-
7/28/2019 A brief note on Baschs remarks on the 7th century
Byzantine wreck at.pdf
1/3
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY,3.2
Comparison with the ship-relief on NaevoleiaTyches tomb provides
apossible explanation ofthe vertical line which runs from near the
foot ofIsis artemon mast to a point just forward of theangle
between stempost and keel; on the tombrelief the mainmast forestay
is attached to a cablewhich runs right round the bow of the
ship,passing over the foot of the artemon mast (cf. alsoBr. Mus.
Cat. Sculpture, no. 2160).The ladder-like appearance of Isis mast
mustrepresent the banding or wooldings (Casson,s.v.)commonly
shownonRoman ship representations.The semicircle near the topof the
mast is part ofthe sheave fitting for the halyard, another
featurecommon in pictures of ships, at all periods. Theprojecting
spike above it may have carried a flag,as in Naevoleia Tyches
ship.The raised level running from abreast of thesecond mastband to
the ladder (?) astern mayrepresent the top of a cabin or, perhaps
moreprobably, the top of the raised hatch(es) coveringthe hold (cf.
Naevoleia Tyches ship). Still movingfrom bow to stern, we come next
to a curiouscontraption which I am tempted to interpret as
agangplank or ladder with (the left-hand part)steps leading down
inboard from the top of thebulwarks to deck level. The most likely
alter-native is that it represents the after end of theextra waling
piece which is common on ancientmerchant ships (e.g. the Torlonia
relief), buta. the representation in that case would becuriously
clumsy for a feature so commonlyportrayed; b. where there is such a
waling piecethe steering oars pass behind it, whereas herethey are
set some way further aft; c. the rounded,raised top would be hard
to parallel; d. picturesof ships in harbour tend to include a
gangplank-although the Costanzarelief cited above does not.S.C.
Humphreys
Aft of this there is another raised structurewhich appears to
have curves in two of its uprightsupports. Our artist is sometimes
careless, andinclined to represent parts of the ship whichwould not
have been visible (the foot of the mast,for example), but he
understood ship constructionand his curves should perhaps be taken
seriously(note the change of angle at the point where thewales
leave the curve of the stern planking forthe flat sternpost). Two
explanations of thisstructure in the stern are possible. It may be
alight wooden rail surrounding the steering-deckand passing outside
the looms of the rudder oars(the curves in the uprights
representing thelateral projection which this would require);
therail would have been hung with leather orcanvas dodgers in bad
weather. Alternatively,it may represent the top of a small
after-cabinwith a rounded porthole or doorway (cf. Torloniarelief).
I am inclined to think Isis was too smallto have such a cabin,
chiefly because of herlowered mast (perhaps c. 30-40 ft (10-12
m)overall?).The sketchy remains of the stern suggest agooses head
ornament (cheniscus) with a stern-post rising aft of it, as in e.g.
Casson: fig. 149,but certainty is impossible. This design is
ahybrid combination of the cheniscus-and-gallerystern (e.g. Sidon
sarcophagus), where thecheniscus rises directly from the end of the
stern-post, and the axe-blade form of sternpost seenon e.g. Casson:
figs 142-3. It is the deadwoodwhich is prolonged to make the
cheniscus in Isis.The name, Isis Mirionimus, must
beaphonetictranscription in Roman letters of the
GreekIZIZMYPIQNYMOZ, Isis of 10OOOnames.Isis was often called
poly6nymos-Many-Named-and myricinymos.
Departmentof History,University College,Guwer Street,London,
WC.1
A brief note on Baschs remarks on the 7th century Byzantine
wreck atY assi AdaIn a valuable and timely article appearing in
thefirst issue of this journal, Basch makes mentionof the 7th
century Byzantine ship at Yassi Ada(Basch, 1972: 49). He discusses
some salientconstructional features exhibited by the shipsremains
and deduces five basic stages in the hullsconstruction. Baschs
remarks are basedon and,for the most part, accurately reflect my
own
preliminary study of the hulls construction (vanDoorninck, 1967:
86-106). However, there are afew points of misunderstanding that
need to becleared up.Basch incorrectly states: only about one
floortimber in four is nailed on to the keel. A correctstatement
would be that only about oneframe infour was boltedtothe keel.
Moreover, most other
310
-
7/28/2019 A brief note on Baschs remarks on the 7th century
Byzantine wreck at.pdf
2/3
NOTES AND NEWSframes appear to have been nailed to the
keel.Preservation of the framing in this hull was veryfragmentary
(Casson, 1971: Fig. 164) and doesnot permit aclose estimate of how
many frameshad floors and how many did not. I should thinkit safe
to assume that floors were bolted to thekeel, but we ought not to
assume necessarilythat all of the frames nailed to the keel
werefloors, as I wrongly implied in my preliminarystudy (van
Doorninck, 1967: 94). Half-frameswere fastened to the keel in the
contemporaneousPantano Longarini ship (P. & J .
Throckmorton,1973: figs4 & 13).Four pairs of wales, two below
and two abovedeck level, girdled the sides of the hull.
Baschimplies that only the two wales below deck levelwere bolted to
frames, but the frames referred toin his footnote 50, quotation
from my study: Itwould appear more likely than not that only
thewales below deck were. ..bolted to these frames,are frames that
were bolted to the keel. Actually,our evidence indicates that all
four wales werebolted to frames. Each wale appears to have
beenbolted at fairly regular intervals to approximatelyone out of
every four frames in the hull.Basch mentions the presence of guide
(score)lines on the insides of planks nos 18 and 20,these being the
two wales below deck level. Onlytwo such lines were detected on the
lowest wale;only one, on the other. Furthermore, I am not atall
convinced that one of the lines on the lowestwale (between frames
18 and 19) has to do withmarking the intended position of a
frame.However, the other line on the lowest waleappears to have
marked the position of frame 17;the line on the other wale, the
position of frame30. Frames 17 and 30 were not bolted to eitherof
the below-deck wales, but it is likely that eachwas bolted to one
of the above-deck wales.Perhaps futtocks to which the above-deck
waleswere bolted were not fitted until after the below-deck wales
had been bolted in place.Baschs suggestion that one 02 more
framesmay have been pre-erected on the keel is nowbeing considered
during the ha1 stages of ourstudy of the hull. Such conclusions as
can bereached will be included in the final report. Forthe moment
there is only one general commentIwould like to make. Basch does
not give anyserious consideration to the possibility that the
References
first active frames employed by Mediterraneanshipbuilders were
frames not erected until afterthe assembly of the outer shell had
been begunand not necessarily fixed to the keel. Yet Ishould think
this a distinct possibility in atradition of hull construction
where both floorsand half-frames were not usually fixed to thekeel
and futtocks were not usually fixed to floors.I offer this
hypothesis as just one of anumber ofworking hypotheses that the
excavator of earlyMediterranean shipwrecks might have in mindwhile
studying surviving hull remains.Perhaps the pre-erection of
half-frames in theconstruction of the Blackfriars ship owes more
tocontemporaneous Mediterranean ship construc-tion techniques than
even A sch imagines. Wepresently have reason to suspect that the
buildersof the 4th century ship at Yassi Ada may haveerectedapair
of midship half-frames, designatedB-7 on the excavation wreck plan
(Bass & vanDoorninck, 1971: fig. 4), after only about
eightouter hull planks were in place. Beyond the eighthouter hull
plank on the port side (the starboardsideof the hull was not
preserved) the buildersappear to have intentionally avoided
placingmortise and tenon joints under and immediatelyadjacent to
where half-frame B-7 was set. Suchavoidance could have been due to
a pre-erectionof B-7. Joint tenons in the hull were fastened
inplace by dowels. These were driven from insidethe hull in all
instances where a check has so farbeen made. Pre-erection of B-7
would have madeit impossible to fasten joint tenons located
underthe frame with dowels driven from the inside.A pre-erection of
B-7 also seems to be indicatedby the way in which the forward and
after halvesof outer hull plank 20 on the port side werescarfed
together at midships. Two or three mortiseand tenon joints were
normally employed in edge-joining scarfs in the outer hull
planking, butinthisinstance one of the joints apparently was
avoidedunderneath B-7 and replaced by a pair of nails,one nail on
either side of the scarf, driven throughthe planking and into B-7
from the outside.A further examination of the hull-remains,planned
for this summer (1974), may or may notconfirm this tentative
evidence for an earlyerection of half-frame B-7. Any new evidence
orconclusions on this point will immediately bereported.
Basch, L ., 1972,Ancient wrecks and the archaeologyof ships.
Znt. J . of Naut. Archaeoi., 1: 1-33.Bass,G.F.&van
Doorninck,F.H ., r., 1971,A4th century shipwreck at Yassi
Ada.American .ofArchaeology,Casson,L ., 1971, Ships and seamanship
in the ancient world. Princeton.75: 27-37.
311
-
7/28/2019 A brief note on Baschs remarks on the 7th century
Byzantine wreck at.pdf
3/3
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY,3.2
van Doorninck, F. H., Jr., 1967, The7th century Byzantine sh@ at
Yassi Ada: some contributionsto the historyThrockmorton, P.&
J., 1973,The Roman wreck at Pantano Longarini.Znt.J . of Naut.
Archaeol.,2.2: 243-266of naval architecture.Ph.D., Univ. of
Pennsylvania; University Microfilms No. 68-4619.
Frederick H . van Doorninck, r.
TheDefense. Search and recovery, 1972-73The east of Maines
Castine peninsula was ofparticular strategic significance for the
RoyalNavy during the Revolutionary War. Castinewould serve
admirably as a base mid-way betweenNew York and Halifax, a fact
well-known to theirLordships in Whitehall. It was no surprise to
theinhabitants of the Castine area when in July 1779,Commander
Henry Mowatt arrived in theirharbour from Halifax with three small
sloops,several transports loaded with British infantry,and
commenced building fortifications.When the news reached Boston,
Massachusettsreacted by hastily assembling a military and
navalforce worth $8 million. Nearly 1500 raw militia-men were
collected, and in addition, threecontinental warships, three
Massachusetts statewarships, and a number of hired privateers,
allunder the command of Commander DudleySaltonstall. Several dozen
transports completedthe expedition.The entire force arrivedoff
Castine in mid-July,and had it pressed home an attack
immediately,the fate of Mowatts fleet and the half-finishedfort
would have been sealed. The Americanresolve was weakened by days of
delay anddissension, while the British strengthened theirdefences.
While Saltonstall vacillated, a 64-gunship and several frigates
under Sir George Collierarrived from New Y ork and put him to
flight.Saltonstalls ships fled up the Penobscot River,where most
were destroyed by their crews. Thepursuing Collier captured only
three of these ships.A number of ships scuttled in 1779
werestripped by locals over the years, and present noopportunities
for modern operations. However,the brigantine Defense of 170 tons,
owned inBeverly, Mass., by Andrew Cabot, Moses Brownand others,
which carried 16 guns and a crew of100, for 200 years lay quietly
where she sank.Since 1963, local residents have been questionedin
the hope of pinning down Colliers statementthat the Defense, in an
attempt to escape roundthe island of Islesbore, had entered the
mouth ofasmall inlet where she was destroyed by her crewto avoid
capture by HMS Camilla,then in search
Department of Classics,University of California, Davis,Davis,
California,95616, U.S.A.
of her. The location, close to the lee shore ofSears sland,
suggests that Captain John Edmondssought to obscure his vessel
against the islandtree line and to escape after dark. However,
thearrival of HMS Camillacaused her destruction at24.00 hrs.
Eventually, through the efforts ofCappy Hall, a Stockton Springs
lobsterman, thechart coordinates were obtained of a site in thelee
of Sears Island in 20 ft (6.09 m) of water,where much of his gear
had fouled on someundersea obstruction.In the summer of 1972, two
institutions, MaineMaritime Academy and Massachusetts Instituteof
Technology, were seeking a suitable summertraining project for
students of their jointlaboratory funded by the National
SeagrantProgram and the Doherty Foundation. I t wasdecided to
attempt discovery of the Defense,employing the writers 10-year-old
coordinates.The preliminary search was made using arented lobster
boat. Aboard were two divinginstructors, Capt. William Searle
(former Chief ofSalvage, USN) and Walter Lincoln (MIT teach-ing
assistant) and four student divers. The flat,muddy bottom of
Stockton Harbour indicated asonar search would be necessary. After
twomornings using sonar, followed by visualinspection by divers, a
switch was made to side-scan, using a second transducer. On the
third daysonar targets appeared, divers descended, and aships knee
was brought to the surface. Otherstudents brought up 6-pound shot,
stands ofgrape, miniature balls, decking, a bayonet, piecesof gun
carriage, blocks, sheaves and an assort-ment of bronze ingots and
lead scuppers, and agrindstone.Two-foot(0.60m) visibility at the
site preventedany plane-table survey of the wreck, but severalmajor
objects served as reference points. Amortared brick structure
extending to the keelproved to be a cooking stove. Several
cannon(some with carriages) also aided in divingorientation. The
day after the discovery, a diver-photographer, using a Nikonos
equipped with astrobe light, attempted to photograph the stove
312
