11/1/19 Report - Variety of Dug Spikes and Some Thoughts On Why and How They Are So Often Broken. Higher Surf Today.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Broken End of Bronze Spike

The discussions of Troy's find made me wonder about broken spikes.  I started to look at the ends of some broken spikes to see what the ends looked like.   And then I started to wonder why so many of the spikes we find are broken.

Like I said yesterday, I couldn't find the specific examples I wanted but had plenty of others.   Here is a broken bronze spike.  As you can see, the broken end is just a little irregular.  I don't know how much it got smoothed down by the years in the surf, if much at all.

Below is the other end.  It appears that is the head. although there is not much of one.

Head End of Broken Bronze Spike.

Broken iron spikes appear sharper, although they are often encrusted and some of that roughness might be created by electrolysis or cleaning.

Uncleaned Encrusted Iron Spike.

It seems to me that iron spikes are often heavily encrusted - more than bronze spikes.  I found the one above when looking for a similar one that I already cleaned.

Double-Clinched Spike and Broken Iron Spike.

The iron spike on the right in the photo above is a broken iron spike that has already been cleaned.  You can see how sharp the break is.

Bronze is stronger than simple iron, but weaker than carburized iron.

It is amazing to me that so many spikes break like that.

Here is a bronze rod that broke in two places.

Opposite Ends of Spike Broken Twice.

One end of the broken bronze rod shown immediately above is very smooth while the other end is more irregular - more like I would rightly or wrongly expect.  The end shown on the left is kind of scooped out.

Bronze is more dense and brittle than iron, and iron is more easily bent.  It also melts easily in a pot over a fire, so it might get smoothed out by any burning after a wreck.

Here is the photo of spikes found by Jerry P. that I showed yesterday.

Variety of Spikes Found by Jerry P.

In the above photo you will see broken spikes that appear to be very much like the one I just posted.

In the top left grouping, you see three that appear to be broken at nearly the same length.

Shipwreck spikes can either go completely through or the end can be hidden in the wood.  Those that go through are often clenched over.

While often appearing on the boat or ship as ‘straight nails’ to finish with their ends ‘short’ or ‘blind’ within or beneath timbers; large nails—that pass ‘straight’ through frames and strakes—can be found with the projecting end bent once, to become ‘turned nails’ (single-clenched) or twice to become nails that are ‘hooked’ (double-clenched), back into the timbers. Sometimes nails are hooked over quadrilateral washers called roves. They also appear in the lapstrake or clinker form, though this tradition exhibited a once unique form of clenched fastening, the lapstrake rivet. This was a nail with its projecting end nipped off after it passed through the strakes, to be peened or deformed over a rove.*  

*(See http://www.maritimearchaeology.com/information/reference/fastenings/)

Back to my original question, "Why are so many dug shipwreck spikes broken and how does it happen?"

Notice the two-piece bent spike in the upper left of the illustration of Jerry P's spikes.  That might provide a clue to one way spikes get broken.

I made a little illustration using Jerry's photo.

How Spike Can Get Bent When Two Beams Pulling Apart

The illustration above shows how I think a spike might get bent and broken by beams pulling apart either during wrecking or salvage.

I think the most likely breaking point is at the bottom of the straight segment.  It might break there either when the beams pull apart or later after being exposed.

Below is another image of a bent broken spike.

Bent Broken Spike.

Here is another way I think spikes might get broken.  Some spikes are clinched spikes.  They are bent over where the point protrudes from the wood.  I think a clinched spike might tend to break where it was bent over, perhaps when the bottom piece of wood gets pulled away.

Some spikes are doubled clinched.  I showed one of those above.  That one did not break at the bend, but the head was pulled through instead.

If you look at the double clinched spike, it looks like a weak point has been formed at the end of the vertical straight segment.  It looks like it could easily break there.


Here are some excellent thoughts on the subject by Joe D.


I am guessing that spikes could break, and bend for several reasons!

#1- Ships wrecked, and breaking up!

#2- Removal for salvage by sailors or Indians, twisting the boards apart on shore!

#3- Heating from ship's fire or, being worked!


Troy's item could have been repurposed after breakage, or just "sea polished" after years in the ocean! The few spikes i have are from an 1800's wreck aren't quite as smooth as his!

All conjecture of course!

Thanks Joe.

If you have an additional thoughts on how and why so many spikes get broken, let me know.

---

The National Hurricane Center map is showing a little activity.

Source: nhc.noaa.gov

Could we get aThanksgiving storm like the legendary storm of 1984.  Some chance, but very slim.

Today we should see a higher surf and the wind coming from the north for a short time.

Source: MagicSeaWeed.com.

The tides will be decent too.

Happy hunting,
Treasureguide@comcast.net

2/25/18 Report - The Problem With Archaeology: The Perspective of a Supportive Citizen.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Not long ago I posted an irresponsible quote by an adjunct in the TAMU Nautical Archaeology program about treasure hunters being no better than ISIS. Unfortunately that nonsensical quote is symptomatic of a larger problem. even though I'm assured by blog readers that have had personal contact, that full-time faculty members of that institution are more reasonable. I would expect that to be the case.  You can get away with radical statements in a classroom of young people who have to put up with all kinds of craziness to get their academic degree, but irresponsible statements can damage the reputation of a university and the cause of a noble profession. 

Today I'll start by taking a look at a chapter written by Wilburn "Sonny" Cockrell (deceased 2014), a pioneer maritime archaeologist who served as the Florida underwater archaeologist and taught at FSU.  The chapter was published in the book Maritime Archaeology: A Reader of Substantive and Theoretical Contributions, edited by Lawrence Babits and Hans Van Tilburg.  (See link below)

Here is an excerpt from the chapter in which Mr. Cockrell pondered why a treasure hunter's position was better received by the public and host of a TV show than the argument presented by an archaeologist's that appeared on the same show.

This post could go on for a long time but I'll try to keep it short and to the point.  I think it was Mark Twain that said something like, "I would have written a shorter letter, but I didn't have time."  It takes time to boil things down and present a point concisely and clearly.

The Society of American Archaeology web site says, "An archaeological site is any place where physical remains of past human activities exist." (See link below.) That is almost everywhere! Can we get some sanity from the archaeological community? When we hear archaeologists say that treasure hunters are no better than ISIS and the whole world is an archaeological site, it is not difficult to see that there is a problem. And those statements, whether they come from one extreme adjunct or an entire society, tell a lot. 

Archaeology needs to make realistic and practical distinctions. If you read Mr. Cockrell's chapter, you will see that he realized that archaeology was not winning the public debate and he was trying to come up with some realistic boundaries to define the limits of what was considered to be "acceptable" archaeology. He listed several criteria. Those criteria included the age of the shipwreck or submerged site, provenience, legality, professionalism and disposition of the artifacts. You can read that for yourself if you wish.  To give just one example, older wrecks were considered to be more properly the subject of archaeology than recent wrecks.  That is not surprising.  What is surprising is that it needs to be stated because of the feeling given by archaeology that nothing less than the entire world of man-made objects belongs to them.  No reference to age, one of the easiest of all distinctions to make, was included in the SAA statement  I know it is just one sentence and you can't include everything you might want to say in a single sentence, but wittingly or not, the statement represents an underlying attitude.  No one can reasonably claim that every place where there are remains of past human activity is an archaeological site, yet archaeologists, whether they say it or not, act and talk as if it was true.  The Society of American Archaeology came very close to saying it straight out and probably didn't realize the far reaching implications, including alienating the public who they claim to serve and at the same time rely on for support.

Archaeology claims to save the past for the public, but continually demonstrates that they do not trust the public.  Instead of saving the past for the public, they act as if they are saving the past from the public.  Archaeological sites are off limits and kept secret from the public.  Site files are not published and research reports are published only in academic journals and expensive books rather than being made easily available on the internet for the public.

If archaeology really wants sensitive sites to be protected, they should widely inform and involve the public.  Then they would have thousands of caring eyes watching over those sites.   

If archaeology wants to make discoveries, they would work with the public.  The vast cloud of informed eyes (not to mention metal detectors) would make new discoveries.  That has been demonstrated by England's Portable Antiquities Scheme.  An informed participating public would provide the best protection as well as the discovery of many important new sites. 

Here are some of the results of a poll that I conducted.

Of the 117 respondents, only 6 (5%) indicated that they had ever seen items that were in the Florida Collection.  The Florida Collection, as the Division of Historical Resources states, is to preserve Florida's history for the public, yet only a small percentage of the most interested citizens have seen it.

I also found that about ten times more blog readers have seen the privately owned and operated Fisher treasure museums than have seen the items in the Florida Collection."  This suggests that "treasure hunters" actually better serve the public than academic archaeology and our government agencies.  

Archaeology mistrusts and alienates the public.  On top of that, some of their group makes very irrational and extreme statements, which does not help their cause.

Not all the world can be treated as an archaeology site.  As Mr. Cockrell's chapter suggests, there are bounds in practice and reason.  There are more sites and shipwrecks than can ever be studied. 

Archaeology needs to better define what sites are important and worth studying.  As it is, some would have you believe that every site, every shipwreck, every nail, every thing that could possibly be studied should be studied and protected, and every study yields something immensely important. The fact is that much of the evidence of the human past is not in a meaningful context, highly redundant, and most importantly, will never add any new knowledge of significance.  Archaeology needs to complete the job that Mr. Cockrell started and define boundaries.  They need some well defined goals and priorities, and to get over their paranoia.  They should also alienating the public that would eagerly support them if they were more reasonable and inclusive.


References

Here is the web site of the book in which Mr Cockrell's chapter appears.

https://www.amazon.com/Maritime-Archaeology-Substantive-Theoretical-Contributions/dp/0306453312


Here is the web site of the Society for American Archaeology.
http://www.saa.org/Default.aspx?TabId=1346



Have a blessed Sunday,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net

7/9/15 Report - Swimming Beach Finds Today. Gold Spirals. Question For Maritime Archaeology.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Couple Finds From This Morning.

I hope you enjoyed looking at the finds made by the crew of the Capitana.  Today I'll get back to the beach.

People have evidently been going to the beach on these hot days. There are a good number of recent loses out there.  Most everything I've been finding is shallow, including a fair number of modern clad coins.  They look like they haven't been out there very long at all.

The sandy beach conditions aren't good, but at least there is the modern stuff to find.  A lot of junk jewelry though, and some good jewelry.

The rings to the left were found this morning.  The picture isn't great.  The ring on the left is 14K white gold.  The picture makes it look discolored.  It isn't.   .175 troy ounces.  I see from the picture that it still had sand on it too.

Recovery of most targets has been easy due the shallow depth.  No need to dig deeper than necessary.  If you can tell a target is shallow, don't over dig.

The surf was a little higher this morning than I expected.  It was about two feet I would say.  The surf predictions say that we'll have a few days of two foot surf and then back to one foot again.

The sand on some beach fronts is really packed good.  The fine sand continues to accumulate.  If it wasn't for the recent drops, targets would be pretty scarce.

Treasure Coast Beach This Morning Near Low Tide.

You can learn to identify a lot of targets with a PI detector from the signal.  Fish hooks are very distinct.  It just takes practice.

It is a good idea to switch hunting modes.  If you have a favorite mode, you can use it a lot, but you'll benefit from using any other modes you might have once in a while.  If you really get to know another mode, you might find that it has some benefits that can be put to good strategic use.

I was using motion mode first this morning, but before finishing and after getting a lot of the targets out of the way, I rechecked the area using non-motion mode.  The signals are very different in the different modes.  It took me along time to get accustomed to using motion mode, now I'm just as comfortable with it.

There are times for each.  It can be almost like using two completely different types of detectors.

---

Bronze Age Gold Spirals Found

The Danish National Museum announced on Wednesday that archaeologists have uncovered a trove of gold spirals that may have been used for religious ceremonies during the Bronze Age, when the Danes’ ancestors worshiped the sun.

The spirals were recovered from a site that had been excavated before, where a team found four gold bracelets. Amateur archaeologist Christian Albertsen offered to continue searching the area on behalf of the local West Zealand Museum, believing there was more to be found – and he turned out to be right.

The some 2,000 gold spirals that were found have been dated as originating between 900-700 B.C...

Here is the link for the rest of that article.

http://www.thelocal.dk/20150708/danish-archaeologists-make-huge-bronze-age-find

---

Unlike our state archaeologists, who seem to think that everything 40 years old is important enough to protect from the citizens of the state (and that is reflected in our laws), some in archaeology have actually questioned the idea that any and every item having a little age is actually archaeologically important.

William Baker, in a chapter he wrote for a book bearing the title Maritime Archaeology, actually points out that "most relatively modern unidentified ship finds" are of no importance to anybody other than what might be salvaged and sold.

You might want to take a look at this preview of his chapter, which is entitled The Technical Importance of Shipwreck Archaeology.

Here is that link.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4899-0084-5_3#page-1

I think I had the entire chapter online one time but can't find it now.

----

Well, like I said, conditions aren't good, but you will find some stuff at the swimming beaches these days.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net

6/8/15 Report - Treasure Coast Salvage Crew Making Finds. Cultural Wreck Site Formation Processes in Maritime Archaeology.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Cannon Ball Found by Bill B. 
On the Salvage Vessel Capitana..

While finds for beach hunters along the Treasure Coast have been meagre, the salvage crews have been doing well.  Captan Jonah and the crew of the Capitana have made some nice finds.  This cannon ball is one of those.  They also just  found an olive jar bottom and musket ball.  They are on the Treasure Trail.

Other Treasure Coast salvage crews are making finds as well.  Maybe I'll have some photos from them soon.

I wonder what most beach hunters would do if they got a signal from a cannon ball like that?  I'd bet most would never dig it.

Thanks to Captain Jonah and the crew of the Capitana for sharing with us.

----


A couple of weeks ago or so I referred to a couple of academic papers about shipwrecks and old abandoned ships in northwest Florida.  I told you to check the references at the end of such papers.  One of the references that I found in one of those papers was about cultural site formation processes in maritime archaeology.  It was written by M. Gibbs and is found in The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (2006).

Here is the link.

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Gibbs/publication/227714075_Cultural_Site_Formation_Processes_in_Maritime_Archaeology_Disaster_Response_Salvage_and_Muckelroy_30_Years_on/links/53e0ad390cf2d79877a4deeb.pdf

This article might not seem very relevant at first to some of you, but if you read it and really think about it, there are some very practical and useful ideas that you will get from it.  If you have some good experience hunting shipwreck items, I think you'll benefit by reading this and mulling it over.

I haven't taken the time to really organize this post well yet.  I've put off posting on this for some time, hoping to get it digested and better organized, but that hasn't really happened yet.  I'm afraid that it would take me a lot more time, so I'm going to go ahead and post a bit of it hoping that you can take it from there for yourselves.

First off, here are some useful terms from that paper.

I don't know how often detectorists think about flotsam. Maybe not enough.  Prior to a wreck items can be jettisoned.  Some will float, including maybe crates or containers containing items that would not float on their own.  Those items might end up hundreds of miles from the wreck site.  They can be jettisoned long before the ship sinks and then float with the currents.

Other items could be tied to a raft or otherwise buoyed with the hope of later recovery.

I suppose it would normally be near impossible to predict where some of those types of things might end up, unlike items that sink more quickly.

Here is an interesting figure from the Gibbs paper.

I won't get into detail on this.  I'm just not prepared to do that yet.  I suggest going to the original article if you want more detail or explanation.

The above figure diagrams several points and processes leading to the eventual observed seabed distribution of a wreck and associated items.

There are what might be called catastrophic wrecks, which occur as a result of a crisis such as a hurricane, for example, and then there are wrecks that are more controlled or intentional, such as running a leaking ship aground.  And then there are abandoned ships such as some of those in Northwest Florida that I mentioned  a couple of weeks ago.

Wrecks are often salvaged at various different times and to different extents.

Here are four types of materials that would be associated with a shipwreck.  They are also listed in a figure in the Gibbs paper.

Cargo and Contents: Non-fixed items not associated with the mechanical operation of the ship and which were meant to be removable, including the ship’s boats and life-rafts. 

Fixtures and Fittings: Minor fixed items, fittings, yards, chains, ropes, anchors and cannon, minor mechanical items and equipment. 

Minor Structural: Items not normally removed, but whose removal would not compromise the integrity of the hull, such as bulkheads, decks, masts, superstructure, major mechanical items and equipment. 

Major Structural: Elements of the ship whose removal would affect the integrity of the vessel, including hull planking, ribs and other structural items.

If you consider the various stages that Gibbs presents in detail, you might have a better understanding of a wreck site.

I was thinking of two important variables that might be simply described as cost, or risk, and value.

The first items to be salvaged would be high value items that are relatively easy to salvage with little risk.

The higher the risk, though, the less would be salvaged.  Deep sea wrecks are little salvaged, while wrecks in shallow water might be extensively salvaged immediately after the wreck.  The Wedge wreck off of Pepper Park is an example of a wreck that was well salvaged relatively soon after the wreck and then picked over years later until little remains.

When the opportunity occurs less valuable and items that are more difficult to salvage are salvaged.  That can occur over a period of centuries as we all know.

Both catastrophic wrecks and abandoned wrecks will progressively deteriorate due to both natural and human causes.

I didn't take the time to put this together well, I just threw few things out there for you.  I just put enough out there to give you some idea if you might want to go ahead and study the original paper for yourself.

As I think about this and get it digested, I'll might expand on this post in the future.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net