Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.
 |
| Lead Found by Darrel S. A Couple Days Ago Photo by Darrel S. |
---
You might be asking yourself why I am showing this piece of lead again. That is a good question. The answer is that it gives me an opportunity to discuss my approach to researching finds.
If you dug up this piece of metal you might quickly conclude that it is junk and toss it, or you might respond very differently and quickly conclude that is something more exciting - maybe the lead lining of a treasure chest. If you are on a TV treasure hunting show, you might be more PT Barnum than archaeologist, in which case you would hold it up and breathlessly announce that it is definitely from a treasure chest, and you know that is true because you've found hundreds of them before. No matter if you are on a TV show or not, you might hope that it is something exciting and jump to the first exciting conclusion that comes to mind. The fact is that it can be really difficult to be sure what an item like this is, so what I am going to try to present today is a very thoughtful, systematic, almost scientific way of proceeding that might be slow but will give you a good chance of coming up with a very good conclusion. The process of unraveling the identity, meaning and significance of a find can be a lot of fun as well as very informative.
It is a natural tendency to jump to a conclusion based upon your current knowledge, understanding or hopes, and then do everything you can to support that conclusion. The key to what I am suggesting today is avoid jumping to quick conclusions, but rather to question everything, seek evidence, and carefully consider whatever the evidence might suggest. It is better to start with questions rather than conclusions. Ask yourself a lot of questions and carefully weigh the evidence as it is discovered.
I'm thinking of one item I found that I posted in this blog years ago. I've changed my mind about that item a number of times, but now I feel about 95% confident that I know what it is. It took a long time to get there and I changed my mind ( that means "learned something" ) a number of times. When you learn something significant it will often cause you to change your mind.
Back to the lead item at the top of the post. Could it be the lining to a treasure chest? ( No one ever said that it was, I'm just using that as an example.) I doubt it. Why? Lead-lined treasure chests have been found before, but according to what I've read, that is not how the coins on the 1715 Fleet were shipped.
The Cargo of Coins Aboard Nuestra Señora de Atocha, or “The Treasure Chest Defined” is an article written by Corey Malcom reprinted online from The Navigator: Newsletter of the Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Vol.16 No.5, June, 2001. Here is an excerpt from that article.
From impressions seen on both the coin masses and the interiors of the chests, the coins were put into cloth bags before being boxed. The fabric appears to have been a plainweave of fairly large, crude thread, yielding a cloth quite similar to burlap. Unfortunately, none of the actual material survived. Other examples of shipwrecked coin chests are rare - in fact, only one other has been found. An example from the 1715 Nueva España fleet was recovered in 1965 off Florida’s east coast. This crate was also of a simple design, and had dimensions comparable to those from the Atocha. A length of 54.0 cm, a width of 28.5 cm, a height of 27.8 cm, and a plank thickness of 2.5 cm yielded a chest with a storage capacity of 0.026 cubic meters (0.91 cu. ft.) - approximately 60% greater than the 1622 examples. It had no apparent decoration, hinges, or lock. Somewhat differently, its sides were not beveled, but flat. No data is available for the coins carried inside. All in all though, there appears to have been little evolution in the manner of shipping coins...
What, if any part of that, applies to the lead find shown above? The article seems to suggest to me that the treasure chests, or coin crates, on the 1715 Fleet were not lined with lead. Could there possibly be any exceptions? I would think so. Who said this was from a typical coin chest? Might the hypothetical treasure chest be a passenger's personal chest and therefore be different from the typical coin chest? Again, I think that is possible, however I would also guess that finding something like that would be less likely than finding something from one of the many coin chests stored as cargo. However, I have not presented any evidence that it would have anything to do with a treasure chest or anything like that.
Dr. Lori on the Oak Island TV show suggested that a metal plate with holes in it could be from a treasure chest and everyone seemed to be very impressed. There was no analysis or evidence presented at that time. Maybe there will be some in the future. We'll see.
For more of the Malcom article, here is the link.
http://www.melfisher.org/pdf/The_Treasure_Chest_Defined_Atocha.pdf
Now that we've considered one hypothetical idea and done a little research relative to that, lets consider another idea. Could it be hull-sheathing?
We know that lead hull sheathing was used and you can see examples in the Mel Fisher artifact database. Lets look at what an authority has to say about lead hull-sheathing to see if we can learn anything.
Lead Hull-Sheathing of the Santa Margarita is another article authored by Corey Malcom and reprinted online from The Navigator: Newsletter of the Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Vol. 16, No. 1 December, 2000/January, 2001.
Here is an excerpt.
Lead sheet in one form or another has been found on other Spanish vessels roughly contemporary to the Santa Margarita. The wrecks of the 1554 fleet found along Padre Island, Texas; the 1618 Honduran fleet’s San Martín, wrecked on Florida’s East coast; the mid-1500’s St. John’s wreck, the 1559 Emanuel Point wreck in Pensacola Bay, and the wrecks of the 1715 Nueva España fleet, have all produced lead sheet which was being used to cover seams, patch holes, or guard against shipworms. The sheet from these sites is generally described as similar to that from the Santa Margarita - thin, with a cloth impression - indicating that it was all used, or created in a comparable manner...
Here is more from the same article.
The recovered lead bears many holes pierced by the fasteners that held it in place. Though none of the fasteners has survived (likely due to the aforementioned electrolysis) these holes, along with impressions in the lead, reveal the type that was used and the density of their spacing. The tacks that held the sheets to the hull had broad heads of 22mm diameter, and shanks 5mm square. They were spaced at 5-10 centimeters, with their placement tending toward the edges. The direction from which the tacks pierced the lead show that the sheets were placed with the cloth impression toward the hull, leaving a smooth exposed surface that was less friendly to adhering organisms.
You can read more of that article if you want. Here is the link.
http://www.melfisher.org/pdf/Lead_Sheathing_from_Santa_Margarita.pdf
Now we have some information that we can use to analyze the lead find. If we were holding the item we could look for holes near the edge, measure the size, spacing etc.
If you look at the photo you can see what might be a cloth impression. The reason I picked that photo is that is shows the cloth impression. The impression could esaily be over-looked or thought to be insignificant.
Some people think the impression lead sheathing was made by the lead being installed on the hull over a layer of cloth. Other people think the impression has to do with how the lead sheets were manufactured. In either case, we can see what appears to be a cloth impression. If you have any interest in this at all, I would recommend reading the entire article.
Some peope will say all of this is unnecessary. They might be able to look at the item and immediately know what it is. If they can do that, they have previously accumulated the necessary knowledge through long experience. That is great, but when you are unsure, a research thorough research process is necessary. And I would encourage anyone to avoid being "too" sure, and continuing to learn and see if there is anything they can add to their knowledge.
One book on artifacts ( I had the reference here earlier but lost track of it somehow ) strongly makes the point that in the 18th century, items were used and repurposed and reused time and time again. That would certainly be true of lead. It could be used for a lot of things and it can be very difficult to say what it was last used for. If it was sheathing, it could be kept for a variety of other purposes including being melted to make lead shot or fishing sinkers.
What I tried to do today was give you some idea of the slow process of researching a find rather than jumping to rash conclusions without sufficient continuing research. The individual resources and facts were only presented to illustrate the process.
I know that some of you will find very little if anything new or interesting in this post, but I hope some of you benefit from what I tried to show of the long slow process of researching a find.
Disciplined research and thorough analysis can be key to unlocking treasure mysteries, while jumping to premature conclusions, no matter how exciting they might seem, can delay or prevent the solution. I highly recommend an analytical scientific approach.
---
I'm eager to see what three days of north wind will do.
Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net
