a strain of coffee that is native to parts of W Africa -- namely Coffea liberica. It is talked about in depth in the thread. As well as a scenario that promotes an increased Roman presence in the Atlantic ---to set up a plausible infrastructure that might get the Romans across. However, the best minds couldn't really get the Romans to stay in the New World, even if you got them across. Which we also talk about at length.

 

[The Admiral Hook]

I got to about page three before I realized this is basically the same thread that always arises when this is brought up; I.e. Desperately trying to get Romans to purposefully colonize the Americas.

Have there been any serious and well thought out discussions about an accidental, no-return voyage by ancient Romans to the Americas in which the lost sailors change the genetic, cultural, technological, religious, and sociopolitical make up of a given Mesoamerican society?

In a couple of generations or so the partially native granchildren or great grandchildren could replicate enough technology for a return trip and establish Roman colonization and trade...

...or a very vaguely Roman native civilization could be encountered centuries later when Europeans make it to the Americas. So... basically mounted Aztec legionairres or somesuch. Maybe something in between.

That's always what I want to see when I see a Romans in the Americas thread...

Can someone link me to such a discussion or point out a page of this thread where this is discussed, please?

 

[Falecius]

I got to about page three before I realized this is basically the same thread that always arises when this is brought up; I.e. Desperately trying to get Romans to purposefully colonize the Americas.

Have there been any serious and well thought out discussions about an accidental, no-return voyage by ancient Romans to the Americas in which the lost sailors change the genetic, cultural, technological, religious, and sociopolitical make up of a given Mesoamerican society?

In a couple of generations or so the partially native granchildren or great grandchildren could replicate enough technology for a return trip and establish Roman colonization and trade...

...or a very vaguely Roman native civilization could be encountered centuries later when Europeans make it to the Americas. So... basically mounted Aztec legionairres or somesuch. Maybe something in between.

That's always what I want to see when I see a Romans in the Americas thread...

Can someone link me to such a discussion or point out a page of this thread where this is discussed, please?

Such ideas have been suggested several times, but the consensus is that a single stranded ship would have to be extremely lucky to get there with the crew alive and even more so to land them into the relatively narrow set of situations where they have chance to have major impact.
The most likely outcome of such an accidental trip is getting everyone involved dead somewhere in the Caribbean relatively quickly. Their crops, if they have any, might have hard time to grow in the new conditions (early Spanish settlers had to import foodstuffs from Spain for years, despite it being ridicolously expensive). They won't probably have any horses or any other animal actually (maybe chickens?).
They are not guaranteed to have the necessary skills in the crew.
They are very likely doomed.

 

[The Admiral Hook]

Such ideas have been suggested several times, but the consensus is that a single stranded ship would have to be extremely lucky to get there with the crew alive and even more so to land them into the relatively narrow set of situations where they have chance to have major impact.
The most likely outcome of such an accidental trip is getting everyone involved dead somewhere in the Caribbean relatively quickly. Their crops, if they have any, might have hard time to grow in the new conditions (early Spanish settlers had to import foodstuffs from Spain for years, despite it being ridicolously expensive). They won't probably have any horses or any other animal actually (maybe chickens?).
They are not guaranteed to have the necessary skills in the crew.
They are very likely doomed.

Damn, I'd love to read a tl about the effects of a lucky Roman crew...

 

[Coiler]

(I know this is from a while ago)

Just so its on the record. I reserve the right to contradict myself.

Ahem....

So, if we get to the point of establishing a Macaronesian cultural/economic/sailing complex, centered around the Canary Islands as metropolis, and with the remainder of the Islands and some part of coastal Africa as a hinterland, with the most likely configuration being a former Carthage/Cadiz colony, most likely following the 2nd Punic war as either an extremely far flung minor roman province, or a roman oriented tribute state.

Well, that gives us a sailing culture which could conceivably make it to the Coast of Brazil. The big nut to crack, as I keep saying, is getting back. The return voyage is extravagantly difficult and improbable, and almost certainly not economic.

Is there any way we can push this a little bit further? If economics don't work, what about cultural factors?

One thing that strikes me that might be at work, particularly during and lingering after the discovery phase, is 'gamblers fever.' I'm sure that there's another term for it - intermittent reinforcement. The fact that a chance pays off once in a while, or might pay off persuades people to keep playing. This is why people buy lottery tickets or throw their life savings away at a casino (well, there's also the doubling down phenomena - basically, when someone's made the mistake of throwing a lot of money down the well there's a strong impulse to keep throwing down money, otherwise you have to admit that all your time and money and effort up to that time has been for nothing).

So the continuing discovery of a handful of Macaronesian archipelagos, about 30 islands, and the potential wealth that comes from a virgin new Coffee Island probably inspires a lot of fortune seekers.

There's soothsayers giving the locations of new Islands and new fortunes, smugglers and pirates claiming that their coffee comes from previously unknown and still mysterious islands, learned men of letters proving to each other that there must be more islands out there. There's dreams, dreamers and half ass lunkheads. There's the desperate, gambling on that incredibly long shot. The ambitious seeking to make their fortune, etc.

So, during the period of exploration, they keep setting out to sea... and it works to some extent, they find the Azores and Cape Verdes.

Mostly, they just die at sea. They die a lot. Their ships founder in bad weather, they spring a leak and sink, the crew mutinies, they get lost. Basically, they die in profusion, in numbers. Many of the ships that go out don't come back. Of those that do, many come back empty handed. And a favoured few, the ones who find the Azores or Cape Verdes, might come back with something. But after that, it's a lot of dying at sea or coming back busted.

Now under those circumstances, I expect two things to happen.

Some of those who don't come back will make it to the coast of Brazil. The currents are right, the winds are right, and presumably they've brought a modicum of skill and preparation. And mostly, they die there. It's really really hard to get back.

I suppose that there's some possibility of a Phoenician settler colony composed of stranded sailors, that merges with the locals. It might last fifty or a hundred years, unless its very lucky. But I'm not going to worry about that for now.

The second thing is that the seamen who come back empty handed will come back rich in knowledge. Mostly that knowledge will be that spending three weeks bopping around the empty ocean really sucks. But there'll be a modicum of accumulated awareness of winds and currents. So it's likely that they'll figure out the Volta, and perhaps develop that as an institutional knowledge - ie, the traditions and insights that everyone defaults too.

At that point, late, very late in the age of exploration and consolidation, you might have, a really gifted and unlucky fool who ends up in Brazil, and in one of those 'Incredible Voyages' which we usually associate with team ups of wily cats and broken down dogs travelling thousands of miles to find their absent minded owners, he has the combination of hunch, competence and foolhardiness to assume that there's a way to get back into the Volta and get home... all he has to do is follow the coast far enough north...

Aaaand..... he makes it home.

Aaaaaannndddd..... nothing comes of it. It's like the circumnavigation of Africa, or putting a man on the moon. Impressive, dramatic, thought provoking, awesome... and futile.

Now, I imagine anyone who makes a journey like this is going to talk it up the wazzoo, so the stories will be amazing and epic and all that, extravagant as hell.

But he's probably not come back with his cargo hold full of trade goods. That's not sensible. Sailing in unknown territory, crossing indefinite expanses of water. Priority will go to provisions for survival, not booty to impress the hometown folk. You want to get there alive, not die in the middle of the atlantic with a hold full of gold.

There's probably a few barrels of trinkets, perhaps a small supply of chocolate as proof, things like that. But not big.

There might be some talk about more voyages, now that it's been done. The second time is easier. And there might even be visions of wealth - gold and silver, chocolate or tobacco or coca leaves as hot commodity, perhaps the rumour that the far land is the source of coffee and there's a bonanza waiting to be claimed.

And at that point, it should go nowhere. The talk will be just talk. No matter how much hypothetical wealth is out there, the difficulties of getting it back, and the exponential costs of setting up a trade network would be outside the economic capacity of the Canary metropolis. There's just not enough wealth to make that kind of investment and no real motivation to do so. In particular, the Canary metropolis might want to have a whole new supply of coffee... but on the other hand, it doesn't want competitors, or the price to collapse.

The only state that might have the resources to set up such a trade network - including posts and resupply stations, would be Rome. And there's no military or political reason to do so. It's certainly not a paying proposition. So what it comes down to is boondoggle, the senseless whim of a some crazed emperor, pouring the wealth of the state into such a venture. You'd need a lot of money, a lot of wealth and input, for very little to show for it. So the only reason it would happen would be misinformation, skewed assessments, really bad decision making and an immense fortune disposed of recklessly.

So you could, hypothetically see a Roman presence and a series of Roman outposts, way stations, trading stations and resupply depots from the coast of Brazil to the Caribbean and beyond, established and maintained at ruinous expense, so some goof of an emperor can impress his friends with chocolate malt.

That will probably last until the change of Emperors.

And its unlikely to have much of a meaningful effect. After all, Rome and China knew of each other, and there was some limited exchange through the silk road. There was some contact between Meso-American and Andean cultures. But in each case, the contact was mostly insignificant. This would be the same... only more so.

Archeologists would find a few roman trade goods in American sites. But that's about it.

Certainly on the American end, there wouldn't be much influence, save for maybe throwing a bit of Latin into the closest languages. On the European end, even if it's a huge boondoggle, I'd say there'd be many more changes. Not huge ones, but the area is still known, and still chronicled in the post-Roman world, which is going to have some effects, even if recolonization isn't going to be economically feasible for a very long time.

 

[DG Valdron]

Have there been any serious and well thought out discussions about an accidental, no-return voyage by ancient Romans to the Americas in which the lost sailors change the genetic, cultural, technological, religious, and sociopolitical make up of a given Mesoamerican society?

You might have spent some time reading posts about the currents and trade winds. There's just about no way to 'accidentally sail directly into meso-america'. At best, your accidental voyagers might end up on the Brazilian coast and coast-hug 5000 miles. So it's a colossal long shot. Colossal, Brobdingnagian, Cyclopean.

The other problem is that there's a huge span of empty ocean to cross. What are they going to eat or drink in the three or four weeks or two month that they're drifting. They weren't anticipating a long voyage, so why would they provision so heavily? During the Roman era, most Atlantic sailors stayed very close to the shorelines, didn't sail out of sight of the shore, and mostly engaged in short jaunts between known points. It would be rare to carry more than a couple of days provisions, most times, the most people would bring with them is a lunch.

The most likely outcome, really, is that they all die of dehydration or starvation long before they wash up on any shore.

That's assuming that the ship doesn't sink in a fierce atlantic storm or seasonal gale or massive sea wave, and assuming that the ship doesn't simply fall apart at sea. Even Christopher Columbus lost a ship, and his technology was pretty advanced.

How many survivors make it. 5? 10? 100? Remember the more people you want to make it, the more provisions have to be stockpiled for whatever reason for the journey. It's not likely that you'd see more than a small group, from say 1 to 20, surviving the journey.

Hmmm. Any genetic contribution is mostly going to be insignificant within three generations (1/8), and largely undetectable in the sixth generation. (1/64)

And that's only among the community of descendants, which will at best number a few hundred or a few thousand in a population of millions.

There probably not be women. It's likely that it will be all male, or 95% male.

That's a problem, because culture and language are transmitted through women. Your hypothetical romans are going to have children who speak their mothers tongue. There might be a few roman loan words... but they're not likely to be any more significant than the hypothetical Polynesian influences.

Indeed, its generally unlikely that any kind of 'Roman Culture' will persist. People in that situation invariably go native. They adopt the customs, the clothing, the means of exploiting the resources perfected by the locals. The notion of a 'Roman-esque' relic culture in Mesoamerica is more attuned to Edgar Rice Burroughs (who I love dearly) than reality.

There might be some contributions - writing and literacy perhaps is the best bet. Metallurgy is possible, its very iffy though. I'm not sure that there's a lot of portable or reproducible technology that Romans could carry over that would make it.

In a couple of generations or so the partially native granchildren or great grandchildren could replicate enough technology for a return trip and establish Roman colonization and trade...

Pretty remote, taking into account that at best, they're 'replicating' crap seagoing technology that wasn't really up to the task of deliberate travel.

...or a very vaguely Roman native civilization could be encountered centuries later when Europeans make it to the Americas.

Extremely vague.

So... basically mounted Aztec legionairres or somesuch.

Is there a serious suggestion that horses - who require fodder - would have survived the trip. How much horse fodder would that take to keep them alive? And how much human surplus food would you need to make sure that the derelict sailors don't eat all the horses?

Maybe something in between.

That's always what I want to see when I see a Romans in the Americas thread...

Given that you have a clear idea of what you'd like to see... Why don't you write it? I'm not being sarcastic. It can be a lot of work, yes. And a lot of research. And people are going to challenge you, and you'll have to overcome that.

But being creative, writing and doing the research can be one of the most rewarding things.

So don't complain about a thread not being what you wanted it to be. Write the thread that you want.

 

[The Admiral Hook]

You might have spent some time reading posts about the currents and trade winds. There's just about no way to 'accidentally sail directly into meso-america'. At best, your accidental voyagers might end up on the Brazilian coast and coast-hug 5000 miles. So it's a colossal long shot. Colossal, Brobdingnagian, Cyclopean.

The other problem is that there's a huge span of empty ocean to cross. What are they going to eat or drink in the three or four weeks or two month that they're drifting. They weren't anticipating a long voyage, so why would they provision so heavily? During the Roman era, most Atlantic sailors stayed very close to the shorelines, didn't sail out of sight of the shore, and mostly engaged in short jaunts between known points. It would be rare to carry more than a couple of days provisions, most times, the most people would bring with them is a lunch.

The most likely outcome, really, is that they all die of dehydration or starvation long before they wash up on any shore.

That's assuming that the ship doesn't sink in a fierce atlantic storm or seasonal gale or massive sea wave, and assuming that the ship doesn't simply fall apart at sea. Even Christopher Columbus lost a ship, and his technology was pretty advanced.

How many survivors make it. 5? 10? 100? Remember the more people you want to make it, the more provisions have to be stockpiled for whatever reason for the journey. It's not likely that you'd see more than a small group, from say 1 to 20, surviving the journey.

Hmmm. Any genetic contribution is mostly going to be insignificant within three generations (1/8), and largely undetectable in the sixth generation. (1/64)

And that's only among the community of descendants, which will at best number a few hundred or a few thousand in a population of millions.

There probably not be women. It's likely that it will be all male, or 95% male.

That's a problem, because culture and language are transmitted through women. Your hypothetical romans are going to have children who speak their mothers tongue. There might be a few roman loan words... but they're not likely to be any more significant than the hypothetical Polynesian influences.

Indeed, its generally unlikely that any kind of 'Roman Culture' will persist. People in that situation invariably go native. They adopt the customs, the clothing, the means of exploiting the resources perfected by the locals. The notion of a 'Roman-esque' relic culture in Mesoamerica is more attuned to Edgar Rice Burroughs (who I love dearly) than reality.

There might be some contributions - writing and literacy perhaps is the best bet. Metallurgy is possible, its very iffy though. I'm not sure that there's a lot of portable or reproducible technology that Romans could carry over that would make it.




Pretty remote, taking into account that at best, they're 'replicating' crap seagoing technology that wasn't really up to the task of deliberate travel.




Extremely vague.



Is there a serious suggestion that horses - who require fodder - would have survived the trip. How much horse fodder would that take to keep them alive? And how much human surplus food would you need to make sure that the derelict sailors don't eat all the horses?




Given that you have a clear idea of what you'd like to see... Why don't you write it? I'm not being sarcastic. It can be a lot of work, yes. And a lot of research. And people are going to challenge you, and you'll have to overcome that.

But being creative, writing and doing the research can be one of the most rewarding things.

So don't complain about a thread not being what you wanted it to be. Write the thread that you want.

I like your direct approach. Too many nice guys on this site these days. No bullshit with you. Stay golden.

I'll respond to a couple of points specifically and the whole thing generally. Firstly, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I wasn't complaining. Simply asking for a link to a realistic TL concerning what butterflies shipwrecked Romans might cause in the New World. If there aren't, then... Fuck it. Oh well. If there are, link please? It's pretty common knowledge around here that OTL's Romans probably wouldn't make it to the Americas and definitely couldn't colonize it. I like a TL in which Europeans in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries meet very different natives in the New World. I must be the only one. Again, sorry.

From maps of the trade winds and North Atlantic currents, they would be more likely to run into the Bahamas if leaving the straight of Gibraltar; Colombia or Venezuela at the southerliest. Sorry, I don't have much experience as an Atlantic sailor. You could call me rather Roman in that respect.

Am I incorrect in my assumption that horses were occasionally shipped by sea? I assumed getting horses around the Mediterranean would be done this way, because I'm unaware of any horses accomplishing such a courageous swim. A shipment of roman horses to Spain could blow off course or be pushed through to the Atlantic by riders. A horse or three could be eaten on the journey when it seems like land will never be found. Voilà! Horses and skinny but fed Romans in the Caribbean.

I can't make a TL on any of this with my lack of knowledge.

I would read yours though if you wanted to have a go. You know your shit, clearly, and making a good narrative version of this idea would keep you from shoving all your well researched factoids down my throat.

I know I sound snarky, but honestly. You write it. I'll read it, comment, and subscribe.

Thanks for the attempt at help! Looking forward to the TL if you do it!

 

[Falecius]

Damn, I'd love to read a tl about the effects of a lucky Roman crew...

I think there's been some attempts and discussions, but I know of no fully develloped TL.

 

[phildup]

I like your direct approach. Too many nice guys on this site these days. No bullshit with you. Stay golden.

I'll respond to a couple of points specifically and the whole thing generally. Firstly, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I wasn't complaining. Simply asking for a link to a realistic TL concerning what butterflies shipwrecked Romans might cause in the New World. If there aren't, then... Fuck it. Oh well. If there are, link please? It's pretty common knowledge around here that OTL's Romans probably wouldn't make it to the Americas and definitely couldn't colonize it. I like a TL in which Europeans in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries meet very different natives in the New World. I must be the only one. Again, sorry.

From maps of the trade winds and North Atlantic currents, they would be more likely to run into the Bahamas if leaving the straight of Gibraltar; Colombia or Venezuela at the southerliest. Sorry, I don't have much experience as an Atlantic sailor. You could call me rather Roman in that respect.

Am I incorrect in my assumption that horses were occasionally shipped by sea? I assumed getting horses around the Mediterranean would be done this way, because I'm unaware of any horses accomplishing such a courageous swim. A shipment of roman horses to Spain could blow off course or be pushed through to the Atlantic by riders. A horse or three could be eaten on the journey when it seems like land will never be found. Voilà! Horses and skinny but fed Romans in the Caribbean.

I can't make a TL on any of this with my lack of knowledge.

I would read yours though if you wanted to have a go. You know your shit, clearly, and making a good narrative version of this idea would keep you from shoving all your well researched factoids down my throat.

I know I sound snarky, but honestly. You write it. I'll read it, comment, and subscribe.

Thanks for the attempt at help! Looking forward to the TL if you do it!

Yup, D'Valdron is pretty formidable.

I have been working on a timeline where the Europeans do just that, meet a very different kind of Native American...the problem is that it has gained a massive scope...still, it's a WIP.

Horses were shipped by sea, but the voyage contemplated here would be unprecedented. If it was accidental, there is no way the ship would be carrying the stores to sustain the horses until landfall. Additionally, if the voyage was an intentional exploratory expedition, how would they know how much fodder to carry? The journey to the new world that they do not know even exists would be longer than anything the Romans had ever experienced, The distances are immense in their frame of reference.

Lastly, the horses would probably have had a difficult time surviving the voyage either due to illness, shortage of fodder and fresh water (they are in competition with the crew for that very heavy commodity) or predation from the starving sailors. Self preservation is far more important motive than the desire to avoid walking.

Spain, if I remember correctly, was a producer of fine horses in the Roman era.

I hope you research this and find a premise for your approach that you're able to support. The challenges and questions one gets while exploring a POD and it's ramifications are a terrific driver of research. Sometimes it even bolsters your proposition.

 

[DG Valdron]

I'll respond to a couple of points specifically and the whole thing generally. Firstly, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I wasn't complaining. Simply asking for a link to a realistic TL concerning what butterflies shipwrecked Romans might cause in the New World. If there aren't, then... Fuck it.

I don't know of any, but then I haven't gone looking. The search function here isn't that great. Your best bet would be to google it creatively.

It's pretty common knowledge around here that OTL's Romans probably wouldn't make it to the Americas and definitely couldn't colonize it.

Well, at the very least, it's pretty damned heavy lifting, I'll say that much.

I like a TL in which Europeans in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries meet very different natives in the New World. I must be the only one. Again, sorry.

Or then again, maybe there's a niche waiting for you to explore.

From maps of the trade winds and North Atlantic currents, they would be more likely to run into the Bahamas if leaving the straight of Gibraltar; Colombia or Venezuela at the southerliest. Sorry, I don't have much experience as an Atlantic sailor. You could call me rather Roman in that respect.

Ouch. I can see where you'd get that impression, but if you dig in a bit, I think you'll find that the favourable winds and currents are south and west. You want to get past the horse latitudes. So there's a general direction south, down the coast of Africa. Closest landfall is the upper Brazilian/Guiana coast. And closest landfall makes a difference. Your hypothetical castaways odds get longer against them every extra day drifting at sea. The Bahamas would be a couple of extra months.

Am I incorrect in my assumption that horses were occasionally shipped by sea?

Soitinlee, both in ancient times and in the age of exploration. Even the Vikings brought horses and cattle with them, and that must have been an experience.

But a horse needs water to drink. So you have to put aside fresh water for them. And they need to eat. So you need to put aside food for them.

Now, the rule of thumb for a horse (thank you google) is that they need to drink between a half a gallon to a gallon per day per hundred pounds, depending. So let's assume our romans are making do with ponies or little horses, say 600 pounds. Lets assume that their drinking requirements are on the minimal side, they're not moving around too much, etc. So half a gallon per day per 100 pounds - 3 gallons a day, per horse.

Lets assume a dozen horses. That's 36 gallons of fresh water a day. Lets assume that the crossing takes a month. That means you need 1080 gallons. That's just to keep the horses alive so far. A gallon of water weighs 8.34 pounds. Which means that you need 9007 pounds of water. Round it up for weight of containers because you need to keep it in containers you need between 5 and 6 tons of water in containers. That would be about 6 cubic yards.

I repeat, that's to keep the horses alive. Presumably the humans would have prior claim on the drinking water to keep themselves alive. So that 5 or 6 tons would be extra surplus provisions.

Your aggregate mass of horseflesh, calculated as a dozen 600 pound horses, would be 7200 pounds. So you'd have to load maybe a third or a quarter more weight in water than the horses.

Now, how much does a horse eat? Estimates range between 15 and 40 pounds of hay and forage a day. We're assuming little horses, and very little activity. So lets stick to the low end of that roughly 15 pounds?

So again, 15 pounds a day, lets say a dozen horses, at sea for 30 days.... 5400 pounds of hay. Okay, cool.

But remember that hay doesn't pack as dense as water does. Values for weight per volume vary. I'm assuming that the Romans didn't have the same efficiency of hay baling that we did. So let's say that hay runs 15 pounds per cubic foot. Realistically, I'd bet that Roman era baling probably doesn't go that far, maybe 10. But let's call it 15.

This simplifies our calculation. 5400 pounds of hay, divided by 15 gives us 360 cubic feet. We can assume simple storage in a special stall or hayloft or stuff like that. You don't need specialized heavy containers. That translates to 13.33 cubic yards. Which would mean you would need a space 6 feet high, 6 feet wide, 10 feet long filled to the top. That would be equivalent to the stable space of between 2 and 4 horses.

Now, space on board a ship is always at a premium. It's not unlimited. Presumably if you're shipping horses, you want to make a profit at it, not send them on an endless cruise. You want to maximize the packing of horses, and minimize space utilized on other stuff.

So what's the justification for 20 cubic yards and 12 or 13 extra tons of horse fodder and water, for that dozen horses. Particularly if you're only planning a journey of a week or less.

And again, that's surplusage, because water and food for the human crew come first.

Have I bored you?

I suppose that there's ways to get around this. A huge early mortality rate. Supposing your hypothetical ship is carrying 50 horses, and 40 of them die or are lost in the first week. Well, then you might get enough surplus left to keep the rest of them alive for the trip.

But how do you get that mortality rate early on? The castaways have no idea what they're in for. If the horses die as a result of storm damage... well, a storm that does that much damage early on... the ship won't survive the rest of the journey. Horseplague? I can see maybe if there's an outbreak of horse disease, they might not be allowed into port and forced to sail out where a storm could get them. That would give you your mortality rate early, lots of surplus for the survivors. But wouldn't the simplest option be to slaughter the lot, dump the bodies and call it a loss?

Am I boring you?

I'll stop now.

I assumed getting horses around the Mediterranean would be done this way, because I'm unaware of any horses accomplishing such a courageous swim.

Most mediteranean journeys are pretty short. An atlantic crossing is equivalent of going from Gibralter to Syria without ever putting in at port. Much more formidable.

A shipment of roman horses to Spain could blow off course or be pushed through to the Atlantic by riders. A horse or three could be eaten on the journey when it seems like land will never be found. Voilà! Horses and skinny but fed Romans in the Caribbean.

Or forty? You might also consider the effects of that much enforced confinement on horses. They're not going to be gamboling about. Most of the horse afflictions relate to confinement.

I can't make a TL on any of this with my lack of knowledge.

Research, lad, Research! The world is at your fingertips. The sum total of human knowledge is out there, and much of it is accessible through the internet at no cost and very little effort.

If its a subject that engages you... start digging. Look things up. Ask a million different questions, try as many variables as you can think of, look for analogous topics, innovate, improvise, guess and bullshit your way over the gaps.

You can do it!

I would read yours though if you wanted to have a go. You know your shit, clearly, and making a good narrative version of this idea would keep you from shoving all your well researched factoids down my throat.

I appreciate the flattery, but I work 14 hour days. I don't have time to commit to any of my major projects like Green Antarctica or Ice and Mice. So nowadays, until I can, I just noodle around with Doctor Who stuff and interesting threads.

I know I sound snarky, but honestly. You write it. I'll read it, comment, and subscribe.

No problem. I'll throw it right back. The best way to get the timeline you want to read, is to write it yourself. And people will read and follow you.

 

[phildup]

Some results of idle research...

Liquids were carried in amphorae. selecting one type at random, (because I could fine the necessary capacities) the Dressel type 1B...

Each amphora has a capacity of about 6.6 gallons (25 litres +/-) or 55.11 lbs. 177 Amphorae would be required for the horses water, 9,700 lbs. Each amphora weighs about 55lbs empty (they are pottery after all and the similarity between the weight of the amphora and its cargo is coincidental). Total weight of water and containers, 19,470 lbs.

Specifications:
Original manufacture place : Tyrrhenian coast (Etruria, Latium and Campania – Italy)
Date : late Republic period, until 10 BC
Dimensions :
- Height : 100 to 122 cm
- Diameter of the belly : 28 to 30 cm
- Diameter of the opening : 15 to 18 cm
- Height of the rim : about 6 cm
- Weight : 24 to 26 kg (empty)
- Capacity : 24 to 26 l. (1 amphora (measure) = 8 congii = 48 sextarii = about 26 l.)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amphora_Dressel_1B.svg

The ships in use at the time could carry thousands of Amphorae, so size is not an issue. a large merchant vessel could be up to 40 meters in length.

"The wreck indicates the vessel was about 40m long (35.10m remains preserved on the seabed[2]), 9m wide, and 4.5m deep with a length-to-beam coefficient of 4.4[4](if L=40m, L/W=4.4).[2] This coefficient of elongation-rate of length to width allows the ship to be much faster than those with a lower coefficient."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrague_de_Giens_(Shipwreck)

The above length to beam ratio is not quite accurate since the actual coefficient is calculated at the waterline, and would be lower.

 

[DG Valdron]

I like what you're doing here. Keep it up.

 

[Herzen's love-child]

I will state here that the peg mortise and tenon, "shell first" construction of Roman ships was not nearly as suited to the rigors of the Atlantic as the clinker built ships most famously associated with the Norsemen. Although you could build far larger ships with the former method (and the Romans indeed built some very large ships) the smaller clinker built craft were far more durable and flexible---made to survive the heavy rollers of the Atlantic which must have dismayed early sailers of the Classic Age, used to the far more benign Mediterranean.

The Mediterranean centric design tech of the former only became Atlantic-worthy when it transitioned slowly in Medieval times to the "skeleton-first" hull building that ultimately led to the Portuguese Nau or Caravel of the 14th and 15th C. This construction not only was much stronger than that of the Classic Age ships of the Mediterranean but of sufficient strength to allow for both more capacious hulls suited for more storage for longer voyages and the sophisticated sailing rigs necessary for them to operate in the Atlantic sailing environment.

 

[phildup]

I will state here that the peg mortise and tenon, "shell first" construction of Roman ships was not nearly as suited to the rigors of the Atlantic as the clinker built ships most famously associated with the Norsemen. Although you could build far larger ships with the former method (and the Romans indeed built some very large ships) the smaller clinker built craft were far more durable and flexible---made to survive the heavy rollers of the Atlantic which must have dismayed early sailers of the Classic Age, used to the far more benign Mediterranean.

The Mediterranean centric design tech of the former only became Atlantic-worthy when it transitioned slowly in Medieval times to the "skeleton-first" hull building that ultimately led to the Portuguese Nau or Caravel of the 14th and 15th C. This construction not only was much stronger than that of the Classic Age ships of the Mediterranean but of sufficient strength to allow for both more capacious hulls suited for more storage for longer voyages and the sophisticated sailing rigs necessary for them to operate in the Atlantic sailing environment.

What he said.

When you are bouncing around in an Atlantic gale you want a bit of bend in your boat, as well as twist. The few frames employed by the Romans were more of a shaping tool than a structural member.

 

[DG Valdron]

Yeah, that whole 'getting blown over by a storm' is a bad idea. A really bad storm sufficient to move the boat real fast and get it out there would likely take it apart.

So the much better option is the slow route of getting really lost and caught in currents and wind. But that takes a lot more time....

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

OK, how about this?

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=8985608

 

[phildup]

OK, how about this?

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=8985608

How long did it take for them to cross? (assuming the winds and currents cooperated...not particularly likely).

With some iron and a cargo of tin...Where did they get all that iron to trade with the Proto-Powhattan? Did they bring miners with them as well? I'm not aware of iron deposits in the Chesapeake Bay area, although there may be some. If I was a vastly outnumbered shipwrecked party in a strange land with locals of questionable intentions...I don't think I would be giving away anything as valuable and force balancing as iron...it would be more valuable than gold to me because of what it can be turned into.

Why did they have the cattle, sheep and pigs? The journey across the Channel is pretty short and I believe The Empire did not have a shortage of livestock, so would they really be importing them from Britain?

The African misadventure mentioned by Herzen in your thread is far more likely to create the result you are looking for (look at the currents and winds). It could even get you to a landing in Florida if the butterflies flap their wings hard enough...but you still need a reason for the Romans to by sailing down the African coast.