Archimedes Iron Claw was one of Archimedes’ greatest inventions. It was incredible machine, the likes of which had never been seen before and was likely never seen again after the Second Punic War. The claw was employed in the year 213 B.C.E. when Roman warships attacked the coastline of Syracuse. Archimedes employed an ingenious system of long range catapults and ballistae along with the iron claw and other machines for surprising any enemies that got within close range of the wall. Part of the genius of the iron claw is that, by Polybius’s description, it seems to have been operable by only one man while having the power to take out an entire quinquereme weighing roughly 100 metric tons.
Though it is widely accepted that the iron claw did exist in some form, no one really know exactly how it was built and there is much disagreement on the subject. However, the basic nature of the device was that it consisted of some sort wooden beam that would swing out over the battlements. Attached to the beam was some sort of grappling hook attached to a chain that would grab the ship by its prow and lift it out of the water. The ship could then me shaken violently until the crew fell into the water and subsequently dropped into the depths of the sea.
The evidence for Archimedes Iron claw comes from three ancient writings by Polybius, Livy, and Plutarch. Although none of the accounts are from people who saw the device firsthand, which may make them a bit more prone to exaggeration, the sources seem to be reliable and do not directly contradict each other. It seems likely that there may not have been any firsthand written accounts of the machine in action “Because according to Plutarch, Archimedes ‘would not consent to leave behind him ...
... middle of paper ...
... when fixed, seem to support his argument better than the proposals of those who have tried to solve the problem with significantly more complex machines.
Works Cited
Rorres, Chris, and Harry Harris. "A Formidable War Machine: Construction and Operation of Archimedes’ Iron Hand." Blackboard. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Nov. 2011. .
Young, C.. "Archimedes’s iron hand or claw – a new interpretation of an old mystery." Blackboard. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Nov. 2011. .
There were plenty of wounds discovered in the bones of Narrabeen man, but the most significant was found in his lumbar vertebra, where what seem to be a spear tip was embedded. By this finding, a statement can be made that the spear (if there were any) passed through his abdomen from the front and the side and cause significant damage to the organs inside.
In “Epameinondas, the Battle of Leuktra (371 B.C.), and the ‘Revolution’ in Greek Battle Tactics,” Victor Hanson argued that Epameinondas’s battle tactics at Leuktra were not revolutionary and thus his brief battle record reported by Herodotus was justified. Hanson broke down his argument into five parts. First, he considered Epameinondas’s innovations of considerable value. Second, he compared Leuktra and Mantineia for similarities. Third, he reviewed Xenophon’s version of the Theban battle plan. Fourth, he reviewed other historic accounts for their reliability. Finally, Hanson provided an explanation of the victory at Leuktra that required no revolutionary tactical maneuvers and followed the narrative of Xenophon.
At first glance, the picture of justice found in the Oresteia appears very different from that found in Heraclitus. And indeed, at the surface level there are a number of things which are distinctly un-Heraclitean. However, I believe that a close reading reveals more similarities than differences; and that there is a deep undercurrent of the Heraclitean world view running throughout the trilogy. In order to demonstrate this, I will first describe those ways in which the views of justice in Aeschylus' Oresteia and in Heraclitus appear dissimilar. Then I will examine how these dissimilarities are problematized by other information in the Oresteia; information which expresses views of justice very akin to Heraclitus. Of course, how similar or dissimilar they are will depend not only on one's reading of the Oresteia, but also on how one interprets Heraclitus. Therefore, when I identify a way in which justice in the Oresteia seems different from that in Heraclitus, I will also identify the interpretation of Heraclitus with which I am contrasting it. Defending my interpretation of Heraclitean justice as such is beyond the scope of this essay. However I will always refer to the particular fragments on which I am basing my interpretation, and I think that the views I will attribute to him are fairly non-controversial. It will be my contention that, after a thorough examination of both the apparent discrepancies and the similarities, the nature of justice portrayed in the Oresteia will appear more deeply Heraclitean than otherwise. I will not argue, however, that there are therefore no differences at all between Aeschylus and Heraclitus on the issue of justice. Clearly there are some real ones and I will point out any differences which I feel remain despite the many deep similarities.
...s an extremely good job at clarifying his arguments through a use of extreme detail and primary source documents.
Before the days of gunpowder, the military used large timber machines to hurl rocks, arrows and flaming barrels of tar at and into castles and forts. In ancient times, in order to prevent attacks from invaders, forts and castles are built for protection. These castles and forts had very strong walls and were sometimes placed high on top of a hill or such. Therefore, people within the military often build machines and structures to aid in attacking castles. These machines were called catapults, which didn’t use explosives like today’s military weapons, instead they used energy which was stored in bent timber and sinew, twisted ropes or heavy weights. A catapult is a machine that initially stores energy and then releases energy in order to fire a projectile. In simple terms, it is a device that is used to hurl an object to a further distance. In order to be classified as a catapult, the machine generally has to be larger than an average person, which logically makes it difficult for the said person to carry. The first catapults were early
Luvaas J., & Nelson H.W. (1987). The U.S. Army War College Guide to the Battle of Antietam The Maryland Campaign of 1862. (pg. 302). 3/21/2014
In the author 's next argument he uses a long illustration in support of a complex argument:
The Web. The Web. 23 Nov. 2013. This website gives information on events and battles that happened at the time. The "Untitled Document" is now available.
A type of weapon that was used a lot during sieges in the Middle Ages were catapults. “Catapults were a weapon used during the Middle Ages (Medieval period) in siege warfare. Catapults were devices for hurling stones or other objects” ("Catapults"). “There were many different types of catapults such as The Ballista - The Ballista was similar to a Giant Crossbow and by using tension. The Trebuchet - The massive Trebuchet consisted of a lever and a sling and was capable of hurling stones weighing 200 pounds with a range of up to about 300 yards. The Mangonel - Missiles were launched from a bowl-shaped bucket at the end of the one giant arm of the Mangonel”. ("Catapults") Catapults were used for invading Castile’s and sieges.
For using in siege warfare, people believe that catapult history began probably in the 300s AD.
Archaeology is a continuously evolving field where there is a constant stream of new branches and excavation methods. Due to the influx of new technologies and innovations in recent decades, archaeologists have been able to excavate previously inaccessible areas. For example, new diving equipment and tools such as proton magnetometers, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and miniature submarines have allowed archaeologists to dive into the deep depths of the ocean. As a result, the branch of underwater archaeology was created to search for shipwrecks and other artifacts on the ocean floor. Underwater archaeology’s role has increased in recent years as it allows archaeologists to more accurately interpret the past by supplementing information gained through traditional land excavations.
"MFAH | Top 100 Highlights | #23 - Head of Poseidon / Antigonos Doson." MFAH | Top 100 Highlights | #23 - Head of Poseidon / Antigonos Doson. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2014. .
The development of an empire is a change strongly emphasized in the Archeology as a radical departure from the Hellenic tradition, and consequently a major source of conflict among the Greeks. Prior to the adven...
With the rediscovery of the ancient cities and the objects contained within we found clay tablets with curios markings. Slowly theses markings were recognized as writing and the script, in its various languages, was laboriously deciphered. In these tablets we find the epic of Gilgamesh. Although scholars have disagreed about the meanings in the story and there have been as many versions of it as there have been translators it still has remained a historic myth.
...145).” This is a physically demanding thing to do, as he was responsible for turning the large wooden bar in order to drill it into the eye of Polyphemus. Finally, Odysseus’ slaying of all his wife’s suitors display his great strength. Odysseus and Telemachus were able to kill the dozen suitors with the help of the gods. In these instances, Odysseus does actions which most men would find physically difficult, which only proves that strength is one of his heroic characteristics.