Page 1

DREDGERS AND ARCHAEOLOGY: Shipfinds from the Slufter


N, \1

DREDGERS A N D ARCHAEOLOGY Shipfinds from the Slufter

J. Adams A. F. L. van Holk Th. J. Maarleveld

Archeologie onder water,

2e onderzoeksrapport Ministerie van Welzijn, Volksgezondheid en Cultuur

Alphen aan den Rijn 1990


Grootschalige locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied.

Initiative: Gemeente Rotterdam Rijkswaterstaat Provincie Zuid-Holland mei 1990

Two versions of this report, fitting in different series and thus with different covers but otherwise indentical are published by: Projectorganisatie Grootschalige locatie Gemeente Rotterdam Rijkswaterstaat Provincie Zuid-Holland

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY Grootschalige locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied Correspondence: Dienst van Gemeentewerken Galvanistraat 15 Postbus 6633 3002 AP Rotterdam Afdeling Archeologie Onder water Ministerie van Welzijn, Volksgezondheid en Cultuur as OREDGERSANDARCHAEOLOGY Shipfinds from the Slufter ISBN 90-800467-1-X This second version can be ordered by giro transfer of dfl. 45.- (plus dfl. 5.-for postage and handling) on girobank accountnr. 374082 Afdeling Archeologie Onder water Eikenlaan 239 2404 BP Alphen aan den Rijn Supporters of the Glavimans Stichting are granted a dfl. 10.- discount.


Summary Samenvatting Introduction PRELIMINARY RESEARCH 1.

Preliminary archaeological survey of t h e Slufter p r o j e c t 1.1 Objectives 1.2 Introduction to the area 1.3 Geological survey 1.4 Historical information 1.5 Potential for archaeological sites 1.6 Conclusions and a line of action 1.7 Changes in planning


Wrecksite S L 1 1.1 Circumstances of discovery 1.1.1 The first hit 1.1.2 Preliminary assessment 1.1.3 Adjustment of the order of sand extraction 1.1.4 On-site inspection 1.2 Description of the recovered remains 1.2.1 The ship 1.2.2 Ship's fittings 1.2.3 Associated finds 1.3 Analyses 1.3.1 Dendrochronological analysis 1.3.2 Caulking and luting materials 1.4 Evaluation 1.4.1 The site 1.4.2 The ship


Wrecksite S L 2 2.1 Circumstances of discovery Description of the recovered remains 2.2 2.3 Analyses 2.4 Evaluative considerations


Wrecksite S L 3 3.1 Circumstances of discovery Description of the recovered remains 3.2 3.3 Analyses 3.4 Conclusions


Wrecksite SL 4 4.1 Circumstances of discovery 4.1.1 The first hit 4.1.2 On-site inspection 4.1.3 Considerations and decisions 4.1.4 Clearance 4.1.5 Renewed considerations 4.2 Description of the recovered remains 4.2.1 The ship 4.2.2 Ship's fittings 4.2.3 Associated finds 4.3 Analyses 4.3.1 Wood species 4.3.2 Dendrochronological analysis 4.3.3 Caulking and luting materials 4.3.4 Copper alloys 4.3.5 Coal 4.4 Evaluation 4.4.1 Introduction 4.4.2 The site 4.4.3 The ship and its construction 4.4.4 Developments in ship construction 4.4.5 Historical setting of ship and ship type 4.4.6 The cargo 4.4.7 Date of shipwreck 4.5 Conclusion


Wrecksite SL 5 5.1 Circumstances of discovery 5.2 Description of the recovered remains 5.3 Analyses 5.4 Discussion


Wrecksite SL 6


Miscellaneous finds



Dredgers a n d archaeology


Objectives a n d planning




G e n e r a l a p p r o a c h a n d limitations 4.1 Formal setting 4.2 Technical scope 4.3 Methods


Results 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Direct results 5.2.1 Shipping and shipbuilding 5.2.2 Wrecksites and site formation 5.2.3 Geology and geographical history 5.3 Experience




Appendix I Appendix I1 Appendix 111

Introduction to dendrochronological analysis Selection of historical documents that are relevant to the study of the ship at SL 4 Conservation and artefact filing

157 161 167



Verklarende woordenlijst

18 1






In September 1987 the Slufter, a large scale disposal site for contaminated dredged material adjacent to the Maasvlakte was put into use. Its realization had taken eighteen months of dredging and construction and many years of preparation. Through its realization the environmental problems of the storage of contaminated material which must continuously be dredged from the channels and basins of the port of Rotterdam in order to guarantee its accessability, were alleviated for the mid term. This, however, was not its only result. A work of this magnitude has many side-effects. Most of these were thoroughly studied in advance and an Environmental Impact Statement [E.I.S.] was part of the decision-making procedure. The present report deals with archaeology, an aspect which was not considered at the time but which has been given ample consideration since it was pointed to at the end of E.I.S. procedure. Realization of the Slufter inter alii implied that 37 million m' of sediments which had been deposited in the outer delta of the RhineIMeuse estuary would be moved and thus loose their original integrity. On the face of it this may not seem very significant. However such earth-moving will also obliterate any data relating to the formation of the area which can be derived from its original stratigraphy as well as any data or remains relating to its former use by man. It is an aspect which will easily attract attention whenever visible remains and monuments outcrop at the surface but which is of equal importance when the cultural heritage is buried in deep sediments. To accomodate for archaeology - for preservation of the cultural heritage - in a large-scale dredging project is not an easy task. One of the main problems in planning is that the cultural values involved are not known in advance. Paradoxically it is just the fact that any vestiges and remains are undisturbed and thus unknown that determines their potentially great value. In the Slufter project this basic problem was considerably reduced by a preliminary survey.


It did not predict what would be found during construction, but it indicated possibilities as well as sensitive areas. On the one hand it showed large sequences of sediments to be archaeologically sterile, thereby considerably reducing the extent of sediments deserving archaeological attention. On the other hand it opened the possibility to set priorities by making the archaeological potential explicit. A line of action deployed on the basis of this preliminary survey set the terms for appropriate action to various kinds of discovery: archaeological attention would be focused on shipwreck-sites; wreck-sites related to a navigation channel which had passed North of the area from medieval times onwards were deemed to deserve more care than wreck-sites relating to a channel to the South which came into use in the 18th century; wreck-sites containing considerable remains in structural cohesion were deemed to deserve more attention than dispersed sites; all on-site archaeological work had to be practicable and reasonable within the limitations set by the construction project; it would be made possible by a flexible approach to the order of construction; overall delays had to be avoided but optimal opportunities for on-site observations would be created by tackling the most sensitive areas first. In this dynamic set-up it was essential that a quick assessment of any discovery could be made by on-site archaeological staff. The principle aim of the archaeological endeavour was to document what would otherwise be lost. Although the preliminary survey and the line of action were completed in advance of the actual start of construction, no agreement had been reached as to which authority was to bear the extra cost of the archaeological survey. A factor which indubitably explains

part of the reticence at this stage was the lack of tangible evidence referred to above. The municipality of Rotterdam provided the most necessary means in advance after the first wreck-sites had actually been found. While sketching the preparatory phase as well as outlining the difficulties encountered the present report is mainly concerned with the archaeological documentation and research as such. In total six wreck-sites were discovered in the dredged area. One site [SL 21 might be of medieval date, the others are younger. Subsequent research proved three sites [SL 1, SL 3, SL 51 to have formed after the same wrecking event, even though they are over 1 km apart. The remains discovered indicate a medium sized vessel which wrecked late in the 18th century. Its study and recording showed interesting detail in the construction of this typical Dutch-built vessel. Part of its fittings, rig and inventory could also be documented. A slightly younger wreck was found at site SL 4. It was preserved virtually complete and must have gone down during or around the 1840's. In the light of its relative young date, the complexity of excavating a complete ship and the priorities set in the line of action the site as such was abandoned archaeologically. However the study of a large hull section which was raised during clearance operations proved most rewarding. It showed a vessel of north-eastern English build engaged in the coaltrade with Rotterdam. Although quite common in its day it represents a class of vessel on which historical data is far from complete. Its study provides detailed and accurate information on its construction. Integration of these archaeological data in the aggregate knowledge of early 19th century shipbuilding and the collier-trade showed it to be particularly rewarding with respect to constructional detail and a better understanding of long term development. For one thing it provided information on aspects that were never written down. For another it provides a valuable means of cross-checking between historical documentation where it appears to be comprehensive and reality as demonstrated by the archaeological remains. It shows assertions to be generalisations or simply incorrect. It also elucidates aspects which are equivocal in the archival record. By providing a clue to historical documents it thus augments our knowledge of early 19th century shipbuilding far more than one might anticipate. However the main purpose of the archaeological work during the realization of


the Slufter was documentation, and documentation is its main result. This applies to the sites mentioned in this summary as well as to the other dispersed discoveries. Both the scale of the project and the attempt to integrate measures for archaeological recording into its organisation are unusual. All in all it resulted in new information on shipping and shipbuilding, wreck-sites and site formation as well as the geology and the geographical history of the area. All this information would have been lost if no attempt had been made to document it. Although far from advertising dredging as an archaeological technique the report concludes that dredgers and archaeology should not be treated as two incompatible phenomena. Wherever there are clear indications that [as yet unknown] archaeological values are threatened by large scale marine engineering this should be taken into consideration. A preliminary survey, a clear line of action and priorities set in advance will make an effort for archaeological documentation quite manageable and will considerably reduce the risk of unanticipated discoveries. If sensitive areas are to be dredged the experience of the Slufter-project has shown that flexibility and a few basic requirements for timely assessment and recording may safeguard valuable information. However, there should be agreement in advance on the way in which the unavoidable costs will be met.


Aan de westzijde van de Maasvlakte is in zee de Slufter aangelegd, de grootschalige locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedeizrivierengebied. Na vele jaren van voorbereiding en achttien maanden baggeren en bollwen kon deze stortplaats in september 1987 in gebrurk worden gesteld. Er is daarmee voor de middellange termijn een milieuhygieniscl~verantwoorde oplossing gekomen voor de problemen van her-ging van verontreinigd havenslib dat bij voortduring uit de Rotterdamse havens moet worden gebaggerd om deze op diepte te houden. Dat is echter niet het enige resultaat, want een werk van deze omvang heeft vele neveneffecten. In de voorbereidingsfase zijn veel van deze aspecten onder de loupe genomen en in de besluitvormingsprocedure was een milieu-effectrapportage [M.E.R.] opgenomen. Het voorliggende rapport is gewijd aan de archeologie. Dat is een aspect dat indertijd buiten beschouwing is gebleven, nlaar dat ruime aandacht heeft gekregerz sinds het 01) 11et eind van de M.E.R.-procedure onder de aandacht is gebracht. De aanleg vaii de Slufter betekende onder meer dat 37 miljoen m3sediment in de voordelta vaii Rijn en Maas zou worden vergraven en daarniee zijn oorspronkelijke samenhang zou verliezen. Op het eerste gezicht lijkt dat misschien niet zo bijzonder, maar door dat graafwerk wordt ook alle iiiforniatie uitgewist die men aan de grondlagen kan ontlenen. Enerzijds gaat lzet daarbij on? informatie over de opbouw en het ontstaan vaii het gebied zelfen anderzijds om spore11 en overblrj~selendie inzicht kunnen verschaffen over de wijze waarop de mens het gebied in vroeger tijd heeft gebruikt. Het zijn aspecten die onmiddellijk in het oog springen wanneer er overblijfselen en n~olzumentenaan ket bodemoppervlak zichtbaar zijn, maar die van even groot belang zijn wanneer het cultureel erfgoed schuil gaat onder dikke lagen sediment. Bij grootschalige zandwinning rekening houdeiz met de archeologie - met als doe1 het cultureel erfgoed te behouden - is geen gemakkeljke taak. Vooral het feit dat niet van


te voren bekend is om welke culturele waarden het gaat, maakt het bijzonder lastig. Paradoxaal genoeg draagt juist het feit dat de sporen en resten voorheen onberoerd zijn en dus princ~pieelonbekend, in belangrijke mate brj aan de potentiele archeologische waarde van het gebied. Bij het Slufter-project is dit zoveel mogelijk ondei-vangen door een vooronderzoek. Hoewel niet in detail kon worden voorspeld wat er gevonden zou worden kon we1 worden aangegeven wat de mogelijkheden waren en welke gebieden bijzondere aandacht behoefden. Van grote pakketten afzettingen kon worden vastgesteld dat deze vanuit archeologisch oogpunt als steriel konden worden beschouwd, waardoor het aandachtsgebied aaizzienlijk kon worden verkleind. Bovendien maakte het vooi-onderzoek het mogelijk om prioriteiten re stellen, doordat het inzicht gaf in het archeologisch potentieel. Op basis van het vooronderzoek werd een plan van aanpak opgesteld, waarin bepaaald werd wat er re doeri stond bij welk type ontdekking: de aandacht van archeologische zijde zou worden beperkt tot scheepsvondsten; aan eventuele scheepsvondsten die in verband konden wordeii gebracht met de vaargeul die vanaf de Middeleeuwen aan de noordzijde lungs het gebied had gelopen zou meer aandacht worden besteed dun aan scheepsvondsten die verband houden met de zuidelijk gelegen geul, die in de 18e eeuw irz gebruik is genomen; er zou meer aandacht worden besteed aan vindplaatsen met grote delen van een scheepsromp, dun aan vindplaatsen met verspreid, 10s materiaal; het archeologisch veldwerk diende doeltreffend te zijn en praktisch uitvoerbaar binnen de beperkingen van het project; het veldwerk zou mogelijk worden gemaakt door plooibaarheid en

flexibiliteit in de volgorde van de zandwinning; vertraging in de totale uitvoering van het werk diende te worden vermeden, maar optimale condities voor het doen van archeologische waarnemingen zouden worden geschapen door de belangrijkste gebieden het eerste aan te pakken. In deze clynamische benadering was het van essentieel belang dat iedere ontdekking onmiddellijk ter plaatse op waarde geschat kon worden door archeologen. De voornaamste doelstelling van de archeologische inspanningen was om vast te leggen wat anders verloren zou gaan. Het vooronderzoek en het plan van aanpak waren voltooid voordat met de aanleg werd begonnen, maar er was geen overeenstemming over de vraag welke instelling de kosten zou moeten dragen die met het archeologische onderzoek waren gemoeid. De terughoudendheid die in dit stadiunl werd betracht valt zonder twijjel voor een deel te verklaren uit het feit dat tastbare aanwijzingen ontbraken, een prohleem waar hierboven a1 op werd gewezen. Nadat de eerste historische schepen daadwerkelijk waren gevonden heeft de gemeetzte Rotterdam de meest noodzakelijke financien ter heschikking gesteld. Hoewel rle voorbereidingen, maar ook de moeilijkheden die het hoofd moesten worden geboden in grove lijnen worden geschetst is dit rapport eerst en vooral gewijd aan de archeologie zelf, de documentatie en het onderzoek. In totaal werden tijdens het werk op zes plaatsen sclzeepsresten gevonden. EE'n van de vindplaatsen [SL 21 zoil middeleeuws kunnen zijn, de overige zijn van later datum. Het onderzoek heeft aangetoond dat drie vindplaatsen [SL 1, SL 3 , SL 51 resten bevatten van &inen hetzelfde schip, hoewel zij meer dun een kilometer uiteen liggen. Het gaat om een middelgroot schip clat op het eind van de 18e eeuw moet zijn vergaan en dat op typisch Nederlandse wijze is gebouwd. Het onderzoek heeft hzerover interessante details aan het licht gebracht. Ook konden delen van de uitrusting, de tuigage en de scheepsinventaris worden vastgelegd. Van iets later datum is het schip dat op vindplaats SL 4 werd aatzgetroffen. Het was zo goed als volledig behouden en moet omstreeks de jaren 1840 zijn gezonken. De rela fief jonge datering, de problemen die rijzen bij her opgraven van een compleet schip en de prioriteiten die in het plan van aanpak waren gesteld noopten ertoe de



vindplaats archeologisch op te geven. Toen de vindplaats vervolgens werd geruimd kwam een groot rompfragment als E'E'n geheel hovetl water en bleek het toch zeer de moeite waai-d dit te bestuderen. Het gaat om een schip dat in Noordoost-Engeland is gebouwd en dat met kolen op Rotterdam voer. Hoewel het indertijd een zeer alledaags schip moet zijn geweest zijn de historlsche gegevens over dit soort schepen verre van volledig. Het onderzoek heeft gedetailleerde en nauwkeurige gegevens opgeleverd over de bouwwijze. Het combineren van deze archeologische gegevens met hetgeen reeds bekend is over 19e-eeuwse scheepsbouw en kolenhandel bleek zeer verhelderend. Enerzijds gaat het daarbij om zaken waarover nooit geschreven is en bovendien levert her waardevolle gegevens om de uitgebreide historische docurnentatie te toetsen aan de werkelijkheid, zoals die in de archeologische overblijyselen besloten ligt. Stellige beweringen blijken daarbij generalisaties of domweg onjuist. Bovendien werpt het onderzoek llcht op aspecten die uit het archiefmateriaal otzduidelijk of cryptisch naar voren komen. Doordat het op die wijze een sleutel vormt tot historische documenten draagt het veel meer bij tot onze kennis van de 19e-eeuwse scheepsbouw dan men zou verwachten. Ondanks dit alles was de belangrijkste doelstelling van het archeologisch onderzoek tijdens de aanleg van de Slufter om vast te leggen wat verloren zou gaan, en dat is ook het voornaamste resultaat. Zowel de schaal van het project als de poging om archeologisch onderzoek in te passen in planning en organisatie van baggerwerk zijtz ongebruikelijk. Het heeft geresulteerd in nieuwe gegevens over scheepvaart en scheepsbouw, over schipbreuk en wrakvorrnitzg en over de geologie en geografische geschiedenis van het betreffencle gebied. A1 die gegevens zouden zijn verloi-en als de poging om ze vast te leggen acl~terwege was gebleven. Hoewel het zeker nief de bedoeling is om de bagggertechniek als een bruikhare archeologische opgravingsmethode te propageren besluit het rapport met de stelling dat zandzcligers en at-cheologie toch niet als twee volstrekt onverenigbare grootheden moeten worden gezlen. Wanneer er ergens duiclelijke aanwijzingen zijn dat vooralst~og onbekende archeologische waarden worden bedi-eigd door grootschalige waterbouwkundige projecten, dienf daaraan de nodige aandacht te woi-den gegeven. Een

vooronderzoek, een plan van aanpak en duidelijk gestelde prioriteiten maken een verantwoorde archeologische documentatie beheersbaar. De kans dat men tijdens het werk onvoorbereid wordt geconfronteerd met archeologische ontdekkingen, waarvan vertragingen van het project het gevolg kunnen zijn, wordt daardoor aanzienlijk verkleind. De ervaring van het Slufterproject heeft geleerd dat, wanneer in potentieel belangrijk sediment wordt gebaggerd, ~~aardevolle gegevens kunnen worden veilig gesteld door eenflexibele opstelling en een paar basisvoorzieningen om ontdekkingen rijdig op hun ~ ~ a a r te d eschatten. Van groot belang is daarbij dat er op voorhand overeenstemming is over definanciering.



The present report is the result of archaeological research carried out as part of a large marine dredging project: the realisation of a large-scale disposal site for contaminated dredged material, the so-called Slufter project. The site is situated to the West of Rotterdam, adjacent to the Maasvlakte [fig. 11. Dredgers and archaeology do not combine easily. Even on dry land the combination of archaeological and engineering interests is not always an easy one. Nevertheless a successful tradition of incorporation of archaeology in planning has developed [Klok 1987; Maarleveld 19891. In a marine situation both the scope of works, the machinery used and the complexity of archaeological recording tend to be bigger, and so are the difficulties that are to be met. It is thus quite understandable that archaeology in a rescue situation under water has so far largely remained untrodden ground. Nevertheless the ever growing extent of dredging activities and their utterly destructive effects on archaeological deposits are to be given serious consideration. In the present project a discreet attempt has been made to do so. As befits such an enterprise strong emphasis was lain on recording what would otherwise be lost. This implied a flexible approach to any discoveries that were made. Slufter project The accessibility of the port of Rotterdam has to be guaranteed by continuous maintenance of appropriate waterdepth in the Lower Rhine reaches. Annually some 23 million m3 of sludge is dredged from the channels and basins. A substantial part of this, some 10 million m3, is so contaminated that it would be irresponsible to dump it into the sea. It has to be disposed of in another, more controllable, way. Ever since the beginning of the seventies finding appropriate disposal locations on dry land has become increasingly problematical. The Stuurgroep Berging Baggerspecie [S.G.B.B. - Steering committee for the


disposal of dredged sludge], set up in 1975, has devised short-term and longer term policies for the issue. In accordance with these policies the Municipality of Rotterdam, the Ministry of Transport and Public Works and the Public Authority Rijnmond [now Provincial Executive of South-Holland] announced their intention to solve the issue in medium-range planning through the realisation of a large-scale disposal site. A range of preliminary studies have resulted in an Environmental Impact Statement [E.I.S.] in 1984 [Gemeente Rotterdam et al. 19841. After an extensive decision-making process the necessary concession and permits were granted for the realisation of alternative I11 as described in the E.I.S. An optimization study successively resulted in a final plan in November 1985 [Gemeente Rotterdam et al. 1985b1 [fig. 21. In short the plan implies that the seabed adjacent to the Maasvlakte is locally excavated to a depth of 28 m. The extracted sand is used in the construction of a dike around the site to a height of 23 m. In total 37 million m3 of earth are moved. The dike encircles an area of 260 ha. The depot has a volume of 90 million m3. Over the years 150 million m' of uncompacted sludge can be accommodated, sufficient to bridge a fifteen year period [I987 - 20021. Started in May 1986 the construction was finished at a great pace. In September 1987 the disposal site was put into use. Preliminary archaeological survey During the process of decision-making on the realisation of a large-scale disposal site objections were raised by the Minister of Welfare, Public Health and Culture [W.V.C.] because the Environmental Impact Statement made no mention of the cultural heritage. The possible effects on archaeological remains remained unstudied. The need to envisage any necessary archaeological investigations through reservations in the budget was stressed. These objections were successful1 in this way that the position towards archaeological remains was given ample

consideration and that the effort of a preliminary survey was deemed necessary. Clauses on archaeological discoveries were included in the concession that was granted for the realisation of the disposal site. It was provided that the Director of the State Service for Archaeological Investigations [Rijksdienst voor Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek R.O.B.] was to be enabled to carry out archaeological investigations to the extent that would reasonably be possible without endangering the planned inauguration of the site through delays. Also a tight timeschedule for in situ work was defined. Simultaneously with further preparations for the project a preliminary archaeological survey was undertaken with two-fold aims: to meet the demand for understanding where within the project area archaeological remains could have been preserved, as well as what the general characteristics of these remains were expected to be; to consider what measures could be taken to further appropriate handling of discoveries within the project. The survey included both geological, geophysical and historical-geographical research. The formation of the area, the way in which it developed and the way in which man had made use of the successive circumstances were provisionally described. Natural channels that silted during the Middle Ages could be recognized. Covered by shoaldeposits those sediments had not been disturbed later on. On the basis of theoretical considerations on the formation and preservation of archaeological sites the historical and geological information was used to predict what kind of remains could be encountered. It was concluded that the sediments between 6 and 12 m below ordnance datum [N.A.P.] could contain wreckage from the period 1000 to 1500 A.D. The. discovery of such remains would be extremely important as they date from a transitional periodin shipbuilding from which very few shipfinds have been studied. As no major gullies seemed to have crossed the area later on it was thought to be unlikely that substantial ship remains of younger clate would be encountered, unless they be the remains of small fishing vessels. The report on the preliminary archaeological survey [Gemeente Rotterdam et al. 19861 shared the dichotomy of the survey itself. In addition to discussions on the relevant data it deployed a line of action to be followed during the construction phase of the project.


Due to the extreme urgency of the realisation of the disposal site a keynote was that construction of the site itself could not be delayed. Operational delays of specific dredging machinery due to archaeological discoveries was to be offset by temporary shifting of activities. It was therefore recommended to excavate the most sensitive areas first. Simple electronic detecting devices would have to be mounted onto the dredgers. On-site archaeological expertise would be made available on a modest scale. The budget for this line of action was estimated at dfl 1,500,000: dfl 300,000 to be used on detecting devices and archaeological support, whereas the rest would account for stagnation and shifting of dredgers.

[Fig. 11

The location of the large-scale disposal site Slufter. Situering van de grootschalige locatie Slufter. [Fig. 21

General lay-out of the large-scale disposal site. Het uitgevoerde ontwerp van de grootschalige locatie.

Implementation Completion of the preliminary survey and publication of the report Vooronderzoek Archeologie had no immediate consequences. The reason for this was a financial deadlock: who was to pay for archaeoIogica1 support and the implementation of the proposed line of action? The Ministry of W.V.C. as the responsible authority for the cultural heritage or the originators of the project that necessitated the excavation? The necessity to open the site for disposal of contaminated sludge in the autumn of 1987 meant that it was impossible to wait till a solution was found. In accordance with the tight time schedule realisation of the Slufter project was started in May 1986 without detecting devices having been mounted. The sequence of excavation, however, concurred with the sequence that was stipulated in the line of action. Shortly after the start of dredging two potentially interesting shipwrecks were discovered. Archaeological expertise was provided on an ad hoc basis but funds to proceed investigations were lacking. Thanks to the municipality of Rotterdam the deadlock was broken: it provided the most necessary means in advance. Since recruitment of competent archaeological staff did not at all prove easy at short notice it was only from the beginning of October 1986 that archaeological work could proceed with a complete crew. From then onwards the proposed line of action could be closely followed. T h e present report The report on archaeological survey as part of the Slufter project is divided in three sections.


In the first part the results of the preliminary geological and historical-geographical studies are described as well as the deployed line of action. The second part is devoted to the archaeology of the Slufter project proper. The third part is included for the purpose of evaluation, i.e. overall conclusions about the area researched, as well as some evaluational observations about the handling of archaeological information in connection with large engineering projects. Both the summary and the captions to the illustrations are presented in English as well as in Dutch. The report is supplemented with appendices and a bilingual [English and Dutch] glossary of maritime terms that appear in the text and captions.

Organisation and responsibilities For the purpose of archaelogical research within the Slufter project a working party was formed in September 1985. Its terms of reference implied: guidance of the realisation of the Slufter as far as archaeological perspectives are concerned; mobilization of expertise and knowledge as well as aids and appliances; reporting and publicity; surveillance of planning and budget control. The working party was composed as follows:

ir. R.G.J. van Orden Project-manager Large-scale disposal site, Public Works Department Rotterdam: ir. J . Bakker Associate Project-manager Largescale disposal site, Lower Rivers Directorate, Ministry of Transport and Public Works; drs. Th.J. Maarleveld Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Culture; drs. L.M. Akveld Maritiem Museum Prins Hendrik, Rotterdam; drs. M.C. van Trierum Office for Archaeological Investigations, Public Works Department Rotterdam.


The archaeological research was carried out by Jonathan Adams, AndrC van Holk and Thijs Maarleveld, the authors of this report. They were greatly assisted by many [see acknowledgements]. Overall coordination of survey and research as well as the final editing of the report have been the responsibility of the last author.



Preliminary archaeological survey of the Slufter project 1.1 Objectives 1.2 Introduction to the area 1.3 Geological survey 1.4 Historical information 1.5 Potential for archaeological sites 1.6 Conclusions and a line of action 1.7 Changes in planning

[Fig. 31 Archaeological sites as previously revealed by dredging in the area:

x concentrations of Mesolithic artefacts; NOORDZEE


shipwreck-sites predating 1800 A.D.;

0 19th century wreck-sites. Archeologische vindplaatsen die bij eerderzuigwerk in het gebied aan het MAASVLAKTE

licht zijn gekornen: x Mesolitische vondstconscenrraries;

+ vindplaatsen van schepen die voor 1800 zijn vergaan; 0 vindplaatsen van 19e eeuwse schepen.





The purpose of the preliminary survey was to establish where archaeological remains were to be found and what kind of remains one had to reckon with. To this end the survey envisaged combining geological and historical information. A theoretical prediction was its aim, in combination of course with a practical guideline of how to cope with discoveries during the realization of the work. First of all it was to be established which sediments were to be considered archaeologically sterile and what kind of archaeological remains were to be encountered in those that were not. It was quite clear that during construction itself there would at the best be occasion for emergency measures. There would be little opportunity for extensive documentation of find circumstances and the geological situation. Studying these in advance would ease interpretation later on. Actual probing of the whole area [ca. 300 ha] was out of the question. Even if that approach could have been made practicable for such an extended and deep unit of sediments, there would have been neither funds nor time to realize it. The preliminary study thus focused on reassessment of previously collected data. It was carried out in the period September 1985 to March 1986. It resulted in a report that was published in April 1986 [Gemeente Rotterdam et al. 19861. 1.2


The Slufter area is situated in the outer delta of the Rhinemeuse estuary. Ever since the North Sea came into existence it has been one of the few inlets in the coast of the Lowlands that offered a passage towards the interior of continental Europe. In historical times the estuary featured important shipping routes. Navigation, however, has greatly been affected by continuous changes in the course and depth of the natural channels. The geological and occupational history of the Rhine/Meuse estuary is rather well studied. Both the encompassing work of Geological Survey of The Netherlands


[e.g. Zagwijn and Van Staalduinen 1975; Schiittenhelm 19801 and the detailed casestudies of C. Hoek must be mentioned in this context. Recent overviews with ample references can be found in Hallewas and Van Regteren Altena [1980], Louwe Kooijmans [I9851 and Van Trierum and Henkes [1986]. The historical development of the foreshore and outer delta however, is largely inferred from the general development of the North Sea basin in combination with data collected further inland. On the archaeological contents of the deposits in the Slufter location nothing specific was known. The only indications were the finds made during and after other major dredging operations in the region. Mesolithic hunting and fishing equipment of Boreal Age has been found among material dredged form the Calandkanaal [Verhart 19881. A whole series of historic shipwreck sites has been disrupted during dredging activities in the Oostvoornse Meer, a few miles inshore. These activities took place in the late sixties and no attention was paid to archaeology at the time. How many sites were destroyed can only be guessed. Along the fringes alone, six historic wreck sites have since been discovered by sports-divers [fig. 31. One of these has been investigated by a group of diving hobby-archaeologists under the leadership of 0. Normann [Maarleveld 1982; Normann 19871, two others are currently under investigation by the Ministry of W.V.C.



In the course of the feasibility studies for the construction of the large-scale disposal site, the area was surveyed geologically. Both deep corings and seismic/acoustical surveys were made. The collected data were - at that stage analysed from a technical point of view only. The relative permeability and stability of the various deposits were more important in that context than their genesis [Gerneente Rotterdam et. al 19841. Nevertheless this data formed a good basis for further research, the

more so since [in view of several location alternatives] a much larger area had been studied than the a c t ~ ~ a lchosen ly site. General characteristics The RhineIMeuse estuary is characterized by deep quaternary sediments [see fig. 4, 51. The riverine sediments from the Under Pleistocene [Formatie van Tegelen; Formatie van Kedichem] are covered by marine sands which were deposited during the Eemian interglacial. These have been reworked during the Weichsel glacial and have partly been covered by the riverine Formatie van Kreftenheye, which is the youngest pleistocene deposit in the area. The first sediments from the Holocene period are a peaty clay layer, which has not been preserved everywhere. It is commonly named the layer of Velsen. During the Atlanticum this layer has been covered by tidal marsh sediments. The subboreal and subatlantic transgressions have caused alternating erosion and sedimentation, resulting in a complex intertwining of shoal-deposits and gully fillings. Supplementary research A detailed reinterpretation of previously collected geological data [fig. 61 was carried out in the present context with the following objectives: to understand the formation of those sediments that were liable to contain archaeological remains; to establish their distribution. In pursuance of the aims set out above it concentrated on the genesis of the subatlantic sequence. In addition to the preceding field work a few coring samples were analysed palynologically. The geological survey thus dealt with three sets of data: acoustical and seismic data; lithostratigraphical data; palynological data. The results that are summarized here were published by Niessen [1986]. The acoustical and seismic data consisted of records that had been recorded with Sonia and Sparker devices. They were primarily made with the aim of charting the presence of the layer of Velsen. Because of its impermeability this layer could be extremely important for the technicalities of the disposal site, had it appeared to be undisturbed in the whole site area [fig. 71. Nevertheless the records do contain a lot of information on the younger sedimentation [fig. 81. Shoal-deposits and


[Fig. 41

[Fig. 71

Chronostratigraphical and

Distribution of the socalled Layerof

lithostratigraphical classification of the

Velsen [hatched].


Verspreiding van de Laag van Velsen

Chronostratigrafische en


lithostratigrafische indeling van het Kwartair. [Fig. 51 Chronostratigraphical classification of the Holocene. Chronostratigrafische indeling van het Holoceen. [Fig. 61 Masterplan featuring the distribution of previously collected geological data. Kartografisch overzicht van de tijdens het vooronderzoek beschikbare


geologische gegevens.


gully fillings could readily be recognized. The skew and orientation of gi~llyfillings could be deduced. The lithostratigraphical description of cores was essential as a clue to the Sonia and Sparker records [fig. 91. In combination the two sets of data to a certain extent allow for the venture of reconstruction of changes in the gully pattern and of the general direction of sedimentation in the area. Palynological analysis was carried out on two cores [fig. 10, 85.004 and 85.0081, thus providing a general basis for the dating of sediments. All in all the geological survey allowed the following general conclusions: the holocene sedimentation reaches to a depth of around 21 metres below N.A.P. [Normal Amsterdam Level]; the top is composed of very young shoal deposits, 2 to 3 metres thick, hardly ever reaching to a greater depth than 6 metres; the subatlantic deposits reach to a depth of around 10 to 12 metres; older marine deposits reach to a depth of around 21 metres; the clayeylpeaty layer of Velsen is found at about 21 metres, at the basis of the holocene sedimentation; the direction of sedimentation in the subatlantic deposits has, in general, been from South going North. The gullies have shifted in that direction; in combination with the results of the palynological research of two seperate gully fillings it is assumed that all subatlantic gully deposits in the area have a late subatlantic date. 1.e. they are surely younger than 700 A.D. and have for the greater part been formed after 1300 A.D.



In addition to the study of the area itself it was thought to be essential to get a good overview of what could be said about the development of the area on the basis of historical information. For this purpose the historical geography was studied by Hofland. His results are summarized here. For his cartographic reconstructions the reader is referred to the original publication [Hofland 19861. Here only some rough sketches are given [fig. 111. Information on navigation in and beaconing of the outer delta does go back to 1280 A.D. A reliable reconstruction on the basis of historical data can, however, only be made

from 1540 onwards. The estuary has continually been very broad. Navigation channels have always been whimsical and water depth was never guaranteed for long. In late medieval times two beacons that are first mentioned in 1280 had to be moved several times. During the 16th century two alternative approaches were in use [three even at a certain time]. The southernmost of these approaches was the most important. It was located some 300 metres North of the Slufter site. The channel was buoyed along its northern bank only. Shipping was thus warned for the shallows along its northern fringes. What hazards shipping confronted southward of the buoys is not very clear. There was no question of the whole stretch between the buoys and the coast of Voorne being navigable. Off-shore both the Hinderplaat and the Westplaat had to be rounded. The Westplaat is of particular interest in the context of this study. From the end of the 17th century onwards the estuary narrowed. On the northern bank a recurved spit [dutch: haakwal] was formed, called the Beer [i.e. bear in English]. As it narrowed the tides were harnessed causing erosion at one place and sedimentation at another. The area of the Slufter disposal site was located in the sedimentation zone. Finally, in the beginning of the 18th century the ebb-tide eroded the Westplaat and forced a new passage. It was located some 100 metres South of the Slufter location and soon became the most important navigation channel. All in all the historical information allows for the following conclusions: the Slufter location has been an area of shallows for the whole period for which historical data are available [i.e. from 1540 A.D. onwards]; channels of any importance have not crossed the location since; during the 16th century the most important navigation channel was within 300 metres North of the location; during the 17th century the shallows [Westplaat] extended towards the North; it is probable that during the 17th century the navigation channel did also shift to the North; in the 18th century a new passage through the shallows came to be used for navigation. That channel is located some 100 metres South of the Slufter location.



Predictions on the archaeological contents of a specific area are a most hazardous affair. Trusting careful analysis of geological and historical data, it is of course possible to make general inferences. Reliable predictions, however, can only be given in the negative. Sterile areas can be indicated. The possibility of striking on a certain type of site in other areas is, however, not a very tangible kind of data. It is something quite different from a positive prediction that something will be found. Nevertheless on the basis of the historical-geographical and geological information presented above some statements concerning any archaeological sites in the construction zone were made which in turn were used as a basis for a strategy. Chance finds after the construction of the Maasvlakte proved that the boreal deposits in what is referred to as the layer of Velsen contain remains of human activity during the Mesolithic. It would however be contrary to reason to suppose that proper attention could be given to any relating sites during the construction of the large-scale disposal site. Systematic investigation of these layers would be an extremely expensive affair, whereas clear-cut results are not indubitably to be expected. It would, however, be sensible to remain alert for chance finds of mesolithic tools in the dredged material. All sediments above the layer of Velsen are of marine origin. Any remains of human activity these might contain must have been brought by or through the sea. The only type of archaeological site one really has to reckon with is the site originating in shipwreck. Archaeological remains cannot be younger than the sediment they are contained in. The oldest topical sequence of marine deposits dates from before the start of the Subatlantic [i.e. before 900 B.c.]. It is certain that seafaring was already practised long before. Nevertheless, the chances of discovery of any wrecksites in the older sediments must be deemed negligible. Also the subatlantic sediments deserved most attention, even though it is true that the area might also contain remains of much older date. Traffic and the resulting losses have gained in intensity. Wether or not these losses can be traced depends on the processes that determine the formation and preservation of archaeological sites. By taking these into consideration the sensitive geological sequences can be defined even more precisely.

[Fig. 81 The interpretation of Sparker-record 22 showing the Holocene sedimentation. Interpretatie van Sparkerrecord 22 in het Holocene sedimentatiepakket.

[Fig. 91 Lithostratigraphical basis of interpretation. De lithostratigrafische grondslag van interpretatie.

[Fig. 101 Palynological analysis of two cores. Boorkolommen met pollenzones.

[Fig. 111 An overview of the development of shipping channels in the RhineIMeuse outer delta, as derived from historical information. Beknopt overzicht van de onhuikkeling van scheepvaartroutes in de Maasmond zoals die kon worden afgeleid uit historische gegevens.




Formation of wrecksites As stated above shipwreck is the main cause of archaeological site formation in the area. It is a process with its own dynamics. There are many reasons why a ship can come to grief. In general this happens more often near to shore or at the mouth of an inlet than on the high seas. A shallow estuarine area, like the outer delta of the RhineIMeuse, is particularly accident prone. The hydrographic situation in such an area changes quickly. Unfamiliarity with the local conditions and currents or just inattentiveness can easily cause grounding. The situation is worse in strong winds, especially with an onshore direction. Onshore - that is westerly - winds are most usual in the area. If grounding leads to wreck this may come about in two ways: the ship stays were it stuck and is torn apart; the ship springs a leak but starts floating again and sinks elsewhere. In the first instance the remains are exposed to extremely strong mechanical forces. They can be dispersed over a large area. The force of the breakers and the velocity of the breaking up process determine the size of individual bits and pieces. In the second instance the ship may sink in deeper water or slide down to deeper water if it sinks on the bank of a gully. In that case the chances of large pieces being embedded in the sediments in their entirety are much better. Once the remains have more or less settled the site is susceptible to a number of complex influences and transforms. At a shallow site the mechanical forces in operation will overrule all other factors. In general nothing remains undamaged in less than six meters of water on an exposed site along the Dutch coast. At a deeper site - i.e. in a gully remains stand a better chance. Chemical degradation and attack by marine organisms are two, mutually intensifying agents affecting their preservation. The mechanical force of the currents is in some ways subordinate. It will in most cases more strongly act upon the environment than upon the remains themselves, as more often than not these have a greater resistance. However, by doing so the currents determine whether or not the remains are buried and to what extent they are exposed to the aforementioned chemical and biological attack. Changes in the course of gullies can produce repeated slowing and acceleration of this kind of degradation. If wreckage ends up in a sedimentation zone - for instance along a convex gully bank -


it can be covered rather quickly: the remains are no longer exposed to the oxygen rich seawater. The context may remain virtually unchanged until discovery. The only influence one has to reckon with is the mechanical force of compaction of the sediments. If a wreck ends up in the middle of a gully or in an erosion zone the situation will be much more complex. The wreck itself will obstruct the currents and will thus interfere with erosion and deposition processes. Scouring will intensify and it is not improbable that the remains or part thereof will slip into the gully so formed. The process may repeat itself time and again. It will only end if the geological circumstances change sufficiently to override the localised effect of the wreck structure or if, due to collapse or displacement enough water storage is attained for the rate of flow to diminish. In both cases sedimentation will occur and the remains will finally be covered after having been susceptible not only to chemical and biological degradation but also to mechanical damage as a result of displacement. The formation of the site will have affected sediments well beyond the local depth of the gully at the time of sinking. For the situation in the area concerned these theoretical considerations have the following consequences. Shipfinds with structural cohesion are not to be expected in those deposits that have formed on shoal tops [and in consequence have a purely horizontal stratigraphy]. In sediments that have been deposited in gullies such finds are only to be expected at a greater depth than six meters [under mean low water and to be corrected for the sealevel at the time of the gully's activity]. They are most likely to appear at the deepest spots of erosion that a phase of activity of a gully has caused. 1.6


Consideration of the historicalgeographical and geological data in combination with the theoretical aspects elucidated above allowed some reasoning on which a line of action could be deployed. To begin with a quite substantial amount of sediment could -for all practical purposes be considered to be archaeologically sterile. This applied both to the pleistocene sequence and to the holocene sequence predating the Subatlantic. This also applied to those sediments that lay at a shallower depth than 6 m below N.A.P., as well as to all those sediments that can be interpreted as shoaldeposits.


What remains to be scrutinized are the gullydeposits in the subatlantic sequence. These were supposed to extend no deeper than 12 m below N.A.P. Their build-up is the result of sedimentation in gullies migrating to the North. This happened after 700 A.D. and for the greater part after 1300 A.D. During the 16th century a gully that was used as an important navigation channel was situated some 300 m North of the construction site. During the 18th century a new passage was opened at 100 m South of the location. On the basis of this information it was inferred that the northern navigation channel had previously had a slightly more southerly course. It might have been in use before 1500 A.D. If any wrecksites related to that channel had been preserved they might be encountered in the northern part of the construction site. Wrecksites related to the southern channel would be much younger. They were more likely to be encountered in the southern part. In designing a strategy two straightforward principles took a keynote position: the line of action should tune to the planning of construction; priority should be given to the most important sites. However straightforward these principles may be, the practical appliance is very problematical. Nevertheless some a priori choices were made regarding both issues.

The Planning of construction The planning of construction was such that the disposal site would be excavated in three phases [fig. 121. Excavation would be carried out by suction-dredgers in a breaching technique. In the first phase the holocene deposits would be removed to a depth of about 12 m [working depth and disturbance approximately 18 m: resulting water depth 12 m, due to spill]. In this phase dredging would be carried out in continuous shifts, 7 x 24 per week. Three dredgers would be involved, with a weekly production totalling 800.000 m'. In view of creating shelter for the dredgers it was preferred to commence excavation in the northern part. The dredged holocene material was to be used in the body of the dike around the disposal site. In the second phase the main part of the area would be deepened to 28 m. The extracted mix of pleistocene and holocene sediments would be used to strengthen the outer part of the dikes. In the third phase the inner side of the dikes would be dredged to the correct cross-section by means of cutter-suction dredgers. During



.-> ,.. Homien


the latter two phases on-site work would be limited to 5 x 24 hours per week. The whole procedure, and especially the tight time-schedule, implied that it would be much easier to shift activities and thus accommodate archaeological discoveries at the beginning of construction rather than at a later stage.


[Fig. 121

Schematic representatlon of the techniques and order of excavation of

the d~sposalsite. In Phase 1 the bulk of the Holocene material is removed. The fine sands are used in the body of the surrounding dike. In Phase 2 a suction-dredger is used to remove the deeper Pleistocene deposits. These coarser sands are used to reinforce the embankment. Phase 3 is the final phase in which the inner fringes are finished to the appropriate crosssection. In de eerste fase van her werk wordt bet merendeel van de Holocene afzettingen verwijderd. Dit fJne zand wordt gebruikt als kern van de ringdijk. In de tweede fase wordt her bassin met een diepzuiger op diepte gebracht Het grovere Pleistocene zand dat daarbij vrij komt wordt gebruikt ter versterking van de oeverzone. In de derde fase wordt de binnenkant van bet bassin netjes afgewerkt Ook dan wordt er nog Holoceen sediment vergraven, maar het doen van archeologische waarnemingenis dan vrijwel niet meer mogelijk.


The most important sites To decide on the relative importance of unknown sites is virtually impossible. The situation, however, was thus that a priori decisions had to be made as to determine what kind of sites were to be deemed important in this particular context. It is fully realised that these decisions are of a contestable nature. Considerations significantly affecting decision-making at this stage were that only those sites would be taken into account where this would be technically feasible under the prevailing circumstances; that older sites would be deemed more important than younger ones. As a result the area of concern was limited to the subatlantic gully fillings. This meant that no archaeological support was needed during the second phase of construction. During the third phase proper dealing with archaeological discoveries would be most problematical as there would only be limited possibilities to shift dredging activities. From an archaeological point of view the emphasis was thus on phase 1. Sand extraction was planned to begin in the northern part of the area. The first section of the dike to be constructed would create some shelter for the dredgers. Bearing in mind that the oldest known navigation channel bypassed the area just to the North and considering the fact that it would be more likely to encounter a wrecksite related to that channel in the northern part than anywhere else this decision was readily endorsed. It would, after all, be preferable to discover any important sites as soon as possible. Furthermore it was quite clear that attention could only be given to shipwreck sites containing sufficiently substantial structural remains. Small items would unquestionably go unnoticed. For proper planning it was essential to know what exactly could be recognized in time and into what categories the possible discoveries could be classified. To devise a method of timely detection in accordance with the proposed method of sand-extraction a series of tests were run on January 23 1986 at a nearby dredging site.

Several systems of acoustic detection were put to the test, while objects of differing sizes were lowered in the breach. A UDI Obstacle Avoidance Sonar mounted underneath the frontside of a stationary suction-dredger was found to satisfactorily register any objects protruding more than 1.5 m from the o~~tcropping sediments. Within the limits set by the available technology it would thus be possible to detect significant shipwreck sites as soon these started to uncover. Wreckage in structural cohesion measuring 5 x 7 m or more can be detected before actually coming loose, provided that the monitor is properly watched. Sites containing fragments of a smaller size only will, however, remain unnoticed. In consequence it was proposed to mount this system onto the dredgers. Detection of an anomaly on the sonar screen was to be followed by three consecutive actions: monitoring of the anomaly would be continued for 15 to 30 min. to see whether indeed it represented a stationary object; dragging the breach with a grapnel from a small boat would start while the anomaly was being monitored in order to establish direct contact with the remains; shifting of dredging activity would be commenced as soon as the grapnel got stuck, in order to allow for diverinspection. The inspection serves technical as well as archaeological ends. It is to be carried out by an experienced diving archaeologist. It allows to assess whether there is any real obstruction hindering continued sand extraction and it also allows preliminary assessment of any archaeological values involved. Technically six alternatives have been anticipated: fragmentary, loose or largely decomposed wreckage; part of a ship's bottom or side with heavy timbers, wooden fastenings and strong longitudinal cohesion, measuring up to 5 x 10 m; part of ship's bottom or side, lightly built, longitudinal cohesion in strakes only, measuring up to 5 x 10 m; ship's bottom or side, heavily built, measuring up to 7 x 17 m; ship's bottom or side, lightly built, measuring up to 7 x 17 m; larger entity or complete ship. As the possibilities for prolonged on-site research in a situation like this are very limited due to adverse, unstable


circumstances and a very tight time-schedule quick removal for study elsewhere is to be preferred. For research it is of course preferable to remove a find as integrally as possible, surrounding sediments included. Taking this into account and also bearing in mind that removal of any overburden will make such operations incomparably more simple a detailed plan was framed for each of the given alternatives [Cemeente Rotterdam et al. 19861. Only the last alternative was left open-ended. In a case like that too many variables are involved and decisons have to be postponed to the very last moment when technical problems, the cultural importance and all factors that can be summarized with the term cost-effectiveness can best be assessed. In all cases it was to be the on-site presence of diving archaeological staff that was to guarantee the quick and responsible assessment necessary for ad hoc decision making. Their expertise was also needed for the reception, documentation, conservation and research of the finds. All in all the preliminary survey showed it to be highly likely that important discoveries would be made. A realistic line of action was deployed in accordance with the proposed technique of construction. The costs of satisfactory archaeological guidance of the project were estimated at dfl. 1.500.000 of which the greater part [dfl 1.100.000] was to be reserved for delays and shifting of the dredgers. It is to be kept in mind that large obstructions may cause this kind of expenses whether they are researched archaeologically or not. dfl. 200.000 was to be spent on archaeological staff and research, dfl. 100.000 for the necessary sonar equipment and another dfl 100.000 for other eventualities.



The strategy outlined in the plan of action formed the basis for all decisions. There was however one essential point where strategy and reality did not meet from the very start. The contractor to whom the construction was allocated decided to use cutter-suctiondredgers for the sand extraction not only in phase 3 as demanded, but also in phase 1. For the kind of sediments involved the cuttersuction-dredger is normally too expensive an instrument. From a technical point of view and with respect to the tight time schedule this was considered to be a favourable decision. For the detection of archaeological sites this decision had grave consequences. Unlike the

pontoon of a suction-dredger, a cuttersuction-dredger is not a stationary instrument. Even if it dredges in a breaching technique it will still sweep to and fro constantly. The turning cutter-head will cause turbulence that will to some extent blurr the sonar. More serious however is the fact that the constant motion will constantly affect the picture that it shows. Monitoring of changes in the breach-profile thus becomes an extremely tiring job as it necessitates constant watching of the screen [7 x 24 hours a week]. Even when one of the dredgers was equipped with an obstacle avoidance sonar all sites were detected by the destructive cutter-head itself. For one thing this meant considerable damage to the remains, for another it meant that smaller and less resistent items went unnoticed. The scale of objects that were detected was thus larger than originally envisaged.




Wrecksite SL 1 1 .I Circumstances of discovery 1.1.1 The first hit 1.1.2 Preliminary assessment 1.1.3 Adjustment of the order of sand extraction 1.1.4 On-site inspection 1.2 Description of the recovered remains 1.2.1 The ship 1.2.2 Ship's fittings 1.2.3 Associated finds 1.3 Analyses 1.3.1 Dendrochronological analysis 1.3.2 Caulking and luting materials 1.4 Evaluation 1.4.1 The site 1.4.2 The ship


Wrecksite SL 2 2.1 Circumstances of discovery 2.2 Description of the recovered remains 2.3 Analyses 2.4 Evaluative considerations


Wrecksite SL 3 3.1 Circumstances of discovery 3.2 Description of the recovered remains 3.3 Analyses 3.4 Conclusions


Wrecksite SL 4 4.1 Circumstances of discovery 4.1.1 The first hit 4.1.2 On-site inspection 4.1.3 Considerations and decisions 4.1.4 Clearance 4.1.5 Renewed considerations 4.2 Description of the recovered remains 4.2.1 The ship 4.2.2 Ship's fittings 4.2.3 Associated finds 4.3 Analyses 4.3.1 Wood species 4.3.2 Dendrochronological analysis 4.3.3 Caulking and luting materials 4.3.4 Copper alloys 4.3.5 Coal



Evaluation 4.4.1 Introduction 4.4.2 The site 4.4.3 The ship and its construction 4.4.4 Developments in ship construction 4.4.5 Historical setting of ship and ship type 4.4.6 The cargo 4.4.7 Date of shipwreck Conclusion


Wrecksite SL 5 5.1 Circumstances of discovery 5.2 Description of the recovered remains 5.3 Analyses 5.4 Discussion


Wrecksite SL 6


Miscellaneous finds

[Fig. 131

Map showing the outline of the Slufter and the distribution of finds againstthe background of the 1985 depth contours.

Dieptekaart uit 1985met daarop de begrenzing van de Slufter en de verspreiding van de vindplaatsen.





The first hit Shortly after midnight, in the early hours of May 4 1986 the pump and cutter of the cutter-suction-dredger Hector got blocked for the first time by wood that turned out to be wreckage. Its position was x 60.228 and y 438.23 1 [Dutch National Grid coordinates] [fig. 131. The obstruction was as solid as to repeatedly block the cutter again. After more than five and a half hours of delay the Hector. had to be moved back. At the dump-site quite a few items were observed, such as pulleyblocks, pieces of rope and lengths of chain. Part of those items [i.e. only the chain] were collected later on. Others are said to have disappeared into private collections. The incident occurred on one of the very first days of on-site work. The Hector was dredging in an easterly direction. From the Gat vat2 de Hawk it was on its way to the area in the North where sand-extraction would begin. The itinerary chosen would make the most of the shelter that the shoals in the area could give. Waterdepth had been near zero and Hector directly broke in to a depth of 17 m. It was at that depth that the cutter hit wreckage. The dredger got stuck and had to back off for clearing. The ensuing delay had caused the channel to fill in so it had to be cleared once more. All through the day loose pieces of timber kept blocking the pump. It was, however, only the next night that the original spot of hitting was reached once more. Instead of its original depth of 17 m the dredger was lifted to a depth of 14 m and could pass the sensitive area without further delay. As soon as the cutter was thought to be clear it was lowered to 20 m. In the early morning it hit again. Planking rose to the surface and drifted away. A windlass came up floating and was lifted onto a barge. A collection of small stuff was collected from the cutter and the pump. For convenience' sake this first site was called SL 1.



Preliminary assessment After the aforementioned channel had been dug the cutter-suction-dredger Hector went on dredging in the northern part of the Slufter. The area where the wreck was hit upon was not to be in exploitation for quite some time. In keeping with the plan of action the spot was dragged with a grapnel from a small boat. Later on, on May 24, a bottom search was organised. Volunteer divers that regularly assist the underwater archaeological unit of the Ministry of Culture were mobilised for the purpose. The water was quite clear that day, amounting to about 2 to 3 metres under water visibility on the bottom, and systematic visual inspection of an area covering approximately 3,500 mZcould be carried out. Most of the channel had, however, filled in. Remaining depth was only 8 to 9 m and no wreckage protruded from the even bottom of loose sand. In short all information on the site one could go by was that at a depth of more than 14 m a wreck had been hit at spots as far apart as 40 m [according to guesses by the dredging personnel and the construction inspectors]. The fragments that had been lifted made it quite clear that the wreck was that of a postmedieval vessel of considerable size. All fragments that could readily be identified pointed to the upper deck structure in the bows. It was assumed to be highly probable that most of the vessel remained. 1.1.3

Adjustment of the order of sand extraction As mentioned before the area around wrecksite SL 1 was not to be dredged for some time. The possibility that the discovered wreck was a complete or near complete ship and fell into category 6 of the plan of action was to be considered seriously. The wood was in very sound condition and the wreck might cause a serious obstruction for the dredgers. To assess both the extent to which this would be the case and its cultural importance it was thought that the planned diver inspection should anyhow take place. First however one would have to get rid of the tremendous

overburden of loose spill sand. To accommodate for this the order of sand extraction was adjusted. The cutter-suctiondredger Triton was to dredge in the vicinity from mid-summer onwards. In the original planning of the work it was to furrow forwards and back again so as to cover the whole area systematically. This method however was changed. TI-itonwas instructed first to dredge a trench around wrecksite SL 1 so as to create overdepth were the overburden could temporarily be dumped [fig. 141.

1 .I .4

On-site inspection To remove the overburden itself, a more gentle instrument than the cuttersuction-dredger was chosen. A so-called prop-wash deflector, mounted on the diving vessel Ursus 11, was used [fig. 15, 161. This vessel belongs to the Ecuador. diving team from the isle of Terschelling. Both the ship and the team have repeatedly assisted in archaeological work. Inspection was carried out on 19,20,21 and 22 September 1986. The wreckage proved to occur at a depth of approximately 18 m. As the Triton had not dredged beyond 17 m it was impossible to wash the overburden into a surrounding trench. The wreckage could not be cleared of overburden over areas measuring more than 4 m in diameter. To be able to correctly direct the prop-wash and to get a clear picture of the extent of wreckage the site was systematically probed with a 6 m water probe that was lowered from the surface. It consisted of a length of 1" steel piping fitted with a coupling and fed through a flexible hose. It sank into the sediments by its own weight and any obstruction could be readily noticed by the man handling the hose from the surface. The wreckage proved to have lost its structural integrity. During a total of 18 inspection dives in successive prop-wash-pits it was established that all wreckage consisted of deck-structure. It also became evident that the structure faced downwards, i.e. that the wreck had been lying upside down. It rested on a tough clay layer that was covered by an erosion layer containing loose objects. It was decided to lift loose pieces. They were cleared with an air lift [fig. 171. Apart from structural remains parts of the ship's rigging and inventory were brought up. Diving in the pits was seriously hampered by a layer of liquified silt that had formed over the deepest parts of the Slufter, due to three dredgers continuously running. In fact the density of the murky water gradually


increased towards the bottom. Divers had problems to weigh themselves down. Working with the airlift brought some temporary relief. Individual dives were not extended beyond 30 min.



The ship Some of the timbers recovered could be reassembled to form what is probably part of the starboard fore deck area. Although various figures show these elements . assembled they are first described individually. 1.2.1

[Fig. 141 Dredging-plan around wreck-site SL 1. Snedeplan rand SL 1. [Fig. 151 Diving vessel Ursus 11. Onderzoeksvaartuig Ursus I1 van het Duikream Ecuador [foto IPL]. [Fig. 161 Schematic representation of a propwash-deflector. Werking van een prop-wash. [Fig. 171 Schematic representation of an airlift. Werking van een airlift. [Fig. 181 Examples of iron fastenings from SL 1. From top to bottom: iron bolt SL1 A89 [diameter 21 mml iron bolt SLl A6911 [diameter 21 mm] large iron spike SLl A6912 [13 x 13 mm].

Fastenings The fastenings consist of treenails, iron bolts, iron spikes and iron nails. The treenails were mostly of softwood but some were oak. The diameters were between 25 - 31 mm although one piece of what is probably a wale was fastened with treenails 32 - 34 mm in diameter. They are roughly finished some being relatively rounded in section but others being more octagonal. Some are left plain but others were tightened. In many instances this was done by cuts that were caulked. More common still was the use of a deutel [central square wedge]. The former examples were cut several times across the head, presumably with a chisel. The pattern and depth of the cuts varied. Two or three of the cuts were rammed with caulking material [perhaps moss]. Also, in some cases a thin hardwood pin about 30 mm long and 4 lnln thick at the head was driven into the treenail. In one case the pin was driven into the centre of the cross-cuts but in another it was driven off-centre and clear of the cuts altogether. The mean diameter of the iron bolts is 21 mm. The iron is square in section but chamfered along the edge. The bolts had a definite head i.e. not merely widened through being driven. They were clenched over a washer. The spikes and nails were square shanked, ranging in size from the smaller nails of 4 mrn square up to the larger spikes of 15 mm square. The latter are also chamfered along their edges like the bolts. They all have similar facetted heads and flat, slightly rounded chisel shaped ends [fig. 181.

Bij de bouw van het schip zijn ijleren pennen, nagels en spijkers gebruikt. Depennenhebbeneendoorsnedevan 21 mm. De hier afgebeelde spijker is 13

mm vierkant.


Frames SLl T75. A futtock 190 x 18 x 11.5 cm trapezoidal in cross section. Towards the foot it gradually tapers and curves slightly in two directions. In view of this shape it is probably

from the bow or stern if not a cant frame as such [fig. 191. At what is presumably its head it js pierced by two iron bolts. The hull planks were fastened by treenails 30 mm in diameter that were cut flush on the inboard surface. There are also several nail holes on both inboard and outboard surfaces. SLl T106. Futtockof 147 x 18.5 x 11 cm tapering at one end to 10 x 16 cm. At the head it is cut with a rebate. In this case a treenail projects from the inboard surface which is wedged with a deutel. There are also nail holes but less than in T75. There is one iron bolt at the foot. SLI T107. Futtock of 143 x 13 x 11 cm. Its curvature corresponds with that of T75. At the head it ends in a flat butt. Just below this is an iron bolt. The plank fastening treenails are also cut flush on the inboard surface as in T75 except for one. Where this treenail projects, iron stain and concretion indicate the grain of a ceiling plank [stringer?]. SLl T108. Futtock 122 x 18 x 12 cm. Heavily damaged, with the head being cut where a fork in the timber occurred. There are no treenails in this timber, only bolts and nails. SL1 T109. Short section of a futtock 18 x 13 cm in section. The treenails fastened both inboard and outboard planking. All of these timbers are oak and three have a certain amount of sapwood remaining. None are complete, all showing shipworm attack at the feet due to their inverted position on the sea bed. Outer hull planking SLl T45. A plank, maximum width-of 21.5 cm and 4 - 4.5 cm in thickness which is curved and shaped in a manner that indicates a position next to the stem or stern post [fig. 201. Apart from the shape, on its inboard surface are the marks of the timbers to which it was fastened that ran horizontally across the stem or stern post. On the outer surface at the edge of the pointed end there is a mark where suggesting it fitted into a rabbet or was secured with a batten. There is also a rebate which may be a repair. There are two nail holes that could have fastened a patch. On both sides of this plank there are also former nail holes that have been plugged with wooden pegs. Other fragments of what are presumably hull planks also show these plugged nail holes on both faces. The average thickness of the planking in the straight body of the hull was around 6 cm in thickness. Lead tingle or repair patch 24 x 7 cm with small nail holes, that might have been used as a temporary patch on either hull or deck planking.


SLl T104. A thick timber that is probably part of a wale 23.5 cm wide by 9.5 cm in thickness. It had been fastened with treenails and still has some of the caulking material on its edges. The treenails have been tightened by being cut, caulked and pinned in the manner described above [fig. 211.

[Fig. 191

Funock SLl T75. De zitter SL 1 T75. Het inhout is

Ceiling Four fragments of thick planking which in the absence of caulking would seem to be from inboard. One is damaged but of the other three, two are 23 cm and the other is 38.5 cm in width. Their thickness ranges between 9 and 11.5 cm so they are probably stringers. They are fastened with iron bolts, nails and treenails. A rebate in one of them suggests it might be a beam shelf. Below the rebate is what appears to be a treenail hole that was started then abandoned. In the same piece a treenail hole passing through the plank has been plugged with an off-cut of a treenail.

vermoedelijk uit het voorschip afkomstig. Erzijn twee ijzeren pennen doorgeslagen. De huid is bevestigd geweest met houten pennen die aan de binnenzijde van het inhout vlak zijn afgesneden. [Fig. 201

Outer hull plank SLl T45. Huidplank SL1 T45. Deze plank die op een van de stevens aangesloten moet hebben, vertoont een aantal bijzondere kenmerken. Aan de buitenzijde is duidelijk te zien waar de plank in de stevensponning sloot. Aan de binnenzijde zijn de afdrukken zichtbaar van de horizontale banden, inhouten die dwars over de steven bevestigd waren. Aan weerszijden zijn spijkergaarjes re ontwaren die met houten pennetjes zijn afgedicht. Dat is oak bij de overige huidplanken het geval. [Fig. 211

Treenail which has been cut, caulked and pinned. De kop van houten treknagels is ingesneden en gebreeuwd. Bovendien is er een houten pennetje ingeslagen [for0 IPLI. [Fig. 231

Inverted hanging knees SLl T95 and

S L l T96. Twee verticale knieen waarvan het lijf onderdeks was aangebracht en het korte gedeelte een Iuikhoofd gesteund heeftlfoto IPLI.


Knees SLI T78. A hanging knee 165 cm in height but incomplete due to teredo attack at the foot [similar to the frame timbers]. The horizontal arm has been damaged and is incomplete. It is well finished but the grain direction of the timber from which it was cut was not ideal. It also included areas of sapwood. It is rebated to fit against and partly beneath a deck beam and was fastened to the hull and the beam with iron bolts. Four in the lower arm and a bolt and two large spikes in the upper arm. The uppermost bolt projects 29 cm beyond the back of the knee. The next two project 25 and 23.5 cm respectively. This indicates the top bolt passed through the main wale. The lower arm is rebated to a depth of 3.5 cm, presumably to fit over stringers and the shelf [fig. 221. At the end of the bolts passing through the lower arm there is concretion that bears the cast impression of the hull planking. SLl T21. Hanging knee which is much more of a grown timber although of much rougher finish [fig. 221. Height is 116 cm. The arm is 74 cm in length. The lower arm is rebated also to fit over stringers. Two bolts and two spikes fastened the lower arm. The upper arm is not rebated but merely flattened to fit against the deck beam. It was fastened to it with two bolts, three heavy iron spikes and three smaller nails. In the outer face there is a shallow hole [15 mm] presumably where a treenail hole was augered through the futtock for a hull plank. SLl T98. Fragment of a hanging knee, also a suitably grown timber like T21 but the upper

arm is very thin. The head was rebated to fit around the beam but the arm itself being so thin was merely flattened against the beam in a similar manner to T21 [fig. 221. It is fastened in a similar manner to the other hanging knees. SL1 T93. The upper fragment of a knee with a deep rebate probably also for a beam. It also has a shallow rebate cut out of the crown and on one side has indications that there were planks set vertically against it. Although it is also presumably a hanging knee [the fastenings are the same in principle as the others] it would seem either the beam was deeper or the knee was set higher relative to it. The slight indication of adjacent planking suggests it might have been positioned at the junction of the hold and cabin areas [fig. 221. SL1 T48. Upper fragment of a hanging knee similar in shape and finish to T75. SLl T95 and T96. Two elbow shaped knees with their surfaces flattened. They were positioned horizontally with the short arm vertical to support a hatch structure [figs. 22, 231. They were fastened with large iron spikes and in one case with an additional bolt. The angle of the knees reflects the camber of the deck and the slight inward lean of the hatch structure. The lower arm ran between the hatch and the side, the heel of the knee butting against the side. SLl T97. Knee from grown timber which is either a lodging knee or, in view of the shallow depth of its long arm, a standing knee. It was fastened with three bolts and spikes [fig. 221.

Waterway, beam shelf, deck beams and deck planks SLI T63. Two loose pieces of timber that are likely to be part of the waterway [fig. 241. They are 8.5 - 9 cm in thickness and the piece which is preserved for its full width is 30 cm. The sectional shape is a parallelogram. Bolts passed through them horizontally and fastened through the full thickness of the hull. Sloped dove-tail rebates were cut into the inboard edge to retain the half beams but their ends were also nailed in place. In line with the rear of these rebates the waterway is slightly bevellecl downwards. Along the bevel is a mark and a line of nail holes indicating the edge of a plank. This suggests that in this part of the ship there was a gutter between the outermost deck plank and the bulwark. In one of the pieces similar to T63 there are holes [6 x 6 mm] in the side opposite the rebates. These are probably the holes from large spikes fastening through the futtocks


[Fig. 221

[Fig. 241

Knees from SL 1.

Individual timbers from the deck and

Knieen. Oe verticale knieen SL 1 T78,

waterway assembly. SLl T80 is a deck

SL 1 T21 en SL 1 T98 zijn aan de

beam. SL1 T99 is described as a stringer,

onderzijde door paalworm

SLl T63 as part of the waterway, SL1

aangevreten. Aan de bovenzijde is er

T l l O might be the end of a wale.

een sponning ingekapt waar zij op de

Onderdelen van de dekconstructie.

dekbalken aansluiten. SL 1 T97 is

Hoewel de onderdelen sterk beschadigd

mogelijk een horizontale knie. Zie voor

zijn was her mogelijk de onderlinge

SL 1 T96 fig. 23.

samenhang te reconstrueren. Zie hiervoor fig. 27,28 en 62. In de zwaluwstaartvormige inkepingen in SL 1 T63 hebben halve balken gerust. Ook de dekbalk SL 1 T80 is met een zwaluwstaen afgewerkt. Twee vulstukjes waren nodig om de dekplanken te ondersteunen. In het oppervlak van een aantal van deze onderdelen zijn merkwaardige gaten aangetroffen die soms ruw met houtzijn afgedicht Zie hiervoor fig. 25 en 26.


supplementing the bolts. SLl T74. A large curved piece of grown timber rebated for a main deck beam and two half beams. It is well finished but includes traces of sapwood. The main beam rebate is flared on both sides whereas the smaller half beam rebates are straight on one side. It was bulted and nailed through to the futtocks. Next to the beam it has been built up on one side with a thin filling piece, corresponding to the top surface of the beam, so that the deck plank would bed flush onto it. SLl T80. Damaged piece of deck beam fitting the rebate in T74. A good quality timber but it has had to be built up at the edge with two small fillets of wood to provide flush bedding for the planks [fig. 241. Nail holes in the top surface are from the nails that fastened the deck planks. There are also various tool marks. Where it has broken, there is the edge of a rebate, probably for a carling or hatch coaming for a companion way. There were apparently no knees reinforcing this beam, being only retained by the dove tailed rebate in the shelf. There are two holes in the beam, one probably for a deck fitting, the purpose of the other is doubtful as it apparently does not pass through the deck plank. Several nail holes in the side of the beam and a mark on the under side indicate partition planking. There are also several peculiar oval holes which deserve special attention. They are not in any way connected with construction itself and they might be associated with the transport of the baulk of timber prior to its conversion. In that case the holes could be left by the dogs, large staple-like spikes used to stabilise logs which have been bound together in rafts for transport downriver [fig. 2.51. These holes also occur on one of the other loose timbers, probably also part of a beam. Some of those holes have been plugged with soft wood and flat wedged in the manner of a treenail [fig. 261. SLl T77. A deck beam, virtually complete, which is 4.68 In in length [4.65 m true horizontal distance between ends]. At one end is a dove-tail where it was let into the shelf. The other end is damaged. On one side [probably the aft side] there are bolt holes where the upper arms of the hanging knees were fastened. The upper side bears the nail holes from the deck planks. There are four blind holes in the upper side, evidence for deck fittings of some kind. On the [aft] face 1.61 m from the side there is a rebate presumably for a carling. Presumably there was a corresponding rebate at the other end of

the beam but damage has removed all trace of it. On the fore side on both sides there was a small iron hook, which might be associated with internal partitioning, for which there is some evidence in the form of nails holes under the beam. On the same side as the hooks there is a small repair piece let into the edge of the beam. SLl T99 and SLl TI 13. SLI T I 13 is the outermost deck plank [margin plank] that was recovered. Associated with it was an oak timber that lay above: T99. Together the two timbers appear to function as a waterway [fig. 271. The interface between them was well waterproofed with a luting compound of oakum and tar. The lower plank is slightly thickened where the oak timber is located. The outer edge of the plank is roughly cut but generally follows the shape of the shelf piece below. Aft of T99 the plank is not preserved for its full width but luting on the upper surface indicates there was another timber overlying it in the same manner. Both the timbers were nailed and bolted to the beams. T99 is rounded in section with a raised lip on the outer top edge [fig. 241. SLl T I 14. A deck plank preserved for its whole length of 6.85 m. It was nailed to each deck beam in a regular pattern: four nails in the form of a square and one centrally placed similar to thefive on a gaming dice. This plank was positioned at the end of the vessel and its foremost end is bevelled accordingly. Its top surface is marked where it fitted under a waterway or such like. In the cabin area the plank was painted on the under side in a greylblue paint except where passing over the beams. It therefore accurately records the beam spacing in this part of the vessel. In the same way it indicates the position of partition planking. The nail pattern along the rest of the length of the plank also indicates the spacing of the beams in the hold area, although the actual widths can only be roughly determined. On the edges of the deck planking there are remains of oakum and tar caulking generally extending for half the depth of the plank. There was very little gap between them and in one case the caulker had driven the caulking iron into the extreme edge of the plank and duly caulked the resulting split by mistake. Some of these elements are shown reassembled in fig. 28. There were other loose fragments of deck planking recovered including a stealer and a piece with a semicircular hole which corresponds to the diameter of the pump tube.


[Fig. 251

zijn die duiden op de wipe waarop her

Hole in deckbeam SL1 T80, presumably

hour in ruwe vorm is vervoerd

[Fig. 281

associated with dogs.

[foto IPL].

Reassembled elements of SL 1: clamp

onderschrift van fig. 24 aan de orde

[Fig. 261

TI13 and SLl T99.

€en van de gaten die in het

SLl T80 and waterway assembly SLl

kwamen. De gaten hebben niets te

Some of the holes which are

Een aantal van de beschreven

maken met de constructie van her

associated with dogs have been

onderdelen van SL I zijn hier weer in

schip, maar er is we1 een verklaring

plugged with wooden pegs. Some of

hun oorspronkelijke verband

voor. Hetjaarringonderzoek wijst uit

these are flat wedged like treenails.

aaneengevoegd [foto IPL].

dat het hout afkomstig is uit Duitsland.

€en aantal van deze Spannkeil gaten

Vermoedelijk zijn de omgezaagde

zijn afgepropt [foto IPL].

stammen in grote vlonen

[Fig. 291

Unidentified timber SLl T79. Its shape

stroomafwaarts langs de rivieren naar

[Fig. 271

de kustgevoerd. Om de stammen tot

The end of SLl T99 in position above

€en balk die doer denken aan een

een stijf vlot aaneen te binden werden

the margin plank SL1 T113. The luting

helmstok. Het stuk is echterzeer ruw

erpennen ingedreven. In het Duits

material can be seen along the seam.


worden diepennen Spannkeil

Her eind van SLI T99zoals het boven

genoemd. De veronderstelling is nu dat

de buitenste dekplank - het lijfhout-

deze gaten zijn gemaakt ten behoeve

past Her breeuwwerk is zichtbaar

van Spannkeile en dat her dus sporen

[foto IPLI.



resembles that of a tiller.

All the planking is Pinus sylvestris and 5.5 cm in thickness. SLI T102. A small piece of what appears to be coaming for a small companion way.

Miscellaneous or unidentified timbers SLI T100. Fragment of beam with rebate. A piece of softwood is nailed into the rebate. SLI T I 0 1. Timber with a rabbet along one edge pierced by bolts, spikes and with two staples on one side. There is a trace of tar in the rabbet. SLl T I 10. Part of a narrowing thick plank with a dished depression at one end. It is pierced with spikes and a bolt and has caulking material along both edges. Opposite the side with the depression there are marks indicating it was positioned against frames. The fastenings corroborate this. On what would be the outer surface there is a small repair patch let in over a large knot [fig. 241. SLI T105. The end of a piece of timber with two dished surfaces similar to that on the end of T110. SLl T I 11. Fragment of timber with bolts passing through it in two planes. One edge is slightly rounded. SLI T20. Small timber, nail fastened, with two flat sides and the other two rounded. One of the flat sides has luting. SLI T79. A large timber of good quality surviving for a length of 2.30 m. At the damaged end there were 5 through-bolts with indications that they were fastened over a series of stepped plates or iron straps. The only other fastening is a bolt near the other end passing through the timber in the other plane [fig. 291. The undamaged end is roughly bollard shaped and the whole timber is slightly curved. It is similar in shape to a tiller [depending on the vessel type] but it is rather roughly finished and may have another function.


Ship's fittings

Windlass The windlass is made from a single piece of pine 4.23 m in length with a diameter of 47.5 cm. It is of the handspike type with two sets of handspike holes on each side of the pawl rim which are cut in line. The pawl rim is a series of notches cut into the windlass barrel, the back face and the sides of each are faced with iron. The barrel was originally octagonal but has been rounded off by heavy wear particularly on one side. The ends are conical where the windlass rotated in the bits [figs. 30, 311.



[Fig. 301 Windlass SL1 A5. It is made from a single piece of pine. Het spil of braadspil van SL I is gemaakt

Pump SLl A13. A section of pump tube was recovered 75 x 20 cm with a bore of 11.5 cm [fig. 321.

uit BBn stuk grenen. Oorspronkelijk was

8; .


het spil achtkantig, maar de facetten zijn in her gebruik afgesleten. De beide einden lopen uit in konische tappen. Er

Hook S L l A55. Iron hook with an eye at the crown [fig. 331.

zijn twee series vierkante gaten voor de handspaken in uitgekapt[foto j.a.1. [Fig. 311 Detail of windlass SL1 A5. In het midden van het spil zijn paltanden uitgehakt. De onderzijde van iedere paltand is afgezet met een ijleren plaatje [foto i.a.1. [Fig. 321 Fragment of a pump tube, SL1 A13 A441

Een deel van een houten oomokoker

SLl A67. Masthead strap

Standing rigging Strap of iron in the form of a square and circle, probably a mast head strap. The square part, fitting around the head of the mast, is 12.5 x 12.5 cm. The round part, binding the foot of the top mast, has a diameter of 16 cm [fig. 341. A total of four deadeyes were recovered. Three are of the same type and size, teardrop shaped, three holed and bound with round section iron bar. Two of these still had fragments of the rope lanyards in the holes. The other deadeye had three holes in one line [fig. 351. Associated with these is a strap of iron 900 x 70 x 10 mm, pierced for bolts. It is likely to be a chain plate [fig. 361. Two lengths of hawser laid rope 32 and 38 mm in diameter. They are served with 6 mm twine and tarred and are fragments of the shrouds.

Stuk beslag dat vermoedelijk gediend heeft om een steng met een mast te verbinden [foto IPL]. [Fig. 351 Deadeyes SLl A3, SLl A39, SL1 A44 and SL1 A40. Jufferblokken [foto's IPL]. [Fig. 361 SL1 A43. Part of a chain plate Puttingijzer [foto IPL].



Running rigging SLl A64. Single sheaved block [wood sheave, iron pin] with iron binding and a hook at one end [fig. 371. SL1 A38. Cheek of a block, the binding was probably a rope strop [fig. 381. SL1 A58. Fiddle block with iron binding and a hook at one end. One of the cheeks has been repaired [fig. 391. SL1 A60. Single sheaved block with a flattened crown, called a sheepshead block. On each side above the swallow protrudes an iron hook [fig. 401. Originally the tapered shafts on these hooks interlocked. One of the hooks, however, was broken. The shaft is reused to keep the other hook in place, a set of pins being driven through a hole through both. The broken hook was reforged in order to lengthen it and to create a new barbed shaft, which was driven into the block's wood [fig. 411. SL1 A65. Fragment of a small iron bound single sheaved block with 10 mm rope still roved through it. SL1 A37. Knight head, single sheaved. The head is a chamfered square in section and flares upwards finishing in a moulded edge [fig. 421. Through the base there are through holes cut at right angles to the sheave which

are presumably for its anchorage. At the mouth of each hole there is a rebate for an iron strap to which the knight was probably bolted. The holes seem to have been cut to an oval section and show signs of wear but this is unclear. SLI A5 1. A traveller consisting of an iron ring served with thin line, then covered with a piece of leather which is sewn around the outside edge. It is of the type with a hook set in the middle of a shackle [Lees, 1984,371 [fig. 431. The ring is 3 1 mm thickness and 32.5 cm in diameter [which would indicate a sprit diameter of 26 cm: 415 of the traveller's diameter]. Apart from the metal pin of A64, all the pins and sheaves of the blocks are of wood, some of the pins may be Lignum Vitae. Chain SLl A7. 4 links with a D-shackle which has a square pin and a swivel link. SLI A8. Two lengths of chain joined by a D-shackle and totalling ten metres in length. SLl A9. 7 links of chain. The association of this chain with the ship is not clear as the windlass is of a type used with hemp anchorcable rather than chain. The presence of the swivel links and shackles suggests this may be part of the mooring chain of a wreck marker buoy. The task for marking wrecks in this area was the responsibility of the Commissarissen van de Pilotage. 1.2.3

Associated finds

Equipment and fittings SLI A76. Two jacks with chamfered wooden shanks with a ring bolt on the side. The top and bottom were sheathed in iron. They are concreted together by the degraded iron mechanism. This consists of a toothed bar of iron set in a rebate on the inside of the shank. The foot of the bar was turned flat, being placed under the object to be lifted. It was cloven in shape similar to a crow bar. The jack was operated by a handle turning a gear wheel that raised or lowered the bar. A similar example from the first half of the 19th century is shown in Maarleveld [1983, 241. SLI A68. Three pieces of a grindstone 39.5 cm in diameter and 7.5 cm in thickness, with a square hole for the axle. It has chisel marks on the sides and is smooth on its outer surface. This suggests it was a grinding wheel for sharpening blades as opposed to quern stone [fig. 441.





. '






zetten. De bovenkant is als een bolder afgewerkt [foto IPL].


[Fig. 431 [Fig. 371

[Fig. 411

SLl A51. Traveller with shackle and

SL1 A64. Single-sheaved block.

SLl A60 has undergone a major repair


Enkelschijfsblok met buitenbeslag.

after one of its hooks had broken off.

Een zogenaamde travelaar. Het is een

Toen de schaapskop voor

ijzeren ring waar touw omheen gewonden is, waarna het geheelis

[Fig. 381

conservering uiteen werd genomen

SI1 A38. Cheek of a block scored for a

bleek dat 6en van de twee haken die

bekleed met leer. Aan e6n kantzit een

rope strop.

oorspronkelijk van weerszijden op een

haak en twee ogen. Hiemp werd de

Wang van een stropblok [foto IPLI.

lange veer in het middendammetje

onderzijde [halsl van een voorzeil

verankerd waren ooit was afgebroken.

gebonden. De ring was rand een

[Fig. 391

Het gebroken eind is opnieuw

boegspriet of kluiverboom gemonteerd

SLl A58. Long tackle or fiddle block,

uifgesmeed, waarbij oak weerhaken

en met een val kon zo het voorzeil naar

iron bound and hooked.

zijn aangebracht Vervolgens is die

buiten worden gebracht [foto [IPL].

Vioolblok. Een van de wangen is

haak iets lager dan oorspronkelijk in

gerepareerd [foto's IPL].

het blok aangebracht.

[Fig. 401

[Fig. 421

SLl AGO. Ram's head block.

SL1 A37. Knight.


Enkelschijfs knechtje. Dnderin zijn er

[Fig. 451

haaks op de richting van de schijf

SL1 A5011. Stave of a wooden bucket.

gaten in gekapt om de knecht vast te

Duig van een emmer of kuip [foto IPLI.

[Fig. 441 SLl A68. Grindstone






Slijpsteen [foto IPLI.

SLI A5011. A stave of a wooden bucket [fig. 451. SLI A.5013. Wooden tool handle, probably belonging to SLI A76 [fig. 461. SLI A59. An iron shod wooden shovel [fig. 471. SL1 A69/1. An iron hinge possibly from a cabin door [fig. 481.

Inventory SL1 A57. Copper alloy bowl, the handle of which was riveted to the side [fig. 491. SL1 A8 1. The Ijd of a copper alloy [possibly brass] container [fig. SO]. SLI A90/1, 2, 3,4. Four pewter plates with identical touch marks [fig. 511. Found stacked together and pierced by an iron bolt, probably during the wrecking or dredging process. They are Dutch, made of English metal possibly in North Holland. They show the marks of reasonably heavy use. SLI A83. A porcelain saucer with blue and white design. Unmarked on the base [fig. 521. SL1 A5014. Rim sherd of a wide salt glazed earthenware shallow bowl [fig. 531. SLI A5015. Several small sherds of an earthenware vessel with a shiny green glaze on the inside. The fabric is buff coloured with coarse gritty inclusions [shown reassembled in fig. 541. SLI A.5012. Fragment of a green glazed red earthenware tile with fragments of mortar adhering, probably from the hearth [fig. 551. 1.3



Dendrochronological analysis The application of the dendrochronological method on ancient ship's timbers provides a powerful tool in dating. This, however, is not its only, nor its greatest asset. It also provides information that is vital to a proper understanding of the timber trade as well as the timber choices made in shipbuilding. The principles of the method, the methodological problems and the procedures followed during the Slufterresearch are briefly outlined in Appendix I. As an aid in understanding the statistics given in the text the reader is advised to read the appendix first. The reference chronologies that were used in the analysis are also shown there. Sampling Since it was impossible to record these ship's remains in situ the association of the different timbers was inferred during the research. Some timbers were brought up by the


Table 1 SL 1 Number of

Number of

Sample no.

Structural element


sapwood rings sapwood boundary



Ceiling plank



Hull plank






Ceiling plank






Ceiling plank




Frame timber




Date of last ring


Table 2 SL 1 Sample no.



Lower Saxony coastal area


dredgers, others were lifted from the site by divers during the on-site inspection. From these more or less loose timbers seven samples were taken. Three are of ceiling planking, two of waterways, one of a futtock and one of a hull plank [table 11.

Possible area of origin

1580 - 1776


1591 - 1710 1548 - 1693 1573 - 1673 1557 - 1649

Lower Saxony coastal area or Weserbergland

1526 1715


Weserbergland, Hamburg or Southern Germany Hamburg Weserbergland, Hamburg or Southern Germany Weserbergland, Hamburg, Lower Saxony coastal area or Southern Germany -


Southern Germany

Low Countries

[Fig. 461

[Table 21

SLl A5013. Wooden tool handle.

200 =mean of sample 1 and 2

Handvat, vermoedelijk behorend b i j

300 =mean of sample 6 and 7

b i n van de w e e gevonden

400 =mean of sample 3,6 and 7

dommekrachten [foto IPL].

Sample 5 is dated by sample 4 of SL 3 (t = 9.14, GL = 65.9 (99.0))

[Fig. 471

Sample 7 is dated by sample 6

SL1 A59. lron shod wooden shovel

(t = 7.23, GL = 67.1)

Houten schep met ijzerbeslag [foto's

Overzicht van de verschillende


herkomstgebieden per houtmonstar

[Fig. 481

tussen de jaarringcurve van een

SL1 A6911. lron hinge.

houtmonster en de referentie-

Scharnier [foto IPLI.

chronologie van een bepaald gebied

[Fig. 491

(maat voor de parallel-variatie tussen

SLl A57. Copper alloy bowl.

twee jaarringcurven) en de t-waarde

Een gee1koperen pan waaraan een

(een getransformeerde correlatie-

van SL 1. De mate van overeenkomst

wordt uitgedrukt i n de Gleichlaufigkeit

handvat heeftgezeten dat met nieten

coefficient). Hoe hoger beide waarden

bevestigd was.

des te beter passen de curven op elkaar, tanminste statistisch gezien. Een statistische overeenkomst moet altijd visueel worden gecontroleerd.


Dating Of the seven samples only one had sapwood. This sample with sapwood [4] -the sample of the futtock - could not be dated, at least not with the chronologies at hand. The number of rings [58, of which 17 were sapwood] is too small for a good synchronisation because the chance of random correlation is too great. In other words the sample-curve fits at different places on different standard chronologies. The ring pattern also showed an irregular growth pattern probably not reflecting the climatological signal. In the histogram of fig. 56 the date of the las't ring of each sample, the length of each ringpattern and their relative position is represented. Three mean site-chronologies could be produced. Ceiling planks [ l ] and [2] synchronised [t = 8.47, GL = 67.1 [99.9%]], waterways [6] and [7] synchronised [t = 7.23, GL = 67.1 [99.0%]] and the sample of the hull plank [3] synchronised with waterway [6] [t = 3.78, GL = 63.0 [99%]]. Surprisingly hull plank [3] did not match with waterway [7]. Ceiling plank [5] synchronised with sample [4] from wrecksite SL 3 [t = 9.14, GL = 65.9 [99%]]. This very high t-value suggests that the two timbers have the same area of origin [a t-value higher than 10 means that the timbers are cut from the same tree]. On this basis, it is possible that SL 1 and SL 3 contain remains of the same ship. This point will be further considered below. Closer inspection of the histogram of fig. 56 suggests that sample [ I ] of a ceilingplank is a repair, because of the gap of 6 1 years between the last ring of this sample and last ring of sample [3], a hull plank. However, one has to consider the fact that all the samples of this timber-complex are from planks. As economical use of timber in shipbuilding requires each log or bole to be converted into several planks of varying width and thickness and considering the further trimming of a plank carried out when fitting it, a difference of 61 growth rings, which is only about 6 cm, is not a great deal. Another point that argues against the interpretation of sample [ l ] as a repair is the fact that sample [ l ] and [2] have a very high correlation and therefore originate from the

same area. This might indicate that the timbers belonged to the same cargo and so have the same felling date. Whether the same is true for the whole complex of timbers is another question. The difference in area of origin of the timbers [see below] suggests that it is not. It is possible that the timber was used from stocks held in the shipyard which could explain the different origins and felling dates but this seems unlikely. Nevertheless the felling date of the youngest dated sample, assuming it is not a repair, is the closest we could get to the building date of the vessel. The actual felling date of the youngest dated sample must be estimated, since this sample is incomplete, i.e. without sapwood. In the case of samples of German origin this means that one has to reckon with a mean sapwood allowance of 20 years. Because there are no dated samples with sapwood one assumes that the last ring of the youngest dated sample is the closest to the heartwood/sapwood boundary. Adding this estimate to the last ring of sample [ l ] gives a date around or after 1796 A.D. Since an unknown number of heartwood rings is missing this date should be interpretated as a terminus post quem. In this case it is of no use to state any confidence interval at a certain probability level, because of the unknown number of missing heartwood rings. To assess the building date is a problem in its own right. The relationship between the felling date and the building date is influenced by several factors: was the wood immediately transported after felling? How long did it take to transport the wood? Was wood stored in yards or used immediately? Was the timber seasoned and/or dried? Some of these questions could be answered tentatively. If the suggestion is right that we are dealing here with a tjalk or smak like ship type, then we could infer that she was built in a small yard. These yards probably had neither the financial resources to maintain large stocks of seasoning timber, or facilities and space for storage over the period of time this would take. Storage and seasoning would be restricted to a minimum. This makes it highly likely that the ship would be afloat within say two years after felling the trees, which gives a building date around or after 1798. Origin of the timbers The restricted application of a reference chronology to a geographical region was mentioned above. During the investigation not all the existing chronologies were


available and so this limits the conclusions one can draw on the origin of the timbers. It is possible that better matches would have been achieved with one of those not used, such as the Polish, Danish, Norwegian or both Swedish curves. Another aspect is that there are areas of forest where timber was obtained for ship-building for which chronologies do not yet exist. Every sample [or mean of samples] has been run against the available chronologies. Sometimes samples synchronise with more than one standard chronology, while the date stays the same. On the basis of statistics it is not possible to match a sample to a certain area of origin. Neither, in some cases, can a preference be made on the basis of visual examination. The Hamburg-, Weserburglandand South-German chronologies for example are very similar. Another possibility can occur, namely that a timber comes from an area between one or more chronologies. When this is the case it is not possible to tie down the sample to a particular chronology. In table 2 the statistics are given for matching positions between samples with the same date and different chronologies. Samples [7] and [5] are not dated by any chronology but by other samples. The area of origin is thus assumed to be the same as that of the sample it is dated with. The samples of ceiling planks [ I ] and [2] could be visually related to the Hamburg chronology. The sample of the hull plank [3] fits visually a little better on the Lower Saxony coastal area chronology. The sample of waterway [6] gives a good fit on three chronologies: that of Hamburg and those Weserbergland and southern German. It was impossible visually to discriminate between them. Since sample [4] of wreck SL 3, by which sample [5] is dated, matches with several chronologies: the Weserbergland, Hamburg, Lower Saxony coastal area, and South-Germany chronologies, the same applies to sample [5] of SL 1. Visually the curve of SL 3 [4] fitted best on the Weserbergland, Hamburg and Lower Saxony coastal area standard chronologies. In short the wood comes from different areas in the more eastern parts of West-Germany and the Lower Saxony coastal area.

[Fig. 531 SLl A50/4. Rimsherd of an earthenware bowl. Randscherfvan een ondiepe kom [foto IPL]. [Fig. 541 SLl A5015. Part of the handle of a green glazed coarse earthenware vessel. Scherf met groen glazuur[foto IPLI. [Fig. 501 SLl A81. Lid of a copper alloy

[Fig. 551


SL1 A5012. Green glazed tile with

Koperen deksel dat niet op de pan

mortar adhering.


Groen geglazuurde tegel met metselspecie.

[Fig. 511 SL1 A90/1,2,3,4. Pewter plates. Een stapel van vier tinnen borden was doorstoken geraakt met een ijzeren pen. De borden vertonen veel snijsporen en behoren vermoedelijk tot het kommaliewant en niettot de lading.


Caulking and luting materials Several samples of caulking and luting materials were submitted to John Evans, Head of Department of Natural Sciences at North East London Polytechnic. Initially the samples were investigated by scanning electron microscope to assess their

[Fig. 521 SLl A83. Porcelain saucer. Blauwporceleinen schaaltje [foto IPLI.



general make-up. They prooved to be composed of a mixture of hair, possibly wool, vegetable matter, including petal fragments, and a binder [fig. 571. No hemp fibres were found. Subsequently the samples were extracted with a series of solvents. The various extracts were investigated by a range of chromatographic techniques, including thin layer and gas chromatography. The results of this phase of investigation indicated that the binder in all cases consisted of a pine pitch. Known weights of each sample were ignited to constant weight in order to estimate the amount of mineral fraction, i.e. [mainly] the clay component. The clay content ranged between 47 and 53% [as opposed to a 14 - 18% range for SL 4 samples]. As lime was sometimes used with pitch as a waterproofing agent the mineral residues were examined for calcium carbonate, the compound of slaked lime [calcium hydroxide] with carbon dioxide. None of this was found, so lime had not been used. 1.4



The site The remains at wrecksite SL 1 were encountered at depths between 14 and 18 m. Part of the 'observations' were made through the crude mediation of the dredging instruments. The site has been accessible for on-site inspection to a very limited extent and this only at the very last stage of its clearance. No detailed soil profile or site map is available. Nevertheless the orientation of the ship's remains could be firmly established, as well as the fact that the early holocene subatlantic boundary locally occurred at a greater depth than in the surrounding area as shown by the geological survey. In combination these factors shed some light on the process of site formation. A substantial part of the upper structure of the wrecked ship must have sunk upside down as a coherent whole still containing part,of the ships inventory and fittings. It seems likely that the ship has rolled over first and that the hull was broken apart at a later stage, the deck S t r u c t u r a l element



structure remaining approximately where it had originally settled, other parts of the hull drifting off. Flotsam and jetsam must have got dispersed wide and far. The main wreckage must have sunk in a tidal gully blocking the tides and thus starting off a process of scouring. The localised erosion has caused the remains to dig into the older sediments only to be covered again after their blocking effect on the tides had been sufficiently reduced.

The ship During the course of the recording of the remains from sites SL 1, SL 3, and SL 5 the many similarities between them fostered a suspicion that they might originate from one and the same vessel. As more detailed analysis proceeded the accumulating weight of evidence made this seem increasingly likely. One of the strongest indicators was the dendrochronological analysis of SL 1 and SL 3. Not only was there a high correlation between the ring patterns of the two assemblages, which suggests the timber came from the same area, but the estimated felling dates were only three years apart. The remains from SL 5 have not been dated by this method. Many characteristics of the timbers and fastenings, however, exhibit strong similarities to those of SL 1 and SL 3. The four types of fastenings: treenails, iron bolts, spikes and nails, are to all intents and purposes identical in all three assemblages. Not all types are present in every case but those that are crossmatch exactly with regard to size, shape and general condition. For example bolts in all three cases have the same chamfered cross section. The nails in all three cases have the same facetted heads with square shanks. Treenails with caulked cuts, some with oak pins were also found in planks from all three sites. The general appearance of the timbers in all three cases is very similar, the oak frame timbers closely corresponding in size. A fragment of pine deck planking from SL 5 is the same thickness as those of SL 1. A deck beam from SL 5 [SL5 TI51 matches those of 1.4.2

[Fig. 561 Histogram showing the date of the last treering of each sample as well as the length of the treering patterns and their relative position. De relatieve ligging van de monsters van SL 1 ten opzichte van elkaar en de datering van de buitenste jaarring van elk monster. De bomen zijn in 1796 of kor7 daarna omgehakt W e mogen aannemen dathet schip binnen twee jaarna deze veldaturn is gebouwd: in of fond 1798. [Fig. 571

Scanning electron microscope image of caulking sample showing hair, possibly wool. Elekbonenmicroscoopvergroting van her

breeuwmateriaal. Het bleek re bestaan uit haar, plantenresten en een bindmiddel, maar hennep [touw ofwerkl ontbrak [foto John Evans].

SL 1 with regard to size, curvature, and general appearance. It has the same smooth well finished surface, shows a similar nail pattern from the deck plank fastenings on its upper side, and has a dovetailed end for location in a shelf very similar in size and shape to the rebates for half beams in the shelf piece from SL 1. Hull planks of SL 1 and SL 3 have former nail holes filled with small wooden pegs. Finally, considering the parts of ship's structure represented by the timbers from the various sites: those of SL 1 consist predominantly of deck elements, while those of SL 3 are all hull timbers. SL 5 is also hull structure barring the deck support beam and the fragment of deck plank. Therefore they are complementary in this respect, something that would be rather unlikely were they wrecks of separate vessels. This suggests that it is one hull that was dismembered and became scattered during the wrecking process. In support of this possibility, the deck structure of SL 1 was found lying deeply buried and upside down. It is well preserved and was still an extensive coherent unit when first found. The presence of a number of artefacts from the cabin as well as rigging elements and deck fittings, suggest that this was not a part of a deck torn from a hull during wrecking. Rather the opposite is more likely, i.e. after sinking the hull came to lie upside down after which sections of the hull were torn away. The distance between the sites [see fig. 131 is not inconsistent with this hypothesis as wreck structure can become scattered over an area of many square kilometres. While it is not possible to prove that these assemblages are from the same vessel, the weight of evidence makes this more likely than that two or three vessels of similar type, size and date sunk in such close proximity.

Construction In discussing the construction of what will be treated as one vessel, the framing system cannot be positively determined due to the fact that none of the hull timbers were connected or articulated in any way. However, there is evidence of the planking system in SLI T45. On the basis of its shape, curvature, fastenings and the marks of the timbers to which it was fastened, this is almost certainly from the bow. The various factors suggesting this are discussed below. Fig. 58 shows the principle of its position relative to these timbers and the stem. The mark along the end of its outer surface



indicates that it either rested in a form of rabbet in the side of the stem or more likely, that it was nailed to the inner surface of the stem. A similar arrangement is seen in a Tjalk-like vessel, 17 m in length and 4.5 m in breadth, that wrecked in the mid 19th century and was found in the former Zuiderzee at lot E46 in East Flevoland in The Netherlands [figs. 59, 601. It is a method of planking well suited to ships with round bows and round sterns and it is seen in many of the various related types. Numerous examples of this general hull form appear in contemporary paintings and prints, for example, a kof zeijlende bij de wind drawn by Groenewegen [I7891 [fig. 611. As observed above several former nail holes on this same plank are plugged with wooden pegs. These holes resulted from the temporary clamps that were used to hold the planks together during construction. This technique was applied where the planking was erected in advance of some or all of the frames. As the frames were placed and fastened, so the clamps were removed and the nail holes plugged. It is as characteristic of Dutch shipbuilding technology as is the method of framing round bowed vessels illustrated in fig. 58. As described, some of the timbers recovered were able to be reassembled to form what is probably part of the starboard fore deck area [fig. 62, also fig. 281. These were: the curved beam shelf SL1 T74, deck beams SL1 T80 and T77, deck planks; SLl TI14 and T116, and a margin planklwaterway assembly SL1 T113 and T99. The beam shelf has a close parallel in another tjalk-like vessel also found in the polders of the former Zuiderzee at lot M40 [Oosting, pers.comm.1. This vessel sunk some time around 1815 and was 19 m in length and 4.5 m wide. The shelf piece of SL 1 was rebated to accept the dovetailed ends of beams and half beams as shown in fig. 62. Its context was confirmed by the nail patterns in the plank above and by the paint on the underside of the plank. These also indicate the beam spacing which is relatively close, around 5 1 - 6 1.5 cm for the first four from the bow [which includes half beams] and between 70 and 108 cm for the five main beams aft of them. The spacing of the beams and their narrow depth is seen in many illustrations and plans of small round hulled merchant sailing vessels. An oil painting by J.C. Dahl, dated 1829 and cited by Cederlund [I98 1,291 in his discussion of the Alvsnabben wreck shows a galjoot with closely spaced beams that are


[Fig. 601

The bow at E46. Detailopname van de binnenzijde van de boeg van hetschip op E46[foto RIJPI. [Fig. 611

Contemporary kof. Kof zeijlende bij de wind, Groenewegen, 1789. [Fig. 621

Reassembled deck structure from SL 1: beam shelf SLl T74, deck beam SLl [Fig. 581

T80, waterway assembly consisting of

Hypothetical reconstruction of bow

SLl TI13 and SLl T99.

planklstem assembly of SL 1.

Een aantal elementen kon weer in

Reconstructie van de boeg. De

oorspronkelijk verband worden

huidplanken rusten op de binnenzijde

samengevoegd. Hierzijn die

van de voorsteven.

elementen weergegeven die de opbouw van het dek in het voorschip

[Fig. 591

illustreren. Opvallend is de kromme

Excavation of a tjalk-like vessel in

dekweger waar de dekbalken invallen.

Eastern Flevoland at lot E46. The vessel

Voorrszijn bet lijfhout en het

shows an arrangement of planking that

binnenboord te herkennen. Zie ook

is similar to SL 1.

fig. 28.

Tjalk-achtig schip op kavel E46in oostelijk Flevoland. Ook hier rusten de huidplanken op de binnenzijde van de voorsteven.


n case o f ,

:ries. e wreck a 1 to be ren lue. It wa e operatic :d by arch 1 would bt studied af

learance om the m 1 archaeol ad been rc removinl for furthe niques, !t involved 'Y of the a 'pt inforn; )r the ope tight tin furdy cha to clear :gligible 1 Dment wii utter-suct of the ovc

floating s

111 wreck:

ge grab If rance had It of the I Ieyond th use explo was C ~ O S , and volu ollect an! '. During the coal ugly little XI.The 11, alfofit w mably ~t1 remains ed in the shown ir ckage wa 1 two sm: as fitting: gging ele lsiderati, reckage 1 of the hu quite clea )nStructic ;. Instead ?re restor

also similarly steeply cambered to those of SL 1. The plan of a smak of 1777 by Van Konijnenburg [1913, fig. 231 again shows very closely spaced beams. Both these examples also show the arrangement of carlings between alternate pairs of beams and then only in part of the vessel. A similar arrangement is suggested by the rebates in the sides of the deck beams of SL 1. Another drawing from the same volume [Konijnenburg: fig. 221 shows the section of a kof of 1830 in which the beams are of similar shallow section to SL 1 as well as being closely spaced. The waterway assembly [fig. 621 formed of a lipped margin plank with a curved stringer above it is unusual. However, of the many vessels excavated so far, few are well preserved at this height so comparative material is limited. The section of the oak stringer shows that the bulwark structure tumbled inwards in the manner of many of the small round ship types. Other pieces found at SL 1 presumably represent a waterway of a more usual type i.e. they are of oak and have rebates cut for the half beams. The two types cannot be reconciled but this inconsistency is not problematic as the nature of the deck structure could have changed along the length of the vessel between the cabin and hold areas. As described, it appears that in the latter configuration a gutter was left between the outermost plank and the bulwark. This would be consistent with a position in the middle of the ship. The position of the main hatch, necessarily aft of the series of main beams as indicated by the deck plank also left a fairly wide area of deck between it and the bulwarks. This is shown by two of the knees described above [SLl T95 and T961. Similar hatch knees were found in a boeier-like vessel, 17 m in length and 4.20 m wide, wrecked at the end of the 17th century in the Zuiderzee at lot F34 [figs. 63, 641 and another vessel also from the polders, found at lot 0 2 7 1 [Oosting, pers. comm.]. The latter also shows a hatch knee placed almost alongside a hanging knee, while in F34 they are placed in the centre of the space between the hanging knees supporting the gangway between the hatch and the bulwark. The latter are like SL1 T97. The hanging knees that bind the deck beams of F34 are similar to SLl T78 [fig. 22, T78]. The recovery of the windlass is one of the factors reinforcing the interpretation of this assemblage as that of the bow. In addition many of the rigging elements also suggest a


function associated with the bow, in particular the traveller which would have run along the bow sprit for setting a jib sail. The sheepshead block [SLl A601 is also an indicator of the bow area: it was used for hoisting the head of a foresail. The recovery of several finds that are likely to have come from a cabin area might on the other hand suggest the stern. However, there could be a cabin at both the bow and the stern. In most types of these vessels the stern cabin was under a raised deck. In the structure illustrated above this is clearly not the case, whereas paint and panelling seem to confirm the cabin-like nature. Caulking and luting It is interesting to note that during the analysis of caulking materials no remains of oakum were found. Oakum is a caulking material composed of hemp fibres, usually derived from tearing apart old or faulty rope. Its absence is remarkable as oakum is usually cited in any description of the caulking process. It may, however, have been used far less than is commonly assumed.

Ship type It can be seen from the above that the ship from SL 1, SL 3 and SL 5 conforms in key aspects to vessels of the Dutch shipbuilding tradition but before attempting to ascribe the remains to a particular type, an overview of small merchant vessels of this general form is necessary. This overview is not a classification of types or an exhaustive documentation of their characteristics. Rather it is intended as a contribution to the discussion on the relationships between the various types of ships with round bows and round sterns, which are far less well defined than is commonly assumed. From the constructional elements recovered it is evident that SL 1 was a round bowed vessel. Although the evidence is lacking, it is presumed that the stern was similarly formed. Many Dutch ship types share this characteristic form, the bluff bow and round stern being a product of building vessels that are a compromise between carrying capacity and sailing qualities. Other characteristics of these ship types are a round stem post, straight stern post and flat bottom. A type embodying these qualities is the tjalk, which - in iron - still survives today and for that reason similar vessels are referred to as being tjalk-like for convenience, as for example those found in the polders noted above as having similarities to SL 1.

[Fig. 631

A wreck that was excavated at lot F34 in Eastern Flevoland shows hatch knees which are very similar to those found at S L 1 . De knieen SL I T95 en SL I T96 die zijn afgebeeld op fig. 22 en 23zijn verwerkt geweest in de constructie van een luikhoofd. Bij de opgraving van een scheepswrak op kavelF34 in oostelijk Flevoland kwam exact dezelfde constructie aan het licht Her gaat daar om een boeierachtig vaartuig dat 17 m lang en 4,20 m breed is. Het is te dateren op het einde van de 17e e e u w . [ F i g . 641

Detail of hatch structure F34. Het luikhoofd van F34 in detail [foto's RIJP].


This does not mean that SL I was a tjalk. Other vessels with strong similarities in form were used for a wide variety of purposes. Some served on inland waters, such as the poon, the Brabantsch beurtschip the Zuidhollandsche gaffeltjalk and the Vriescl?e tjalk. Others operated on the open sea like the Izoeker., the buis and the galjoot. In addition there were many that sailed both inland waters and the open sea, such as the smak, the kof and the Vlaarnsche pleit. This versatility is worthy of comment. It is often remarked that the qualities of this hull form, in particular the flat bottom, made them eminently suitable for trade in the shallow inland seas. This is certainly true but their full bows also took the sea well without plunging or dipping too deep, and enabled them to operate succesfully in both spheres. This was cited by the masters of the tjalks that were still trading in the early decades of this century as being one of their positive qualities [Loomeyer, 1980, 841. Because of the strong similarities of form between these types, defining their various characteristics is difficult. The names of the various types were used over a long period, at least from the 17th to the 19th century. While names remained the same it is certain that many aspects of the vessels themselves did not. For instance the galjoot is known to have gradually changed in hull form and rig during the eighteenth century [Van Beylen 1970-73, 2, 3081. An extreme, yet cautionary example, cited by McGowan [I98 1,321 concerns the boeier- originally a two masted vessel, which dropped out of use towards the end of the 17th century. By the mid 18th century the name had come to mean a round sterned craft used for pleasure sailing. Another example is that of the kof which came to mean two different types of vessel that were in use at the same time. One, the smaller to medium sized inland and coastal trader, the other a large sea going form. Table 3 shows data taken from newspapers in the northern provinces in the period between 1743 and 1798 in which ships were advertised for sale [Loomeyer 1980, 151. The type and the length of the vessel was given. The two distinct types of kof show clearly. The small kof was sometimes differentiated from its larger relation by being referred to as kofschuite, kofschipje, and kofke, where the suffix je and ke means small. The big kofs had a slightly sharper underwater hull form to improve their sailing ability, whereas the smaller kofs retained more similarity to the

in case c weries. the wreck ad to be P tinue. ~t v rice Opera )red by an tat would e studied


Clearan, From the ed archae had been 3f removi "or furtt :hniques, re involve Iity of the cept infor itor the O[ he tight t~ Sturdy cl: ed to clea negligible lipment u cutter-su, t of the 0. :floating "1 wrecl Uge grab , arance ha Int of the beyond t I use expl, t was cho s and volt collect ar e. Durine f the coal ingly littl jed. The t lalf of it \ ~mablyit :remains lted in the shown i :ckage w, h two sm as fitting k i n g elf

"iderati (reckage . of the h~ quite cle: Onstructic s. Instead ere res to1

tjalks. The main difference between the latter was the greater depth of the kof and the greater length to breadth ratio of the tjalk. That they were close in general characteristics is illustrated in the reference made by one Jochum Jans in 1781 who was offering his vessel for sale, describing it as a tjalk or kofschip [Loomeyer 1980, 161. This strong similarity between the various types is another aspect of the problem. Le Comte [I83 1, 121 calls the smak the sister of the kof. In support of this, in a survey of ship masters living in the Veenkolonieen [a former peat digging area in the south west of the province of Groningen] a ship named the Eendracht is listed as a kof later smak [Van Koldam et al., 19791. Although the two types were obviously similar, there were differences. The smak has a triangular helmport transom with the jigger mizzen mast stepped onto this structure just forward of the head of the rudder. To further complicate the issue, an illustration by Groenewegen [I7891 shows a vessel he refers to as a smak or a tjalk. The stern is smak-like so this either implies that the structure was not exclusive to smaks or that tjalk was already becoming a general term? From the above it is evident that caution must be exercised in defining the characteristics of the various types, let alone in attributing archaeological remains to a specific type. Even if this can be done, which as Cederlund points out is a necessary preliminary step [1981, 161 it is often not possible to draw a clear distinction between them. This is nowhere more clearly demonstrated than when considering the many vessels of related types that have been discovered in the polders [the former Zuiderzee]. The degree of preservation in many cases is remarkable but even where the majority of the hull remains it is still impossible to ascribe it to a particular type. Hence the appellation tjalk-like or boeier-like. A contributary factor is that in many of these wrecks a major proportion of the structure at deck level is missing. Because all these types were the product of the same ship-building tradition hull form and construction technique are not diagnostic. Aspects of rig, deck configuration, and hatch structure etc., being connected with the purpose to which the hull was put also had an influence on how the vessel was classified. On the question of size several factors are of help. The one preserved deck beam indicates a breadth of around 5 m adding an estimated 40 - 50 cm for the thickness of the hull


Table 3

Length in meters




12 - 14



14 - 16



16 - 18


18 - 19



10 12






20 - 21



Tot. Staatje met afmetingen van tjalken, smakken en koffen, gebaseerd op advertenties in noordelijke kranten met ten verkoop aangeboden schepen (Naar Loomeyer. 1980, 151

Table 4 Tjalk




timbers. The ends of the beams are fairly square implying they were from a position at or near the main breadth. This is not at all unlikely for, eventhough this beam is from fairly far forward the sides of this hull form were relatively parallel. The length to breadth ratio of the tjalk was around 4.9:l. This would indicate a length of 24.5 m for SL 1 which would seem too long compared to the maximum of 21 - 22 m for tjalks in fig. 61 above. Of the other types the length to breadth ratios were commonly between 3.9: 1 for smaks and 4.1 : 1 for sea going kofs [Loomeyer 1980, 181. This would give a length of between 19.5 m and 20.5 m. Sea going kofs were of the order of 24 - 28 m while the smaller type was around 12 - 16 m and 19 m at the largest. This suggests SL 1 is unlikely to be a kof. The types commonly around 19 - 22 m in length and 5 m in breadth include the smak, the hoeker and the galjoot. The hoeker at this period was common in the south of Holland while the smak was built in the north in large numbers. Table 4 shows ships built in three towns in the province of Groningen during the period from 1738 to 1805 [taken from Van Koldam et al. 1979, 43-47]. This is not assumed to be comprehensive but can be taken as a good indication of the number built of the various types. Wrecked off Rotterdam, the hoeker might be a likely suspect. The trade from the ports in the northern provinces being largely directed towards the Baltic. However, a certain amount of coastal traffic makes a northern provenance for the vessel quite plausible. An interesting pointer might be the pewter plates found on the site. Their touch marks show them to be made out of English metal and of a type made in the north of Holland around the end of the 18th century. The other finds also fit this general period and accord with the mean felling date of 1793 indicated by the dendrochronological analysis of SLlJSL3 timbers. A contributary consideration is the probable north German origin of the wood of SL 1 and SL 3. While one cannot be definite, this suggests a northern rather than a southern built vessel as most of the timber for the latter was brought down the Rhine from the south German forests. In conclusion, while the smak might seem to be the most likely type to which this ship belongs, all one can say in the light of the foregoing discussion is that it belongs firmly in the Dutch tradition of small merchant trading vessels with round bows and round



sterns. On the evidence available it is dangerous to attempt to be more definite.

[Fig. 651 Map showing the profile of the newly dug Hindergat shortly after operations. Dieptekaart van het Hindergat, kort nadat hetgegraven was.




Just like wrecksite SL 1 wrecksite SL 2 was discovered at the very beginning of sand extraction. Cutter-suction-dredger Triton had started its work to the south of the Slufter location. As the Slufter would block the Gat van de Hawk a new passage for the tides had to be created. The new channel was to cut through the Hinderplaat, a sandbank that runs parallel to the coast and it is subsequently called the Hindergat. On May 28 1986 the Triton got stuck in a wreck in the position x 59.216 and y 436.719 [fig. 131. The cutter was lifted and some heavy, characteristic ships timbers were lifted with it. The site lies just at the fringe of the projected channel, at a depth of approximately 10 m. After the timbers had been cursory examined it was decided that the site would be spared during further dredging activity. Any on-site inspection would be postponed as the site would probably be covered in spill sands. During soundings that were to be carried out to establish the development of the Hindergat as a tidal gully the wrecksite would frequently be inspected and if erosion would locally occur inspection dives could be organised [fig. 651. On July 6th, however, during a clearance operation of the Hindergat the Triton struck the wreck again. Two days later the same thing happened. No material was collected. The wreck clearly caused a substantial obstruction. Soundings carried out in May 1987 showed the site to have been totally covered in sediments. As the site was not under any further threat it was left to be for the present.



The recovered timbers, were badly damaged. Only those with significant features are described. All were of oak. SL2 T1. A badly damaged piece, 68 x 28 x 10 - 11 cm. Judging by its size and knotty character it may be part of a V-shaped floor timber. In the centre there is one treenail



hole 30 mm in diameter. SL2 T4. A V-shaped floor timber probably from near the stern. There is a rebate across the foot on one side. It is pierced by a large number of treenails [fig. 661. SL2 T5. Fragment of keel 3.2 m long 30 cm in depth. The breadth is uncertain due to splintering. There is moss luting in the rabbet for the garboard which was held in place with iron nails. The angled end is the skeg i.e. the projection protecting the foot of the rudder. The stern post had been treenailed down to the keel and at this point there is the mark of an iron bracket or heel plate that reinforced the connection with the stern post [figs. 67,681. On the under side there is a treenail hole possibly for securing a shoe or false keel. However, with its rounded crosssection this seems unlikely and it may be concerned with construction. SL2 T9. Timber with treenail holes badly worn, probably part of a futtock. SL2 T10. Plank 172 x 9 x 3 cm fastened by nails 10 mm square. They are on average placed on every 30 cm along its length [fig. 691. On what was the inboard side there is moss luting around the nail holes [fig. 701. SL2 T11. Possibly part of a small beam 70 x 11 x 9 cm, has one nail hole 9 mm. Badly damaged. SL2 T14. Short plank fragment with 4 nail holes and moss luting on one side [fig. 711. SL2 T15. Thick plank, 80 x 19 x 7 cm, possibly a wale or stringer, with an unwedged treenail 35 mm in diameter. Near the treenail on one side is a 10 x 10 mm nail hole that has been plugged with a square wooden oak peg [figs. 72,731. SL2 T18. Badly damaged fragment of timber with an angled end. Has a rebate running across it and possibly one sunning along one side though this may be dredger damage. SL2 T19. Large thick plank 230 x 13 x 4.5 cm. At one end there was a scarf joint fastened by nails and sealed with moss luting, some of which remains [fig. 741. There are also nail holes along the length of the plank irregular in pattern. Depressions in the surface indicate a nailhead of around

40 mm in diameter [fig. 751. On the reverse side to the face of the scarf there was moss luting over the whole surface. Possibly a repair. SL2 T23. Splintered fragment, probably of a beam. Iron stained luting on one side. Some nail holes in the other face. SL2 T20. Heavy iron bar fairly square in section, 6 x 6 cm and 1 m long; possibly the shank of an anchor.



After the first examination the timbers were stored in a pond that was specifically dug for the purpose. During a violent winter storm the dam between this pond and the by then extended dredging pit was broken and most of the recovered material was lost. This leaves us with a very fragmentary picture of the wreck. No dendrochronological or other analysis could be carried out.



The ship was obviously heavily built with rough and crooked timbers. No datable finds were found associated with it and no dendrochronological dating was carried out. The most distinguishing feature is the moss that was used as caulking material. In Dutch shipbuilding moss caulking was common until around 1600. By then the technique went out of use for merchant craft. Fishing boats of the North Sea coast were, however still caulked with moss well into the 19th century. With its keel, its overall dimensions and its V-shaped crutches the ship cannot readily be identified with either of these shiptypes. The fastenings that were used, 30 mm treenails and 10 mm square iron nails suggest a substantial vessel but they were a common combination and they remained standard fastenings in many countries over a long period and for vessels of widely differing size. The bias in favour of nails for the plank fastening is interesting but there is not enough material to know whether they are representative. The treenails in the floor timber SL2 T 4 [fig. 661 show they were not used exclusively. They also show that treenails were used to fasten the frame timbers fore and aft. This suggests an early date, stylistically supported by the iron heelplate bracket. Also crutch shaped floors are common in ships prior to the early 17th century when such pieces were relatively easy to obtain.


van een stuk ijzerbeslag met een breed uitgesmede veer. Mos en vorm van het ijlerwerk pleiten voor een vroege [middeleeuwse] datering.



[Fig. 701

Detail showing nail hole and moss luting. Detailopname van een van de spijkergaten. Ook hier is bet mos dat als breeuwselis gebruikt goed te herkennen [foto p.s.1. [Fig. 711

SLZT14. Plank fragment. Ook aan deze korte plank is veel mos bewaard gebleven [foto p.s.1.

[Fig. 721

SL2 T15. Plank fragment, Oit plankfragment is dikker dan de overige huiddelen. Mogelijk is bet een berghout. Naast de treknagel is een gaatje afgedicht met een vierkant houten propje [spijkerpen] [foto p.s.1. [Fig. 731

Detail of SL2 T15. Detailopname van de treknagel en de spijkerpen [foto p.s.1.

[Fig. 741

SLZT19. Thick plank. Deze plank loopt uit in een /as. Ook hier is ruimschoots mos gebruikt als breeuwsel en als pakking. [Fig. 751

Detail of SL2T19 showing nail holes and nail head depressions. Deze plank is met grote spijkers bevestigd geweest. De koppen van de vierkante spijkers tekenen zich in bet bout af. Zijzijn ongeveer 4 cm in doorsnede [foto p.s.1.





During the night of July 30th on July 3 1st 1986 the cutter-suction-dredger Hector encountered wreckage between x 59.4271~ 438.127 and x 59.4231~438.123 [fig. 131. All wood was brought ashore. Coming back to the same general area on August 2nd more wreckage was found. Progress in sandextraction was not really delayed by the remains and no on-site inspection could be organized. All wreckage recovered had been severely chopped by the cutter-suctiondredger.

had the edges beaten to form a roughly octagonal section. Nails and spikes with square shanks of around 5 mm and 10 mm respectively. The nails have a faceted head [fig. 761. Into the surface of some of the planks small wooden pegs 5 mm square had been driven. These may be to fill former nail holes. This is probably associated with the Dutch technique of construction in which temporary clamps were nailed across the edges of adjacent planks to fasten them until the frame timbers had been fitted. 3.3



All the timbers from this site were brought up during dredging operation by a cutter-suction dredger. They are badly mutilated and as a result it is often difficult even to identify the type of the particular piece. In general they consisted of frame timbers and inner or outer hull planking. Relationships between them were impossible to establish. Most pieces were less than one meter in length. The planks were around 5 - 6 cm in thickness. Some are around 9 cm thick and are presumably stringers or wales. The frame timbers included some short lengths from which samples could be cut for dendrochronological analysis. The sectional dimensions varied from 13 - 11 cm up to 21 x 17 cm. The larger ones presumably being frame timbers from lower in the hull. All the timber is of oak and fastened with treenails, iron bolts, spikes and nails. The treenails are hand finished and around 30 mm in diameter. They were tightened by cutting into it with a chisel or such like and then caulking the cut. The cuts are sometimes crossed as in fig. 76, but others are less regular. Sometimes a thin wooden pin was driven into the centre of the treenail at the junction of the cuts. The bolts are between 20 - 30 mm in diameter, the majority of which are 20 mm. They are fashioned from square bar which has



Dendrochronological analysis The timber of wrecksite SL 3 was brought up solely as the result of dredging activity. The individual pieces were therefore completely out of context and with the relationships to each other destroyed. It was only their close proximity that indicated they were from the same vessel. As none of the timbers recovered exceeded 1 m in length only broad assessments of their type andlor function could be made. In such circumstances the selection of samples was more or less predetermined by the work of the cutter-suction dredger. Only the few unbroken and unsplintered pieces were suitable for dendrochronological analysis. The principles of the method, the methodological problems and the procedures followed during the Slufter-research are briefly outlined in Appendix I. As an aid in understanding the statistics given in the text the reader is advised to read the appendix first. It also features the reference chronologies that were used in the analysis. Dating Four samples have been analysed, of which three were presumably frame timbers and one was probably a ceiling plank. Table 5 summarizes the results. The histogram of fig. 77 shows the date of the last rings and the relative position of the samples to each other. Two frame timbers [I] and [3] could be

matched to form a mean curve [t = 4.60, GL = 74.2 [99.9%]]. Against this mean curve the other frame timber [2] was able to be matched [t = 4.51, GL 63.1 [99.0%]]. Sample [2] is the only sample with sapwood [12 rings] as is indicated in fig. 76. One line of reasoning would be to add the sapwood allowance of 20 sapwood rings for wood of German provenance and arrive at a felling date of 1789. However, from the relative position of the samples we may conclude that the end ring of sample [3] is probably very close to the heartwood/sapwood boundary. Samples [3] and [2] belong to the same timber complex, first because they form a mean curve and secondly because they are dated by the same samples of SL 1 [see below]. If the histograms of SL 1 and SL 3 are considered together [fig. 781 it becomes clear that the dates of both assemblages are congruent. Also the would-be repair of SL 1 [ l ] attains a normal position in the histogram. Still the gap between SL 3 [I] and SL 1 [3] exists, but the most likely explanation is that due to the way the timber was worked the samples shown in the diagram below SL 3 [I] are missing a great deal of heartwood. Equally plausible purely on a dendrochronological basis are the alternative explanations of re-used timber or extensive repair. This reinforces the point already made concerning the SL 1 assemblage; that samples from the frames are the most useful for dating purposes. To date the timber complex we could establish a mean heartwood/sapwood boundary according to Baillie [1983, 56, after Hollstein, 19801 of the two samples, which gives a good estimate of the felling date. This mean sapwood boundary thus estimated is 1773. Added to that the sapwood allowance of 20 years gives a felling date of the timber complex of 1793 + 5 following Eckstein [1974, 351. Using Hollstein's [1965, 191 interval estimate of 11 - 34 sapwood rings at the 95% probability level, the felling date lies between 1784 - 1807. Yet this range can be narrowed down by adding the minimum [ l l years] of the interval estimate to the endyear of the youngest dated sample [3] and the maximum [34 years] to the oldest dated sample [2] with sapwood [fig. 781. In this case it seems better not to take the oldest dated sample [I] but the oldest dated sample with sapwood [3]. The resulting interval than becomes 1788 - 1803. A building date around 1795, based on the same arguments as presented for SL 1, can be established.


Table 5 SL 3 Sample no.

Structural element

Number of rings

Number of sapwood rings

3 4

Frame timber


Ceiling plank




Frame tirnbe;




Frame timber



Table 6 SL 3 Lower Saxony Sample no.

Hamburg t


coastal area t






GL ( O h )



Date of


last ring


Possible area of origin



1668 1777



1558 1771

Weserbergland, Hamburg, Lower Saxony coastal area or Southern Germany


1655 - 1781



1632 - 1765


Southern Germany

Low Countries

Western Germany







Origin of the timbers As stated before and shown in table 6 sample [4] synchronises with several of the standard chronologies. The highest correlation is with the Weserbergland chronology. The correlations taper off from the Weserbergland in northern, southern and western direction. Visually the curve fitted best on the Weserbergland, Hamburg and Lower Saxony coastal area standard chronologies. The other samples have been dated against samples of SL 1 [table 71. Since samples [ l ] and [2] of SL 1 gave the best match with the Hamburg chronology, the same is assumed for samples [I] and [3] of SL 3 [fig. 79 and table 61. These results incite the conclusion on purely dendrochronological grounds, that SL 1 and SL 3 are remains of the same ship. The date of the timbers from SL 3: 1793 as the most likely felling date, within the time range 1788 1803 and 1795 as the building date. As for the provenance of the wood: all the timbers came from West-Germany, roughly from the area along its northern and eastern borders. Surprisingly none of the timbers had their provenance along the western fringes of Germany, where much timber is known to have been obtained.

Table 7


SL 3 Samples 2 and 3 are dated by the mean curve of sample 1 and 2 of SL 1, with the following results: Sample no.


GL (Oh)

Sample 1 is dated by sample 3 I t = 4.60, GL = 74.2 (99.9))

[Fig. 761 Two treenails from SL3 that have been tightened by being cut and caulked. In one case it has been further secured with a thin wood pin [below right]. Below left is the facetted head of an iron spike.

Twee treknagels die zijn ingesneden en gebreeuwd. In de linker is bovendien een houten pennetje gedreven. Het staat rechts onder afgebeeld. Daaronder is een vierkante spijkerkop weergegeven.



The suggestion that SL 1 and SL 3 are part of the same vessel is supported by the fact that SL 1 is mainly deck structure and SL 3 mainly hull structure. Although the sites were 1.075 km apart this is by no means improbable. Large sections of structure can break away during the wrecking process and be transported many kilometres from the original site of disaster. If such units are not further broken apart, movement will continue until they are no longer subject to the motive forces of wind, current and wave action. This may occur when they get firmly stuck onto an obstruction, such as a beach, or a shoal or a rock outcrop. In that case the remains will be subject to strong mechanical forces and their disintegration is likely to continue. Alternatively they reach a position where due to shelter or depth of water the elements are no longer sufficient to move them, a position that is where the wreckage might continue to degrade but is also liable to get embedded into the sediments. The dynamics of shipwreck do not contradict the hyphothesis of the remains at SL 1 and SL 3 being part of the same vessel, whereas it is strongly supported by features of the timbers themselves which have been evaluated in the section devoted to wrecksite SL 1 [paragraph 1.4.1.

S a m p l e No.


1 5 SO












16 5 0




17 5 0



[Fig. 771

Histogram showing the date of the last rings, the total numer of rings in each sample as well as the relative position of the samples. De relatieve ligging van de monsters van Sf 3 ten opzichte van elkaar en de datering van de buitenste jaarring van elk monster. Met een verticale balkis de grens tussen kernhout en spinthout aangegeven. De datering van de groep monsters ligt op of rond 1789. [Fig. 781

The histograms of SL 1 and SL3 combined. De relatieve ligging van de monsters van Sf 1 en SL 3 ten opzichte van elkaar en de datering van de bliitenste jaarring van elk monster. Uitde combinatie van de histogrammen van SL 1 en Sf 3 blijkt dat de dateringen van de twee groepen monsters elkaar overlappen. [Fig. 791

Visual match of mean curves from SL 1 and SL3. Both are shown against the Hamburg standard chronology. a = Hamburg standard chronology b = mean curve of samples SL 1 [ I ] and SL 1 121 c = mean curve of samples S L 3 111. SL 3 [21 and SL 3 [31. Synchrone ligging van de gemiddelde curve van Sf 3 t0.v. Sf 1 en van de gemiddelde curve van Sf 1 t0.v. de Hamburg standaardchronologie. Een getekende jaarringcurve geeft loodrecht op een lineaire tijdas de jaarringbreedtes [logaritmischl weer. De zo ontstane punten worden door lijnen verbonden.


[Fig. 801

Dredging plan as altered due to the discovery of SL 4. Het snedeplan van de c.2. Triton, vergelijk fig. 14.




The first hit The discovery of the first wrecksite [SL 11 led to changes in the order of sand extraction [fig. 141. In accordance with the adjusted planning the cutter-suction-dredger Triton was engaged in digging a channel around wrecksite SL 1 when during the night of August 24 upon August 25 it hit another wreck [fig. 801. This happened in the position x 60.244 and y 438.023 [fig. 131. During the previous shifts it had intermittently been hindered by wreckage and coal blocking its pump. Accordingly the screen of the sonar that had by then been mounted was attentively watched. During the afternoon of the 25th and the morning of the 26th as much sand was removed from the wrecksite as possible. The dredger could undercut the wreck which had its top at around 1I m of depth. When the dredger was moved it was surmised that the wreck stood well out of the dredging breach. 4.1.1


On-site inspection On-site inspection proved much more successful than on wrecksite SL 1. The conditions however, were no less apalling. On the night of the 28th the wreck was buoyed. On the following days a series of inspection dives was made by a group of six divers belonging to or associated with the underwater archaeological unit of the Ministry of W.V.C. First of all the gradient of the slope in front and above the wreck was checked for reasons of safety of the divers. Torches were unnecessary equipment as their beams could not be seen in the murky water. Gauges could not be read and all diving had to be surface controlled. Observations could only be made groping. As the aim of the action was solely a preliminary assessment of the site no accurate measuring was attempted. Overall dimensions and a general impression of shape and condition of the vessel contained in the wrecksite was all that was endeavoured. Moreover, a whole series of loose bits and pieces were raised [fig. 811.


The picture that emerged was that of a carvelbuilt vessel standing upright in the sediments, orientated approximately north-south. A rough sketch is given in fig. 82. One of the ship's sides protruded from the sand wall. But for two holes cut into it by the cutter-suctiondredger it was in extremely good condition. A wale could be felt, protruding no more than 1.5 cm from the rest of the planking. Only the very top of the ship's side was damaged by Teredo attack. Although the side turned inwards on both ends no stem or sternpost was observed. At the spot where the dredger had damaged the wreck, the hold had been emptied and could be entered. For the larger part it was filled to the brim with large lumps of coal. The top of the site as encountered was thus more or less a flat surface of coal. Part of the other ship's side, a bulkhead and remains of deckstructure with a hatch could be recognised. The raised timbers showed a few iron and some yellow-metal fastenings. 4.1.3

Considerations a n d decisions On the evidence presented above it was surmised that the ship was built at the end of the 18th century at the earliest and around 1850 at the latest. It would measure over 20 m, it carried a cargo of coal and it was virtually complete. This preliminary assessment was extremely important, because it was the basis on which to decide what was to be done with the wreck and these decisions had to be taken quickly. True to the line of action that had been deployed in advance it was decided to archaeologically abandon the SL 4 site as such. Arguments for this were - its relatively young date and - the fact that the potentially important site SL 1 still awaited archaeological attention. Furthermore the unstable situation of the sediments and the depth of up to 18 meters would make on-site research fairly problematic, both in terms of the technical approach of the work and in terms of safety of working conditions. In view of the tight timeschedule [only four more weeks were left for on-site work at SL 41 it had been decided in advance that such an effort would only be

7 the ceili :tween th ere proba ) to and ir what are lvaged as

tll plank1 I the port : naining v( rtraighr b, -e approx: .48 cm = he bilge ti e [lO"]. T [king are 4 Along th :s of five planks sh, -6cm[2 just befor Irn of the 13 112"l 1 7 cm [3": n in sectic ickness is the resul planks as Two met1 itinction I i recovere te that the as more d nd some ; ge, i.e. tht also conf Is in the d t of the h~ Ir T I 4 in 1 poard to tl d itself is icm [2"]. lportion o : whereas 1 1/4"]. P n the area )ttom whe rnon on sl o below. m planks /with' an . ~also t alc 1 produce level. In 1 by this trt ~ulkingm -he outer lo bevel : her edge.


made in case of highly exceptional discoveries. With the wreck abandoned archaelogically it still had to be removed to enable construction to continue. It was agreed that the necessary clearance operations would be scrupulously monitored by archaeologists and that any parts that would be brought to the surface could be studied afterwards.


Clearance From the moment the site was abandoned archaeologically the problem of its handling had been reduced to the technical problem of removing obstacles which caused a nuisance for further construction. The chosen techniques, the time-schedule and the expenditure involved were not anymore the responsibility of the archaeologists, who were just being kept informed in order that they might monitor the operations. In view of the tight time-schedule and the presumably sturdy character of the wreckage it was decided to clear the site in a way which combined a negligible risk of damage to the dredging equipment with good prospects of success. The cutter-suction- dredger Triton removed most of the overburden of sand whereafter the floating sheerlegs crane Taklift I lifted all wreckage onto a sea-going barge with a huge grab [fig. 831. Alternative options for clearance had been to dredge a deep hole in front of the wreckage and to let it slide to a depth beyond the projected depth of the Slufter or to use explosives and a grab. The method that was chosen enabled a crew of archaeologists and volunteers to assist on the barge and to collect any items of interest that might emerge. During the preparatory dredging much of the coal was dredged to the dump and surprisingly little of the ship's inventory was raised. The hull itself proved so sturdy that about half of it was raised as an integral unit. Presumably it represents the southern part of the remains as sketched in fig. 82. It is illustrated in the cutaway perspective drawing shown in fig. 85. The other half of the wreckage was raised as loose timbers together with two smaller assemblages as well as fittings such as a windlass and some rigging elements. 4.1.5

Renewed considerations With all the wreckage lifted onto the barge and the forepart of the hull preserved as an integral unit it was quite clear that careful documentation of its construction could still yield interesting details. Instead of simply removing them, they were restored to the


[Fig. 811 Loose timbers were raised. Bij de duikverkenning werden losse delen omhoog gebracht. [Fig. 821 Sketched plan and section of S L 4 as drawn during on-site inspection. Schetsplattegrond en doorsnede van de vindplaats. [Fig. 831 After the site had been abandoned archaeologically it was cleared for construction purposes with a huge sheerlegs crane and a grab. De vindplaats werd geruimd met een grote knijper. [Fig. 841 The salvaged section of SL 4 on the

is /let vervolgens naar de werkbasis

barge prior to being craned off onto a

vervoerd. Het hout is afgedekt met

[Fig. 851 Cutaway perspective drawing of the

flatbed trailer for transport to the

natte jute zakken om te sneluitdrogen

port side showing the approximate

compound. It is swathed in w e t

te voorkomen [foto IPL].

extent of the structure that survives as

hessian sacsto prevent rapid drying.

an intact unit.

Toen bij de ruiming een groot deel van

In deze perspectieftekening van de

bet voorschip als Ben geheel boven

bakboordszijde is goed te zien hoeveel

kwam is besloten dit alsnog re

er in verband behouden is.

documenteren. Hier staat het op een zeegaande ponton. M e t een dieplader



archaeologists care. Even though the remains were obviously severely maimed by the operations it was decided to henceforth handle them with care. The elements were carefully wrapped in soaked Hessian sacking and great care was taken not to damage them any further [fig.84]. They were put ashore with a mobile crane and shored and supported in an upright position in a spot where they could be studied at leisure, the aim being to record as much constructional detail as possible and to put this information in its correct historical and cultural context.



The ship The hull can be described as wood fastened in that the inner and outer planks are mainly held to the frames with wooden treenails. The main structural elements are fastened with iron bolts. The various types are noted in the description of the timbers they fasten, with additional discussion of treenails below in the context of repairs and in paragraph 4.4.3. 4.2.1

Keel Only the fore section which was not preserved for its whole length [fig. 861 survives in cohesion with the other structure. Aft it ends at a scarf joint although this is damaged and incomplete. The corresponding section of the joint was salvaged as a loose timber [also shown in fig. 861. As it runs forward the keel becomes progressively more damaged and ends just aft of where it would have scarfed onto the stem. Other short sections of the keel survive broken off at scarf joints. The number of joints represented indicate there were at least 4 pieces. Analysis of the wood identified all the pieces as birch [see paragraph 4.3.11. The keel tapered slightly in both directions either side of the midship section. Its dimensions are shown in table 8. The section remaining in place would have been between 7.5 - 8 m in length [around 24 26 feet]* depending on the nature of the scarf with the stem. The overall length would have been in the region of 24 - 25 m dependant on various factors cliscussed below.

Scarf joints Although not complete, judging by the angle of the scarf relative to the depth of the keel, the foremost scarf was approx. 1.80 m in length. The other two scarfs, also incomplete,


were of a similar length. The tabling of the foremost and aftermost scarfs was angled down towards the stern and presumably, so did the central scarf. This is not clear from the surviving assemblage but judging from the deep rounded section of the keel and the lack of evidence for fastenings, there was no false keel or shoe. Without such protection the lower arm of a scarf usually sloped down aft as it was less liable to damage and leakage. There are no keys or hooks in any of the scarfs and this is reflected in the number of stopwaters [now missing]. These, as their name implies, were for preventing the passage of water along the faces of the joint but they also acted as keys and improved the longitudinal strength of the joint. In the central scarf there are four in the surviving 1.06 m of tabling. The joints were fastened by clenched iron bolts 19 - 20 mm [3/4"] in diameter [in one case 25 mm [I"]]. These and the stopwaters are irregularly placed. There are some horizontal fastenings: a small roved bolt in the lower arm of the midship joint, possibly associated with construction. In the aft section under the deadwood there is a small treenail [25 mm [l"]] vertically upwards but it does not seem to fasten the deadwood.

Apron and Deadwood No sections of the stem or sternpost have survived. The only element of the stem assembly left in situ is the lower section of the apron. This lies above the keel and is scarfed to the single piece of deadwood and fastened to it with treenails. At its forward end it terminates in an angled butt [fig. 861. It is strongly fastened by the keelson/keel bolts. The stern deadwood was similar to that of the bow but more substantial. The foremost 2.68 m survives; one broken fragment and two pieces in the dismembered assemblages of structure. Hawse pieces Several very eroded timbers were recovered that were attached to large lumps of concretion. After removal of the surface cover of compacted sand it became apparent that they were iron hawse-pipes [fig. 871.

"As during evaluation this wreck turned out to have strong connections with English shipbuilding it was decided to add some

Frames Heavy oak floors, between 29 and 30.5 cm [I1 - 12"] square, are set across the keel on approximately 58 cm centres [1 ' 11-1. Amidships they are horizontal on their upper surface but their lower surface shows slight deadrise. They run out to the turn of the bilge

imperial measurements in brackets for easy comparison.

where they butt against the second futtock. They are made from one piece except at the bow where one is formed from two pieces scarfed together. The intermediate first futtocks begin clear of the keel and continue through the turn of the bilge and butt against the third futtock. The first futtock overlaps the joint between the floors and the second futtock, as the second futtock overlaps that between the first and third futtocks. The result is a regular system [fig. 851. At the joints the heads and heels of the timbers are cut at an angle and accommodate chocks which are discussed below. In some cases the timbers were bolted horizontally to each other forming a paired frame. Where this was done two 20 mm [3/4"] iron bolts fastened the adjacent timbers; the first to the second, second to third and third to fourth futtock. There were no bolts between the floor and the first futtock. Representative timbers of each type are shown in fig. 88.

Garboard and limbers Amidships, the garboard strake was let into a rabbet cut 3.5 - 4 cm below the top of the keel. It did not therefore lie flush against the bottom of the floors. A thin feather edged pine board filled part of the resulting space and the channel left between that and the keel formed the limber passage. Either side of the midship area where the hull became more 'V' formed the floors were supplemented by chocks or fillers. The garboard lay flush against these so a notch was cut to form the limber passage. An illustration of the configuration amidships is shown in fig. 89. Keelson The keelson is formed of two timbers 28 cm [ l l"] in width that are bolted through the floors to the keel with 32 mm iron bolts. The maximum combined depth amidships was about 7 1 cm [28"]. The lower element runs horizontally, reducing in depth as it runs forward over the rising floors. It ends in a butt just aft of the foremast [which is stepped into the upper element]. The resulting space is filled with deadwood. The upper element which also runs horizontal terminates in a butt above the apron [fig. 861. Aft of the foremast the keelson was badly damaged by the dredger. One separate piece recovered shows the beginning of a horizontally tabled scarf joint. Both elements would have run at least to a point aft of the main mast. After that one or other element must have terminated or reduced with the rising of the floors towards the stern in a similar fashion as at the bow.


Table 8 SL 4





25.5 cm

37 cm

At aft scarf joint



(damage precludes accuracy). (11 by 14-15 inches)

of forward section Midships (approx.)



Aft. reduces t o



[Fig. 871

T I 4 Midship floor timber Midscheepse

Hawse pieces including on the left side


of the picture the iron hawse pipe.

T23 Aft floor timber Wrang of legger

Van het dek dat bij de verkenning in

uit het achterschip

situ nog werd aangetroffen zijn weinig

T22 Aft floor timber Wrang of legger

delen boven water gekomen. Hoog in

uit het achterschip

het voorschip heeft deze constructie

T30 First futtock Buikstuk

gezeten waar de kluisgaten doorheen

T31 Aft first futtock Buikstuk uit het

lopen. Hetzijn ijzeren kokers die


gesteund worden door horizontale en

T8 Second futtock Oplanger

verticale verstevigingen. Het ijzer is

T3 Third futtock Oplanger

sterk aangekoekt. Beide kokers zijn

T5 Cant timber Oraaispant

aan de linkerzijde zichtbaar [foto IPLI.

T25 Chock between floor and second futtock Kruisklamp tussen legger en

[Fig. 881


SL 4 Timbers. The timbers shown are

T32 Chock between floor and second

representative of their type, being in

futtock Kruisklamp Tussen legger en

the best condition and the most


illustrative of those recovered. They

T33 Chock between first and second

are drawn orientated to indicate their

futtock Kruisklamp tussen buikstuk en

approximate position in the hull but


they are not necessarily adjacent timbers. Op deze afbeelding zijn een aantal represenfatieve inhouten bijeen gebracht Ze zijn afgebeeldin hun oorspronkelijke stand. Het zijn echter niet noodzakelijkerwijs opeenvolgende of aansluitende inhouten.

Fig. 90 illustrates the assembly of frame timbers, keelson, apron and mast step, fig. 91 is the same view with floors omitted to show the deadwood and the composite floor.

Fastening of main structural elements The iron bolts fastening the keel, floors and keelson are 32 mm [I 1/4"] in diameter and were driven downwards, some only through a floor and the keel, others through both keelson timbers, floor and keel [fig. 861. This was a result of the construction sequence and is discussed below. They did not have a washer under the head, the flared shape resulting from driving the bolt home presumably being adequate [fig. 921. The lower ends do not appear to have been clenched over a washer although it is possible that without the protection of a false keel these have been worn away. However, some appear to have ended well above the bottom of the keel and simply left blind [figs. 86, 92,931. Cant frames Ten cant timbers survive on the starboard side and although they have slumped out of position they are still correctly orientated as shown in the plan [fig. 941. The main timbers are long curved pieces sided between 17.5 and 27 cm and moulded 16 - 22 cm. They were footed against the apron with shorter tapered timbers filling the space between them. The first cant frame was spiked to the last floor timber and bolted to the short tapered frame forward. None of the others are bolted although a cant timber that was recovered loose has two horizontal bolts, indicating that at least one pair of cant timbers a side [possibly from the stern] were paired [fig. 88, T S ] . Breasthooks One breasthook 3.04 m long remains in place although it has sagged out of position with the rest of the bow section [fig. 941. Although it was not very regular in shape it was fashioned from good quality timber, 39 x 32 crn in section tapering to the ends. It was positioned above the end of the remaining piece of the apron. A slight depression suggests a shallow rebate over the apron but erosion and damage make this unclear. It was bolted to the cant frames by twelve iron bolts and the ceiling was cut to fit around it. The area between the breasthooks was planked by short pieces running parallel to them, one of which remains in place. The position of the next breasthook-up is indicated by the angled ends


[Fig. 891 Detail of keel, floor and keelson assembly showing the limber passages. Detailtekening van het samenstel


kiel, legger en zaathout waarop de waterloop zichtbaar is. 1 Bilge planks Kimweger 2 Ceiling planks Wegering 3 Limber strake Vullinggang 4 Limber board Vullingplank

5 False keelson Bovenzaathout 6 Keelson Zaathout

7 Floor timber Legger 8 Outer planking Huid

9 Garboard strake Zandstrook 10 Pine board Tingel 11 Keel Kiel 12 Chock Vulklos 13 First futtock Buikstuk 14 Stopwater Keernagel [Fig. 901 The construction at the bow. De constructie in het voorschip. 1 Mast Mast

2 Chock Kruisklamp 3 False keelson Bovenzaathout 4 Keelson Zaathout 5 Floor timber Wrang oflegger

6 Chock Vulklos 7 First funock Buikstuk 8 Apron Binnensteven

9 Deadwood Slemphout 10 Keel Kiel [Fig. 911 The same view with floor timbers omitted. Dezelfde tekening is hier opengewerkt. [Fig. 921

[Fig. 931

Copper alloy and iron fastenings.

Bottom of keel bolt showing where the

SL4 A8811, copper bun-end bolt;

under side of the keel has split away.

SL4 A8812, SL4 A88/3, copper alloy

The bottom of this boltwould have

bun-end bolts; SL4 A117, iron spike;

been about 3 cm above the bottom of

SL4 A1 18, iron bolt; SL4 A87, iron

the keel.

keelson bolt.

Deze foto toont hoe de onderkant van

Bevestigingspennen en spijkers van

de kiel bij een ijzeren pen is

koper. koperlegering en ijzer.

weggebarsten. Hetgaat om een blinde pen die bij benadering tot 3 cm boven de onderzijde van de kiel doorging [foto IPLI.



of the ceiling planks [fig. 941. The spacing between the two positions suggests that there were probably a series of 5 or 6 breasthooks up to and including the deckhook. Two halves of what are presumably breasthooks were salvaged as loose timbers. Hull planking On the port side there are 24 strakes remaining versus 8 on starboard. In the main or str.uigl~tbody of the hull the bottom planks were approximately 30 cm in width 130.48 cm = an English foot]. Above the turn of the bilge they are approximately 25 cm wide [lo"]. The upper strakes of the outer hull planking are oak and the lower strakes are elm. Along the turn of the bilge there was a series of five thicker strakes. The aftmost in situ planks show a gradual thickening from 5.5 - 6 cm [2 1/2"] at the garboard up to 7 cm [3"] just before the turn of the bilge. Around the turn of the bilge they are approximately 9 cm [3 1/2"] thick, reducing to about 6.5 - 7 cm [3"] up to the wales. They are shown in section in fig. 95. The increase in the thickness is not very pronounced and is partly the result of the reduction in thickness of all planks as they run round the bow to the stem. Two metres further forward of this point the distinction has disappeared altogether. Planks recovered loose from further aft indicate that the transition in the middle of the ship was more distinct. They are 10 cm [4"] thick and some are distinctly chamfered on one edge, i.e. the first and fifth bilge planks. This is also confirmed by the length of the treenails in the dismembered timbers from this part of the hull [e.g. those at the end of the floor T I 4 in fig. 881. The planking from the garboard to the bilge was 7 cm. The garboard itself is generally thinner: around 5.5 - 6.5 cm [2"]. The bilge planks have a high proportion of 35 mm [I 3/8"] diameter treenails whereas the others are almost all 32 mm [ I 1/4"]. A band of thickened bilge strakes in the area of the hull that would rest on the bottom when the ship took the ground was common on ships of the period and is referred to below. All the elm planks are rather roughly finished or dubbecl witti an adze not only on their outer surface but also along their edges. There is no attempt to produce the theoretically vital caulking bevel. In fact the scalloped surface produced by this treatment would appear to grip the caulking medium very securely [fig. 961. The outer planks of oak higher up also have no bevel although they are finished to a smoother edge. There is only one place


where there is a bevel that must have been cut intentionally and that is at the butt joint on one of the oak planks. The wales, also of oak, were 9 - 9.5 cm thick [3 112" - 3 314-1 but were possibly a maximum of 10 cm [4"] thick amidships. Apart from an eroded fragment of the second, only the lower wale is still in place. Along its lower edge, where it is proud of the ordinary plank below, it is carved with a simple moulding [fig. 951. There were probably a series of four or five wales: The lowest is 19 cm, probably 20 cm at midships [7 112" resp. 8-1 in width and the others are likely to have been the same.

[Fig. 961

[Fig. 981

The adze used to trim the edge of this

Comparison of the heads of the copper

elm outer plank has left a relatively

butt-end bolts and those of copper

rough surface. There is no appreciable

alloy. The alloy bolt is still shaped as it

bevel towards the outer edge and on

was cast, while the head of the copper

many of the planks still in place the

bolt has flattened and split like a much

outer edges of the seam are very close

used cold chisel. This is not just


because the copper is softer. One of

De kant van deze iepen huidplank is

the alloy bolts in a loose timber was

met de dissel bewerkt waardoor een

struck with a maul and the same effect

ruw oppervlak is ontstaan. De kant is

was produced with no difficulty. This

niet merkbaar afgeschuind. Vrijwel

suggests the alloy bolts were driven

nergens is dit gebeurd. De

with a wooden mallet, possibly to

breeuwnadenzijn daardoor bijzonder

prevent them cracking.

smal [foto IPL].

Het is opvallend dar de geelkoperen pennen vrijwel onbeschadigdzijn

[Fig. 971

terwijl de roodkoperen stuk voor stuk

Butt-end bolts. One bolt and one

aan de kop zijn gebarsten. Dat ligt niet

treenail in the end of each plank. They

aan de hardheid o f brosheid van het

were always offset as shown unless

metaal. Kennelijk zijn de twee soorten

for some reason this was not possible.

pen in verschillende werkgangen

Bij de stuiken is her uiteinde van iedere verwerkt en zijn de roodkoperen huidplank steeds met Ben geelkoperen pennen voorzichtig met een houten pen en een treknagel vastgezet Zowel

hamer in een voldoende ruim gat

de treknagels als de pennen staan

gedreven lfoto's IPLI.

steeds diagonaal tegenover elkaar lfoto IPLI.

[Fig. 991 A flat wedged treenail in a ceiling

plank. Treknagelmet wig in een wegeringplank lfoto IPLI.


Copper alloy fastenings The main fastenings of the planking were treenails. In addition the butt ends were secured by a bolt set in opposite sides of the plank [fig. 971. The majority of these bolts are 16 mm in diameter [5/8"]. Most are copper alloy although some appear to be nearer pure copper and are larger in diameter: 20 mm [3/4"] while a few in the bottom strakes are iron, also 20 mm. These bolts are blind i.e. they do not pass right through the hull, relying on friction for security [fig. 921. Those of copper appear to have been cut from cast rod, rolled and then beaten to roughly point the end. The faceted and split heads suggest they were driven with an iron hammer. The alloy bolts were individually cast and the mould marks filed off prior to use. The heads, in contrast to those of the copper bolts, show no signs of being driven with a hammer. As they were not as ductile as those of copper they were probably driven with a wooden mallet to lessen the chance of cracking [fig. 981. There is one case where this seems to have happened. Judging by the condition of the broken surface the break is old, certainly when compared to those broken during salvage. A second bolt had been placed only a few cm away. The metal of the broken bolt seemed to be a very porous cast which was presumably the reason it cracked. Ceiling Eighteen ceiling planks remain in place on the port side and six on the starboard, not including the limber boards. The ceiling planking is oak. There is great variation in width but most of the planks average 26 28 cm [approximating to 10 and 1I"]. Either side of the keelson there is a run of limber boards 15 cm [6"] in width and 4 cm in depth. These are supported on small blocks so as to lie at the same level as the limber strakes

which are 7 cm [3"] thick and 30.5 cm wide [I foot]. From these the ceiling runs out to the turn of the bilge averaging 6.3 cm [2 1/2"] thick. At the turn of the bilge there are three stringers I0 cm thick. From there up to the clamp the planks are again 6.3 cm thick [fig. 951. These dimensions are those near the midship section. All planks and stringers reduce markedly in thickness towards the bow and all except the limber strake and limber board reduce in width. The fastenings for the ceiling are treenails, the majority of which are wedged [fig. 991 although some are left plain. They were supplemented by iron spikes, mostly square headed, 9 mm square at the top of the shank and flat ended [figs. 93, 1001. It is to the stringers that the thick outer bilge planking described above would correspond, giving extra rigidity along the line of the joints between the floors and the first futtocks. They are additionally fastened with iron bolts approximately 20 mm in diameter that were driven from outboard and clenched over rings inboard [fig. 1011. The planks from the bilge stringers upwards seem to have been painted with tar and it is possible that the whole ceiling had been originally.

Mast-step and mast The stump of the pine foremast survives to a height of 1.40 m where it shows severe shipworm attack. It is octagonally faceted and is 40 cm in diameter at the highest preserved section. It is bound by an iron hoop 25 cm above the mast step, presumably to prevent splitting. The mast-step is formed by a block of elm 91.5 x 28 cm [36" x 1I"] which is fastened to the top of the upper or false keelson by six spikes. The rectangular foot of the mast is stepped into it and also into the false keelson though only by about 2.5 cm [I"]. The whole assembly was reinforced by two slabs of wood bolted to each other through the false keelson. Fore and aft of the foot of the mast two blocks of wood were set into the step filling the excess space. Transverse channels were cut across the top into which battens had been nailed to retain the blocks [fig. 1021. Beams and knees The only beams surviving are fragmentary and none of them remain in place. Many were from the hold and were not decked over [fig. 1031. They were spaced 2.83 m apart [six feet] and rested on a shelf [which is no longer present]. This in turn rested on a stringer or clamp 9 cm thick [seen in section in fig. 9.51.


[Fig. 1001 An unwedged ceiling plank treenail and nearby the head of an iron spike. B 01

II " I;


I f

; ; -./, ;, I /\ ,I






Niet alle treknagels in de wegering


hebben een wig. Naast deze treknagel is een spijker ingeslagen [foto IPL].

[Fig. loll

The recess impressed into the surface of one of the bilge stringers by the washer of a clenched iron bolt. lndruk van de klinkring van een geklonken ijzeren bout ofpen in een van de kimwegers [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1021 The mast-step. Voor het mastspoor is een blok iepehoutop bet bovenzaathout genageld. Het rechthoekige spoor gaal door en dooc maar is bovendien nog fwee en een halve cm in het bovenzaathoutingelaten. Van weerszijden is het geheel verstevigd met twee planken die met ijzeren bouten door het bovenzaathout heen aan elkaar geklonken zijn Ifoto IPLI. [Fig. 1031 Beams and knees. SL4 B01, end of hold beams with iron strap SL4 K1, iron knee SL4 T26, SL4 T27, SL4 T28, SL4 T29, wooden knees. Onderdelen van de dwarskoppelingen hoog in hetschip. Let op het einde van een ruimbalk met een ijzeren band die om een oplangergreep, ijzeren knieen en houten knieen.


This was moulded along its lower edge in the same manner as the outer wale. There do not appear to have been any knees used to retain these hold beams. Instead, an iron strap 90 mm in width and 20 mm thick [3 112 x 3/4"] passed around the futtock against which the beam butted. The futtock was trimmed to accommodate the thickness of the iron strap which was then bolted through the end of the beam with 20 mm [3/4"] iron bolts. The beam was also bolted vertically to the shelf and this in turn was bolted through to the wale every other timber. Both wooden and iron knees were recovered during salvage as seperate elements and appear to be from the the deck-beams [as distinct from the hold beams]. The shape of the iron knees indicate a horizontally laid shelf above a clamp in the same configuration as those of the hold beams. This suggests the wood knees were lodged horizontally. This is also suggested by the bolt-holes which are all in the same plane. The latter characteristic is not diagnostic but hanging knees of wood were commonly rebated to fit against the side of the beam and not directly underneath it. The bolts fastening the knee to the hull passed through the lower arm while those fastening it to be beam passed horizontally through the upper arm. Some characteristics were puzzling initially: the channel or rebate cut into one face of the knees, the varying distance between it and the side of the knee, as well as the curved back face of the long arm. This became clearer when looking at the deck-beams. Two eroded beam ends were recovered during the inspection dives [see fig. 81,821, having had slightly flared ends which had been bolted horizontally and vertically. The horizontal bolt-holes correspond in principle to the pattern in the wooden knees, though no actual matches can be made. Some distance from the end of the beams on the upper side is a shallow rebate or channel into which a longitudinal beam appears to have been bolted. The channel corresponds to that in the wooden lodging knees. The knees are of various sizes and appear to have been paired, explaining the varying depth between the channel and the edge of the knee. The longitudinal timber rebated into the top of the beam would appear to a side binding strake described by Andrew Murray in 1863, although he described it as a feature of naval ships [see glossary]. A hypothetical reconstruction of hold and deck-beam structure is shown in fig. 104. The deck elements are shown reassembled in fig. 105.


Beam support pillars or stanchions Two mortises in the top of the keelson either side of the foremast step correspond to the position of the hold beams. Presumably they are for the pillars that supported them. However, one mortise appears to be partly covered by the mast step and would not have been directly below a beam. Also, under the third hold beam aft [at section 3 indicated on the plan: fig. 941 there is no corresponding mortise. There are some nail holes however, so possibly the pillars aft of this point were located on a sole plate nailed on the top of the keelson. Only one broken stanchion was recovered [fig. 1061. This had a tenon of a size that corresponds to the mortises in the top of the keelson. One side of two of the mortises are sloped enabling the tenon on the top of the stanchion to be located in the mortise in the underside of the hold beam. It could then be slid sideways into the mortise in the keelson [fig. 1071 and secured by a strip of wood nailed into the groove. These are missing in SL 4 but nail holes attest to their use. Repairs and miscellaneous features In a number of places small pieces of wood have been used in order to fair the run of the plank. Most common is the placing of a piece of oak board against the outer face of a futtock, filling it out to provide a continuous surface against which the outer plank could rest. A slightly different case occurs inboard. Thin pine board was laid under the central stringer on the starboard side and several of the ceiling planks on the port side in various places to bring them up to the level of those either side. In many cases the pine was only a few millimetres thick but in others it seemed as though it was used to pack out two inch planks where two and a half inch planks were required. In other words the filling was required under the outer planking due to a deficiency of the frame timbers, whereas inboard the deficiency was with.the planks. This may partly be due to the progressive reduction in thickness of the planks towards the bow noted above or it might result from repair. Outer hull planks On examining the outer surface of loose frame timbers there are many treenails that have been cut off flush with the surface. This varies considerably from one timber to another but preliminary examination suggests this is most common in floor timbers. Some of them may be a result of the ceiling being laid

[Fig. 1041

Reconstruction of deck and hold beam stucture. De ruimbalken en dekbalken waren op deze wijle bevestigd. De vorm en constroctie van het dek en de dekbalkweger kan worden afgeleid uit de vorm van de ijzeren knieen.

[Fig.1051 Elements of deck structure reassembled. Dekbalken en horizontale knieen die op elkaar aansluiten [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1061 A stanchion placed in one of the

mortises on top of the false keelson. Although the stanchion fits it is not known whether or not this is its originial location. De ruimbalkenzijn ondersteund geweest door een stut die ermet een dook in ingelaten was en die ook in een gleufje in het bovenzaathoutzat opgesloten.


before the garboard and lower strakes were fitted. Alternatively it indicates repair. If outer hull planking was replaced this would necessitate cutting the treenails that had fastened the old planks flush to the frame before fitting the new ones. Prior to this they would have been drilled out to ease removal of the plank. In SL 4 there are indeed several cases where this was done. This is indicated where the auger had penetrated a few millimetres too deep as well as slightly off line, leaving a shallow hole in the surface of the timber and the old treenail [fig. 1081. In some cases the pattern of flush treenails is consistent with the number one would expect to fasten the old planks i.e. one or two per strake on each frame but there is great variation and if this is associated with repair not all planks were replaced. The other indication that some of the planks are replacements is that many of their treenails are blind. There could be several reasons for this. Some of the original treenails were blind but the majority are through-fastened. If the ceiling was already in situ [as it might be in a minor repair] there would be no need to fasten all the new treenails right through. To provide an effective connection a treenail only needs to be a little longer than twice the thickness of the plank. Fig. 109 shows treenails that fastened the garboard and adjacent strake which are blind, one of which cuts the primary treenail that fastens through to the ceiling. On the next floor forward there is a treenail that is cut flush both above and below, signifying at least that either a ceiling plank or an outer hull plank had been replaced. According to Murray [1863] the grip of even a 6" [15.2 cm] treenail is substantial [most of those seen in broken frames are between 20 - 30 cm long]. Table 9 lists the results of some experiments into the resistance of treenails to a sheering force. It can be seen that there is not a great deal of difference in the force resisted. The treenails were observed to move about 112" [12 mm] before sheering. These figures are an average of several experiments. The maximum force resisted by a 1 112 inch treenail in a three inch plank was 4.1 tons [Murray 18631. Through-fastening every new treenail would mean piercing existing ceiling in double the number of places and weakening it. Seeing as it was also important to hull strength this was obviously undesirable. Fig. 1 I0 shows SL4.110, a blind treenail that was wedged in its nose. The wedge tightened the treenail as it was driven against the end of the hole rather


like a modern rawlbolt. This method of treenailing is described by Tideman [1861, 3671 although it is not stated whether it is specifically a Dutch technique. His publication predates his prolonged stay in England [Dirkzwager 19701. No other cases have been found among the several blind treenails seen loose or in fractured timbers. Two cases were found where a treenail hole had apparently been started, then abandoned after 3 - 4 cm and filled with mortar. Around several treenails or treenail holes there are traces of tar indicating that tar had been poured into or applied around the mouth of the hole. Several treenails recovered loose or from damaged timbers are black, suggesting that they had been dipped in tar prior to being driven. This technique is very old and known to have been widely used in Scandinavian shipbuilding. As there are a relatively small proportion of these treenails they could be additional fastenings or part of a repair. If the present skin is the second, it was in place long enough itself to need repairs. Alternatively the repaired planks are original planks left in place when others were renewed. In many cases a crack has developed from the end of the plank either stemming from the bolt, which was only a few centimeters from the butt end, or the treenail in line with it. The cracks run from the butt past the bolt and usually to the nearest treenail in the line of the crack, so some could have occurred as the treenail was driven. In some cases these cracks have been caulked [fig. 1111 one of them fcr a length of a metre. There are other repairs to the outer planks in the form of Dutchmen [small repair patches]. These are small rectangular fillets of wood let into the plank and nailed in place. In one case the repair is to the corner of an oak plank and is fastened with 4 small iron nails. Another on the edge of an oak plank is fastened with one large iron spike. Both these patches are only some 2 cm thick. Underneath the latter was a treenail which was very close to the edge of the plank and it is possible that a crack between the treenail and the edge necessitated the repair. Two other repair patches of elm, let into elm planks, are both fastened with two copper alloy spikes [fig. 1121. One is a repair the full thickness of the plank, the other is a Dutchman let into the plank like the other two. Being close together and so similar, they were probably fitted at the same time. Other spikes of the same type have been noted on loose timbers and possibly originate from the same repair. The other two being differently

Table 9 Diameter of treenails (inches)

Average stress before fracture in treenails fastening in 6 "resp. 3" planks (tons) 6"

[Fig. 1071


[Fig. 1091

A method of fitting and securing deck

Diagram showing blind secondary

stanchions [pillars].

treenails fastening what is probably a

De stutten zijn vermoedelijk op deze

replacement plank [garboard]. The

wijze geplaatst.

through treenails that fastened the original plank have been cut flush. The

[Fig. 1081

secondary treenails are usually driven

Illustration of the shallow auger holes

at a completely different angle and as

left in many of the timbers after the

here often cut through the old ones.

treenails had been drilled out. The

Schematische weergave van de

remaining part of the treenail was then

bevestiging van een - vermoedelijk -

cut flush and the new plank fitted.

later ingezette plank in de zandstrook.

In veel inhouten zijn ondiepe

De blinde treknagels zijn secundair. De

boorgaten waargenomen die her

door en doorgaande treknagels

gevolg zijn van het uitboren van

waarmee de oorspronkelijke plank was

treknagels. Het restant van de nagel

bevestigd zijn glad weggekapt. In veel

werd glad weggekapt, waarna de

gevallen zijn de secundaire treknagels

nieuwe plank op z'n plaats werd

in een volstrekt andere richting


geboord dan de oorspronkelijke die net als hier nogal eens doorsneden worden.



fastened and both sitting proud of the surface of the plank are presumably repair[s] carried out at different times. There are two other repair patches in the edges of planks that are similar but larger. One of them was fastened with two square pegs [fig. 1131. This was a loose find but can only have been done either before the plank was fitted or after the adjacent plank had been removed. The latter is more likely and if so is additional evidence of a repair program that entailed replacement of some planks and repair of others. Square pegs of the type noted here occur in other instances as well as dowels of 12 - 17 mm diameter but these appear to be for filling nail holes etc. and are not fastenings. A good example is a case where a hole for the butt-end bolt of a plank was being drilled into the futtock of a paired frame. The auger encountered one of the horizontal bolts, so the hole was plugged and another hole drilled for the bolt on the other side of the plank [fig. 1141. In a similar case a hole for a butt-end bolt was drilled too near the edge of a timber and was then plugged with a small square peg of elm. In another interesting case a stealer has been fitted presumably in between two planks already in situ. One of these planks has had to be cut back to accommodate the stealer, shown by two treenails of the in situ plank that were cut in the process [fig. 1151. The normal method of fastening a stealer is with a spike at the end and a treenail on the next frame back. Had the stealer been cut any thinner it would have been too narrow to fasten in this manner without splitting. There is little suggestion of repair to the main structural timbers. In the bow the regularity of the framing system breaks down but this may be more a result of the change in the shape of the hull. There is one chock in this area that is so large as almost to be a short futtock. It might be the result of economy but alternatively it could be a repair. Rot often started around these chocks which might have necessitated cutting away the ends of the adjacent futtocks as well, thus requiring a much larger replacement. Another chock nearby also looks as though it is a replacement but in this case this is because it looks much newer than the surrounding timber. It is well shaped and does not appear to include sapwood [unlike many of the others]. Both chocks look as though they were covered in lime which was sometimes used as a preservative. If they are repairs it can only have been effected after the removal of the



[Fig. 1101





prople Deze sturk a aangebracht op

Treena~lsand wedges of varlous types

een gekoppeldspant en hetrs mogeli/k

Treknagels, w~ggen,deutels en houten

dat de boor op een ~lzerenpen gestoten 1s Men heeft vervolgens de twee koperen pennen en da twee treknagels ~ndit geval aan dezelfda

A crack that has started at the bun-end zrlde van de gang aangebracht bolt and ran back to the treena~lhas

[foto IPLl

been caulked In the same manner as a

[Fig 1151 Een scheur die van een koperen bout

Drawing showing a stealer fitted

naar een treknagel loopt is op dezelfde

between two existing planks. Part of

wijze gebreeuwd als een gewone naad

the upper plank is cut away, as shown

[foto IPL].

by the two treenails cut in the process. This was done in order to maintain

[Fig. 1121

enough width in the stealer so it could

A plank repair patch which is notthe

be fastened without fear of splitting.

full thickness of the plank is usually

Deze insteker is kennelijk tussen twee

known as a Dutchman.

eerder aangebrachte planken gezet.

Een half houtje.

Van de bovenliggende plank - en de treknagels waarmee die bevestigd is -

[Fig. 1131

is een stuk weggekapt Dit was nodig

A repair patch on the edge of a plank

omdat de insteker anders niet

fastened with two square wooden

voldoende bread gemaakt kon worden


om erzondergevaar van scheuren

Een ingezet stukje dat met twee houten pengaten in te boron. Hetgaathier 2,

-;. c-



.#. --. C .



. pennetjes L.

langs de zijkant van een

plank is vastgezet [foto IPL].


overigens niet om een reparatie. In paragraaf 4.4.3. wordt beargumenteerd dat deze insteker, de

- -

[Fig. 1141

uiterste vlakgang naast de kim, als

An intended hole for the butt-end bolt

allerlaatste huiddeelis aangebracht.

plugged with a small dowel. This is a

In fig.95is hetplankno.6.

bolted frame and the auger probably encountered one ofthe cross bolts fastening the futtocks so the butt-end had to be placed in the other side of the plank.

Rechtsonderis een gat dat vermoedelijk geboord is voor een koperen pen afgedichtmet een houten



ceiling, leading to the question as to whether some or all of that is also a replacement? This is quite possible and those with the pine filling under them may be replacements. If this is the case one might expect more of the chocks to have been replaced at the same time. Rot especially occurred when they included a thick layer of sapwood as did many of those in this vessel.


Ship's fittings

Windlass Fragments of a windlass, badly damaged by Teredo, consisting of the pawl bitt and one side of the barrel including the pawl rim. The barrel is octagonal with a pine whelp on each facet and these appear to have been covered in sheet-iron. The diameter of the barrel, not including the whelps is 42.5 cm. There are two sets of intersecting handspike holes on each side [fig. 1161. Both axles were recovered and these are heavy square section bars. One end was located in the end of the barrel, on the other end which projected beyond the cheeks, were warping heads one of which was recovered. The surviving parts are reconstructed in fig. 117. In the absence of purchase rims it would appear to be an ordinary handspike type, rather than a mechanical patent type worked by pump handles. The rebates on the top of the pawl bitt are probably for a strongback, a beam running between the cheeks. Standing rigging SL4 A02. Deadeye with iron binding. The block is 16.3 cm. It is fairly well preserved with one link of chain still attached to the binding [fig. 1 181. SL4 A02b. Deadeye with iron binding [fig. 1191. The block has some worm damage and mechanical damage [salvage] but is generally well preserved. It is larger than A02, the block being 21.4 cm in diameter. The lanyard holes show a fair amount of wear. A99. Deadeye with iron binding, the same size as A02b, with apparently two concreted chain links. SL4 A69. Iron binding of a deadeye with a link of chain still attached. The chain link is 140x 8 2 x 20mm. SL4 A41. Iron strap turned to retain the pin of a shackle. SL4 A93. Similar to A41 but preserved for a greater length and includes a bolt 25 cm from the shackle. SL4 A54. Length of flat iron with two boltholes, one at the preserved end and the other


--... -.. . ..---



[Fig. 1161

[Fig. 1181

Part of the windlass barrel showing the SL4 A02, deadeye. whelps, handspike holes and the pawl

Een jufferblok metijzerbeslag.

rim. In the foreground lies the end of the other side of the barrel with the

[Fig. 1191

iron axle.

SL4 AOZb, deadeye.

Gedeelte van hetspil. De ijzeren

Een jufferblok met ijzerbeslag.

verstevigingen of kiezen, de spaakgaten en de paltanden zijn goed

[Fig. 1201

te zien. Op de voorgrond ligt het

SL4 A54, probably part of a chainplate.

andere uiteinde, waarbij de ijreren as

Vermoedelijk een puttingijzer [foto IPL].

zichtbaar is. [Fig. 1211 [Fig. 1171

SL4 A01, double block.

Reconstruction of the salvaged parts of Een goed bewaard gebleven the windlass.

dubbelschijfs stropblok met houten

Reconstructie van de geborgen

gelagerde schijven en een metalen as.

onderdelen van het spil.



36 cm from this, with part of the bolt still in place. Both bolt heads seem to have had washers under them. On the opposite side of the bolt head is a fragment of an oak outer plank 6.3 cm thick [fig. 1201. This and the two fragments above [A41 and A931 are parts of chain plate assemblies. The lower deadeye was chained from its iron binding probably down to a wale where it connected to a shackle in the top of the strap or plate which was bolted through the side of the hull. SL4 A75. Large thimble, heavily concreted, approximately 7.5 cm across internally. Possibly for a stay.

Running rigging SL4 A01. A well preserved double sheaved block scored for a rope strop, with wood sheaves [probably Lignum Vitae] and a metal pin. It was taken apart for conservation and the sheaves proved to feature a yellow metal bearing. There are several marks on one cheek CC, R F l l and what looks like a makers mark [fig. 1211. SL4 A03. A single sheaved block bound with an iron strap and crowned with a hook [fig. 1221. SL4 A04. Single sheaved block scored for a rope strop, similar in shape to A01. Heavily concreted but otherwise in reasonable condition.


Associated finds

Cargo and ballast As established during the on-site inspection the hold of the vessel contained large lumps of coal. A large quantity of it was salvaged along with the other remains. A sample of it was kept [fig. 1231. Compacted in the limbers of the recovered part of the ship flint shingle was found. Ballast as such does not seem to have been present. The predominant material between the floors was coal- dust. It is possible that a few large flint nodules, found in the vicinity of the wreck had also been on board, although association is not certain. Miscellaneous This section includes small finds, fastenings recovered loose, samples and other categories not included above and is sub- divided according to material type. Ceramics SL4 A09/2. Rim sherd of an earthenware vessel, possibly a strainer, three holes below



thickened rim. Outer surface decorated with curved lines in yellow slip. Inner decoration of dragged yellow and red slips [fig. 1241. SL4 A09/8. Six sherds of a red earthenware pot or bottle. The fabric has coarse gritty inclusions. The wall thickness of 9 mm near the base thins rapidly to 2.5 mm at the shoulder [only 75 mm higher]. Clear [salt?] glaze from just above the base on the outer surface and on the entire inner surface. Shown reassembled [fig. 1251.

[Fig. 1221

[Fig. 1251

SL4 A03, single iron bound block with

SL418, sherd.


Van de scheepsinventaris en het

Enkelschijfsblok met buitenbeslag en

daartoe behorende aardewerk is


bijzonder weinig gevonden [foto IPL].

Clay pipes Three intact bowls were found as well as fragments of two others and several stem fragments [fig. 1261. SL4 A26. Plain bowl with rouletted rim. Possibly Dutch mid 18th century. If so probably intrusive. SL4 A27. Plain bowl, rouletted rim. Dutch late 18th century. Heel mark: GN [Gerrit Nobel] 1768 - 1870180. SL4 A105. English moulded decoration. Inscribed Munchester- Unity.This pipe belongs to a large group of pipes decorated with masonic emblems appearing in a wide variety and in immense quantities from the mid 18th century onwards. The form of the bowl developed in the second quarter of the 19th century and production of these pipes continued into the 20th. The occurrence of a text together with several symbols on the side of the bowl indicates a date early in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. The oval form of the stem is caused by intensive use of the mould, indicating that this pipe is of low quality. SL4 A106. 2 fragments of a small plain bowl of 19th century shape. SL4 A107. 5 fragments of a decorated bowl, 19th century. Poor quality, flawed in firing. Bricks SL4 A08. Six pieces of red clay brick very eroded. S14 A l l . 16 bricks or part bricks of various types and sizes, including 3 complete yellow Dutch [IJsselsteen] bricks in good condition. Others are extremely water worn and are of various pink and red clays.

[Fig. 1231

Some of the large lumps of good quality coal recovered with SL 4. The on-site inspection showed that a large quantity was still in the hull when discovered.

Glass SL4 A100. Wine bottle base, light olive green thick metal. Deep kick-up, no visible pontil mark [fig. 1271. SL4 A101. Wine bottle-neck and upper body. Light olive green metal, thin in the body and with a heavy square string rim [fig. 1271. Not part of A100.

De lading bestond uit grote kolen [foto IPL]. [Fig. 1241

SL4 A09/2, rimsherd. Scherf van slibwerk kommetje [fotok IPLI.



SL4 A102. Two body fragments similar metal to above but slightly different colour. SL4 A102b. One base fragment; brown metal.

Metal Copper/copper alloy SL4 A25. Small copper button with a raised pattern on the front. There is a text around the rim of the reverse which is illegible due to pitting of the metal [fig. 1281. It was found between the floor timbers just aft of the foremast. SL4 A1 5. Body of a cast brass barrel tap, the actual tap spigot of which is missing [fig. 1291. Copper and copper alloy fastenings are shown in fig. 92. Lead SL4 A57, 1911, 1912. Rolled sheet lead fishing-net weights. One is 11.5 cm long with a fragment of rope still within it [fig. 1301. SL4 A62. A tapering lead weight attached to two iron rods one of which passes down the centre of the weight and is held in place with a split pin [fig. 1311. Iron SL4 A48. A small grapnel with some rope still adhering [fig. 1321. SL4 A72. Three links of stud-link chain [fig. 1331. Various other lengths of the same size and type of chain were found and are probably parts of the anchor cables. The original link length was around 165 mm [6.5"]. SL4 A 63, 68 and 90. Objects that are similar to A62 but the weights are of square section iron [fig. 1341. Several bolts and spikes have been illustrated in fig. 92. Wood

SL4 A5 1. Barrel stave: 85.4 x 11.8 cm across the centre and 11 mm thick, split into three pieces [fig. 1351. There are no indentations or iron-stain to indicate iron hoops and no other marks of any kind. There are tool marks on the inner surface. SL4 A118. Stave of a cylindrical canister made from a hardwood 52.5 x 9.5 x 0.8 cm. The outer surface seems to have been tarred. SL4 A23124. Two fragments of an oak plank with markings [fig. 1361. Wooden fastenings have been illustrated in fig. 110.


[Fig. 1261 Clay pipes. Vijf pijpekoppen. De middelste links heeft bet hielmerk van Gerrit Nobel, de onderste links is een Engelse versierde pijp. [Fig. 1271 Bottles. Glazen flessen. [Fig. 1281

[Fig. 1301

SL4 A25, copper alloy button

SL4 A57, SL4 1911. SL4 1912. lead

Koperen knoop [foto's IPLI.

weights. Visloodjes. Dergelijke nehrerzwaringen

[Fig. 1291

worden op veel scheepswrakken

SL4A15, barrel tap.

gevonden lfoto PLl.

Bronzen tapkraan waaraan hetzwikje ontbreekt.


Textile SL4 A52. Brown silk square found between futtocks at hold beam level. Almost complete apart from one hole. Leather SL4 A13. Part of a shoe [upper heel]. Stone SL4 A 12. A grindstone, three quarters complete, of light grey crystalme rock [fig. 1371. The shaft was 44 mm square and on one edge of the hole is a fragment of wood. The area around the shaft is ironstalned. It is 27.2 cm in diameter and 8 cm thick. There are tool marks on the radial surface while the outer surface has been worn smooth and slightly concave. This suggests it was used vertically for grinding blades rather than hor~zontallyfor gr~ndinggrain. Animal bone SL4 A20. Butchered rib, probably bovine, cut across both ends [22.7 x 3.5 x 8 cm]. Samples Various samples were taken for identification or analysis. Where this has been completed the samples are evaluated in section 4.3. SL4 S1. Caulking between port side outer hull planks. SL4 S2. Environmental sample from between floors. SL4 S3. Environmental sample from between floors. SL4 S4. [A88141 Head of a copper alloy butt-end bolt, broken during salvage. SL4 S5. [A88151 Head of a copper alloy bolt, with a break that does not look modern. SL4 S9a. Coal concreted to ceiling planking. SL4 S9b. Sub sample of 9a. SL4 S10. Fine silt and clay above flint shingle. SL4 S 11. Flint shingle blocking the limber passages of the floor timbers immediately aft of the foremast. It was also spread over the garboard strake in a shallow layer 1 - 1.5 cm thick. Above this lay an organic silt [sampled]. Above this and sealing both was a layer of coal dust 4 - 5 cm thick that had filtered down passed the limber board into the space between the floors. SL4 S112a. Coal dust from between the floors overlying S10. SL4 S 112b. Sub sample of S 112a. SL4 TS 1-26. Wood samples. SL4 S27-S37. Wood samples. Some remarks on association As a proportion of the objects that must have gone down with the ship the number of finds retrieved is small. Like many others in a busy channel the wreck site was contaminated both


Table 10 SL 4





TS 1

False keelson


Quercus sp. (oak)




Betula sp. (birch)



midship starboard

Betula sp.


Outer hull plank

lower midship port

Ulmus sp. (elm)


Outer hull bonom

lower midship port

Ulmus sp.


Outer hull bonom





midship plank port

Quercus sp.



midship starboard

Fagus sp. (beech)



from sample 8

Quercus sp.



midship port plank

Quercus sp.


Wedge (punch)

from treenail sample 10

Quercus sp.


Wedge (punch)

from treenail sample 10

Ulmus sp.


Filling (under plank)

midship starboard

Quercus sp.


Filling (under bilge stringer) starboard forward

Pinus sylvestris(pine)


Repair ("Dutchman")

port outer plank forward

Ulmus sp.


Mast step

keelson forward

Ulmus sp.




Ceiling plank

port midship

Quercus sp.


Ceiling plank

port midship

Quercus sp.


Ceiling plank

port midship

Quercus sp.




Quercus sp.


False Keelson


Quercus sp.




Quercus sp.




Quercus sp.




Quercus sp.


samples Betula sp.

Pinus sylvestris

Garboard, port side

Ulmus sp.

Garboard, starboard side

Betula sp.

Garboard, loose plank

Ulmus sp.


[Fig. 1311


SL4 A62, lead weight attached t o iron

SL4 A63, SL4 A68, SL490, weight and

rod with a split pin.


IJzeren staaf met een loden gewichtje.

Een vierkantijzeren gewicht en enige

Hetzou deel uitgemaakt kunnen

daarbij behorende ijzeren appendages.

hebben van een unstes

Het lijkt een grove uitvoering van het

[Fig. 1321

[foto IPL1.

voorwerp dat i n fig. 131i s afgebeeld SL4 A48, a grapnel.

Een klein dregje m e t touwlfoto IPL].



SL4 ASl, barrel stave.




SL4 A72, three links of stud-link chain.



SL4 A23124, plank with markings.

Plank met merktekens [foto IPL].


SL4 A12, grindstone.

Slijpsfeen van lichtgrijs kristallijn gesteente [foto IPL].




Wood species Analysis of wood species was performed by Peter Stassen, Ministry of W.V.C., under the supervision of dr. P. Baas, Rijksherbarium at Leiden. The collection of slides and catalogues of the Rijksherbariurn were used as comparative material for identification. Samples of wood for species analysis were taken from several constructional elements of SL 4.



Enkele schakels mannetjesketting [foto


by earlier and more modern material in the years following its sinking. Together with the nature of the site and the circumstances of salvage this makes it impossible to prove or disprove association between many of the objects and the ship. Cautionary examples include some of the pottery, a piece of boiler clinker and a modern shoe that were raised with loose timbers from the site. The association of the bricks is also questionable. Some are complete and in good condition while others are fragmentary and/or very water worn. The latter appear to have been exposed on the seabed for a long time in contrast to another hard edged fragment that looks suspiciously like a modern fire-brick. The most striking example is a plastic teastrainer that was embedded in compacted sand in one of the hawse-pipes. This is probably the result of the ship having become periodically more or less exposed. The vintage of the strainer would be consistent with seabed disturbance that must have occurred at the time of construction of the Maasvlakte in the 1960's. Other objects that the wreck probably caught are the lead net weights and perhaps the small grapnel. One of the clay pipes would appear to predate the English pipe [SL4 A1051 found in the wreck by about 75 years. The approximate date has yet to be established but its presence is not very surprising considering the number of ships passing this area in any one year. The amount of debris and general rubbish on the seabed would have been appreciable long before SL4 sunk.

Procedure First the samples were boiled in water for over an hour, after which they were cut with a razor-blade in very thin transversal, radial and tangential sections. These sections were then bleached and rinsed several times in fresh water and then mounted on a slide embedded in KARO, a corn syrup which keeps the samples in good condition for several years.

For the examination a binocular microscope was used. The magnification factor used for the transversal sections was 40, for the tangential sections it was 100 and 250 - 400. The radial sections were magnified 200 or 400 times, while a magnification of 600 times was used for examination of some of the epithelial vessels on the end grain.

Table I 1 SL 4 Sample no.



Number of


of rings

sapwood rings sapwood boundary


Floor Floor Funock

Results The results of the analysis are shown in table 10. After 25 samples had been analysed a further four samples were taken. This was done to establish whether all sections of the keel and both garboards were birch as the first results suggested. In general the wood species identified appear to be northern European and Mid-European species. No obvious non European species were found although oak, elm, beech and birch all have closely related species in North America which are difficult to distinguish.

Hull plank Keelson Hull plank Hull plank Hull plank Stringer Table 12 sample no 3


= 7.15

GL= 69.9 (99.9%) The statistics for the mean curve of


Dendrochronological analysis

floors of SL4. The background of the statistics is clarified in Appendix I.

Sampling The salvage of the SL 4 shipwreck was performed with a large grab. As a result only part of the hull was recovered as an integral unit. A large number of timber were raised individually. To preserve the integral unit of hull structure for survey purposes eight of the total of nine samples were taken from loose timbers. The ninth sample was taken from a stringer that was still connected to the main structure. However, the relationship of the timbers to the structure with regard to type and function was obvious. So this sampling procedure was perfectly valid. The principles of the dendrochronological method, the methodological problems and the procedures followed during the Slufterresearch are briefly outlined in Appendix I to which the reader is referred as an aid in understanding the relevant statistics. The reference chronologies that were used in the analysis are also discussed there.

Mate van overeenkomst tussen monster SL4 (3) en SL 4 (9) uitgedrukt in de t-waarde en de Gleichlaufigkeit. Uit beide curven is een gemiddelde curve samengesteld. Beide monsters zijn genomen van de spanten. Table I 3 sample no.





not at issue

t = 16.08



GL = 76.6 not at issue

t = 4.64

t = 7,32

GL = 68.6 (99.9%)

GL = 64.3 (99.9%)

not at issue


not at issue The statistics for the mean curve of the

Dating Of the nine samples, eight have been dated [table 111. It was not possible to date sample [4] of the stringer, although it had enough rings [I581 and a regular ring pattern. This indicates its area of origin was outside the area covered by the standard chronologies used. It was possible to build up two mean site chronologies [tables 12 and 131. The one consists of samples [3] and [9], both floors, and the other of samples [5], [6] and [8] and


hull planks of SL4 Mate van overeenkomst tussen monster SL4 (5), SL4 (61, SL4 (7) en SL4

0.De vier afzonderlijke curven konden worden gecombineerd tot een site-chronologie. Alle vier de monsters zijn genomen van huidplanken. Dit vormt een ondersteuning voor het idee dat verschillende structurele elementen een verschillend herkomstgebied hebben.

Date of


last ring

to a lesser extent [7]. All these samples are of hull-planks. The high t-value between samples [5] and [6] means that they are made out of the same tree. Since sample [5] and [6] are taken from two hull planks which had been broken loose this conclusion is not necessarily significant. Each of the two site-chronologies is built up from structural elements of the same type. This supports the idea of a different provenance for different structural elements. Three of the samples contained sapwood, as is indicated [by the vertical bars] in the histogram [fig. 1381. In the histogram the relative position of the samples, their length and the date of their last annual ring are shown. The samples with sapwood are all from frames: sample [2] with 19 sapwood ring, sample [3] with 10 sapwood ring and sample [9] with 19 sapwood rings. To get the best estimate of the felling date of the complex of timbers the mean of the heartwood/sapwood boundaries is taken and to that is added the mean sapwood allowance, according to the method suggested by Baillie [1983, 36; after Hollstein 19801. Although sample [2] could not be matched with samples [3] and [9] their English provenance suggests that they could be treated as one timber complex. This in turn means that they can be treated as belonging to the same timber shipment with the same felling date. The mean sapwood allowance for timber of English origin is 30 years [Hughes et al., 1981, 3831, so the estimate of the felling date is 1836, with a probability of 95%, that the true felling date lies between 1829 and 1854 [see fig. 1391. The reasoning behind is as follows. Of a sample of 175 recent oaks of

Possible area of origin England England England Weserbergland or Southern Germany Weserbergland, Southern Germany or Western Germany Weserbergland or Southern Germany Hamburg Weserbergland or Southern Germany -

Enkele kenmerken van de monsters van SL 4. Weergegeven is om welk structureel element het gaat, totaal aantal jaarringen, aantal spinthoutringen, overgang kernhout-spinthout, periode die her monster beslaat in kalenderjaren en de mogelijke [Fig. 1381


Histogram showing the relative position of the samples, their length and the date of their last annual ring. The heartwood-sapwood boundary is also indicated. Histogram waarin de datering van de monsters naast elkaar is gezet. Elk blokje geeft de lengte van het jaarringpatroon weer en eindigt bij de buitenste jaarring. Ook de grens van het spinthout is aangegeven. [Fig. 1391 Histogram showing the estimated felling date. Histogram waarin is weergegeven de kapdatum en het 95% betrouwbaarheidsinterval van de

monsters SL 4 121, SL 4 131 en SL 4 191. De procedure gaat als volgt in zijn werk: door bij de gemiddelde kernhoutspinthout-grens van de drie monsters het gemiddelde aantal spinthoutringen van Engelse bomen op te tellen komt men op een kapdatum van 1836. Het gemiddelde aantal spinthoutringen van Engelse bomen van 30 ligt met 95% zekerheid tussen de uiterste waarden 19 en 50 ringen. Door de 19 i

spinthoutringen op te tellen bij de


kernhout-spinthoutgrens van monster


121en de 50 spinthoutringen bij de


kernhout-spinthoutgrens van monster

I( I


: YEAN .. . SAPWOOD ............................,.... BOUHOARV

191 ontstaat het 95%






...................................................................... ....................... . ... ,854


betrouwbaarheidsinterval voor de datering van de groep monsters.

I 1800


I lalo






Northwest England and Wales with complete sapwood, the number of sapwood rings were counted. It appeared that with a probabilty of 95%, the felling date of an oaktree lies between 19 and 50 years after the heartwood/sapwood boundary [Hughes et al., 198 1,3831. In this case we have three samples with sapwood. By adding the 19 years to the heartwood/sapwood boundary of sample [2] and the 50 years to the heartwood/sapwood boundary of sample [9] the 95% probability interval is established. The building date of the vessel governed by the same variables considered for SL 1 might lie within two years after the felling date, i.e. around 1838. Combining this date with the date of wreckage of the ship, based on the find of an English clay pipe, which is dated at the beginning of the second quarter of the 19th century, a short working life of 5 - 10 years is indicated.

Origin of the timbers As stated above two mean site chronologies could be produced. The mean curve of the floor [9] and futtock [3] and the curve of the floor [2] matched best with the English standard chronology visually as well as statistically [fig. 1401. The mean site chronology of the hull planks matched well against the Hamburg, Weserbergland and South-German chronologies, but no differentiation could be made between them [fig. 1411. The sample of the Keelson [I] could also have a German origin. It matched with the Weserbergland, South-German and to a lesser extent to the West-German chronology. However, the visual agreement was not particularly good with any of them. This suggests it was from another North European area. Table 14 gives the statistics for the samples of SL 4 as dated against the different standard chronologies.

Table 14 SL 4 Sample




Southern Germany


100 = mean of sample 5 and 6

Overzicht van de mogelijke

200 = mean of sample 3 and 9

herkomstgebieden en de daarbij

300 = mean of sample 5,6 and 8

behorende statistische waarden per

400 = mean of sample 5.6.7 and 8

monster van SL 4.

500 = mean of sample 6 and 7

Aangezien de verschillende standaard-chronologieen onderlinge

Of sample 3 and 9 only the main

overeenkomsten kunnen vertonen kan

curve(= 200) is dated ( t = 5.31,

een monster op meer dan een

GL = 71.0 (99.9))

chronologie tegelijk passen.

[Fig. 1401 Visual match of S L 4 curves and English standard chronology. a =sample SL 4 [Z]. b = English standard chronology. c = mean of sample SL 4 [31 and S L 4 [9] [= 2001.



Several samples of caulking and luting materials were submitted to John Evans, Head of Department of Natural Sciences at North East London Polytechnic. Like the samples from SL 1 these were initially investigated by scanning electron microscope to assess their general make-up. The SL 4 samples proved to be composed of an intimate mixture of clay, wood shavings and a binder [fig. 1421. Just like the SL 1 samples the SL 4 samples did not contain any hemp fibres.

Twee curves van SL 4, synchroon afgezet tegen de Engelse standaardcurve. [Fig. 1411 Visual match of S L 4 curves and Weserbergland standard chronology. a = mean of S L 4 [5], S L 4 161, S L 4 [7] and S L 4 [El.

b = Weserbergland standard chronology. Gemiddelde curve van SL 4 monsters, synchroon afgezet tegen de standaardcurve van het Weserbergland.


Western Germany

Low Countries


Lower Saxony


coastal area


Extraction with a series of solvents and subsequent analysis of the extracts by a range of chromatographic techniques indicated that the binder in all cases consisted of a pine pitch. Ignition of known weights to constant weight showed the mineral fraction [i.e. mainly clay] of the SL 4 samples to range between 14 and 18% by weight. No residues of lime were found.



Analysis of copper alloys used for bolts was carried out by Cathy Giangrande, Royal Armouries, Tower of London. Her results are followed by some observations on the types of fastening used. [Fig. 1421

Procedure Two butt-end bolts were analyzed using a Kevex 0750 energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometer, using a carbon secondary target. The conditions were 55 kV and 1.8 ma for 400 and 1500 seconds. The surface of the bolts were cleaned down to bright metal before analysis. The results are shown in table 15.

Observations The analysis shows the two bolts to be very different in composition. This indicates that they were from different batches of manufacture though not necessarily from a different source. The proportions of each metal in the alloys could vary for several reasons. They were probably made at a foundry near the shipyard as and when they were needed. They are still referred to today as yellow metal. Although this designation more or less implies that any copper alloy was acceptable, various alloys were being tried during this period. One that proved successful was Muntz metal, patented by G.F. Muntz around 1832. This was an alloy of copper, zinc and lead which had a tensile strength of 50,000 to 65,000 pounds per square inch, or about the same as that of bar iron. Neither of these bolts are Muntz metal, although bolt 8814 has a fairly high lead and zinc content. The lead improved the density and working quality and the zinc the casting qualities but with its high tin content 8814 is really a bronze. Bolt 8815 with a high zinc content is a brass. This is the one that appears to have cracked when being driven [see paragraph 4.2.1 on copper alloy fastenings]. As noted above the main reason is probably that the cast of 8815 is very porous.


Scanning electron microscope image of SL4 caulking material. Elektronenrnicroscoopvergroting van

een breeuwselmonster. Het bestaat uit klei, houtschilfers en een bindmiddel. Ook hier is geen touw of hennep lwerkl gebruikt.

Table 15 SL4 A8814
















tr tr


Results: in percentages tr {trace) = 0.01% or less

SL4 A8815

Table 16 Blind bolts Into 4" of wood

into 6" of wood

Diameter of bolt




518" (16mm)



3.05 3.05

3.3 2.45



3.1 3.5 3.5 3.15

3.5 3.5 3.9 3.5

314" (19mm)


Table I 7 Clenched bolts

Diameter of bolt



518" (16mm)

6.45 6.45 6.0 5.9

5.75 6.25 5.5 5.5

314" (19mm)



7.5 8.0 8.75

7.0 7.25 7.45


SL4112b % class

OIO 112 class

Coal While the preliminary investigation of the hull structure was being carried out, two samples of the coal were sent to the Yorkshire Regional Laboratory of British Coal for analysis. Coal from various archaeological sites has been analysed in the past. The techniques used are: petrographic [reflectance] and palynological [spore count]. Through these techniques the rank and age of the coal can be determined. From a knowledge of these parameters in British coals it is sometimes possible to identify a source. One sample was collected from pieces of coal that had been concreted to the stringers and ceiling planks by the degraded iron fastenings. A second sample was collected from the thick layer of coal dust found between the floor timbers under the keelson. The former would obviously represent the final cargo, whereas the latter could have accumulated during more than one voyage. If that was the case and if the coals carried had come from more than one source this would show up in the analysis. The analysis was carried out by Pamela Spriggs, Yorkshire Regional Laboratory, British Coal. Her results are presented below and are followed by some historical considerations that anticipate the discussions under 4.4 and 4.5.


Table 18

Ro class

Comparative tests on the strength of copper and iron bolts are interesting in this context. The tables 16 en 17 give the average strength of copper and iron bolts of various thicknesses. The figures are taken from Murray [1863]. Only those of the sizes used in SL 4 being included here. The figures give the direct tensile force in tons needed to break the bolt or pull it out of the timber. Table 16 concerns blind bolts driven into sound oak to a depth of 4 and 6 inches [ I 0 and 15 cm] with the usual drift i.e. they were slightly larger than the hole augered for them. Table 17 shows the results of the same test on copper and iron clenched bolts. Interestingly there is not a great deal of difference between the adhesion of the two metals. The iron being stronger would tend to spring from the timber before breaking. In the case of clenched bolts the fastening failed when the bolt pulled through the washer. The small difference between the two metals is because the copper bolts, being softer, could be more efficiently clenched over the washer.

% class

% 112 class

The mean maximum reflectance of both samples is 79% with a standard deviation of 0.06.


Petrographic analysis The mean maximum reflectance and the distribution of individual reflectance measurements made on one hundred points of vitrinite are shown in table 18. Palynological analysis The samples yielded a well preserved spore assemblage and both contained the stratigraphically significant species Endosporites globiforrnis and Dictyotriletes hireticulatus. The samples are considered to lie within miospore Zone VIII [Smith and Butterworth, 19671 which corresponds to the lower part of the middle coal measures from just below the Aegiranum marine band. Both petrographic and palynological analysis indicate that the two samples were derived from the same source. From the mean maximum reflectance value the coal is estimated to have a volatile value of 36 - 39% expressed on a dry ash free basis. High volatile coal of Middle Coal Measures age is common in Britain and is known to outcrop or occur near the surface in the following coalfields: - Cumberland; - Durham [outcrops near Bishop Aukland and on the banks of the river Wear]; - Northumber!and; - South Wales [south-east part of the coalfield]; - Lancashire [south-west part of the field]; - Yorkshire [northern part of the field]. The number of potential sources of the coal can be reduced by some logical considerations. The three most abundant sources in the list are Cumberland, Yorkshire and Durham. Of these three the sources in Durham and Cumberland are nearest to the coast. As the coal was presumably en route for a port in the Rotterdam area it is unlikely to have come from Cumberland. In this line of reasoning Durham is considered to be the most likely source. However, the other British sources cannot firmly be excluded.



Introduction The data and analyses presented above should be integrated into the aggregate knowledge on historical shipping. The present evaluation is an attempt to do so from different viewpoints and on different levels. First of all some remarks will be made on the process of wrecking and the archaeological site as such. After that attention will be given to the ship and its construction. As it is especially in constructional detail that the present study has yielded new information



this will be dealt with at length. Specific attention will be given to the specific use of different species of timber and other materials. A reconstruction will be presented of each step in the sequence of construction of the hull with reference both to the archaeological observations and to contemporary historical handbooks on shipbuilding. This detailed evaluation will be followed by an assessment of the position of this particular construction within the framework of longterm developments in shipbuilding. Separate paragraphs will be devoted to the short term historical setting of ship and shiptype and of the cargo. In a final paragraph the historical event and the date of shipwreck will be discussed. T h e site Although the archaeological site SL 4 was abandoned after cursory inspection a few obvious remarks can be made about the process of site formation. The ship's hull had retained its integrity and was standing upright in the sediments at a depth of between 1 1 m [top] and 15 m [keel]. For one thing this means that the ship must have sunk like a stone in relatively deep water. In the area concerned this must have been in a gully. Standing on the bottom the ship must have blocked the tidal currents. Ensuing scouring must have caused the ship to dig into the sediments it had settled upon. In view of the excellent state of preservation of the ship this process must have elapsed rather quickly. It explains why the ship was found at a depth well beyond the average depth of the deepest subatlantic sediments. It is remarkable that the gully - which must locally have been as deep as 11 meters - was not documented in the historical sources.



T h e ship and its construction Some general remarks The initial idea that the coal cargo and the copper alloy fastenings indicated the ship to be an English vessel from the first half of the 19th century was confirmed by subsequent research. For example the fastening of the butt-ends of planks with one treenail and a bolt in the manner shown in fig. 97 had become fairly standard in English shipbuilding in the eighteenth century. The practice may have arisen from supplementary spikes driven into the butt-ends of planks at the bow and the stern which were more likely to start or spring

from the frame. Originally iron was used but copper was not only rust free but was also not subject to electrolytic decomposition when the hull was sheathed in copper. By the time of building of SL 4 copper or copper alloys were in general use even on hulls like this one that were not sheathed. Another aspect is wood used in the construction of the hull. The keel is made of Birch and while this is unusual, Elm or Beech being more common, it is consistent with the increasingly wide variety of species used in English shipbuilding during the 18th an 19th centuries. In addition to the variety of wood types listed in table 9 the dendrochronological analysis has indicated that the oak that was used came from at least two sources and probably more. For reasons of comparison a historical list of wood types used in the Sunderland built snow Boreas [I8281 is shown in table 19. In a comparable Dutch vessel the hull timber would have been all of oak from European forests, while timber in an equivalent American vessel might include a similar number of species as SL 4, English yards had necessarily to import timber from all over the world. The demands of both the Royal and merchant navies for wood of sufficient quality for shipbuilding had long since exceeded the supply available from English forests. The problems caused by the competitive demands of the charcoal industry, and the wide variety of other uses to which wood was inevitably put were compounded by poor forestry. Overseas sources were the only alternative. The variety of species, although largely enforced by scarcity, were nevertheless used in situations that suited their natural characteristics. For example Elm was used for the bottom planking in SL 4. As well as being available in reasonable lengths Elm has a very high resistance to rot. This is, however, only the case as long as it remains wet, so its use was confined to the strakes below the light water mark. The dendrochronological results show all the frames of SL 4 to be of English provenance whereas the hull planks and keelson are from German or other European forests. This agrees with the historical evidence that for certain structural elements a definite preference was given as to their area of origin. David Steel [I8051 referred to the use of East country oak [i.e. the Baltic] for hull planking, except at the bow and the stern where English oak should be used. this may have been because of its supposed greater strength and durability but may have had as much to do



with the fact that Polish oak could be obtained in much greater lengths. The use of the shorter English planks at the bow and stern allowed the long foreign planks to be used to best advantage, reducing the number of butt joints in the hull. Fincham [I8511 writes that oak planks from Danzig [modern Gdansk] were used especially for the bottom. It was thought to be inferior to English oak. English oak was preferred for the frames. Besides inducing the use of a variety of wood species the scarcity of appropriate timber also induced maximum economy. This had a considerable effect on the methods of converting and using the timber. As a result an accepted principle of framing large hulls - whether they were warships or merchant ships -had become established in England probably by the eighteenth century. In merchant ships this general method of framing was followed almost until the end of the sailing ship era. This particular framing system and the related sequence of construction are dealt with in many treatises on naval architecture of the 18th and 19th centuries. However, many of the authors are writing about their own work and naturally tend to use the more impressive vessels they had built as examples. As a good result these treatises show a definite bias towards large warship construction rather than the far more numerous smaller merchant ships. Another aspect of these works is that in seeking to demonstrate the high degree of skill and knowledge that the work of the shipwright demanded, authors obviously outline procedures and techniques as they ought to be carried out and while they sometimes allude to alternative methods it is often implied that the technique or procedure being described was the only way of doing something. The possibility of cross-checking between apparently comprehensive historical documentation on the one hand, and the reality demonstrated by the archaeological information on the other is considered to be important. A reconstruction In the hull from SL 4 we have an example of how construction has been carried out in reality in one specific case. It is especially as a complement and a check to the historic documentation that the assessment of the archaeological information is of incomparable value. To allow for a comprehensive assessment a detailed reconstruction of the sequence of construction of the SL 4 hull is worked out

below. The archaeological observations will be reviewed side by side with historical data as derived from the contemporary handbooks on shipbuilding. The most useful1 treatise in this context proved to be A Treatise on Marine Architecture by Peter Hedderwick, a shipwright who ran a shipyard at Leith in Scotland and who had wide practical experience. His treatise was published in 1830 and deals exclusively with merchant vessels. He makes constant reference to alternative practices found in other districts and thus gives a more accurate impression of the variety with which the basic principles of construction could be carried out than is usually the case. Slightly earlier is The Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture by David Steel, first published in 1805. More widely known than Hedderwick it became a standard work, its third edition [I8221 incorporating the views of such authorities as Hutchinson, Snodgrass and Seppings. The two agree on the general principles of construction but Hedderwick's work is more relevant to vessels of the size of SL 4 and she was constructed in a manner similar to the way he describes. The reconstruction of the sequence of construction of SL 4 will be supplemented by notes from Hedderwick and Steel. References will particularly be made to Plate X of Hedderwick's treatise [fig. 1431 which exhibits many of the features found in SL 4.

Table 19 Deck and Hold beams;

English and Bremen Oak.

Floors and 1st futtocks;

English and Bremen Oak.

Other futtocks and top timbers

Eng. Oak.

False and main Keelson

American Oak.

Planks: Keel to 1st futtock heads;

Eng. Beech &Am. Elm.

to LWM

Eng. Beech & A m . Elm.

LWM to Wales (10.5" broad)

Danzic and Eng. Oak

Wales and Blackstrakes

Eng. Oak

(4 wales and two Black strakes all 8" broad) Topsides, Sheerwater and Gunwale

Eng. Oak


Eng. & D a n r Oak


Danz. Oak

Bilge Planks (inboard)

Eng. & D a n r Oak

Remainder of Ceiling

mixed English &Foreign Oak


Eng. and Danz. Oak



5 Breasthooks

Mixed Oak

1 Crutch (no pointers)

Eng. Oak Wood types in Sunderland built snow Boreas of 1828 (see also Lloyd's survey in Appendix II) [Fig. 1431 Plate X from Hedderwick's Treatise showing the frame timbers with the chocked joints as well as many constructional details that are similar to SL 4. Het handboek A Treatise on Marine Architecture van de Schotse scheepsbouwer Peter Hedderwick is

Keel Firstly the keel pieces were cut and scarfed. The evidence suggests there were four pieces. The scarfs were tabled horizontally. Steel specified four pieces for a merchant vessel of 330 tons. Hedderwick: the keel should be sided one half inch for every foot of the ship's extreme breadth and the hanging [depth] under the rabbet [should be] equal to the siding;. .. According to Hedderwick the dimensions of SL 4's keel which are approximately 28 x 37.5 - 38 cm [ l l " x 14 112" - 15"] should have been more like 33 x 43 cm [13" x 17"]. Steel however, for a West Indiaman of 330 tons specifies 12" inches breadth x 13" depth at the centre of the keel, tapering to 10 112" at the keellstem scarf and 10" at the stern post. Steel's description assumes a vertically tabled scarf. Hedderwick's specifications are also for a vertical scarf but he outlines the arguments for both side scarfs and flat scarfs: The seam of the scarph is sometimes laid horizontally, but oftener in an up and down


een van de historische bronnen die het meest geschikt is om de bouw van SL 4 aan te spiegelen. Het verscheen i n 1830 en behandelt oitsluitend

koopvaardijschepen. Op Plate X die hier staat afgebeeld is het gebruik van kruisklampen weergegeven, maar ook i n andere details komt de bouw van SL 4 overeen met hetgeen Hedderwick als gangbaar beschrijft I n de evaluatie worden de archeologische gegevens afgezet tegen hetgeen Hedderwick en David Steel, de auteur van The Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture uit 1805 vermelden over de scheepsbouw i n hun t i j d De historische bronnen worden dus gestaafd aan de archeologische werkelijkheid.

way, as it is much stronger in the latter position. But there are various opinions respecting the scarphing of keels. In many parts of the west of England, the flat scarph is preferred, because it is easier to come at should it require caulking, and answers very well when covered with a false keel.. . [Hedderwick plate X: FIG. 4. and 5.1. As noted above the flat scarf of SL 4 does not seem to have been protected by a false keel.

Garboard rabbet cut Both Hedderwick and Steel describe cutting the rabbet for the garboard strake except in the area of the scarfs. This was left until the sections had been joined. The keel sections were then bolted together after the faces of the joints had been prepared with a luting compound. Both Hedderwick and Steel proscribed tarred felt or flannel but no remains of this were found in SL 4. The bolts were to be large headed and clenched on rings. The seam on the top surface was then sealed thus: cut a groove in the upper side of the seam, one inch deep and 112" wide, caulk the seam with a strip of flannel, then a thread of oakum on top of it; then fit a piece of dry oak into the groove; tar the groove well, and drive the piece tight down with a piece of tarred flannel under and round it, and fasten it down with a few copper nails or oakpins. [Hedderwick] A similar technique had been in use for centuries and has been found in several archaeologically investigated ships: the Dartmouth [new keel 16781, Sea Venture [lost 16091 and the Mary Rose [built 1510, re-built 1536, lost 15451. These were all vertically tabled scarfs. In SL 4 there was apparently no tarred felt in the scarfs but as noted above there are traces of what may have been an oakum based luting compound. Preventing the entry of water also relied on stopwaters, a technique often used for horizontal seams and when used in a keel scarf also improving longitudinal strength by acting as a key. When the keel had been bolted together the garboard rabbet could be completed. The keel was set on heavy blocks with treenails driven into them on either side to hold it absolutely straight. Stem and stern assembly The exact distance between the the stem and stern posts was now marked off on the keel, then the positions of the floors. Both Steel and Hedderwick state that the deadwood is laid immediately after that although Hedderwick says it can be left until


after the stem and stern assemblages are up. In describing these procedures Hedderwick is the more detailed. The stem and the apron also had to be made from several sections. The pieces were shaped and rabbeted [except for the scarfs as in the keel] then assembled and bolted. The apron was cut so its scarfs alternated with those of the stem and with those that would eventually fasten the breasthooks. The scarf was cut for the stem and the keel. Sheers were set up and the stem was hoisted and slung in its approximate position. The scarf was then tarred and flannelled after which the stem was joined to the keel. It was carefully adjusted into alignment with the keel, bolted and shored. The procedure for the stern post was similar. In small ships the transom, fashion pieces and filling transoms were assembled on the ground and raised as one unit. In larger ships, the filling transoms were then removed to lighten the load, being refitted later.

Deadwood The small piece of forward deadwood in SL 4 is merely the tail end of the apron and formed a ramp for the rising floor timbers. It was treenailed in place prior to the floors being laid and was through-bolted between the keel and the keelson. Frames With the deadwoods in place the framing was begun. The operation of joining together the different timbers in constructing the frames, or the methods taken for that purpose, may vary a little according to the custom of the place. [Hedderwick] Both authors emphasise the necessity of avoiding grain cut timber [floors or futtocks cut out of insufficiently curved wood]. SL 4 shows several examples of grain cut or crossgrained pieces [fig. 88, T3, T30] and this is discussed in more detail below. First the floor timbers were set on the keel. Steel implies all of them were bolted into position but often this was not the case even in warships or East Indiamen. Hedderwick says this should be done when building afine vessel but in his general text he refers to every other floor being bolted first. In humbler ships it was sometimes every third or every fourth floor that was placed first. After they were bolted to the keel the futtocks for these floors were assembled and raised into place. These timbers were framed great care being taken with their shaping as it was to these that the intermediate futtocks were faired.

[Fig. 1441 Diagram showing the moulded side of frames [shaded] running forward 19

In SL 4 from the deadwood aft every third floor was bolted in place i.e. every third pair of timbers was framed. Over the deadwood the system was less regular. Those timbers that were certainly framed or bolted together are indicated on the plan [fig. 941. The aftmost frame timber left in place, a first futtock, was bolted to the second futtock aft of it. This shows that the sequence of every third pair of timbers did not extend for the whole length of the hull but probably only to the midship point. Aft of that the frames were bolted in mirror image. This was because the floors forward of the midship section were moulded on the forward side. This is best explained by the diagram [fig. 1441. The chocks orfilling under the floor timbers that increased in size as the floors became progressively more angled above the deadwood are illustrated by Hedderwick [fig. 143: FIG. 351 [see also fig. 88, T22, T231.

and aft [A] from the midship section. Op de plattegrond [fig. 941 is aangegeven welke inhouten aan elkaar gekoppeld zijn. De gekoppelde leggers en buikstukken zijn naar de ma1 afgetekend en verder in vorm gebracht. Het systeem waarin de inhouten vddr de midscheeps zijn afgetekend en aan elkaar gekoppeld, is achter de midscheeps juist in spiegelbeeld gevolgd.

The procedure for raising the futtocks of the main frames varied. Steel describes the system that was used in the Royal and East India Company yards for large ships. The futtocks were cut and assembled on the ground. The cross bolts were secured and the chocks were treenailed in place. The whole unit was then hoisted into place with sheers but not without considerable reinforcement to prevent it losing its correct form. First the chocked joints had quartering [short lengths of plank] nailed over them. Then a prop or shore was fixed in the inside of the frame, fastened at the head and heel with cleats. Then a length of chain was passed round the back of the frame. This was a considerable rigging operation, although in smaller ships these frames would have been reasonably easy to handle. Hedderwick mentions a method for larger vessels [over 300 tons] that must have been much easier in the small merchant yards with a small labour force: For larger. vessels, only thefirst and second, and third and fourth futtocks are bolted together on the ground; but the bolt-holes are all bored, and the bolts driven when the frames are set up.. . As they were set up they were supported by shores and connected athwartships by crosspawls: temporary planks of wood nailed between opposite frames, tying them together until the beams were fitted.

Harpinslribbands When the main frames were up, strong strips of wood were nailed along their outer sides.


These ran from stem to stern and followed the sheer of the hull. They were set at or just below the level of the floor heads, first and second futtock heads and the level of the wales and provided support against which the intermediate or filling frames could be erected. Although temporary they were made out of good quality timber and carefully worked so that they formed an even curve. This was important as they were also the guide for trimming and adjusting the outer face of the futtocks of the intermediate frames. They were called ribbands where they ran along the main frames and were usually made of fir. Where they curved round to the stem and stern post - the cant bodies -they were called harpins and were made of oak. First the lower ribbands were nailed to the outside of the frames at the level of the heads of the floors and the first futtocks. Alternatively, Hedderwick says two of the bilge planks could be fitted instead. The staging [the working platform erected around the ship] was then put up so as to be able to fix the upper ribbands [to the heads of the third futtocks and at the height of the wales and top timbers]. When the main frames were up, shored, crosspawled, and the ribbands had been run, the intermediate floors were placed. Keelson After the intermediate floors were in place the keelson was fitted. Made of several lengths, the scarfs were arranged so as to alternate with those of the keel. There was often an upper and a lower keelson. Where this was the case Hedderwick says both pieces were individually scarfed and bolted as though they were single keelsons. They are currently termed a double keelson or a keelson and rider keelson depending on whether the upper element ran all the way aft or not. Fig. 145 shows a plan of the collier Earl of Pembroke bought by the Navy, renamed Endeavour and converted for use by Captain James Cook. Using straight timbers for the keelson assemblage as in the bow of SL 4 would be cheaper in both cost and labour than the large curved pieces shown in this drawing and in Hedderwick's plate [fig. 143: FIG. l:'T']. Lloyd's surveys of vessels built at this period and the first half of the 19th century refer to the upper element as a false keelson or riding keelson [see Appendix 111. When in place bolts were driven through both keelsons and the floors to the keel. In SL 4 the keelson bolts were driven through the


intermediate floors. Through the floors of the built up frames there was already a bolt. Intermediate timbers With all the floors bound by the keelson the futtocks of thefilling frames could be erected. Individually set up upon the head of the one below, nailed to the harpins and chocked. The first futtocks in SL 4 begin about 20 cm from the keel. This was the practice in merchant ships whereas in warships the first futtocks were united across the keel by a cross chock. The merchant ship practice allows water to collect and run to the pumps without coming above the ceiling and damaging the cargo. ...the heels of the lower futtocks run no lower than to take a treenail in the outer edge of the Garboard Strake in each timber. To have a bolt driven from the outside, and clenched upon the Limber Strake through the heel of every lower Futtock from the After Hatchway to the Formast [Steel 18051 Some of SL 4's limber strake fastenings are exactly as described but others are blind bolts driven from inboard. All the timbers of SL 4, framed or otherwise, are similarly sided and set close together. In larger and finer ships small pieces of wood were usually set between the timbers through which the bolts passed. This is another aspect of framing well illustrated in the contemporary drawings and models [also fig. 143 Plate X: FIG. 261. The chocked joints of SL 4 are also slightly different in the manner the timbers are cut to that commonly illustrated. One futtock is trimmed in an angled butt and the other is cut at an angle all the way across [fig. 85, 951. In all cases possible to see it is the head of the futtock that is cut this way. Perhaps this made a better platform for the upper futtock to rest on during building than if they were both left with one third of their depth as a butt. This would only apply if the futtocks were still being erected individually. There would be no advantage in frames that were preassembled, yet the bolted frames of SL 4 also have this type of joint. A possible explanation is that the futtocks of the bolted frames were being erected in pairs as described by Hedderwick and in this case the system would ease handling. Another factor might be the way in which the futtocks were trimmed a little at a time until the shape of the futtock was fair with the mould. It would be easier to do this with the foot cut at an angle as the job could be done quickly and easily with an adze.

Cant frames At the bow the first cant timbers forward of the frames proper were bolted and probably one or two other pairs of timbers were framed each side both at the bow and the stern. The intermediate cant timbers were not fastened to each other but erected in a similar manner as the filling frames. Set in place supported by shores, they were then nailed to the harpins and possibly reinforced with temporary cleats. Planking Prior to planking Hedderwick recommended that the whole outer surface of the timbers be dressed to a smooth even surface so that the planks lay solidly against them. In some places in the SL 4 hull there is a slight lip in the surface of the futtock at the seam between planks. This is a common effect of dressing the timber for each plank individually, as the planking proceeded. Although it was.a less satisfactory alternative to the method prescribed by Hedderwick we must conclude that it was done that way. First the outer bilge planks were fitted then a few more strakes were fitted working upwards so as to bind the feet of the second futtocks. The wales were begun at the same time starting with the second from top and working down as far as possible on the staging. Staging was then raised so the planking could proceed upwards. If the timber used was green the bottom planking was left off as long as possible while work proceeded with fitting deck beams. Hedderwick says this planking was worked from the garboard outward to the bilge planks. This was almost certainly the case in SL 4. The last strake to be fitted would be the one next to the lowest bilge plank. The stealer described above [fig. 1151 that had been fitted between existing planks [as evidenced by the cut treenails] lies in this position [fig. 95, plank no. 61. There are various opinions respecting the methods of planking the bottom [the hull in general below the wales] some preferring to work from the bilge upwards, others to begin at the wales and work downwards; . . . [Hedderwick]. Hedderwick recommended working upwards as the weight of the plank made it easier to fit closely to the one below. Even when working upwards it was common to leave out the strake next to the bilge planking so the chips of wood resulting from work inside the hull could fall through. This too was probably done in SL 4 as very little in the way of shavings and offcuts were found between the frames.

[Fig. 1451 A plan of the collier bark Earlof

Pembroke 366 tons. Redrawn from an Admiralty draught by David MacGregor, showing her as she would have been before she was bought into the Navy and converted for a voyage of exploration by James Cook. She was built by Thomas Fishburn at Whitby in 1764.

De collier bark Earl of Pembroke die door de Britse marine werd aangekocht en verbouwd voor een expeditie onder James Cook. Zowelin dit schip als het schip dat Hedderwick op Plate X afbeeldtis voor hetzaathout en het bovenzaathout krom gegroeid hout gebruikt. Dat is veelzeldzamer en duurder dan het rechte hout in SL 4.



Beams There are many ways of fastening the deck beams to the ship's side, as by wooden forand-aft knees and iron hanging knees. Others have no for aft knees, but have their beams fastened by dovetailing them into the shelf and clamps, letting them down one third of their thickness; and then on the upperpart are fastened the two legs of a strong plate of iron, which passes round the timber opposite the end of the beam. [Hedderwick] The first method is almost certainly the way that the deckbeams of SL 4 were fastened. The alternative method described is similar to the hold beam fastening in SL 4 except the ends of the beams were not dovetailed [fig. 103, 1041. Although the iron knees shown in the Plate are staple knees their shape, due to the horizontal shelf, is very similar to those of SL 4 [fig. 143 Plate X: FIG. 16,331. A variation is that the shelf [fig. 143,33:F] is placed against the clamp [fig. 143,33:G] whereas in SL 4 it is placed above it, which would seem more logical and stronger [fig. 1041. Pillars Once the beams were in place pillars or stanchions were placed under them for support. In SL 4 there was probably one pillar to each hold beam stepped onto the false keelson. They could be located in a small mortise as shown in fig. 107. Alternatively they could be located on a small step nailed onto the top of the keelson. This was often preferred as it avoided cutting into a main strength timber. More seriously, a mortise also acted as a trap for water and was a potential site for rot. Breasthooks and crutches With the cant frames in position a series of large wooden knees were placed across the bow, binding the stem assembly and the forward cant frames. The equivalent members at the stern were called crutches. Both hooks and crutches were bolted at right angles to the fore and aft line. Consequently the arms of those low in the hull ran diagonally across the frames. The alternative arrangement in the stern were timbers that ran diagonally up to the wing transom. They were called sleepers or pointers. Sometimes both crutches and pointers were used. Like deck knees these elements were later commonly made of iron. Ceiling Neither Steel or Hedderwick is explicit on the subject of internal planking but much of it


was done after the outer planking was complete. The limber strake [binding the feet of the first futtocks] bilge stringers [over the joint between the floors and second futtocks] and the beam clamps were fitted first [as with the wales and outer bilge planks]. Treenails As the stringers and intermediate ceiling planks were fitted the rest of the treenails would now be driven right through from the outer hull planks. The outer planks being fastened initially with the butt end bolts and a small number of treenails. Hedderwick: as to the treenailing of the bottom and the top sides, it is the general custom to double-bore each timber on the breadth of each strake if it exceed I0 inches and to double and single bore all the narrow strakes: that is, to double-bore one timber, and single-bore the next alternately. The size of auger for the bottom plank, for vessels of 100 - 300 tons measurement, is inch and quarter, and for the top-sides inch and eight. [31.75 mm, 28.57 mm]. As the fastenings in SL 4 show many different aspects we need to enlarge on the subject. In SL 4 the outer hull planks wider than ten inches [25.4 cm] are mostly double bored as Hedderwick specifies, those less: double and single bored. Those less than 7" wide [17.8 cm] are single bored. The diameters of the treenails range from 25 mm to 38 mm but are concentrated at 29 - 30 mm, 32 mm, 34 - 35 mm, 37 - 38 mm, [ l 1/8" 1 1/4", 1 3/8", 1 1/2"]. The majority of the holes in the loose bottom planks are 35 and 32 mm. However it is difficult to be certain about the size especially when measuring a treenail that is flush to the surface of the wood. It is never perfectly circular. One reason is that treenails were not initially turned on a lathe but split out of straight grained oak. Sometimes they were finished with a circular plane or moot in which case they were more evenly cylindrical. Alternatively they were hand finished with a spoke-shave or drawknife hence the octagonal section and irregular shape. They were also cut slightly larger in diameter than the hole through which they were to be driven. A selection of treenails is illustrated in fig. 110. The grouping into sizes is the result of measuring several hundred. More certain and more significant is the measurement of a treenail hole i.e. the auger size used. Although a measurement taken too near the surface can also be misleading. Sometimes the treenail was intentionally cut wider at the head as Hedderwick recommends.

. ..treenails should be well rounded, and of equal thickness from the point to within 114th of their length from the head, where they should begin to swell a little. By properly driving such a treenail, it will draw the plank close up to the timbers.. . This and the use of wedges, either at the time or later to tighten them up can distort and enlarge the mouth of the treenail hole. One beneficial side effect of the violent salvage of SL 4 is that there were plenty of loose timbers in which either the treenail holes or the treenails themselves could be examined. Calipers were used to measure the treenail holes at least 2 cm below the surface of sound or complete timbers and in the centre of several fractured pieces. Wedging and tightening Depending on certain factors such as wood variety, position in the vessel and its age etc., treenails are often wedged or otherwise tightened to further increase their tightness. Its necessity in so many boat and shipbuilding traditions has resulted in a wide variation in methods used. Of the methods used in SL 4, firstly there are the common flat wedges, found in scandinavian shipbuilding and throughout Northern European shipbuilding both in clinker and carve1 hulls [fig. 991. Another common form is the square wedge driven centrally into the treenail and common in Dutch shipbuilding [deutel]. A third method seen in SL 4 is the use of several small wedges in one treenail; usually three but occasionally four and in at least two cases five. Hedderwick's description of the latter is particularly interesting in the context of SL 4: in the north of England, where an immense number of vessels are employed in the coal and coasting wade, their vessels are much esposed to striking the ground in going over bars in entering and leaving harbours, and in lying on the ground at times wirh heavy cargoes. The ship builder and masters of such vessels ought to know well what methods answer best to keep their treenails tight, and prevent the planksfr-om drawing or starting over them. Accordingly at these places, and several others, they tighten the treenails by driving three small tapering wedges or plugs rnto the head of each treenail. These plugs are made of well seasoned oak, and are about 1 112 inches long, and 318th~of an inch square at the head, and drawn to a sharp point; they are called punches. He continues to say that punches were not favoured in vessels that were going to hot



climates, being found to shrink and fall out. In these ships cutting then caulking the treenails in the manner of yards in the south of England was more effective. This latter method was not found in the hull of SL 4. Hedderwick implies the method he used himself was the single square wedge: the most general method used in Scotland is to drive one large plug or punch into the centre of each treenail, these being made of dry oak, about 2 112 inches long and 518th~of 314th~ of an inch square at the head. Fig. 146 shows two treenails in an oak outer hull plank of SL 4, one with a plug, the other with punches. The various types are also shown in fig. 110. In SL 4 the various types are generally applied according to function. For convenience in describing them, single square wedges will be referred to as deutels to distinguish them from punches. Deutels and punches are used almost exclusively on the outer hull planks and the flat wedges almost exclusively in the ceiling. One reason is that square wedges tighten the treenail around its whole circumference without splitting it and is thus more suitable for use outboard. A flat wedge on the other hand splits the treenail across its diameter which could result in leakage as the wedge is often nearly as long as the thickness of the plank. In the ceiling planking this is of no consequence. Of the three techniques flat wedges are, however, probably the strongest. This may be the reason for the main exception to the above, in that outboard the treenails fastening the garboard and first three or four strakes of SL 4 are mostly flat wedged. On the bottom strakes and bilge planks deutels predominate, then punches from there upwards. Hedderwick does say that the treenails on the bilge and other round parts of the ship should be wedged to prevent the plank from starting over them with strain of caulking. This implies that the others need not be. Indeed they were commonly left plain for it was supposedly not necessary to wedge oak treenails outboard when new. The wood would swell when wet and thus become tighter. Inboard this would of course not apply as long as the ship remained relatively leak free. In SL 4 it was obviously the standard to finish a treenail inboard with a wedge. In other historic ships known through excavaton such as a cog that sunk off Bossholmen island in the 13th century, the Mary Rose rebuilt 1536, and Sea Venture [lost 16091 wedged treenails are in the minority. In theory an oak treenail need only be wedged if driving it is

found to be relatively easy. If so it was obviously not as tight as it could be and so was wedged to make it as secure as possible. The ideal case was a treenail that could only just be driven through the timbers being fastened. Normally the faceted nose of the treenail is driven 4 - 5 cm clear of the timber before being cut off. Fig. 110 includes such an off-cut found between the cant frames of SL 4 [A1 111. However, in some cases in SL 4 the treenail obviously proved s o tight it could not be driven quite far enough, the nose of the treenail being visible below the surface of the plank. When this happened it was usually left unwedged and another treenail was driven nearby. In at least two cases a treenail in SL 4 could not be driven any farther than the inboard surface of the futtock. The hole in the ceiling was filled by a dummy treenail [probably an off-cut] that was duly wedged and so indistinguishable from the genuine fastenings! Another example was observed in an outboard plank where a treenail hole was augered right at the edge of futtock. The auger was deflected off the timber so another was drilled on the other side of the plank and the redundant hole plugged and wedged. Many of the planks on the outer hull have treenails of various sizes yet most are wedged with punches as though all the treenails were treated this way irrespective of type and condition. A few are left plain and others have deutels, interestingly, it is often the latter that break the regular pattern. In the context of this vessel, the punches are probably the standard tightening method, while those left plain or finished in another way have probably been fitted at a later date. The frigate Unicorn built in 1834 and now preserved at Dundee in Scotland also has her treenails punched in this fashion and also has yellow metal bolts fastening the butts of the planks. If wedging existing treenails was not thought to be sufficient the next course open to the shipwright, short of replacing the plank, was either to drive out the treenail completely and replace it or to drive extra treenails. There was a limit of course as too many would weaken the timber. A way round this was to drive a new treenail partially cutting an old one. On the port side of SL 4 there are four examples of this in a small area that are so similar in treatment they presumably represent the same repair. The secondary treenail hole has been augered to cut the first at a divergent angle [fig. 1471. In all cases the second treenail is blind but curiously three out of the four are flat wedged while the fourth


has a deutel. There are other cases where the secondary treenails cut the first at a convergent angle and which from a mechanical point of view would seem to be far more secure. Certainly some of these are fortuitous but others by their uniform angle and the degree to which they cut the first treenail would seem intentional. Examples of blind secondary treenails cutting the existing ones can be seen in some of the timbers shown in fig. 88.


Developments in ship construction The consruction of the hull of SL 4 as reconstructed above illustrates three very important factors in the long-term development of large carve1 shipbuilding. Firstly, the design of vessels to fullfill a specific requirement, in this case the carriage of bulk cargo. Secondly, as a structure it is a good example of the framing system that was widely used over two centuries in the English tradition but which is poorly represented in the remaining wooden hulls either afloat or preserved in museums. Thirdly, a factor very much bound up with the first two, that of timber availability and conversion. A rough sketch of this development with emphasis on these interconnected aspects is given below. The first period of large camel hull building in England was characterised by relatively round hull sections and complex but flexible framing systems where the futtocks were scarfed to each other in a variety of ways. Although the basic system was regular, variation due to the necessity of repair or simply through the use of different lengths and thicknesses of the timber to hand appear not have compromised the overall strength of the hull [fig. 148, a]. Such systems, even when rigidly applied distributed the futtock joints evenly over the whole hull. Up to a point ad-lib repairs would only enhance this effect. With a certain amount of strength in the joints themselves and clamped by heavy ceiling and stringers fastened through to the outer hull planking, the result was a strong hull. During the second half of the 16th century there were marked changes in the hull form of large ships. The section became much more angular, something that is well illustrated by various contemporary manuscripts. This had major implications for the techniques of construction. Any sharp curve in the hull section tends to concentrate the futtock joints. The sharper the curve, the harder it is to find a timber that follows the radius of the curve and continues for any distance beyond. The

[Fig. 1461

[Fig. 1471

Outer hull treenails, one with a single

Strengthening the plank fastenings.

square wedge - a plug or deutel-the

Secondary treenails partly cutting

other with three small wedges or

existing treenails at a divergent angle.


h h e r e this is done the secondary

Aan de buitenzijde zijn de beknagels

treenails are blind like those illustrated

op uiteenlopende wijze stijf gezet. Oe

in fig. 109.

ene toont een gewone vierkante wig of

Op deze foto is duidelijk te zien hoe de

deutel, de andere drie kleine pennetjes

bevestiging van de huidplanken op een

of deuteltjes [foto j.a.1.

gegeven moment verbeterd is door nieuwe treknagels in re slaan. Oe nieuwe nagels zijn blinde nagels. Deze werkwijze is ook weergegeven in fig.

109 [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1481 Comparison of framing systems showing the major changes that occurred particularly between the 15th and the 17th centuries. These are generalised and not representative of individual ships. Bij grote schepen zijn de spanten opgebouwd uit een aantal inhouten. In de loop der eeuwen zijn er veranderingen opgetreden in de wijze waarop datgebeurde. Dit is een schematische weergave van de ontwikkeling zoals die in grote lijnen tussen de 15e en de 17e eeuw heeft plaatsgehad.



shipwright therefore has to place the futtock joints either in the curve itself or not far either side of it purely because the timber will not allow otherwise [fig. 1491. With all the joints, however well scarfed, aligned at the same heights along its length, the hull would be too weak. The answer was to change the emphasis from end to end joints to overlapping timber. When this is done sufficient hull strength can be achieved with little or no strength in the futtock joints and without any horizontal connection between adjacent timbers [fig. 148, b]. In fact in this system many of the timbers did not even butt against each other, the gaps left between them being called spurkets. Characteristic of late 16th -early 17th century shipbuilding in England, this system was also more economical in the use of timber. With all the joints concentrated in the most acutely curved section of the hull, a high proportion of the futtocks could be formed out of virtually straight timber. This may have had little bearing on the development of this form but its economic advantages would have been appreciable. When these ships made their appearance the timber crisis was yet a century and a half away but already in Henry VIII's reign there had been legislation concerning its sale in response to scarcity. Of various references made concerning the problem, the most apt in the context of this report appears in Harrison's introduction to Holinshed's Chronicle, [Holinshed 15771: of cole mines,. . . we have such plentie in the north and westerne par-tes of our Islande as may suffice for all the Realme of Englande. And so must they doe hereafter indeede, if woode he not better cherished than it is at this present. The next significant development in English shipbuilding occurred, probably gradually, during the 17th century. This time it did not primarily concern the hull form. Apart from the radically sharp hulls of the early frigates exemplified by the Dartmouth [I6551 hull form changed fairly slowly. There was a trend towards wider floors and a more rounded lower section but the method of designing hull form based on arcs of circles remained. In the framing system there was probably an increasing tendency to reduce the gaps or spurkets between the frames. This, coupled with the ever increasing cost as well as the difficultly in obtaining compass timber directly influenced the next developments. It is these changes that the hull of SL 4 illustrates.





In a hull of round section the frame timbers can be arranged so the joints are disposed evenly throughoutthe structure [a]. Sharp curves in the section tend to concentrate the joints in or near the curve [bl. The sharper the angle the more marked this effect will be [cl. De lassen tussen de opeenvolgende delen waaruit een spant is opgebouwd kunnen in een schip met een afgeronde dwarsdoorsnede goed verspringen. Hoe hoekiger die dwarsdoorsnede is, des te meer lassen zullen er dicht bij de kim komen re liggen. Dat komt de sterkte niet ten goede. [Fig. 1501 The effect of cutting funocks of the same curvature and dimensions out of increasingly straight timber, also of the same girth. Een inhout met dezelfde vorm word? uit stammen met dezelfde dikte maar uiteenlopende kromming genomen. Dat heeft direct gevolgen.

[Fig. 1511 An example of stretching timber resources to the limit is seen in the way the first funocks of SL 4 were cut. Bij de buikstukken voor het schip van

SL 4 zijn de mogelijkheden van het beschikbare hour tot het uiterste benut Eigenlijk is men zelfs iets te ver gegaan.


When the futtocks in SL 4 are examined it becomes apparent that in many cases they have been cut out of timber that curves rather less than it should. In most cases true cross grain has been avoided but in others the futtock has been cut out of virtually straight timber and several have cracked as a result. The characteristic shape of these timbers is the angled end cut to accomodate the chock. The reason for the chock is illustrated by the diagrams fig. 150 and 15 1. In fig. 150 futtock a] is cut from a timber of matching curvature or radius. It is the maximum length and thickness that could be cut from this piece of timber without including rot-prone sapwood. The ends can be butted or scarfed to the next futtock by any method [although if scarfed the length of the overlap will be lost]. In futtock b], of the same curvature and size but cut from a straighter timber, there is no alternative to sacrificing the ends. Even where the discrepancy in the radius of the futtock and the timber is not so great, conscientious removal of sapwood will still result in an angular end. So too would this be the case if futtock a], was extended [a2]. Although not ideal, the timber of futtock b], is sufficiently curved for the central grain to run continuously from end to end. Futtock c], on the other hand, is cut from virtually straight timber. It is truly cross grained in that the grain runs across from the inner to the outer surface constituting a significant weakness. If all the sapwood is removed, the outer surface of the futtock will have a rounded section, something that is common in SL 4 timbers. In extreme cases the futtocks cannot even conform to the required shape. Many of them are a compromise, being fairly rounded but with a considerable quantity of sapwood remaining. In the terminology of the Lloyd's surveyors [see Appendix 11] they would be: not well squared or- well sapped. Butting futtocks of type b], or c], to each other leaves a gap which if not filled will reduce the area of hull available for solid through-fastening of treenails. The gap is therefore filled with a chock. The chocks vary in size depending on how much had to be trimmed off the futtock. Fig. 15 1 shows a typical first futtock from SL 4 [see also fig. 88, T301. It is cut from almost straight timber and on many of them the heel chocks are substantial. In the futtock joints in general some are diminutive [in a few cases there is no chock at all] while others are quite large. The latter make an effective end to end joint between the futtocks but this is a secondary

function. A joint made this way even when the chocks are butted does not have the strength of a properly scarfed joint and this is demonstrated by the considerable reinforcement that was necessary when raising the frames into place. Joints of this type are well illustrated in the various treatises on Naval Architecture in the 18th and 19th centuries. However they are always shown as being butted and of a regular size [fig. 1521. As suggested above, the treatises have a strong bias to the finer built large merchant ships or warships. On the proper jointing of timber in this fashion, Steel says: .. .each [timber] sho~ildstand upon its proper head. The heads and the heels of all the timbers to have one third of the substance left the moulding. In other words at least one third of the moulded depth of the futtock should meet in a true butt. The implication is that they were not necessarily to be the same size as long as they did not exceed the specified depth. If this was exceeded to the point where the chock became the same thickness as the frame this was a through chock: . . .ifone timher happens to he short, provide the next long enough to make good the deficient length, as through chocks should always be rejected ... He goes on to specify that: the seats of the chocks should not exceed once and a half the siding of the timber [fig. 1531. By limiting the amount that is trimmed off the timber and the length of the chock one is limiting the extent to which the available timber can be utilised. It is interesting that rather than flout these rules he advocates compromising the regularity of the framing system as the lesser of two evils. The chocks in the hull of SL 4 do not seem to answer to a set proportion at all. One of the chocks is no longer wedge shaped but more like a very short futtock. Similarly a wreck on the beach between Zandvoort and Bloemendaal, investigated by the Ministry of W.V.C. in April 1986, shows extremely long chocks [fig. 1541. With its general characteristics and its yellow-metal bolts in the plank butts it too looks like an English vessel. The other development in the framing of ships was the use of bolts fastening adjacent futtocks horizontally. This may have begun as a constructional aid but it led to a change in the constructional sequence. It may have been connected with the new way of converting timber involving chocks and would have become economically more viable with the


reducing cost of iron. Prior to this futtocks had been raised individually, shored, nailed to the harpins and additionally secured until planked by various means such as knocking wedges between them or with temporary battens. The details of the procedure certainly varied widely but it would not be so easy with chocks. Not only were there double the number of pieces involved but there was less surface for the heel of one futtock to rest upon the head of the one below. The next logical step was to bolt the component futtocks of a frame together on the ground and then raise them in one unit, as described above. At the time the termframe implied framed timbers as opposed tofilling frames orfilling timbers. As discussed above, even when fully developed as a construction sequence not every frame was so formed, the filling frames being erected in the earlier manner. In what order these changes occurred is difficult to say. Various authors have stated the practice was introduced in 1714. The source for this 'fact' can be traced back through John Fincham [I85 11 who gives that date for the introduction of chocks when describing the system introduced by Sir Robert Seppings that superceded it. Seppings [I8201 in the presentation of his method in the Philosophical Transactionsfor the year 1820 had cited an old work in my possession, dedicated to George the first and on the basis of this, supposed the practice was introduced around 1714, being the year in which George I came to the throne. As a matter of fact it is also the year that William Sutherland's treatise: Britain's Glory of Ship-Building unveil'd was first published, so that might be the old work to which Seppings refers. In fact Sutherland describes chocks in some detail and recommends correct proportions in relation to the futtock. It is obvious that the practice was in use considerably earlier than this and was demonstrated to be so by the excavation of the Darrrnol~th[built 1655, rebuilt 1678, sunk 16901 [Martin 19781. In the case of the Dartmouth there were no horizontal fastenings between the futtocks in the section of hull excavated and salvaged. This suggests a transitional stage although some bolts may have been used higher up. Sutherland describes bolting the futtocks together although he says that in large ships they were only bolted up to a certain height [a similar compromise as that recommended by Hedderwick over a century later]. As with most new practices change probably occurred at different times in different areas. It is also

[Fig. 1521

[Fig. 1541

Cross section of a man of war from A

A chock from the

History ofNavalArchitecture by John

Zandvoort/BloemendaaI wreck. Its

Fincham [18511, showing the oldchock

extreme length is significant.

method and the buttand coaksystem

Bij een scheepswrak dat in april1986

introduced by Sir Robert Seppings.

op bet strand tussen Zandvoort en

Lassen met kruisklampen zijn

Bloemendaal is onderzocht zijn ook

regelmatig afgebeeld. Op de

kruisklampen gebruikt. Ze zijn erg lang

afbeeldingen zijn de kruisklampen

-zoals hier afgebeeld -maar vaak

echter altijd met een borst of stuik

laten zij bovendien geen lijf meer over

uitgevoerd en zijn zij regelmatig van

van de eigenlijke inhouten [foto IPL].

vorm; zo ook hier in een afbeelding van Fincham. [Fig. 1531 Diagram showing the maximum size of a futtock chock according t o Steel [18051. In deze schematische tekening zijn de maximale afmetingen en verhoudingen weergegeven die een kruisklamp volgens de regels van Steelzou mogen hebben.



possible that the use of chocks was well established as a remedy, the occasional one being used where inadequacy of specific timber made it necessary. With rising timber prices its use presumably became increasingly widespread until it became standard practice. Developed in the 17th century, the method was the norm throughout the 18th and well into the second half of the 19th century. The new method introduced by Sir Robert Seppings in 1818 involved butting the futtocks and joining them with circular coaks or large dowels. The system made use of futtocks of a shorter length in order to reduce the curvature required in each piece and to ensure a solid butt-end [fig. 1521. In Philosophical Transactions [I8201 he criticised the practice of only bolting alternate pairs of frame timbers: In forming the frames or ribs, half the timbers only are united.. .the intermediate two timbers [termed fillings] being unconnected with each other, and merely resting on the outer planking, instead of giving support to it.. .This loose practice is, I believe, peculiar to the English merchant ship-builder; and indeed was persued till very lately even in His Majesty's Navy, while the preferable system of connecting the ribs was common to other maritime powers. While ships with all their timbers horizontally bolted were undeniably stronger, his assertion that the filling frames were only resting on the planking ignores the strong binding effect of the latter. More than two centuries earlier ships with all their timbers resting on the planks had circumnavigated the world. He was even less complimentary about the use of chocks: but the present mode of joining together the several pieces of the same rib, is also highly objectionable. It is done by the introduction of a third piece, technically termed a chock or wedge piece.. . Of these chocks not one in a hundred is ever replaced [i.e. reused] in the general repair of a ship; for they are not only found defective, but very generally to have communicated their own decay to the timbers to which they are attached. Besides this, the grain of the ribpieces being much cut, to give them the curvature required, has a considerable share in weakening the general fabric. That they occasion a great consumption of materials, is obvious, as the ends of the two rib pieces must first be cut away, and then be replaced by the chock. This last statement is interesting, for as demonstrated in fig. 150c and 15 1, in timbers where the grain was much cut, to obtain the


curvature required, the space occupied by the chock was not cut from solid timber. This apparent contradiction continues in the next paragraph: the introduction of chocks was no doubt to procure that curvature which is so necessary in the formation of a ship, when crooked or compass timber became scarce.. . It probably stems from the fact that as the chock system had become the formal method in the Royal yards, timbers were cut to be joined in this manner whether it was necessary or not. When a curved piece was cut from straight timber there undeniably did occur waste along its length [fig. 150~1,even though it can be used for chocks and other small pieces. Seppings' alternative method was certainly a great improvement and survives in one of the ships he built; the Unicorn [I8341 which is still afloat in Dundee. In thephilosophical transactions he advocated the use of his system to merchant ship builders, particularly for East Indiamen. Apparently some merchant vessels were subsequently built on this principle [Hedderwick illustrated it in his treatise see fig. 143, plate X, FIG. 24, but despite general consent that there were better ways, merchant yards continued to use chocks for many years. In 1842 William Hutchins proposed a new method of framing and jointing for merchant ship construction very similar to and presumably derived from that advocated by Seppings, which by then had become the norm in the Navy. John Fincham in 185 1 referred to chocks as the old method but plans of merchant ships built after this date as well as Lloyd's surveys show that it had remained the standard method for wooden framed English ships. SL 4 and ship from Zandvoort/Bloemendaal both exhibit that unbutted chocks were normal in vessels up to about 350 - 400 tons. The great similarity with those illustrated by Sutherland [I7291 indicate this rougher application of the technique had probably remained constant since the 17th century. It had certainly stood the test of time. Hedderwick's opinion was that although there were better methods, such as dove-tailing the chock, or the Seppings system of butt and coak used by some of the Navy People, chocks if well fitted would answer every purpose. Whether it was chocks or the butt and coak method, both were the result of the constraints imposed by the price and availability of timber. This is best summed up by Hedderwick's final remark on the subject of joining futtocks:

I consider a method of scarphing them, where it can be obtained, as preferable to either.


Historical setting of ship and shiptype To be able to assess to what type of ship SL 4 can be attributed it is important to assess size. Initially her extreme breadth was estimated to be around 8.20 m [27 feet] which, based on the dimensions of other similar vessels, would have given a tonnage of something over 300 tons according to the old tonnage rules in force between 1773 and 1836, and perhaps 10 - 25 tons more by the new rule of 1836 [see Glossary: entry tonnage and tonnemaat]. On the basis of the sections [fig. 951 as compared with contemporary drawings such as Hedderwick's brig of 303 tons [fig. 1.551 and taking into account some distortion of the hull during salvage [although this is difficult to judge] the main breadth could be nearer 7.90 m [26 feet] as it became obvious that the extreme breadth was neither far astern of the aftmost surviving floors, nor much greater than that of the surviving structure. This would also result in a smaller tonnage. Even though it is hard to calculate SL 4's tonnage accurately, this estimate is supported by comparison of the dimensions of floor timbers and plank thicknesses of SL 4 with those that appear in the survey reports of merchant vessels carried out by Lloyd's surveyors in the major English ports. These prove to be an extremely informative source of information on ships built from the late 18th century onwards. They make fascinating reading, containing not only details of constructional elements but also of any repairs carried out. As they are not easily accessible for the general reader a selection of these reports with data relevant to the discussion of SL 4 is given in Appendix 11. In the course of the present study some 1,300 of these survey reports were examined, but even this is a very small proportion of the total number. Comparison of dimensions in the survey reports and in SL 4 suggests that this vessel was under 300 tons. On the other hand the number of bilge stringers, outer bilge planking and other features like the iron hold beam clasps suggest she was not much less. The dimensions given in the surveys were presumably those in the main body of the ship. Steel specifies dimensions for floor timbers that gradually reduce in size towards the bow and the stern, so the 29 cm [ l l 1/2"] floors forward of the midship section in SL 4



would be consistent with this. Floor timbers from further aft were recovered loose that were approximately 30.5 cm [12"] square. On this point it should be born in mind that these timbers are not particularly regular in shape, this can be seen in the sections of the floors in fig. 86 so it is difficult to be specific. Another point is that although timber size is a good general guide it was not invariable. Occasionally a ship is referred to as having timbers of light scantling which meant they were smaller than was usual for a vessel of that size. The ship SL 4 was carrying coal. Many ships in this kind of trade however, were not originally built as a collier. Old ships were retired into the coal trade, where their leaky hulls were not such a disadvantage in the carriage of a cargo that was not subject to sea damage. Nevertheless the evidence suggests that this particular ship was indeed built for the trade of bulk goods such as coal, and most probably in one of the North Eastern English ports, e.g. Sunderland. Apart from the fact that her construction and hull shape are typical for medium and large size bulkcarrying cargo vessels there are several arguments for this. Her size is within the range of vessels engaged in the English foreign coal trade. Thomas Richardson [I8331 regarded vessels between 200 and 300 tons as most suitable for European trade. The lower beams were not decked over [at least in the middle of the ship], hence the term holdbeam rather than deckbeam. This is highly typical for colliers and other bulk carriers. The beams were not intended to support any great weight [reflected by their shallow depth at the ends] but functioned as tie beams. In view of this their method of fastening would seem ideal. The flat floored hull shape with thickened strakes at the turn of the bilge is well adapted to take the ground at low water in shallow harbours and creeks along the North Sea. The hull is not sheathed as it would have been if it had been intended for trading to e.g. the West-Indies or the Mediterranean. She appears not to have been very old on sinking. The northeastern English origin is supported by the typical use of punches to tighten the

treenails. Furthermore SL 4 has a marked similarity to vessels built in Sunderland as they appear from the Lloyd's surveys. It is even quite possible that the survey of SL 4 herself was among those reports studied. Usually the destination of the ship was given but of course that might only refer to one subsequent voyage. A large number of the surveys were carried out in the summer and although colliers often made repeated voyages between the same ports many of the vessels of the size of SL 4 would be trading to the Baltic and elsewhere during that season. This might explain why so few destinations are recorded [in the surveys seen] for either Rotterdam or Holland in general, at a time when from Lloyd's list it is apparent that trade with this area was frequent. Unless the survey was very detailed [and more often they are not] there would be nothing apart from the size to make the connection. Occasional Baltic trading for SL 4 is suggested by the flint shingle found compacted in her limbers. Flint occurs widely on the East-Anglian and south coasts and has been the common ballast material in English ships for centuries. Ships often sailed to the Baltic in ballast, returning with timber. A similar voyage in its earlier career might be a likely explanation for the presence of shingle in SL 4. As a product of the English northeastern yards the hull type represented by SL 4 has its origin at the end of the 17th century, the period of the final divergence of warships and merchant ships with regard to design and hull form. The major developments have been discussed at length by Davis [I9721 and McGowan [1980]. Cheap imports [esp. fluits, either bought or taken as prizes] had caused the position of southern English merchant shipyards to decline by 1700 whereas those in the northeast seem to have been more enterprising. For various reasons [timber supply; iron foundries in the vicinity] they were better placed to build large capacity ships cheaply than those of the south. With the specific need for this kind of vessel they seem to have begun building an English equivalent of the fluit in large numbers. The ships they built, although structurally very different from the Dutch model, incorporated its proven virtues as well as those of the similar Norwegian Cat, another successful bulk carrier much used in the Baltic timber trade and closely related to the fluit. So wholesale was the north-east takeover of this sort of shipbuilding that terms such as Cat Built and collier bark became


synonymous with north- eastern building. Because of their sturdy construction and good sailing qualities several of these Collier Barks were bought by the Royal Navy and adapted for use in the voyages of discovery under Captain James Cook in the 1770's [fig. 1451. From that time up to the mid 19th century there was a progression towards longer and shallower hulls using increasing amounts of iron in their construction. While this was cheaper than using expensive grown timber it did not alter the basic principles of construction. The method of securing the hold beams in SL 4, which was impossible with wood, is unusual in this respect. Generally iron was used for reinforcing existing structure or to fabricate an element that was formerly cut out of wood, such as the upper deck hanging knees of SL 4. SL 4 represents the last generation of wooden merchant vessels of this form from a period when sail power was still predominant. They were built in their thousands and were the work horses for the bulk trades for nearly two centuries. SL 4 probably is the largest section of a collier of this period to survive. An interesting parallel may be wreck 44Y088 [Broadwater et al. 19851, a robust merchant ship of about 130 tons, which is suspected to be a collier brig. It sank in the York river in Virginia [U.S.A.] in 1781 at the Battle of Yorktown. In terms of shipbuilding SL 4 and 44Y088 are just one generation apart and a comparative study would be most interesting.

Rig Unfortunately few rigging elements from SL 4 were recovered. She could either have been three masted and rigged as a bark or two masted and rigged as a brig or a snow. In general at this period brigs were usually under 290 tons and barks generally larger but there was quite a large overlap. Brigs and certainly snows over 300 tons were not uncommon. Fig. 155 for example shows the brig Williani Yoling of 303 tons. The Lloyd's survey reports in Appendix I1 review the snow Mary of 323 tons and a small bark such as the Clarinda of 246 tons. By their very nature these surveys are chiefly concerned with the condition of the hull. However, fittings and rigging were also considered for wear and general condition. Sometimes the inventory is fairly detailed but usually it is brief. Fig. 156 shows a large brig that was thought to be the Ellen Simpson [310 tons, new measurement] but the male figure head suggests otherwise. Photographed in the late 1840's by the Reverend Calvert Jones, she

[Fig. 1551 Plate XX of Hedderwick's Treatise showing a lines plan of a Brig of 303 tons, the William Young built in 1824. A fairly short and deep hull typical of the vessels of this size engaged in foreign trade. Lijnenplan van de brik William Young volgens H e d d e ~ l i c kHet . schip meet

303 ton. De gedrongen romp met grote holte is typerend voor Engelse schepen van deze afmetingen.


gives a good impression of the appearance of a vessel of the size of SL 4. Another of his photographs [fig. 1571 shows the bark Countess of Bective, 329 tons built at Sunderland in 1843, to the right of a small ship: the Mary Dugdale built at Hull in 1835 of 375 tons. Unfortunately the position of the mast in SL 4 is not significant. There was fairly wide variability in the positioning of masts within each rig type and the position of SL 4's foremast is consistent with either two or three masted rig. A good illustration of this; fig. 158, shows a sail plan by David MacGregor of the bark Arab built 1839 at Garmouth [269 tons]. The mizzen mast is stepped unusually close to the main although she was by no means an isolated case. The other factor is that it was quite common for a vessel to change from one rig to another, the bark rig becoming increasingly popular in the 1830's. Brigs became barks and vice versa. The Ellen Simpson, mentioned above was built as a bark in Sunderland but was registered as a brig in 185 1. Appendix I1 features an account on what a voyage in such an ordinary cargo vessel, the Charles Kerr from Shields, could be like.


The cargo The ship at SL 4 was carrying coal, a typical import to The Netherlands and a typical import to the port of Rotterdam [fig. 1591. The analysis indicated a series of English coalfields, headed by those in county Durham to be its likely source. This is perfectly in line with the circumstantial evidence of the ship it was contained in and its historical setting. Nevertheless the situation on the coal market saw quite a few changes in the period of wrecking of SL 4 which are worthy of mention. In the coalfields the late 18th and early 19th centuries saw a rapid increase in production. The industrial revolution and the widespread adoption of steam power both increased the demand for coal and the efficiency of mining. Not only was coal being won in ever increasing quantities from deeper seams but improved logistics and increased demand made it economically viable to transport it to the ports for export from farther inland. Thus in considering the sources of SL 4 coal the criteria of abundant and accessible seams near to the coast became less important after the 1830's and 1840's. The majority of English coal was transported to London but a foreign export market had existed at least as early as the 16th century. As a result of heavy taxes


the export market only grew at about half the rate of the domestic market as foreign customers turned elsewhere. The trade to Holland was typically variable. An early alternative was Scottish coal which in the 17th century was not taxed at the same rate. The coalfields in the Land van Llrik [Libge] were a source nearer by. The purposes for which coal was used in Holland were both domestic and industrial. In the latter capacity it was used for sugar refining, brewing and the distillation of Jenever, vast quantities of which were in turn exported to England. However, peat and wood, being easily obtainable, remained the predominant fuels into the 19th century. There was a healthy demand of coal but it was not particularly vital to the economy. With alternative, albeit lower quality sources available, consumption remained susceptible to changes in circumstances. For a brief period duty on English coal was reduced to revive the export market but this created the anomalous situation of artisans in Holland paying less for their coal then their competitors in the Thames Valley. To add insult to injury they were able to undercut them when selling their finished products in London. In 1709 the tax on coal carried in English ships was abolished but reinstated the following year. From then on it rose steadily throughout the 18th century and into the 19th. Trade did however continue to a certain extent for merchants were often able to negotiate private concessions. The alternative was to defraud the Customs and Excise altogether. This being the case and given the relative efficiency of the English mining and shipping operations, coal from the North East and Scotland retained its attraction. In the 18th century there were even Dutch merchants living in Rotterdam who owned a mine at Hallreath, Inverkeithing. By the end of the century it was Sunderland that had taken over as the main source and at this period there were four agents for Sunderland coal stationed in Delfshaven, Schiedam and Dordrecht [all in the Rotterdam area] as well as Amsterdam. Trade with Holland was then interrupted by the Napoleonic wars [I793 - 18 151. The effect was not felt immediately but in 1795 the French invaded Holland. Pro French Patriots proclaimed the Bataafse Repuhliek and thus allied to France, Holland duly declared war on England. From then on there was a sharp drop in shipping movements. In the brief Peace of Amiens in 1802 there was a vigourous revival of the coal trade and

[Fig. 1561 A large brig thought to be the Ellen

Simpsonof 310 tons [it has however been pointed out that the figure is male]. She has been photographed by the Reverend Calvert Jones in the Swansea area [Wales] in the late 1840's. Foto van een grote brik die op het eind van de jaren veertig van de 19e eeuwis gemaakt door de Eerwaarde Calvert Jones. De opname is gemaakt in de omgeving Swansea in Wales. Hoewel het schip een mannelijk boegbeeld heeft is gesuggereerd dat het om de Ellen Simpsonzou gaan, een schip van 310 ton [National Maritime Museum, Greenwich]. [Fig. 1571 Taken at Swansea in the mid 1840's. also by the Reverend Calvert Jones, this photograph shows the small ship Mary Dugdale of 375 tons on the left and the bark Countess of Bective 329 tons, built in Sunderland in 1843. Well clear of the quay she shows the way these vessels sat upright in the mud at low water. Een andere foto van Calvert Jones toont links de Mary Dugdale -met375ton is dit schip vrij klein voor een volgetuigd schip - en de Countess of Bective, een bark van 329 ton die in 1843in Sunderlandis gebouwd [National Maritime Museum, Greenwich].



arrival of large numbers of colliers from Newcastle and especially Sunderland are recorded in the Zee Brieven of Hellevoetsluis [at the Goereesche Gat, a main channel into Rotterdam]. Even after 1802 trade did not cease altogether. The risks of trading in time of war are well illustrated by numerous references to both French and Dutch ships being taken and brought to English ports and vice versa. Despite these dangers merchant vessels continued to ply their trade to Holland even after 1803 when England imposed a blockade of all ports in the Channel and the North Sea from Brest to the Elbe. Obviously the potentially high profits to be made if they were successful outweighed all other considerations. Often such vessels were apprehended and turned back. During the subsequent course of the war the status of Holland changed repeatedly until in 1813, when after the defeat of Napoleon at Leipzig, the Kingdom of The Netherlands was established under William I. The comparative peace stimulated trade and the frequency of shipping rose considerably with ships from the North East of England being well represented. For various reasons, after the threat of Napoleon was renewed, William annexed Belgium in 1815. This had a marked effect on the coal trade with Britain. William's policy was to encourage the development of the coal mines in what was now the Southern Netherlands. In 1816 a tariff on imported English coal was introduced. This was compounded when the English duty was also increased in 1819 to 22 shillings a ton for coal exported in English ships and 35 shillings and 4 pence for export in foreign ships. A reduction of this duty in 1825 had little effect. Table 20 shows the steady decline in the frequency of English shipping, especially from North East ports, entering the Rotterdam area in the years between 1815 and 1821. It can be seen that Sunderland as the major exporter of coal to Holland suffered the most dramatic decline, while trade with Hull and Newcastle was more broad based. On account of its quality a small amount was still imported but it was extremely expensive. The British Consul at Rotterdam in 1818 in a letter to Castlereagh said: the consumption of British coal, indeed, is confined at present to the upper class of private houses in Rotterdam. This general pattern continued for over a decade, then the political situation changed once more.



Table 20 Ships arriving in Rotterdam from Nothern Ports (after: Van Mechelen, 1929)
























Total incoming English shipping


Tussen 1815 en 1821 nam de vaart

[Fig. 1591

vanuit havens i n noordoost Engeland

Holland still imports large quantities of

op Rotterdam gestaag af.

coal, though no longer from England. It

[Fig. 1581

it being distributed throughout Europe

comes from all over the world, much of A sail plan illustrating the rig of a bark:

or re-exported to Scandinavia, Spain

the Arab of 269 tons built in 1839 at

and ironically, even to England, where

Garmouth in Scotland. The plan was

certain types of coal are imported for

reconstructed from the spar

power stations. Only two kilometres

dimensions on the builder's lines plan

from where SL4 sank, another English

by David MacGregor. For the features

ship: the Hornchurch lies at the coals

not detailed he used the proportions

wharf at Mississippi Haven in the

given by Hedderwick.

Europoort area west of Rotterdam. The

Zeilplan van een bark. Het is een

ships are loaded or unloaded by graps

reconstructietekening die David

on gantry cranes. The record moved in

MacGregor heeftgemaakt aan de

a 24 hour period is 130.000 tons. At that

hand van het lijnenplan en de

rate the volume of coal carried by SL 4

beschreven afmetingen van de

would have been unloaded in 6-7

rondhouten van de Arab, een schip dat


i n 1839 i n Garmouth i n Schotland i s

De huidige kolenoverslag i n de

gebouwd. Waar h i j moest interpoleren

Mississippihaven ligt op nog geen

heeft MacGregor zich zoveel als

twee kilometer afstand van de

mogelijk door her handboek van

vindplaats SL 4. De hoeveelheid kolen

Hedderwick laten leiden.

die her daar gevonden schip kon laden wordt tegenwoordig i n 6 a 7 minuten verwerkt lfotoj.a.1.


The people of Belgium had become increasingly discontented with the union with Holland and with the encouragement of the French a revolt was mounted in 1830. Despite William's efforts to maintain unity a temporary government declared independence and then the Kingdom of Bel,'alum was declared on November 22nd 1830. It was not until 1833 that William, subject to military and political pressure from the French and the English respectively, formally suspended hostilities. One effect of this political upheaval was to interrupt the supply of cheap Belgian coal. The reaction in North East England was swift and in the last months of 1830 trade began to boom once again. The next year the process was accelerated by a large reduction in English duty payable on exported coal and the volume of trade increased dramatically. Table 21 shows the number of ships from the North East ports in relation to the rest of Great Britain. In 1829 ships from Sunderland and Newcastle accounted for less than 4% of the total English shipping entering the ports in the Rotterdam area. By 183 1 they accounted for 31.6%, Sunderland alone accounting for 22.26%. Facilities for exporting coal from the Durham collieries now underwent rapid development through the construction of railways to the coast and the building of docks. Seaham harbour started shipping coal in 1831 and in the same year Middlesborough Dock was opened. In 1834 the Stanhope and Tyne Railway was opened and Hartlepool Dock opened in 1835. With existing facilities at Newcastle and South Shields on the Tyne and Sunderland on the Wear, the means for exporting more of the increased output of the North Eastern coalfields now existed. In the thirties and fourties the coal fields of County Durham in particular underwent a marked expansion. Several new pits were opened, old ones reopened and new seams were won at those already in production. This reinforces the hypothesis that the coal carried by SL 4 came from County Durham. Sunderland, at the mouth of the river Wear, is the port much of the coal would have been shipped through. It had begun to develop as a port in the mid 17th century when Wear coal began to compete with Tyne coal and had taken over from Whitby as the focus of north east shipbuilding. The small shipyards along the banks of the Wear built most of the 200 - 300 ton collier brigs in which coal was exported, not only from the Durham mines but from Northumberland and Yorkshire as well.

That being the case, and in view of the increased capacities of the industry at this period already considered, a Sunderland built ship might well have been transporting Northumberland or Yorkshire coal. As is shown in table 21, incoming ships from Hull in 1831 were second only to Sunderland in number. However, trade between Hull and Rotterdam had remained active during the years when Belgian coal was being imported into Holland. It continued largely unaffected by the large influx of Sunderland and Newcastle ships. The inference is that even after 1830 the majority of ships from Hull were not carrying coal but other commodities. On balance therefore, Durham remains the most probable source.

Date of shipwreck In considering the likely date of sinking of SL 4, the time span indicated by the body of evidence fits fairly well with the mean felling date of 1836 suggested by the dendrochronological analysis. The structure in terms of the principle of building is not particularly helpful as it was used over a long period of time but the variety of wood species used and the presence of iron knees suggests the end of the 1820's or later. This would correspond to the decorated pipe; estimated as being from the beginning of the second quarter of the 19th century. The iron hawse pipes [as opposed to lead] and the apparently iron plated windlass whelps both indicate chain anchor cable rather than hemp. The various lengths of stud-link chain recovered from the site could be part of it [stud-link chain being used for anchors rather than open link chain]. Chain started to replace hemp for anchor cable around 1800 [officially adopted by the Royal Navy in 18111. The windlass is of the hand-spike type which suggests a date prior to 1850. Patent windlasses appeared in the late 1820's and were widely adopted during the eighteen thirties and fourties. The seamen of colliers, renowned for their competence in general, would seem to have been skilled in anchor recovery using handspike windlasses: ...I happened to employ a mate and seven menfrom a Collier, to transport the ship to the Graving Dock at Deptford, when these seven men, only, hove up this anchor ... in a quarter of the time that it used to be done by 18 men, ... [Hutchinson 1777,961. So it may be that traditionalism and pride retained the handspike type longer in this trade. On the other hand as MacGregor points out, any innovation that made a back-breaking job 4.4.7


significantly easier would tend to override the seaman's traditional conservatism [MacGregor 1984b, 491. The standing rigging was hemp, as attested by the deadeyes. This suggests a date prior to 1850 - 60 when it began to be replaced by wire. The evidence of the coal pointing to the North East as a likely source and the boom in the coal trade to Holland that occurred in the 1830's also fits this general picture quite well. Judging by her repairs, although she was not a great age, she must have had a few years service behind her. Adding at least a year to the felling date for transport and building, one is looking at a date in the early 1840's for her sinking. The 1840's thus seem a good starting point for research into the documentary sources to attempt to indentify the ship, her place of building, her master and owner and her date of wrecking. Wreck registers of the 1840's and early 1850's have been searched but none of the vessels that wrecked in this period off Rotterdam would seem to be of the right size. If the estimated felling date is too early and if the ship had a longer life than at first thought, she could have sunk somewhat later, although this is near the end of the period indicated by her windlass, hemp rigging and general hull form. Also judging from Lloyd's List, by the mid 1840's the frequency of shipping movement between the English north-east and the Rotterdam area had substantially reduced. It is most probable that her origins can eventually be determined as her loss will certainly be on record.



Whether the identity of the ship be discovered or not the research of the remains from wrecksite S L 4 has evoked the picture of a vessel engaged in the coaltrade between a north-eastern English port and Rotterdam. It is the kind of everyday trade that gradually made Rotterdam the largest port in the world. The ship itself was built around or shortly after 1838, at a north-eastern English shipyard, possibly one at Sunderland and its shipwreck may have occurred somewhere in the 1840's. Like its trade the ship had an everyday nature. It was humble in construction and finish. It is the very reason why no such ships remain. No one at the time regarded them as worthy of preservation or study. All were broken up for reusable timber, but for those that wrecked. Although contemporary handbooks do contain a lot of information on early 19th century shipbuilding and shipping it is only through

Table 21 Ships arriving in Rotterdam from Nothern Ports (after: Van Mechelen, 1929)

Hull Newcastle






















Total incoming English shipping

De vaart tussen Engeland en Rotterdam nam vanaf de laatste maanden van 1830 weer enorm toe. Het aandeel van de havens in noordoost Engeland komt in de tabel goed uit.


the study of archaeological material that this information can be checked and enlarged. The recovery of the hull section from SL 4 gave the opportunity to scrutinize and study everyday shipbuilding as it really was opposed to how it should have been, according to the handbooks. Its study elucidates what is equivocal in the archival record and provides detailed information that was never written down. It is a firm clue to understanding the often shorthand and cryptic but very informative Lloyd's survey reports. Much of the information gleaned confirms what we know or could assume from documentary and pictorial sources. However it is especially in detail of construction, repair and the application of materials that its study provided new facts. Some examples are the typical plank-butt fastening with one treenail and one copper alloy bolt, the systematic augering of holes for secondary treenails that cut the first at a slightly divergent angle, the alternate punching and deuteling of treenails and there are many more, such as the variety of wood species used, the framing with chocks that often are larger and of rougher manufacture than tolerated by the handbooks and the experimental use of iron. These latter aspects strikingly reflect the scarcity of suitable timber for shipbuilding in mid 19th century England. Many aspects of ship design, construction and use that are shown by S L 4 can be traced right back to the very beginnings of carve1 shipbuilding in northern Europe, while at the same time representing its final form in the context of modest medium sized merchant vessels. In this way and as one of the few hulls providing factual information SL 4 is a much more important example of the development than one might anticipate.

[Fig. 1601 SL5 T04. Futtock. Oplanger[foto IPL], [Fig. 1611 SL5 T04. View of the same funock, showing the rebated head. Oezelfde oplanger. De bovenzijde is ingekapt [foto IPL]. [Fig. 1621 SL5 T07. Foot of a funock or cant frame, tapered t o scarf against another timber. Een inhout dat taps toeloopt, mogelijk een draaispant of een oplanger [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1631 SL5 T05. Lodging knee with a rebate for a half beam. Een horizontale knie met een inkeping waar vermoedelijk een dekbalk, een zogenaamde halve balk in heeftgerust [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1641 SL5T03. Fragment of a tapered ceiling plank. Gedeelte van een wegering [foto IPLI. [Fig. 1651 SL5T11. End of a tapering hull plank. Gedeelte van een huidplank.




On September 1st 1986 the cutter suction dredger Hector hit wood when working at a depth of 22.5 m. This happened in the position x 59.884 and y 438.467 [fig. 131. About a month later wood was again encountered in approximately the same area at a working depth of 17.5 m. This time 15 loose timbers were recovered. The remains did not cause any delay to speak of and no on-site inspection was ventured.



SL5 T04. Curved timber 1.35 m in length, 17 x 11 cm in section it is probably a futtock. One end, probably the head, is stepped, in that it has a rebate 17.5 cm deep and 6.5 cm across cut out of one side. Planks had been fastened to it with treenails and a bolt [fig. 160, 1611. SL5 T07. One end of a treenail fastened timber [futtock?] that is curved in two directions. It is 17 x 14 cm in section. The end narrows, possibly where it met the next futtock in a simple plain [unfastened] scarf [fig. 1621. SL5 T06. Fragment of a treenailed, slightly curved timber 16 x 13 cm in section. SL5 T05. A grown knee with two bolt holes passing through the long arm and traces of one through what remains of the short arm. The bolts are aligned in the same plane and there is a rebate in one side of the long arm. It is probably a lodging knee, the rebate being for a half-beam [fig. 1631. SL5 T03. End of a plank 27 cm wide and 6 cm thick. Marks of the futtocks to which it was fastened are visible on one side. As there was no trace of caulking on the edges this in probably a ceiling plank [fig. 1641. It was fastened with treenails, bolts and nails. SL5 T l I. Piece or a tapering plank 17 cm reducing to 11 cm wide x 6.7 cm in thickness. The edge is sloping rather than square and there is a rebate at the thick end. No treenails but two bolts. Possibly the end of a stealer [fig. 1651.


SL5 T13. Piece of planking 6.5 cm in thickness with the edge sloping in the same manner as T11. Fastened with treenails and a bolt. SL5 T01. End of a plank 34 cm wide and 4 cm thick. It was fastened with treenails [one of them softwood] and was also nailed along the edges. Both edges are moulded so it would seem likely to be panelling from below decks [fig. 1661. SL5 T02. Small fragment of plank of the same type as T01. SL5 T15. End of a deck support beam preserved for a length of 1.80 m and which is 14.5 x 11.5 cm in section. Its curvature indicates it ran athwartships and is a [half?] beam rather than a carling. The end is dovetailed to sink into a shelf. Its upper surface is pierced by the holes of the plank nails [fig. 1671. SL5 T08. Fragment of a softwood deck plank 5.5 cm thick, which had been fastened with nails and a bolt. Fastenings were treenails, iron bolts, spikes and nails. The treenails are hand finished, some of them almost octagonal in section. Some of them had been cut and caulked in the manner shown in fig. 76. The bolts were 21 mm square with a flattened or chamfered edge. The spikes were square in the shank with faceted heads. Both are very similar to those shown in fig. 18.



No SL 5 remains have been analysed in any other way than through careful comparison of their attributes with those of the material from other sites. The striking similarities in types of fastenings used between remains from SL 5 with those of both SL 1 and SL 3 have been commented upon in paragraph 1.4.



The site SL 5 was not inspected. The fact that the cutter suction dredger Hector was not really hindered by the remains, whereas they clearly belonged to a large vessel suggests that the site only contained a

fragmented hull section. No associated finds were collected. The remains themselves indicate that they represent a fragment of the same hull as those at wrecksite SL I and SL 3, as has been discussed at length in paragraph 1.4 where the remains from the three sides are treated as one assemblage. This means that upon wrecking the wreckage of the ship has been dispersed over a large area, substantial fragments being embedded at least at three sites, as far apart as 1.075 km [fig. 131.

[Fig. 1661

SL5T01. Moulded plank, probably from below decks. Plank met lofwerk, vermoedelijk van de betimmering [foto IPLI.



SL5 T15. Deck beam with dovetailed

end for location in a clamp. Dekbalk. Het uiteinde is zo bekapt dat het in een uitsparing in de balkweger past [foto IPL].


Between october 27th and 29th 1986 the cutter suction dredger Triton hit wood, pieces of iron anchors and a quantity of general debris. Much of the wood consisted of large tree stumps but some of it appeared to be from a wooden vessel. Five pieces were salvaged, along with a large concreted swivel link, part of the shank of a small anchor and an iron strip with fastening holes along its length. There is not necessarily any association between these materials. The work was being carried out right at the edge of the Slufter and the dredger was cutting the correct profile partly into the existing deposit of the Maasvlakte. The dredgemaster was of the opinion that the material might have arrived there as a result of the dredging operations that created the Maasvlakte in 1960's. The material as a whole had the character of jetsam found on a beach after a storm so this is certainly possible. In support of the jetsam idea is the fact that on the face of it the material was deposed since the Maasvlakte was formed. Against it is the localised occurrence of the timbers. The wooden pieces recovered were entirely iron fastened, both with small iron bolts 10 mm in diameter and iron nails 4 - 6 mm square. Both wood and iron were in very good condition. This is not necessarlily significant, particularly in the light of the condition of wood from for example SL 1 but together with the lack of wood fastenings it suggests the vessel from which they come could be relatively modern. The iron strip looks similar to those protecting the keels and bilge keels of small fising vessels. Alternatively the pieces may all be from the deck and bulwark level of an otherwise wood fastened vessel. The shape of all the pieces where a surface is preserved are angled and rounded suggesting they were from this level. In any event no more of the vessel was found during the dredging operation in this area. The timbers of SL 6 if not re-dredged from another location may be a small section of a vessel that was deposited here after being wrecked or abandoned elsewhere.



[Fig. 1681

Scupper pipe. Houten bos met daardoorheen een spuigat Vermoedelijk is hier sprake van hergebruik van een stuk hoot oh een steven van een schip. De ingesneden merktekens Iijken diepgangsmerken te zijn zoals die vaak op stevens zijn aangebracht.



Scupper pipe A member of the public brought in a piece of timber having found it on the beach some years before [fig. 1681. It is the upper part of a wooden scupper pipe and similar examples are seen on ships of the 16th, 17th and to some extent the 18th century, although by this time lead was more common. A reconstruction of their fitting can be found in Ketting [1979,56]. This piece is of additional interest as it appears to be re-used wood. On one face there are what appear to be draught marks. Also, lodged inside it when found was a small cast iron shot but this was in very poor condition. Judging by its condition, this piece was not exposed on the seabed for long. It may have been transported to this area during the extensive dredging operations in the 1960's entailed in creating the Maas~llakte.Alternatively, it may originate from one of the wrecks in the immediate area. SL 2 is a possibility, being of the right approximate date and fairly close to foreshore where the find was made. Variation in seabed level due to tidal patterns and storms, especially in a sandy deposit like this, can repeatedly uncover a wreck leading to further scattering of fragments of the vessel and its contents. This could have been accentuated by the change in patterns of scour and deposition wrought by the forming of the Maasvlakte. SL 2, lying at a relatively shallow depth [around 10 m] and close to the new coast line, would have been particularly susceptible. Mooring block An isolated find. This consisted of a large piece of granite into which was set an eye of wrought iron. To this was attached a linking mechanism for the mooring chain. Both were made of square section wrought iron bar 30-33 mm in cross-section. The hole in the stone had been chiselled out below the surface so that the base was wider that the opening. The two ends of the bar forming the eye were then set in the hole, probably red hot, and beaten so that they flared outwards. Mortar was then poured into the cavity and



when this had set the surface was sealed with lead. It was probably a mooring block marking the former channel.

Anchors and chain These were regular finds and this is not surprising considering the number of dragged and or lost anchors that inevitably litter a busy sea way. Faunal remains From the pleistocene layers large quantities of fossil bones were recovered. As they were not collected in an archaeological context they are not dealt with in this report. With respect to the general characteristics of the fossil faunas from the Maasvlakte-Slufter area the reader is referred to Vervoort-Kerkhoff and Van Kolfschoten 1988.



Dredgers and archaeology


Objectives and planning




General approach and limitations Formal setting Technical scope Methods

4.1 4.2 4.3 5.

Results Introduction Direct results 5.2.1 Shipping and shipbuilding 5.2.2 Wrecksites and site formation 5.2.3 Geology and geographical history 5.3 Experience

5.1 5.2




An evaluation of the way in which archaeologically relevant documentation could be intertwined with daily procedures of a large-scale marine engineering work is given here to indicate what has been learned through the experience of the Slufterproject. Of course on-going construction imposes severe restrictions on the scope of archaeological research as compared to a laboratory situation. Nevertheless where planning necessitates large-scale moving of sediments it is that stage that offers a last chance to make specific observations. It thus offers a unique occasion and neglect of the archaeological values involved will leave them destroyed. Within the bounds of the Sluftesproject a serious attempt was made to pay proper attention to these aspects. It had its flaws and its bad luck, but nevertheless it had clear-cut results. Both its assets and its inadequacies are subject matter to keep in mind in future planning. The third part of the report will discuss what has been gained by the archaeological survey in terms of archaeological information, historical interpretation and the way in which archaeology and large-scale engineering can be matched. Of course these results will be reviewed within the framework of the objectives and planning, the prospects, the general approach and its limitations.



The purpose of archaeological research as part of the Slufter project was to record what would be lost by its realization. Archaeology - as all other modes of scientific inquiry - depends on the accumulation of many bits of information. Concealed in traces and remains in the subsoil archaeological information has the special quality of directly reflecting past reality. When viewed apart each bit of information may seem insignificant but as a basis for inductive reasoning and a check on deductions archaeological data is vital to a reliable reconstruction of man's past. The data can be collected through excavation, a procedure that destroys part of the evidence. Where modern development necessitates clearance of the subsoil important information can be safeguarded through a serious effort to record what has long been left untouched and concealed. In the Slufter project where it was urgent to move on at great pace once work had started primary recording was to be the predominant objective of any archaeological effort. It would not only make data available for immediate interpretation but more significantly it would preserve them for future use. This general approach puts a premium on flexibility in response to any discoveries and sets the scope for planning. Allowing for rapid changes in emphasis the line of action to be followed was deployed within the framework of: the prospects for archaeological discoveries; the feasibility of archaeologically relevant observations on-site and through controlled recovery; the limitations dictated by the circumstances, the tight time-schedule and the technical approach of the project; the restraints determined by choices in advance as to what kind of sites must and can realistically be handled at what cost.



Although there was a fair chance that evidence of occupation in Mesolithic times would be destroyed, it was decided in advance not to try to avoid this, as meaningful results could not realistically be expected. Also all sediments predating the Subatlantic [900 B.C.] were treated as being archaeologically sterile. The same applied to the shoal-deposits within the subatlantic sequence of marine sediments, as these were only liable to contain dispersed material. It was decided to concentrate all efforts on the gully-fillings which had for the greater part been deposited after 1300 A.D. The prospects were that these gully-fillings which had been deposited in the outer delta of one of the main gateways for shipping into continental Europe would enfold evidence of maritime activity in the form of wreck. Historical research of geographical information showed that the main navigation channel in the 16th century had passed the area some 300 m to the north and had shifted northwards since. Had it shifted in that direction before - i.e. in a period for which the historical sources are mute, whereas the general direction of sedimentation suggests as much - it would have passed much closer in the previous centuries. During the 18th century a new channel came into use, not more than 100 m south of the area. If sites predating the 16th century were to be discovered, the northern part was the most likely place, while sites relating to the younger channel - and to a period of sharply increased intensity in shipping - would tend to concentrate in the south. Of course it does not follow from this argument that excavation of the northern part would reveal medieval wrecks. As these, however, were deemed to be of such importance as to deserve maximum attention the decision to excavate the northern gully-fillings first was readily endorsed.





The administrative scope for archaeological survey during construction of the Slufter disposal site was set by the relevant provisions in the permits granted for its realization. In view of the urgent - socially accepted - need to quickly realize the disposal site and thus to alleviate environmental problems these provisions were rather restrictive. The Director of the State Service for Archaeological Investigations [R.O.B.] was to be given a reasonable chance for archaeological investigation, in sofar as this would not cause any delay in the overall realization of the project. Also a tight time schedule was defined within which any discovery should be dealt with on site. The provisions did not imply any obligation on the originators to financially support archaeological work.



The tight time-schedule of the project as well as its technical approach determined archaeological procedures to a considerable extent. On the basis of experiments it was assumed that remains measuring 5 x 7 m or more could be detected by sonar while being uncovered in the dredging breach. Sites containing no coherent structure of that size were conceded to pass unnoticed. Great emphasis was put on the necessity of on-site inspection. Even though the circumstances for under water work would hardly be favourable it was only on the basis of on-site observations that any decision on further handling of a site could be taken. Another principle was that clearance of archaeological sites should take place by recovery of units as large as would be realistically possible in order to allow for further observations and documentation off site. 4.3


As foreseen the removal and deposition of 37 million m3 of sediments in a 16 months period puts a lot of stress on


archaeological observation. The circumstances in a sand digging pit in full production put their restrictions on such archaeological methods that come into view. Free diving is out of the question. Lifting operations must be carried out with great care, whether it be by direct hoisting or with lifting balloons. Particularly the latter are accident prone where there is no underwater visibility. For archaeology it was a major drawback that the contractor decided to use cutter-suctiondredgers in phase I instead of conventional suction-dredgers. For the construction work itself it was an asset as the machinery had great capacity. It meant however that all dredging of sediments considered to be of archaeological potential was done by means of cutter-suction-dredgers and these sweep to and fro constantly while the cutter grinds its way through the sediments. They thus lack the quality of a stable platform and cause great turbulence both in the water and the fluidised silts. Both aspects seriously affected the possibilities of detection by sonar. In each instance it was the destructive cutter itself or blocking of the pumps that caused detection of archaeological remains. The original goal of detection of all remains measuring 5 x 7 m or more was by no means attained. It was the structural strength and resistance of the remains as opposed to their size that determined their detection. It is thus highly likely that what has been discovered shows a definite bias towards the solidly built. While good results are to be expected with a sonar mounted on a stationary suction-dredger, for cutter-suction-dredgers its use is not to be recommended. The method of dredging did also seriously affect the possibilities for on-site inspection. Either the site was disrupted before giving cause to action [wrecksite SL 3, SL 5, SL 61 or it was immediately covered by spill [wrecksite SL 1, S12]. Only the sturdy nearcomplete hull at wrecksite SL 4 resisted the dredging in such a way as to allow it to be cleared for inspection without major damage. The remains at wrecksite SL 1, that must have formed a substantial integral unit, had totally

lost their integrity before coming within reach. Nevertheless the importance of on-site inspection cannot be overstressed. Where it was done [wrecksite SL 1, SL 41 it produced a clearcut result, essential both to the archaeological interpretation and to the tackling of clearance. A serious problem was the removal of overburden of silt from wreck-material that had already been detected. The dredging material present featured high-capacity instruments only. These had to keep up production and had obvious side-effects when used for clearing purposes. A cutter-suctiondredger can be fiercely destructive and drawing near with a deep working suctiondredger carries the risk of collapse. It will not ease on-site inspection. A partial solution for this problem was found in the use of a prop-wash deflector, an instrument not normally acceptable in an archaeological context but often used in treasure hunting. A waterprobe lowered down from the surface was of great help to determine the distribution of solid remains.





The results that have been reached through archaeological research as part of the Slufter project fall into five categories: archaeological information on specific ships, their build, their functioning and their wrecking; archaeological information on wrecking processes and on the formation of sites in a shallow estuarine area; specific archaeological information on trade through the port of Rotterdam; understanding of shipbuilding techniques through the assessment of specific archaeological data in the context of relevant historical information; understanding of the development of the area through matching of archaeological, historical, geographical and geological information. Their significance lies in three fields which will be dealt with separately: shipping and shipbuilding; wrecksites and site formation; geology and geographical history. An additional result is the experience that was acquired with the integration of archaeology into a large marine dreding project.




Shipping and shipbuilding The archaeological work in the Slufter project shed light on three seperate vessels: the ship at SL 2, the ship from SL 4 and the complex from the sites SL 1, SL 3, SL 5.

SL 2 The few timbers with moss caulking raised from SL 2 show it to be an interesting find. Obviously a keeled vessel of substantial dimensions it might be of medieval date. Most of it, however, was left in situ where it was covered with newly deposited sediments and


where it remains safe for future investigation.

SL 4 SL 4 was completely dismantled. Documentation of its remains proved to be the chief task of the archaeological team. Preliminary assessment on the basis of on-site inspection prompted the decision to clear the site as such and to study only what would be brought up through clearance operations. This proved to be highly rewarding and most cost effective. A detailed picture could be drawn of how this particular - very ordinary English vessel from the early decades of the nineteenth century was built. It showed surprising evidence on choice and conversion of timber. The inconsistent use of wood species, a birch keel and the framing system implying the use of chocks combined with the restricted use of wrought iron strengthening members such as knees and beamstraps reflect the resourcefulness of the shipbuilding industry and of the particular shipbuilder to cope with the situation of increased demands for ships and tonnage and deficient supplies of appropriate timber. Evidently this ship carrying coal was a purpose-built collier and as such the only surviving representative of this very common class of vessel from this period yet to be studied. The detailed recording of such elements as its rider-keelson and mast-step, its butt-joints with the specific arrangement of treenails and butt-end-bolts and the punches in its treenails shows us how this particular ship was built, but it is also an indispensable key to the proper understanding of the shorthand but very informative survey-reports drawn up in commission of Lloyd's of London. As such it contributes not only to our knowledge and understanding of this particular ship, but through facilitating access to the contemporary surveys it significantly adds to our knowledge and understanding of early nineteenth century shipbuilding in general. With its ordinary cargo the ship was evidently on its way to Rotterdam. As such it represents

the bulk trade through which this port was developing at the time.

SL 1, SL 3, SL 5 The weight of the evidence on this late 18th century dutch-built vessel fell short of expectations aroused on its discovery. For one thing the hull had not been preserved as an integral unit: at the main site SL 1 deckstructure had been present upside down, as shown during on-site inspection. For another thing what had been there was severely damaged during operations. Nevertheless the recording of the assemblage showed interesting detail on the waterway, the coaming and decking in general. The arrangement of planking in the bow is quite peculiar and the assessment of the find showed how little specific informaton is available on common Dutch kofs and related types with round bows and round sterns. The evidence emerging from the dendrochronological analysis is quite comprehensive and is a valuable addition to the aggregate data on timber use and wood trade. So is the apparent evidence on the use of dogs when the wood converted for SL 1, SL 3, SL 5 was transported as logs in a raft. The associated finds which evidently were part of the ship's inventory or fittings were documented. No serious attempt was made to assess their significance. The data, however, are collected and are available for future use.



In general the theoretical considerations on the formation of wrecksites that lay at the basis of the deployed line of action [see paragraph 1.51 were confirmed by the results of archaeological work at the Slufter location. Two aspects, however, definitely stand out. One is the clear confirmation that the remains of a ship run aground can get dispersed over an extremely large area and that even relatively large portions of the same ship can get dug in far apart. On the face of it this may not seem very significant but hardly ever is marine archaeological investigation carried out over such an extensive area and hardly ever have parts of the same vessel actually been found over 1 km apart. In the case of SL 1, SL 3, SL 5 the ship must have rolled over first. The hull broke apart at a later stage with large parts drifting off and settling elsewhere. The other conspicious aspect is that wreckage at both SL 1 and SL 4 were encountered at a


depth beyond the average depth of sediments from the subatlantic period. After sinking the extent of scouring must have been considerable in both instances. The ship at SL 4 must immediately have sunk in a rather deep gully. The remains at both sites, however, must have slipped deeper into a localised gully formed by scouring. In view of the generally good state of preservation the whole process must have elapsed rather quickly.


Geology and geographical history The archaeological information and the geological and historical- geographical data assessed as part of the preliminary survey do in general favourably agree. On the face of it there seems to be a slight contradiction in the fact that the preliminary survey stressed the need to carefully scrutinize the northern part whereas most finds were made in the south. The reasoning was however that any finds relating to the navigation channel which ran to the North of the area in later medieval times were more likely to be encountered there than anywhere else. Moreover it was decided in advance that any finds relating to that channel - and thus of that early date which comprised structural elements of a size not defying timely detection through the current methods was to be deemed extremely important due to the relative scarcity of such remains. It is however by no means surprising that no such discoveries were made. This can be accounted for by the scarcity as such on the one hand and by the relatively coarse method of surveying on the other. Discoveries relating to the southern channel, which was in use from the mid 18th century onwards - a period of sharply increasing intensity of shipping - were made in some number. These include the major assemblages as well as the items contaminating the sites, from a clay pipe at SL 4 predating the wreck by 75 years to the more recent material. As such the results of excavation do not challenge the geological interpretation of the area. However, the localised effects of the scouring processes around wreckage have been underestimated and so has the importance of a rather recent gully. For indeed the fact that the top of the SL 4 wreck occurred at a depth of about 11 m below N.A.P. means that a gully of that depth crossed the area in the eighteen fourties. The remains at SL 1 occurred at an even greater depth, indicating that the [same?] gully was more important at that particular spot around 1800 A.D. The recent Gat van de Hawk was

no deeper than 7 m in 1985 [see depth contour lines in fig. 131. From the historical information it was not apparent that a gully of any importance crossed the area at the time of sinking of the wrecks at SL 1, SL 3, SL 5 and SL 4. It is thus highly unlikely that the channel had any real meaning as a navigation channel. Nevertheless it must have been quite deep. 5.3


Integration of a meticulous discipline as archaeology into the coarsely dynamic approach of dredging and marine engineering is not as antithetic as it may seem. Although the tight time-schedule puts considerable constraints on archaeological work this did not prove to be the most serious problem. With a detailed line of action featuring an assessment of discoveries and practical situations one can expect to meet with, as well as clearly defined guide-lines on how to cope with them, it is quite possible to adequately react with the necessary energy and flexibility. The guide-lines must of necessity imply decisions in advance on priorities. The assessment must be as detailed and reliable as possible. Where feasible a detailed predisturbance survey can be a powerful tool. A thorough survey and a good liaison between a positive archaeological input and the project direction and engineers to explore all the possible ways of introducing flexibility into the work schedule are two factors that are vital to the overall success of the archaeological effort during construction work. It can also guarantee a good relationship between the archaeological team and the contractor. In itself, however, the reliable assessment of the archaeological potential of a particular area is not without problems. What can be assessed is which areas and which sequences of sediments have or have no archaeological potential. By the identification of areas with no archaeological potential at all -or a very limited one - the area on which to focus attention can be considerably reduced. However, even if an area or sequence of sediments can positively be identified to be potentially rich one is left with a certain measure of uncertainty: specific predictions as to what will actually be found during excavation of potentially rich areas can never be made. This is a great impediment in planning. It is a crucial problem that what is to be constructed can be clearly defined in plans whereas what will be destroyed is never known in detail in advance. It is actually the


fact that sediments are untouched and thus of unknown content that determines their archaeological importance. Time and again this simple truth leads to the situation where the archaeological potential is not taken into account at all and where chance finds during construction work will lead to hectic efforts to rescue what has already half been destroyed, whereas their presence could to some extent have been foreseen. In a way the Slufter project was no exception to this rule. Even though a preliminary survey had been carried out prior to the start of work it was that very situation which occurred and which created the most serious problems. The construction permits provided that occasion should be given for archaeological research, but who was to pay for what had to be done? Was it the responsibility of the authorities responsible for cultural heritage management or of those responsible for the realization of the large-scale dredging project. The deadlock was finally broken by the municipality of Rotterdam allocating a restricted budget. It allowed for the mounting of sonarequipment and the engagement of archaeological staff and was supplemented with small grants from the Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Culture and the Ministry of Transport and Public Works to meet with day-to-day expenses. However, all this only happened after the first sites had been discovered. On-site inspections had by then been organized provisionally and on an ad hoc basis. However, the intensity of archaeological work had necessarily been low. Four out of six sites had already been discovered and dismantled. Especially in view of the tight time-schedule it was valuable time lost. Thanks to the initiative of the municipality it still proved possible to achieve the main objectives. In the future however it is essential that clear-cut arrangements as to responsibilities and finance be made well in advance.


In cases where planning necessitates largescale dredging unanticipated confrontation with archaeologically significant material can be avoided through the assessment of archaeological potential in advance. Such an assessment can significantly narrow down the spatial limits of potentially important sediments. If it is convincingly probable that important archaeological values are at stake a serious effort should be made to record what will be lost. To this end the deployment of a line of action indicating how and according to what priorities archaeological information and remains will be handled can be a considerable help in planning. Budgetary consequences are divisible in a fixed and a variable part. The first is the minimal requirement for general documentation and - if necessary - on-site presence of archaeological staff. Its height is more or less a function of the technical and organizational approach of construction. The second part consists of what is needed to deal with important sites, including excavation, documentation, conservation, report and publication. Its amount is more or less a function of the kind of archaeological discoveries actually made.



Appendix I Appendix I1 Appendix I11

Introduction to dendrochronological analysis Selection of historical documents that are relevant to the study of the ship at SL 4 Conservation and artefact filing

157 161 167



Verklarende woordenlijst

18 1







Dondrochronological analysis of ancient ship's timbers has several assets. On the one hand it is - of course - a powerful tool in dating. On the other hand - and more important still - it provides information that is vital to a proper understanding of the timber trade and the timber choices as made in shipbuilding. This appendix is both meant as a general introduction to the principles underlying the method and as an account of its application during the Slufter-research.

Biological foundation The production of new wood cells in trees is chiefly controlled by temperature and precipitation. Thus in the temperate climatic zones, tree growth is linked to the annual cycle of seasons. Within this general relationship, local variations of temperature and precipitation, coupled with the particular physical aspects effect the growth of new wood in any one year. In general the worse the conditions the less new wood formed. Due to the differing characteristics of cells formed at various stages of the annual cycle, the wood laid down during the life of a tree is seen in the cut section of a bole as a series of concentric growth-rings or tree-rings. The differing thickness of these reflect the variations in climate during the life of the tree. The dating of tree-ring patterns is based on the assumption that trees growing in the same climatically homogeneous area at the same time will produce the same sequence of broad and narrow rings. Starting with living trees a chronology can be built up from progressively older timber. Such a chronology is known as a standard, master, or reference chronology, where the values for each ring width are in fact a mean derived from several samples. In principle, timbers from archaeological sites can then be dated by comparing their growthring pattern to that of the chronology, there being only one position where the two will be truly synchronous. In addition, the master chronology will only be representative of the


climatically homogeneous area where it was built up. The nearer the origin of the timber being dated to that area, the better the chances of a good match. Thus in addition to dating wood, dendrochronological analysis can often indicate its area of origin. Having said that, the relationship between climate, microclimate, environmental conditions and growth can be disturbed by various factors such as mechanical forces, insect attack and disease. Growth ring patterns formed under such circumstances are atypical and cannot be dated.

Procedure A. Sample preparation and measurement The first stage is the selection of samples suitable for dendrochronological analysis. Three criteria play an important role in the selection process: the number of rings of the sample; the completeness of the sample, i.e. does the sample possess sapwood or bark? the association of the sample with the structure. In the case of SL 1 and SL 3 not much of a selection could be made, since this had already been done by the cutter-sectiondredger. Although SL 4 had partly at least been salvaged in integral assemblages, most of the samples were also taken from loose timbers. The selected samples were cut from the timbers in slices of 10 - 15 cm thickness. For the next stages of processing the samples were frozen. The thickness of the slices was reduced to 2 - 3 cm and from each slice two or three wedge-like samples were sawn. The surface of the samples was made smooth with a craft knife and in the case of sapwood, with a razor blade. The smooth surface so created gives a clear view of the boundaries between the tree-rings. By working the wood in a frozen state, damage, especially to the sapwood is prevented. Next the sample is examined under a binocular microscope and every tenth tree-

ring is marked with a pin, as an aid for measuring tlie sample. The sample is then mounted on a travelling stage and viewed through the [stationary] binocular microscope with cross-hairs. The edge of the sample is aligned with the cross-hair, then the travelling stage is moved until tlie first growth-ring border. The distance travelled by the travelling stage is measured to the nearest one hundredth of a millimetre and recorded as a ring width. The recording of these measurements and their subsequent analysis were carried out using the apparatus and computer program developed by R.W. Aniol [Aniol 1983a, 1983bl.

B. Dating When all tlie ring widths of the samples from one ship have been measured, the samples are internally synchronised. This means that the samples are compared with each other and where significant matches appear they are combined to form a mean site-curve. The reason for working with mean site-curves is tc reduce the influence of the individual tree[s] and maximise the climatic component of the ring width-sequence. Because ship-timbers, even of the same ship, often have different origins it is often not possible to internally synchronise all the samples. The resulting mean curves and tlie curves of individual samples are therefore dated against as many standard cl~ronologiesas possible [Van Holk 1986, 19871. The computer program CATRAS gives one or more possible synchronous locations of the saniple curve [or mean site curve] on the reference chronology. Synchronising annual ring patterns means checking if and to what extent two ring series match. The algorithm of the computer program for comparison ring widths series is based on: Gleichlaufigkeit, [GL], this is the percentage of agreement [Eckstein, 19691; the t-value [Baillie & Pilcher 1973; Baillie 19821 calculated from the correlation; in CATRAS a different kind of algorithm [Aniol in preparation] is used to compute the product-moment correlationcoefficient; the percentage of agreement in Weiserjalire [pointer years] [Aniol & Schmidt 19821. Since the computer program only suggests a synchronous match, the drawn curves of the sample and standard chro~iologysliould be compared and tlie date suggested by the


Table 22 Age class of tree

Estimation of missing sapwood

< 100 years

16.0 f4.5


20.4 f 6.2

> 200 years

25.9 f 7.5 Estimation of number of sapwood rings of West-German oaks (after Hollstein 1965). Schatting van het aantal spinthoutringen van West-Duitse eiken, verdeeld naar ouderdomsklassen. Number of oak sapwood rings of trees

Table 23 Age class of tree

Number of sapwood rings

from Northwest England and Wales, divided according to age class. The samples are all at breast-height (after Hughes et al. 1981,388). Aantal spinthoutringen van eikebomen afkomstig uit Noordwest Engelanden Wales, verdeeld naar ouderdomsklassen. De monsters zijn genomen op borsthoogte. [Fig. 1691 Map showing the areas represented by reference chronologiesthat were used in the present analyses. 1 Western Germany 2The Netherlands 3 Lower Saxony Coastal Area 4 Hamburg 5 Weserbergland 6 Schleswig-Holstein 7 Southern Germany 8 Poland 9 England De standaardcurves die voor de analyse gebruikt zijn behoren tot de volgende gebieden. I West-Duitsland2 Nederland

3 Nedersaksisch kustgebied4 Hamburg

5 Weserbergland6 Sleeswijk-Holstein 7 zuidelijk Duitsland 8 Polen 9 Engeland


computer program checked visually with the help of a light-table. The curves are drawn on semi-logarithmic paper, where the time axes [absissa] is linear and the ring width [ordinate] is plotted on a logarithmic scale. The ring-widths [points] are connected by a line to form the curve. In the present analysis several reference chronologies have been used. They correspond with several larger or smaller areas which have been indicated on the map in fig. 169.

Sapwood An important factor which influences the accuracy of a dendrochronological date is the presence or absence of sapwood. The growth of a tree is by the cambium, a layer of cells immediately beneath the bark. Wood is developed towards the inside of the tree and bark towards the outside. The woody part of the tree can be divided in heartwood and sapwood. The sapwood consists of the most recently developed tree-rings within the cambium. It is through the vessels of these still living cells that sap, containing the nutrients for the tree, is transported. With each year's growth, previously formed sapwood cells are left progressively further from the cambium. They undergo various chemical and physiological changes, including the deposition of durable lignin and cellulose, becoming heartwood. Heartwood gives the tree its strength, while sapwood, apart from being weaker is filled with nutrients and is more susceptible to decay. Shipwrights, although unaware of the causes, were well aware of the result and usually trimmed the sapwood off timbers to be used for shipbuilding. This means that the outermost rings of most dendrochronological samples of ship timbers are missing. On this basis three different conditions of samples can be distinguished: the sapwood is complete [with or without bark]; the heartwood/sapwood boundary is present, with some sapwood rings; there is no sapwood and also an unknown quantity of heartwood rings is missing. In the last two cases the number of missing sapwood rings have to be estimated. In the last case only a date as a terminus post quem can be given. Research has been done to establish an estimate of the mean number of sapwood rings for different areas [Baillie 1983; Eckstein und Bauch 1974; Holstein 1965, 1980, Hughes et al. 19811.

Unfortunately the range of variation of the estimates is rather wide. Hollstein's [1965, 16-19] estimate of sapwood rings of West-German oaks is based on the examination of 200 oaks with complete sapwood. The results are shown in table 22. It can be seen that the number of sapwood rings of oak trees varies with the age of the tree. At a 95% probability level it can be said if there is only one sample with sapwood available that the true felling date of a tree lies between 11 and 34 sapwood years after the heartwood/sapwood boundary, with a mean of 20 years. More or less the same figure is used by Eckstein [Eckstein & Bauch 1974,351. In the case of missing sapwood 20 + 5 sapwood years are added to the heartwood/sapwood boundary. The difference is that he does not give a confidence interval for the different probability levels. Another problem concerning the estimation of missing sapwood rings is touched upon by Hughes et al. [I98 1, 38 1-90]. From their research it became clear that even within a tree the number of sapwood rings can vary greatly, according to height. Because it is often unknown which height in a tree an archaeological sample comes from, a still larger range of variation of sapwood rings has to be taken into account. The estimation of the number of oak sapwood rings of trees from Northwest England and Wales by Hughes et al. [I9811 is based on a sample of 175 trees. The number of sapwood rings are given in table 23. To correct for the fact that archaeological samples might originate from different heights in a tree a mean figure of 30 sapwood rings is added to the heartwood/sapwood boundary. At the 95% probability level the true felling date lies between 19 and 50 years after the heartwood/sapwood boundary [Hughes et al. 1981, 389; Baillie 1983, 551.




First are given a selection of reports of Lloyd's surveyors; second there is a narrative of a journey by the Charles Kerr from Shields. It is an illustrative account on the kind of hazards a ship in the mid-19th century coaltrade might be confronted with. Selection of reports of Lloyd's surveyors Notes were taken from surveys of vessels built in North East ports that were near enough to the tonnage of SL 4 to show similar constructional features and timbers of similar scantlings. Some passages from surveys of ships built elsewhere are included for comparison. Where applicable, below each extract the similarities or otherwise to SL 4 are noted. Barque ROBERT & ANN 322 tons Built in Whitby 1789 by George Fishburn [Thomas Fishburn had built two of the colliers used by James Cook]. Surveyed at Newcastle. Timbers well sound, has been originally well squared, and as yet are sound, and well cross chocked at the first futtock and floor heads, but not sunk at points. At this day 7 April 1834 r'p'd to first futtock head replaced 7. first futtocks, and all the cross chocks fresh beded, 4. new Hold Beams an 3. New Deck Beams,- all new refasten'd with 5. new Knees, and new ceiled to first futtock heads, 1. new Transom ... - caulkedfiom Keel to Gunwall, and treenails punched and overhauled. This vessel in a good seaworthy condition, andfit to carry cargoes not liable to sea damage on any voyage were a wood bottom should Navigate ... Signed: Mathew Poppelwell. [Character assigned E l ] The chocks of the futtock joints are referred to as cross chocks a term also used to describe the large chock between the first futtocks in the built up frames of naval ships. That they are not sunk at points means that their ends are not butted in the manner shown for


example in Hedderwick plate X, FIG. 16 [fig. 1431. The reference to the treenails being punched as a general tightening is interesting and this was possibly the case in SL 4. Their description by Hedderwick, particularly in connection with the North Eastern shipyards was noted above. Snow MARY 323 tons. Built Sund. 1804, lengthened 1810 Mostly all Eng Oak. sound and fairly squared, seen entire in the lower hold,- some Foreign White Oak well squared put in at present for floors and futtocks-. Deck good R. [red] pine, Plank sheer, and [flat?] topsides, blacken strakes, wales to light marks all Danz and Memel, some Eng. Oak, Elm in Bottom, all properly shifted in butts well worked to timbers, appears firm,- Deck and Hold Beems fastened by double lodging Oak Knees,- with 20. extra hanging Iron Knees under deck beams, an a shelf 7. by 13. in Oak on the arms of hold beams,- 6. Hooks forward, one aft ... [Repairs] [done in Shields] At this date. Rip'd entirely in the lower hold to Clamps, entire new Am Elm Keel 11 sided 10 in hanging, 16. floor timbers, 14. first futtocks, and other defective timber replaced, all cross chocked but not sunk at points,- New Am Oak main and R. pine false Kelson,- all new ceiling,- 4 lower hooks refitted to timbers,- 2 new pointers, 2 new hold Beams, 8 Strakes of Am Elm and R. pine doubling with lin wood sheating over Abbot felt to Keel copper nail'&- new Am. Oak false stem post, and new R. pine within [trunk?],- mixed treenails drove shave from axe, caulked and generally overhauled,. . . That this Vessel having gone thro' this great repair, and in conformity with the foregoing Scale of dimensions is in my opinion entitled to be classed for two years according to the rules of classification laid down ...AE 1. This survey, like that of the Boreas referred to in paragraph 4.4 and quoted below, illustrates

the wide variety of timber species used in construction. Lengthening was a common procedure and involved inserting extra frames at the midship section. Blaclteii strakes were the strakes above the main whale. They were the lowest strakes of the hull that were painted, usually with tar hence hlackeii or hlack strakes. In many of the ships built before c. 1825 the iron knees are referred to in these surveys as extra as they were commonly added to strengthen an old ship. The treenails that were drove shavefrom the axe were like those of SL 4. Many of the ships surveyed were sheathed, sometimes with wood as here or with copper which was more expensive. The sheathing material was laid over a layer of tarred felt or paper and nailed into place. Sheathing was usually applied if the vessel was destined for tropical waters. SL 4 was not sheathed but some of the ships referred to in the surveys as being destined for Holland or the Baltic were, indicating that they had been to the West Indies or elsewhere on previous voyages. Snow B O R E A S : 216 tons built Sunderland 1828 [surveyed Shields] Destination Holland Length aloft 83' 24'9"extreme, 14'9" [depth]. Butt end bolts: copper [short]. Keel to bilge planks 3" Bilge planks 3 112" and 4" Bilge to wales 3" Wales 4". Floors sided 10 moulded l l 112 Moulding of 1st 2nd and 3rd Futtocks 10" Top timbers S; 6" M; 4". OWNERS DECLARATION: this is to certify that the Boreas was ripped in July 1830 and had the following repairs- 3 midships floors, 7 first foothooks, 2 Hold beam knees, Oak Keelson and new Oak Ceiling the Hold beams fresh fastened with new bolts and fourteen hundred new treenails in Midships. Robert Ness. The copper hlrtt end bolt were the bolts securing the butts of the outer planks. The term short means they were blind like those of SL 4. The siding of the frames was not reduced until the top timbers. In SL 4 the frames are also sin~ilarlysided at least up to the hold beams.

Planks: Keel to is F' heads; ist F' heads to LWM*

Eng Beech. 2 112" Eng & mixed oak. 3" [Bilge 41

Upper planks and wales Mixed oaks. 3" Keelson American oak. False Keelson Red Pine. [*light water mark] A good proportion of t~.eenailswedged in flat of ceiling. Eng oak ones used, but not mooted [the other parts of the ceiling has not many treenails thro'] main Keelson bolted every other floor into keel, false bolts into the futtocks rooms and not clenched.. . Timbers described as being well squared and freefrom sap or well sapped had been cut out of good sized timber and all the sap wood trimmed off. Many of the timbers in SL 4 would probably have been described as not well sapped or sappy. Sliver chocks are those not sunk at points or not butted at their ends. The word implies they were relatively shallow and long. The reference to the small proportion of treenails through the ceiling is interesting in the light of the discussion on treenails above. A moot was a circular plane used for finishing treenails thus making them uniformly cylindrical. These were shavedfiom the axe like those of SL 4. The reference to false bolts might mean that those of the intermediate frames were not clenched under the keel which may have been the case in SL 4. SWALLOW 249 tons

Built: Sunderland 1834 [Owner: Thompson] Destined for Rotterdam 86'7", 25' 1 l", 10'6" & 4'7" Floors Sided 10 - 12" Moulded 12". Eng. & Foreign Oak "[some of the Eng. floors are "Wainy']" . . . plank butts fastened with one short bolt & one treenail forward they are double bolted. [copper] The plank fastening is the same as SL 4: one treenail and one short bolt although judging by the few curved planks that must have come from the bow of SL 4 she was not double bolted like the Swallow. Barque D U C H E S S O F KENT 342 tons

Snow M E X I C O 225 tons built Sunderland 1825 Copper butt end bolts, 1,1/16th Iron Keelson bolts, scarphs of keel copper bolted. Built of mixed Oaks, timbers said to be reasonably squared and free of sap [sliver chocked].


Built Surzderland 1835 All American oak framed throughout 13" square floors 10x10 at ends. Lower outer planks: 3", 4 1/2", 3". Chocks butted. 13 frames a side bolted together.

A case of butted chocks in a slightly larger ship. This was usual in ships of 350 tons or more. 13 frames amounts to every other pair of timbers in the square body of the ship. Barque CLARINDA 246 tons Built Sunderland 1828 [Adams] Surveyor: George Bayley Timbers moulded a n d sided 12" 3 Bilge planks outside, 2 inside [4"1 Lower Deck Beams secured with a strap I-ound the timbers- the upper Deck Beams are secured with one wood lodging Knee and one Iron Hanging Knee with three arms on the side thus [drawing] Butts and thickstuff at Floor Heads Bolted and clenched 5 Breast Hooks, 2 Pointers, Iron Crutch & bolted through both Keelsons at every Floor. This is the first of several references to the method seen in SL 4 of fastening the lower or hold beams with an iron strap passing around a futtock. It seems to be most common on ships built on the River Wear, particulary in Sunderland. Hedderwick mentions the technique although he prefers the method shown in Plate X FIG 28 [fig. 1431 the upper deck beam arrangement is also similar to SL 4.

This ship is also similar in co~~struction to SL 4 and closer in size. She also has three 4" bilge stringers. The iron straps retaining the beams are the same size. Another detail is the description of the stringer [below] and the waterway [above] the beam, that is not only bolted through each frame timber but also up and down through the ends of the beams as in SL 4. Barque S A P H I R E 296 tons Built Sunderland 1832 by T. Dixon. Destination Qriebec. Floors 12.5" in middle ... Masts Yellow pine. Timbers African, Dantzig ant1 English Oak. Planking: African and Dantzic oak. The hold beams secrrr.ed with cr str.inger and lron strap t.orrnc1 one timber, Clamp and Iron 'T' Hanging Knee the deck beams with one oak Lodging Knee, [Clamp] and Iron Diagonal one. . . . Orrtt bolts [ropper-f clinched, three bilge strakes and two limber strakesAgain a similar method of fastening the hold beams but with additional knees. The butt bolts were clinched [clenched] i.e. They were driven all the way through the hull and clenched over washers inboard. Brig OCEAN 229 tons

Brig WILLIAM 284 tons Registered in Hull, built on the Wear? 1832 Oak built, Af. oak beams 3 internal bilge planks 4" ceiling 3" FASTENINGS: lron bolts irz Riding Keelson otherwise Copper fastened- Coppered 1833 Lower deck secured with a strap passing along the end of the beam and round one timber a waterway and stringer bolted through every timber and up and down through the beam ends,- the beams are dowelled to the stringer- the upper deck is secured in a similar manner with stringer & waterway & wood lodging knees- & the waterway is dowelled down to the beams- 2 pointers aft Crutch Wing Transom Knees 5 breast hooks No butt bolts through but few treenails through the 5 strakes of the ceiling below the upper Deck. The general appear-ance of the ship is favourable, but the omission of through Bolts in the Butts and the very slight connexion of the lower Deck Beams with the side being only a plate of iron about 3" wide & 314 inch thick are in my estimation great drawbacks to her durability and therefore in my opinion she ought not to be classed more than 9A. George Bayley [she was classified A1 for 8 years].


Built Sunderland 1832. Destination: Archangel . ..theframe where seen to be English Oak except for one floor timber which is birch the beams are of foreign Oak the timbers are not well squared and the workmanship is generally inferior. The use of birch for a floor is interesting and was probably a repair. Many of SL 4's oak floors would have been termed not well squared. New Barque AUGUSTA J E S S I E 385 tons Built Sunderland 1834 by Adctmson [commenced building Jan 1833, launched March 18341. TIMBERING: The of the vessel throi~ghoutis composed of English Oak, well squared and well cleared of sap, the stem, Stern Post, beams, Transoms, Aprons, Knight Heads and Hawse timbers all English and African Oak, sound and good, Floor ends and first foothook heads are regularly cross chocked, but chock ends are not butted 14 frames put up on each side, bolted together from the floor ends up to the 2nd foothook heads. Cant bodies are not framed or bolted;. ..

The ~jholeof the outside plank from the Shear Streaks [waterway included] down to the light water marks is of African and English Oak. From the light water marks to the Keel is American Elm: the whole of the Ceiling plank Inside is of Afrikan and English Oak. The shift of outside plank in midships have three streaks through between butts and at the force and after end of the ship 2 streaks through. Ceiling planks shifted 2 and 3 streaks between butts. Hold beams fastened with an Iron Clasp 5" broad ~.oundthe outside of one timber with 4 bolts in each arm. Also an Iron Knee both above and below each beam end, bolted and clinked throughout. Deck Beams are fastened with one wood ledger Knee and one Iron Knee under each Beam End with a lug. .. also the 2nd waterway dowelled into the Beam Ends ... 4 forecastle deck Beams fastened with D.W.L. Knees of Eng Oak ... Butt Ends are double bolted, one bolt in each Butt End is clinched inside.. . All treenails used are of the best English Oak, the principal part turned with a machine. Surveyor: John Brunton. Streaks = strakes; Sheer Streak [Strake] = the uppermost outboard hull plank; clinched = clenched; D.W.L. Knees = Double wood lodging knees; Ledger Knee = Lodging knee.

Narrative on the Charles Kerr from Shields By way of describing what a voyage in one of these colliers could be like the following letter provides a graphic illustration. It was printed in the Hastings and St. Leonards News on Friday, March 12th 1852. Narrow escape from shipwreck The following letter has been received by Mr. Daniel Sargent, of Hastings, from his brother Mr. George Sargent, who sailed from Newcastle in the middle of last month, in the Charles Kerr, of which he had the command, bound with a cargo of coals for the dep6t at Aden. The spirited and unvarnished story of the perils which were encountered in the endeavour to make the voyage, though the letter was not intended to meet the public eye, will doubtless repay our readers for the trouble of a perusal. The letter is dated from Cuxhaven, February 25. 'My dear Dan, Have this time had a narrow escape, the ship was leaky in harbour, but not


so much so as I thought 'twould be a risk to go the voyage, but the first night at sea it came on to blow heavy at S.W. with a heavy sea; the ship being deep, nearly 1000 tons of coal on board, she laboured very much, I double-reefed topsails and reefed courses, and stood to the S.S.E., as with such a ship, drawing 19ft. 6in., I wanted sea-room. -The second night, gale and sea increasing, being on the starboard tack washed away our fore and main guard boards, they being the old fashioned ones, two feet broad, our starboard rigging was then all adrift, immediately wore ship to secure our masts, but in rounding-too a heavy sea came on board carrying away the gripes of the long boat and stove her broadside in, we got her secured to the ring bolts to leeward, the ship all this time making much water, kept the pumps constantly going, took in the slack of our starboard rigging and again wore bend to southward; close-reefed topsails and handed courses, water in hold having increased to four feet. The remainder of time at sea, heavy gales, hove-to four days, no rest, and after a week at sea five men laid up, so you see we had few enough at the pumps, the leak gradually increasing on us. At all events we fetched the Texel, more moderate, gave her canvass, wind lulled round to N.W., hoping to get to some port in de English Channel, or if I could have got into the Downs I would have taken her up to London, sold the coal, and again taken her to the north to be repaired, but the wind again came round to the S.W. and blew a heavy gale with rain and thick hazy weather, the crew fairly tired out, myself also; bore up for Shields and had got half way over when it again flew into the N.W., having at this time double-reefed topsails and reefed courses, rattling the old barque through the water to get hold of the land, but no go. I then made up my mind to run for the Elbe, but nothing but thick hazy weather and not getting a sight of Heligoland, but knowing by my soundings I was in the Channel on the fair way of the Elbe, I made up my mind to run while daylight continued; wind at N.W., very thick with rain, kept the lead going, shoaling our water gradually into seven fathoms, when it cleared up a little, and as Providence ordered it got a sight of the Light Vessel before it thickened in again, at this time six feet water in her hold, shoaled our water to four fathoms, when all at once bump she goes.

I thought the masts would have gone by the board, laid all flat aback. The tide making, she came off after about fifteen minutes, water

increased in that time to eight feet, it again cleared up, when we saw the Light Ship about a mile off, dark coming on fast; we rounded the Light Ship close to the Dark, asked them for a pilot and told them we were sinking, but they could not give me one. I then gave her all the sail I could pack on, up the Elbe for the second Light Ship, but coming on very thick, gale increasing, could not hail the second Light Vessel, so steered for the pilot galliot she having a small light, expecting the masts to go over the side with the quantity of sail on the vessel, but neck or nothing, a pilot or a bump; sure enough bump it was, eleven feet when we struck, after a time managed to get the sails stowed, then out boats, after which got the people's clothes on the poop in case we should have to leave her before daylight. Our long boat being stove we had only a gig and second cutter, having left our first cutter in Shields. While busy with getting the clothes on the poop, the wind having backed into the West, she came off the sand all at once into deep water, a pretty predicament for a sinking ship; let go both bowers slap, sorry I did not do so to keep her fast when I had her fast, nothing now but the pumps for it. Poor George asleep on the poop among the people's bags covered over with a sail, pumps going all night, leak still increasing, twice the people knocked off and wanted to take to the boats, but I refused, as I thought she would keep up till daylight and then we should be sure of assistance. At daylight they saw our signals of distress, when they came to our assistance from the pilot ship, ten pilots and five sailors with two boats, they all clapped on to the pumps, now having twelve feet in well. Eleven a.m., flood having made, hove the anchors up and made sail, thank god fair wind up, but just as we got off Cuxhaven the wind came right out, and, expecting her to go down under our feet, a steam-boat came to our assistance and in half an hour stuck her in the mud, 15ft. 6in. in the hold, a near touch Dan my boy; than God, all right. Poor George saw no danger, he left the poop in the night without my knowledge, went into the cabin, took a book of maps and my dictionary that he has had at school, went back again, crawled under the sail, and went again to sleep; when I found him when the people came to our assistance fast asleep with the books in his arms. I awoke him and asked him what he had there, he told me, and said that if he was saved he should save those books.' The Charles Kerr was a bark of 463 tons built in Sunderland in 1826 and was registered in


Shields [near Newcastle]. She had been surveyed in January 1852 when she is noted in Lloyd's register as having had some repair andpart new deck. In the 1853 register she is noted as having had a large repair, presumably precipitated by the rigourous voyage described above. In 1853 George Sargent is no longer listed as her master and she is not listed in Lloyd's register after 1857. This episode illustrated an important point; that ships often came to grief a long way off their intended course. Had the Charles Kerr gone down in the Elbe, in the absence of documentary evidence it would be a natural assumption that she was bound for one of the ports in the area such as Cuxhaven. It is a possibility that SL 4 was also bound for somewhere else, though in her case the weight of evidence suggests otherwise.

[Fig. 1701

A section is cut from the S L 4 hull for display in the Prins Hendrik Maritime Museum in Rotterdam. De vondsten, maar ook een doorsnee van de romp van SL 4 zullen tentoongesteld worden in het Rotterdamse Maritiem Musuem Prins Hendrik [foto IPL].




The main purpose of the archaeological survey during the Slufter project was to produce the documentation that constitutes the basis for the present report. A conspicuous side-effect of archaeological investigation, however, is the collection of larger or smaller amounts of artefacts and samples. These need to be given proper care. For one thing artefacts should if necessary be given conservation treatment, for another a collection emerging from any one excavation or site should as a principle remain together. The institutes that are - under the ancient monuments law -entitled to carry out archaeological field research in the Netherlands are not normally at the same time museums. Still they are responsible for what they excavate. In the long run, however, that is after completion of post-excavation research, they are supposed to dispose of their collections for the benefit of museums, exhibitions, long-term filing and secondary research. In order to achieve these aims regional or rather provincial depots have been established in which archaeological collections are accomodated. For the province of South Holland this depot is part of the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden. Deposition of the Slufter collection in this depot would thus be the obvious procedure. Nevertheless it has been proposed to deviate from this line in view of the strong nautical bias of the Slufter collection and to put it at the disposal of the Prins Hendrik Maritime Museum of the City of Rotterdam. After recording a careful selection was made of items to be kept. These include a selection of significant timbers from the various wrecksites which were buried for long term preservation in the national underground depot for archaeological ship's timbers which has been established some years ago in the IJsselmeerpolder area, where the timbers are kept well below the ground water table. A section of the hull from SL 4 which had slowly dried was selected, cut off and kept above the ground. A similar section was


offered to the Tyne and Wear museum for display in Sunderland, the small northeastern English town where this collier was presumably built. The smaller finds which needed conservation were treated by mr. T. v.d. Horst from Zaanstad. The methods used can be summarized as follows. Wrought iron items and fittings were treated according to North & Pearson with a duration of two months and a fourfold replacement of the solution. The remaining salts were treated with unsoluble barium sulphate. The treatment was finished with tannine. In the composite items the iron fittings were sometimes of needs cut to enable separate treatment. The blocks and other wooden items were treated by freeze drying, with an approximate duration of one month for every six kilos of waterlogged wood. Item SL1 A5 1 , described as a traveller [fig. 431 was somewhat problematical. The iron ring was served with rope and a leather cladding and could not be treated as one unit. The leather would be destroyed during the iron treatment and removing the leather would damage the rope serving as well as some concretion. The latter solution, however, was chosen. After treatment the traveller was reconstructed with modern rope. Pewter, yellow metal and lead items were cleaned electrolytically. After neutralization they were treated with wax. Restoraton and plaster filling of ceramics and a grindstone need no further comment. When sheepshead block SLI A60 was taken apart for treatment it showed a repair which has been commented upon in the text [fig. 411. Removing the metal pin from the marked double sheaved block SL4 A01 [fig. 12 11 posed some problems. The sheaves had yellow metal bearings. Rope was cleaned in a phosphoric acid solution. After neutralization loose parts were reinforced with new rope. The complete collection of artefacts and samples including the SL 4 hull section will be given into the care of the Prins He~zdrik Maritime Museum, where part of it will be on display [fig. 1701.


The glossary is meant as an aid to understand maritime terms as used in this report. It has no claim to being exhaustive. It has a bilingual format. In the English part each lemma gives the English definition of an English word. To the right of the page the Dutch equivalent is given. If it is marked with see the meaning is more or less identical, if it is marked with cf.


the English and Dutch versions do not really match. In the Dutch part Dutch definitions are given for Dutch words, while the English equivalents are marked with zie or vgl.. Alternative words or terms are placed in brackets after the main entry. Words followed by an asterisk* are the subject of a separate entry.

Adze see: dissel

Wood working tool. It is similar to an axe but the blade is set at right angles to the handle.

Apron see: binnensteven

Part of the stem* construction, it runs through the same arc as the stem and is fastened inboard of it. It is sometimes called a false stem.

Auger see: avegaar

A large wood-boring drill with a simple wooden T-bar as handle. The design of the bit varied. The type commonly used by shipwrights was of the shell type although the corkscrew shaped twist types were also used.

Bark [barque] see: bark

Originally a specific hull form but later a vessel with three or more masts in which the aftmost mast is rigged fore and aft, the others being square rigged.

Beam-shelf [shelf] see: balkweger

The large stringer* on which the deckbeams*' rest.

Bevel Afschuining

Angled or sloping face on the edge of a timber, so cut to fit another.

Bilge cf.: ruim, vlak, kim

The lowest part of the hold of a ship or the flattest part of the hull upon which the ship rests when aground. Turn of the bilge see: kim The upward curve of the ship's hull approximately at the end of the floor* timbers. Bilge planks cf.: kimgang, kimweger Thick planks lying at the turn of the bilge either outboard or inboard although the latter are sometimes referred to as bilge stringers.

Blind see: blind

A fastening where neither the nail or the hole augered* for it passes right through the timber to which another is being joined.

Block see: blok

The wooden block or shell enclosing one or more sheaves [or holes in the case of a deadeye*]. One or more blocks are rigged together to increase the mechanical power applied to ropes used for various tasks on a ship, such as raising topmasts and yards,

controlling sails and lifting or restraining heavy equipment. Blocks vary in size, number of sheaves and shape depending on where in the vessel they are rigged and their purpose. Bowsprit see: boegspriet

The spar projecting forward from the bow, either above or to the side of the stem*, to which the stays* of the foremost mast are attached. The extension of the bowsprit is called a jibboom*.

Breasthook cf.: band

Large grown* timber that is placed internally across the apron* forming a strong connection between the two sides of the hull.

Brig see: brik

A vessel having two masts: the foremast and the main mast, both of which are square rigged.

Bulwark see: boeisel

The structure above the upper deck forming a strong waist high rail providing crew safety, preventing heavy seas washing across the decks and also securing various lines associated with the running* rigging.

Butt see: stuik

The end of a timber or plank when cut square. Butt joint: the junction of two timbers finished in this manner.

Camber see: balktrek

In the context of deckbeams camber is the arc of the beam making it higher in the centre of the ship.

Cant frame see: draaispant

In the main body of the ship the frame* timbers were laid at right angles to the keel but where the hull curved in towards the bow the frames were often set radiating outwards, approximately from where the stem* scarfed* to the keel. Timbers were often canted in a similar fashion at the stern but not to the same degree.

Carling see: klamaai

A deck timber running between the deckbeams* i.e. longitudinally.

Carve1 see: karveel

A word that has come to mean the method of ship construction where the hull planks are flush-laid against a skeleton of frames* and are not fastened to each other at their edges.

Caulking see: breeuwen

The method of making a seam between planks watertight, for instance in deck planks or the hull planking [of carvel* built ships]. Various materials are twisted into lengths, several of which are driven into the seam with a caulking iron and a caulking mallet. They are then sealed with a waterproofing compound such as tar. A common caulking material is oakum* but others include animal hair, wood fibres and moss. Often a compound of more than one is used.

Ceiling see: wegering

The internal structural planking of the hull, i.e. not lining or panelling.

Chain plate [chains] see: putting

Originally chains bolted to the side of the ship, the upper end of which was joined to the iron binding of the lower deadeye*. Later, flat iron strap was used [hence the term plate] or a combination of the two.


Chamfer afschuining

The angled surface formed when the sharp corners of a timber are cut back or bevelled* for safety or good appearance, such as the under side of deckbeams* or the edges of deck pillars*.

Chock see: klamp

1. Generally any angled or wedge shaped block of wood added as packing to constructional timbers to build them up to the required dimensions, or between them to effect a joint.

Clamp see: 1. balkweger 2. klamp

1. The stringer upon which the ends of the beams are supported. They are often rebated into it in various ways. The term is used synonimously with beamshelf or shelf, although this implies a timber laid horizontally or at least that is not rebated. 2. A general term for offcuts or small pieces of wood used for temporary fastenings. In the context of the Dutch shipbuilding tradition, particularly those pieces used to fasten hull planking during construction, prior to fitting the frames.

Cleat see: klamp

1. A small piece of wood used in construction to hold timbers in place or prevent them from moving until permanently fastened [such as preventing a shore* from slipping]. See also clamp 2. 2. A small piece of wood attached to for example a spar in order that a rope can be belayed.

Clench [clinch, clink] see: klinken

The method of securing metal fastenings by hammering the end over a washer or rove*. This could either be done by simply turning it over the rove or rivetting, i.e. beating it until it had tightened sufficiently not to pull out.

Clinker built cf.: overnaads, klinken

The method of boat and shipbuilding in which the strakes of hull planking overlap and are fastened through the overlap with nails clenched* over washers or roves*.

Coaming see: luikhoofd

The timbers framing the edge of a hatch in the deck.

Companion way see: opgang

A flight of steps or ladder, strictly speaking leading from the quarter deck to the upper deck but generally used to refer to a personnel, rather than a cargo hatch.

Compass timber see: krommer

Naturally curved wood used for correspondingly curved elements in ship construction. It is much stronger than if the same shaped piece was cut out of straight grained wood. The term is synonimous with grown* or crooked* timber, although it is the more suitable of the three for describing the evenly curved pieces required for frame timbers. Grown timber is the most general term while crooked implies a sharper or more irregular shape and is often used in the context of knees* or crooks*.

Crook see: knie

Grown timber* used for knees* or the V-shaped floors* used at the bow and stern of some vessels.

Cross grain cf.: draads hout

A curved timber cut from straight wood to the extent that the wood grain passes from one side of the piece to the other, amounting to a serious weakness.

Cross-pall [-spal1,-pawl,-pale] A temporary plank used to tie the frames together during zie: zwieping construction prior to fitting the deckbeams.


Crutch cf.: band, wrang

Similar to a breasthook* but positioned at the stern.

Deadrise see: tilling

A term referring to the upward angle of the floor timbers* as they run out from the keel* towards the turn of the bilge*.

Deadeye see: jufferblok

A block* with holes instead of sheaves, used in pairs to tighten the shrouds* and stays*.

Deadwood see: slemphout

As the form of a ship's hull becomes sharper forward and aft, the frames can no longer be brought down to the keel and so they are fitted on or against solid timber built up over the keel.

Deckbeam see: dekbalk

The main athwartship timbers of the deck structure also effecting a strong union between the sides of the vessel.

Deckhook cf.: band

A breasthook* that is at the level of a deck* and so forms part of its support in addition to binding the cant* frames.

Deck pillar see: dekstut

Deck support or stanchion*.

Dottie see: deutel

See plug, punch.

Dub cf.: dissel

The action of working timber to a smooth surface with an adze*.

Dutchman cf.: half houtje

A repair to a timber where the flawed or damaged section is cut out so as to form a rebate*. After preparing with a luting compound a new piece of wood is let into it and fastened in place.

False keel see: loze kiel

A protective layer of timber fastened along the bottom of the keel, being relatively easy to replace when worn.

Fashion piece see: rantsoenhout

The curved timbers set across the stern post* forming the base of the stern.

Floor [floor timber, rung] cf.: legger, wrang

The lowest piece of a ship's frame running across the keel.

Frame [rib] see: spant

Transverse timbers forming the skeleton of a ship and to which the planks are fastened. In large vessels they are made from several pieces [see floors, futtocks, top timbers].

Framed timbers see: spant van oprichting

Timbers constituting a frame which has been erected in an early stage of shipbuilding.

Futtocks [foothooks] cf.: zitter, buikstuk, oplanger, stut

The timbers that together with the floors* and the top timbers* form a frame*. They are numbered lst, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, the 1st being the lowest and the 4th the highest.

Garboard see: zandstrook

The plank next to the keel [garboard strake: the lowest strake of planking].

Grown timber see: gegroeid hout

General term for naturally curved wood suitable for shipbuilding but it often refers to the sharply angled pieces from the branches of trees used for knees* [see also compass timber].



Half beam cf.:dekbalk

The small timbers supporting the deck planking that lie between and parallel to the deckbeams. They are rebated into the carlings* and possibly into the beam shelf*.

Handspike see: handspaak

A wooden lever used for turning a windlass* [as distinct from the hand spike; used like a crow bar for manoeuvring guns].

Harpins [harpings] see: boegsent

Lengths of timber [usually oak] used to support and bind the cant* frames at the bow and the stern during construction. They are scarfed* to the ribbands* so forming a band of timber running the whole length of the ship.

Hatch see: luik

An opening in the deck, for loading of cargo and equipment or for access from one deck to another.

Hawse holeltimbers/pipes see: kluisgat

The holes through which the cables from the anchors pass into the ship. In large wooden ships they are generally cut through the cantXframe timbers next but one to, and either side of the stem [hence hawse pieces or hawse timbers]. They were often lined with lead, or later, iron hawse pipes.

Heartwood see: kernhout

As successive rings of new sapwood* are formed the innermost cells become too far from the growth region to function. Through various chemical changes including the deposition of cellulose and lignin the cells become heartwood.

Heel cf.: teen, hieling

The lower end or foot of a timber; e.g. the heel of the sternpost.

Helm port see: hennegat

The opening in the stern of a ship or the raised structure of a smaller vessel through which the head of the rudder, or the tiller passes.

Hold see: ruim

The lowest space within the body of a ship.

Hold beams see: ruimbalk

Strong athwartship beam in the hold. Hold beams were not decked over.

Jib-boom cf.: kluifhout

The spar fastened to the bowsprit, extending its reach, and to which stays and jib sails can be attached.

Jigger-mizzen see: druil

A small sail rigged on a mast stepped right aft on smaller sailing vessels.

Keel see: kiel

In wooden ships: the lowermost fore and aft constructional member, formed of one or more timbers, running along the centre line and joined to the stern post* and stem*.

Keelson [kelson] see: zaathout

The internal backbone of a ship. A large timber [or timbers] running parallel to the keel* above the floors*. It clamps the floors by being through-fastened to the keel.

Knee see: knie

An angled or curved piece of wood or iron used to connect various elements of the hull that lie in different planes, such as the deckbeams* to the frames*. When made of wood they were best cut from grown* timber but were superseded by iron knees as grown timber in general became increasingly scarce. Those

set with one arm running down from the side or underside of a beam were referred to as hanging knees. Those set horizontally against the beam were lodging knees and those rising vertically from the top of the beam are standards. When knees of iron became common, the forms knees could take became much more varied. A staple knee is a double iron knee; either a hanging knee where the lower arm continues down and along the top of the deck beam below [becoming the standard] or where two lodging knees are combined in a similar way. Limber see.: waterloop Limber hole see: loggat

Channels for the passage of water to the pumps. They were usually cut in the underside of the floor timbers*. Alternatively they were formed by the gaps left between timbers for the purpose.

Limber boards see: vullingplank

A series of short boards between the keelson and the limber strake that were removeable to allow access to the space between the floor timbers and to the limber holes.

Limber strake see: vullinggang

The first ceiling* plank either side of the keelson*.

Margin plank see: lijfhout

The outermost deck plank.

Mortise cf.: pen- en gatverbinding

A square or rectangular recess cut into a timber into which the tenon* of another timber fits [forming a mortise and tenon joint].

Moulded depth dikte

The depth or thickness of a ship's timber when viewed in section i.e. looking forward or aft [from the old term mould referring to the cross section of a ship].

Moulding see: kraallijst

Carved decorative finish to a timber.

Oakum see: werk

Fibres of old rope teased apart and then twisted together in strands for caulking* seams between plankingY.

Parcelling see: smarten

Strips of tarred canvas wound round a rope after it has been wormed* after which it is served*.

Pawl see: pal

Pawl bitt; the heavy pillar or vertical post set in front of the windlass on which the pawl mechanism is mounted. Pawl rim; the heavy iron toothed rim around the centre of the windlass barrel. In older windlasses it was just a series of notches cut into the barrel. Pawls; iron dogs or flaps hinged on the pawl bitt with their ends resting in the teeth of the pawl rim. This simple ratchet mechanism prevents the windlass turning in reverse when under load.

Plank cf.: huid

Technically the slabs of timber sawn or split from a bole that are between 1.5 inches [4 cm] and 4 inches [ l o cm] in thickness. Timber thicker than this is referred to as thick stuff and thinner timber as board. The term planking is i.a. applied to the planks of the ship's hull.



Plug [dottle] see: deutel, spijkerpen

A square hardwood wedge driven into the centre of the end of a treenail* to tighten it. Homonymous are the plugs that are used to plug a disused nail-hole and which go by the name of spijkerpen in Dutch.


See sleeper.

Punches cf.: deutel

Small square wedges used to tighten a treenail* as opposed to a single square wedge, see plug.

Rebate [rabbetlsponning

A recessed channel cut in a timber to accommodate another, such as the V-shaped rabbet cut into the side of the keel* into which the garboard* is fitted or rabbetted.

Ribs cf.: spant

An old term for the frames of a ship, now applied loosely in this context but more specifically to the frames of a small boat where they are cut from one piece of timber.

Ribband see: sent

Lengths of timber [usually fir] nailed along the outside of the frames* to bind and support them during construction.

Rider see: kattespoor

Heavy internal reinforcing member of wood and later of iron, laid across the keelson*, ceiling* and stringers*, usually in line with the frames to which they were strongly fastened. Standard in warships, they were sometimes added to merchant-ships during repairs or in old age.

Rigging see: tuigage

The collective term for the whole assembly of ropes, blocks* and spars on a sailing vessel.

Rise of floor cf.: oplopen

A term describing the progressive increase in the depth of the floors* or the height that they are set above the keel fore and aft of the midship section.

Room and space cf.: spantafstand

The room occupied by a frame* and the space between it and the next frame along on the keel. In effect the distance between the centres of two frames.

Rove see: klinkring

A round washer or square metal plate against which a nail of bolt is fastened by being turned or clenched* over it.

Running rigging see: lopend want

All rigging used to raise or lower yards and to raise, lower and trim the sails.

Sapwood [xylem] see: spinthout

The outer rings of wood formed within the cambium of a tree through which sap is transported and in which food is stored.

Scarf joint [scarph] see: las

A method of joining two pieces of timber end to end with a tapering overlap, generally so that the width and thickness of the timber is not altered. There are many types of scarf joint varying in complexity. To scarf: to join two timbers in this fashion.

Scupper pipe see: spuikoker, bos

A pipe which passes through the ship's side on a level with a deck to allow water to run away.

Serving see: kleden

Yarns of rope wound tightly around a rope over the worming* and parcelling* to form a protective layer.

Sheathing see: dubbeling

The layer applied to a ship's hull to protect the planking from attack by marine borers such as gribble [Limnaria] and shipworm [Teredo Navalis]. It was made of various materials at various times. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there were various combinations dictated by price and the destination of the vessel. Tarred paper, or tarred felt covered by pine boards was a common and relatively cheap option. A final layer of copper sheeting was more expensive but the most effective.

Sheers [sheerlegs] see: schrank

Two or three long timbers or poles lashed together to form an 'A' frame or tripod from which a block* could be hung, enabling heavy weights to be hoisted [such as frame timbers in ship construction].

Sheer strake see: scheergang

The uppermost strake of the outer planking.

Shelf see: dekweger

See beamshelf.

Shift see: verscherven

The arrangement of planking* so that the butt-joints in adjacent strakes are not too close together so creating weakness. In general planks were arranged so that there were at least two planks running between any two butt-joints.

Ship rig cf.: volschip

The rig of a vessel with a bow sprit and three or more masts [including topmasts and topgallants] all of which are square rigged.

Shore see: schoor

A timber used as a temporary prop or support for frames, stem and stern post etc., during construction of the vessel.

Shrouds see: hoofdtouwen

The lateral stays* of the masts.

Side-binding strake cf.: schaarstok

... is scored [rebated] down and into the beam-ends at some distance from the side, and bolted through the side between the beams. The scoring into the beams connects the in and out fastenings of this strake with the longitudinal tie of the beams, ... Andrew Murray 1863.

Skeg see: scheg

The triangle formed by keel*, stempost* and deadwood*.

Sleeper [pointer] see: worpknie

Internal stern reinforcing members of wood or [later] iron, running diagonally upwards and inwards to the underside of the transom* or just below it. Formerly the term had referred to what are called bilge stringers here.

Snow see: snauw

A vessel with two masts: fore and main, which are both square rigged but with an additional small mast [a trysail mast] stepped immediately behind the main mast.

Spar see: rondhout

Any of the timbers used to support the rigging of a sailing vessel, such as the masts, yards and booms etc.



Spike see: spijker

A large square shanked metal nail used for general fastening purposes, particularly planking.

Spurket see: lucht

When frame timbers are not jointed end to end the spurket is the resulting gap. [Not to be confused with spirketting: the stringer set above the ends of the deckbeams or above the waterway if present.]

Stanchion [deck pillar] see: dekstut

In general a vertical support pillar, for example of a deckbeam* usually stepped* into the keelson* or riders*.

Standing rigging see: staand want

The rigging supporting the masts, consisting of shrouds* and stays*.

Staple knee

See knee.

Stave see: duig

Component plank of a cask or other stave built container such as a bucket.

Stays see: stag

The thick rope [or wire] guys for the masts and bowsprit.

Stem see: voorsteven

The large timber scarfed* onto the keel that determines the shape of the bow of a ship and into which the ends of the outer planking are rabbeted*.

Step cf.: mastspoor

The rectangular recess into which the heel or foot of the mast is locked or stepped so that it cannot move. It can be cut into the keelson or formed by blocks of timber above the keelson or a deck depending on the size of the vessel and the position of the mast.

Stern post see: achtersteven

The large timber set on the upper face of the aft end of the keel to which it was joined. It can be variously formed depending on the type of vessel but commonly the ends of the outer hull planking are rabbeted into it in a similar fashion as with the stem and the rudder is hung on its aft side.

Stopwater see: keernagel

A hole or channel cut along the interface of a seam into which a dowel is driven to prevent the passage of water. It is a technique used in seams that cannot be effectively caulked, such as that in the scarf joint of a keel. As well as a dowel or treenail, moss and fat or other waterproof material can be rammed into the hole which is then plugged with short treenails.

Strake see: gang

A run of plankingY

Stringer cf.: weger

A thick internal plank running longitudinally along the hull. They can either alternate with the ceiling* planks or are placed where extra strength is required such as over a line of joints or under deckbeams.

Siding breedte

The thickness of a ship's timber e.g. a futtock* or a deckbeam* when viewed from the side or above.

Tabling cf.: las

The face of timbers cut to be scarfed* together, often including quite complex keys and notches.

Tack see: hals

The foremost lower corner of a fore-and-aft sail as well as the tackle to tighten it downwards. In square rigging the tack is the rope or tackle on the lower corner of a sail which is used to brace it when sailing to windward. In this connection the term is also used to indicate over what side of the ship the rigging is hauled and thus its direction in relation to the wind.

Tenon cf.: pen- en gatverbinding

A square or rectangular projecting tongue of wood cut to fit into a mortise* so forming a mortise and tenon joint.

Thimble see: kous

A heart shaped eye of wood or metal around which the end of a rope is spliced to make a hard eye [as opposed to a soft eye without the thimble].

Tiller see: helmstok

The lever by which the rudder is turned.

Timbers cf.: inhout

At its most general: wood that is suitable for, or has been converted for carpentry or construction. In the context of ship construction it can refer to any of the pieces used as main strength members in the hull [as opposed to planks] but more particularly refers to frames*.


A temporary repair patch of lead nailed over seams of deck planking or hull planking to stop leaks.

Tonnage see: tonnemaat

The measurement of capacity, formerly in all ships, now in merchant-ships only [war-ships being classified by their displacement tonnage i.e. their actual weight]. In English ships the capacity had originally been equated to the number of Bordeaux wine casks or tuns that could be stowed. The early formulae by which this could be calculated consisted of multiplying the length of keel, by the breadth, by the depth in the hold and then dividing the product, commonly by 100. This remained the basic principle of the many methods of tonnage measurement until 1836. The differences were the exact points between which the measurements were taken, the divisor used and that depth and keel length were not actually measured but were proportions of those distances that were. The rule in force between 1773 and 1st Janury 1836 is a good example. The calculation still entailed Length x Breadth x Depth which was then divided by 94. The breadth was measured between the outside of the plank at the widest part of the hull. The length was the distance along the rabbet of the keel* from the aft side of the stern post* to a perpendicular from the foreside of the stem* below the bowsprit*. From this was subtracted the rake of the stem which for convenience was taken to be three fifths of the extreme breadth. This gave a theoretical keel length. This was multiplied by the breadth which in turn was multiplied by half the breadth [taken to be the depth]. The sum was divided by 94, the answer being the tonnage. This method was inaccurate in many cases as it took no account of hull form. The method introduced in 1836 attempted to remedy this. It involved measuring the internal breadth at various heights and the depth from the underside of the deckbeams to the ceiling beside the keelson. This was done at three specific stations along the length of the hull, thus the resulting figure more accurately reflected the true capacity.


In northern Europe and the Low Countries one measured with a ship's carrying capacity expressed in lasten a weight measurement of grain. Nevertheless conversion from tuns into lasten was frequently done. Top mast see: steng

Spar that is fitted as an upward extension of the mast.

Top timber see: stut, oplanger

The uppermost timber of a frame*.

Transom see: worp

Heavy horizontal stern frame timbers set across the sternpost. The uppermost is the wing transom, set just below the top of the stern post. Set at the height of the deck is the deck transom, the others being filling transoms.

Traveller see: travelaar

An iron ring to which [most commonly] the tack [lower forward corner] of a jib sail is attached allowing it to be hauled out along the bowsprit* or jib-boom*. The leather covering reduced friction and prevented it chafing the timber.

Treenail [trenail, trennel, trunnel] see: treknagel Wooden dowel used for fastening timbers together.


Wale see: berghout

A thick outer hull strake corresponding to the internal stringer* providing additional longitudinal strength such as at the height of decks, the water line below gun ports etc.

Waterway see: waterloopsklos

The outermost deckplank, often made from hard wood and usually thickened towards its outer edge to prevent water lying over the seam and seeping down between the frames.

Whelp see: spilklamp

Supplementary pieces of wood on the face of a windlass* barrel saving it from being abraded, especially when hauling a chain cable or giving a hemp cable extra grip. They are easily replaced when worn.

Windlass see: spil

A winch for raising anchors or yards that was set horizontally on the deck and in early forms turned manually by levers [handspikes*] located in sockets in the barrel or shaft. In the 1830's various patent mechanical devices were introduced to reduce the work load, in which pump handles were used to lever two vertical bars acting on purchase rims either side of and similar to the pawl* rims.

Worming see: trenzen

Laying a small rope or line in the lay of a larger rope or cable prior to parcelling* and serving*.


De verklarende wool-denlijst geeft inzicht in de wijze waarop maritieme termen in het voorliggende rapport zijn gebruikt. Er is niet naar volledigheid gestreefd. De opzet is tweetalig. Het Engelse deel geeft Engelse definities van Engelse woorden, het Nederlandse deel geeft Nederlandse definities van Nederlandse woorden. Bij elk woord

wordt een ver.wijzing gegeven naar een lemma in de andere taal. Is de betekenis van de hetreffende woovden nzin of meel. gelijkluiderzd dun wordt verwezen niet see resp. zie. 1s er ve~.schilin hetekenis dun wor.dt cf. resp. vgl. gebruikt. Wooden woaraan een afzonderlijk lenzma is gewijd zijn waar van belang voorzien van eel1 sterretje*.

Achtersteven zie: sternpost

Zie steven

Avegaar zie: auger

Grote handboor die met een dwarsstang of dwar.shoutje word[ rondgedraaid.

Balktrek zie: camber

De bolling van de dekbalken* in de lengterichting [d.w.z. dwarsscheeps] die de dekrondte bepaalt.

Bark zie: bark

Schip met dl-ie of meer masten, waarhij de achterste nzast langsscheeps getuigd is en de overige masten vierkant geti~igd zijn.

Balkweger zie: beam shelf

Zware weger* waarop de dekbalken* of ruimbalken* rusten. Deze balken zijn veelal in de balkweger ingelaten.

Band Dwarsscheeps verbanddeel in het opgannde deel van voor- of vgl.: crutch [band in lzet ruim] achterschip. Het is een symmetrische kromn~er*die aan de breasthook [stevenwrang] binnenzijde op de steven* of binne~zsteven*hevestigd is.


Berghout zie: wale

Zwaar uitgevoerde huidga~zgdie het schip 01s een l~orizo~~tale hoepel omsluit en in belangrijke nlate bijdr.angt tot hecktheid en sterkte.

Binnensteven vgl.: apron

Opgaand verbanddeel dat aan de binnen-ijde legen de steven* ligt. Soms opgaande voortzetting van het slenzpho~t'~.

Blind zie: blind

Gezegd van pennen, nagels erz gaten die niet door en door gaan.

Blok zie: block

Hulpmiddel voor het geleiden van tortwwerk en /let scheren van takels. Veelal is eerz blok van CCn of nleer schijve~z[katr~ollen] voorzien.

Boegsent zie: harpin

Dee1 dat tijdelijk op de draaispanten* in voor.- en achte~.schip wordt aangebracht om deze tijderls de b o i r ~te~ondersteune~z. Het is een logische voortzettirzg van de overige senten*. Anders dan deze is dit eclzter geen strooklat* maar eel1 in 1lor.m gebracht deel.

Boegspriet zip:

Rondhout dat over. de voorsteven* naar voren steekt en dat dienst doer als aangr-ijpingspunt voor voorstagen en voorzeilen; soms nog verlengd nzet een kluifiout* of boom.

Boeisel zie: bulwark

Verhoging van het boord door een of meer gangen*.

Boord ship's side

Opgaande scheepswand.

Bos zie: scupper. pipe

Houten spuikoker*.

Braadspil vgl.: ujindlass

zie: spil

Brik zie: brig

Schip met vierkant tuig, gevoerd op w e e masten waarvan de achter.ste de grote mast is.

Breeuwen zie: caulkin,p

Het afdiclzterz van naden en scheuren door het indrijven van vezelig materiaal. Bij een karveel* gehouwd schip worden bijvoorheeld strengen werk* in de naden gedreven met een breeuwijzer [rabat- of kalefaatijzer] en een breeuwhamer.

Bzlikstuk vgl.: furtock,first fi~frock

Inhout* dat deel uitmaakt van een samengesteld spanr*. Meestal krom inhout dat de verbinding tussen vlak en zijde verzorgt en als zodanig de legger* of wrung* verlengt, om op zijn heurt door een oplarzger verlengd te worden. Soms onderscheidt men een recht onderbuikstuk dat tot op de kieI reikt en een krom bovenbuikstuk dat het naar boven toe verlengt.

Dekbalk zie: deckbeam

Dwarsscheepse verbindingsbalk tussen de boorden* waarop een dek rust. Dekbalken die niet de gehele breedte overspannen - bijvoorbeeld ter hoogte van een luik of bij een constructie met klamaaien* - worden halve halken genoemd.

Dekstut zie: stanchion, deck pillar

Stijl of paal ter ondersteuning van een dekhalk. De stijl is n~eestalzowel in de dekbalk als in het constructiedeel waarop hij rust ingelaten. Indien het om een rnidscheepse dekstut onder her eerste of erzige dek gaat is dat meestal het zaathout*.

Deutel zie: dottle

Vierkanten hardhouren wig die in het eind van een treknagel* of pen is geslagen om deze te beklemmen.

Dissel zie: adze

Stuk handgereedschap voor de houtbewerking: Iijkt op een hijl, maar het snijvlak staat haaks op de steel.

Draads hout vgl.: cross grair~

Horit dat volgens natuurlijke vezelstructuur is bewerkt. Loopt het werkstuk uit de draad, dun is her veel minder sterk.

Draaispant zie: cant frame

Spant* in voor- of achterschip dat niet haaks staat op de lengreas van /let schip maar iets naar voren respectievelijk achteren gedraaid om de lijn van de huid* beter te volger~.

Druil [broodrvinner] zie: jigger-mizzen

Klein dr-iehoekig zeil dar op kleine schepen gevoerd wordt op een mast die tegen de achtersteven is geplaatst.



Dubbeling zie: sheathing

Bekleding die op de huid* is aangebracht onz deze te beschermen, met name tegen aangroei eri aantasting door organismen als paalworm [Teredo Navalis]. De dubbeling karz van hout zijn, maar ook van metaalplaat.

Duig zie: stave

Elk derplankjes waaruit een vat of klrip is opgebouwd.

Duim vgl.: inch

Lengtemaat; in dit rapport komt de Engelse duim [25,4 mm] regelmatig voor.

Fokkemast vgl.: foremast

Voorste mast bij schepen met drie of meer masten en bij schepen met twee masten waarvari de achterste de glnte mast is [briktuig*, schoenertuig*].

Gang zie: strake

Strook in de beplanking van een schip, bestaarlde uit een of meer, in elkaars verlengde liggende, delen.

Gegroeid hout zie: grown timber

Hout waarvan groeikenmerken als een kronime drand of vertakkingen zijn benut; behalve op kronzmers kan de term dus ook van toepassing zijn op constructiedelen nzet eerz scherpe hoek zoals wrangen en knieen.

Half houtje zie: dutchman

Stukje hout dat bij benadering tot de halve dikte in een plank of deel is ingelateti om een zwakke plek bij te wer-ken; buitenwerks loopt het halve houtje vlak met het gerepareer-de deel.

Hals zie: tack

Voorste onderhoek van een langsscheeps zeil.

Handspaak zie: hand-spike

Houten of ijzeren spaak die aan het ene eind rond is erz aari het andere vierkant; dient om een windas te draaierz en als hefboorn om zware Iasten te tillen en re verplaatsen.

Helrnstok [helmhout] zie: tiller

Houten of rnetalen stok waarmee het roer bediend wordt.

Hennegat zie: helm port

Opening in het achterschip waardor de helnzstok* binnenboord steekt.

Hieling vgl.: heel

Onderste gedeelte van een mast, steng* of boegspriet*. Veelal vierkant bekapt. Ook her onderste gedeelte van een steven* wordt hieling genoemd.

Hoofdtouw zie: shroud

Touw dat voor zijwaartse steun tussen het hoveneincl van een mast en een punt aan het scheepsboord gespannen is.

Huid vgl.: planking

Buitenbeplanking van de romp.

Inhout vgl.: timbers

Algemene benaming voor de st~tkkenhoitt die het geraarnte varz her schip vormen en die zorgen voor het dwarsverband.

Insteker zie: stealer

Taps toelopende huidplank die met name in het voor- en achterschip wordt ingezet warineer de doorloper~degangen een spievormige opening zoctderz laten. Wanneer een gang taps tegen het berghout wegloopt spreekt nzen van een verloren gang.

Jz~ffer zie: dead eye

Blok* zonder schijven; in plaats daarvan zijn drie gateri aangebracht. Het aantal verklaart de benarning.

Karveel zie: car'vel

B o u ~ ~ w i j zwaarbij e elke volgende huidgang glad tegen de onderliggerzde aansluit. De huidgangen zijn zijdelings niet met elkaar verborzderi.

Kattespoor zie: rider

Dwarssckeeps verbanddeel dat 01s extra versteviging boven de inhouten* over- zaathoutX en wegering* is aangebracht.

Keernagel [scheinagel] zie: stopwater.

Nagel die als waterkering is aangebracht in een naad die walerdicht moet zijn, maar die niet of nauwelijks effectief gebreeuwd kan worden, bijvoor.beeld een /as waarvan het ene uiteinde zich binnen- en het andere uiteinde zich buitenboord bevindt. De nagel kan een houten pen zijn, maar ook slechts aan de uiteinden met een korte houten pen zijrz afgepropt. Over de rest van de lengte is het gat dan volgestopt met een under materiaal, bij~~oorbeeld mos en vet. In het laatste geval wordt ook we1 van nzosna~elgesproken.

Kiel zie: keel

Centraal langsscheeps verbanddeel. Deelt het vlak* in tweeen.

Kim vgl: [turn of the] bilge

Overgang tusen vlak* en zijde.

Kimgartg vgl.: bilge planks

Z~laarderuitgevoerde gang* in de huid*, ter hoogte van de kim *.

Kim weger vgl.: bilge planks

Weger* ter hoogte van de kim*.

Klamaai zie: ca/.ling

Langsscheeps verbanddeel in de dekconstructie.

Klamp zie: I . chock, clamp 2 . cleat

I .Algemerie benarning voor klein stuk hout dat dient voor tijdelijke steun of extra verster-king. 2. Een opgezet stuk hout waarop touwen belegd kunnen worden.

Kleden zie: ser.vir~g

Het srrak om~linderzvan touwwerk met een dunne lijn. Het kleden kan worden voor.afgegaan door trerzzen* en smarten*

Klirtken vgl.: c1er1c.h

Wijze van zekeren van een metalen nagel of bout waarbij het eirlde met een klinkhamer wordt uitgeslagen tot een kop, a1 dun riiet over een klinkring*.

Klinkrirzg zie: rove

Metalen ring die om her uiteinde van een bout of nagel gelegd ~lordtvoordat daar een kop aari geklonken wordt; soms iets conisclz gevormd om de trekkracht van de klinknagelverbinding te vergroten.

Kl~~ifltout zie: jib-boonz

Op de boegsprietX aangebracht vei.lengstuk.

Klziisgat zie: hawse pipe

Gat in de boeg waardoor een ankerkabel of ankerkettirzg buiten boord geleid wordt.



Kluiverboom vgl.: jib-boom, bow-sprit

Los rondhout*, dat lungs de voorsteven* gevoerd ~ ~ o len dt waarmee het aaizgrijpingspunt van de voor.zeilen verder naar voren wordt gebracht.

Knie zie: I . knee 2. crook

I . Houten of ijzeren verbanddeel met een sckerpe hoek. 2 . Stuk stamhout met vertakking dat geschikt is om eel1 knie o f een wrang* van te maken. Het stan~gedeelten~ordtlijf genoetnd, het takgedeelte tak.

Kous [touwkous] zie: thimble

Houten of metalen oog dat ingespitst n~ordtin torru~n~erk teneinde een sterk en slijtvast aangrijl)iti,psprrntte creeren.

Kraallijst zie: moulding

Decoratief randje langs de zijkant v a ~ een i plank of balk.

Krommer zie: compass timber

Van nature krom gegroeid /?outclat geht.~riktis voor een krom constructiedeel; veel sterker dun een identiek ,qevormd deel dat uit recht gegroeid hout gerzomen is.

Kruisklamp zie: chock

BIok hout dat ter aanvulling van de spanten worclt gebruikt. Is het netjes met borsten gelast dun kan men ook van slerrtelstuk spreken.

Las zie: scarf joint

Houtverbinding tussen twee delen die nagenoeg in hetzelfcle vlak liggen.

Legger vgl.: floor

Recht inhout, dwarsscheeps over de kiel* geplaatst. Is een dergelijk inhout* niet recht omdat het vlak* daarvoor ter plaatse te veel tilling* keeft, dati sprekeri wij van n~rang*.

Lijfhout zie: margin plank

Buitenste dekplank, meestal iets d i k k e ~uitgevoerd.

Loggat zie: limber hole

Uitsparing in de inhoutenY op het vlak* voor het door~lnte~i van water.

Lopend want zie: running rigging

Het totaal van touwen en blokken dat gehrrrikt ~ ~ o rom dt rondhouten* en zeilen te hijsen en te strijken.

Loze kiel zie: shoe

Opgezet deel aan de onderzijcle van de kiel* dat hij slijtage eenvoudig vervangen kan worden.

Luchten vgl.: [room and] space, spurket

Ruimten tussen de spanten.

Luik zie: hatch

Opening in her dek waardoor men toegang heeft tot de daaronder gelegen ruimte.

Luikhoofd zie: coaming

Opstaande rand om een luikgat.

Mastspoor vgl.: step

Steunpunt voor het ondereind van een mast, veelal znJaal.blok met eetz rechthoekig gat ojivel rechthoekig gat in het zaathout*.

Oplanger vgl.: futtock

Staand inhout* dat dient tot verlenging van andere inhouten in een sarnengesteld spant.

Overnaads vgl.: clinker

Bouwwijze waarbij elke volgende huidgang de onderliggende overlapt.

Opgang zie: companio~iway

Ladder of trap tussen een dek en de daaronder gelegen ruimte; ruimer ook een luik dat voor personen bedoeld is en niet voor lading.

Pal zie: pawl

Pen of klamp om een spil* of rad te blokkeren wanneer het onder spanning staat. De pal wordt daartoe acizter- CCn van de paltanden op het spil gezet.

Pen zie: treenail

Zie treknagel.

Pen- en gatverbinding zie: mortise and tenon joint

Ho~~tverbinding waarbij een nok aan het ene deel is ingelaten in een uitsparing in het andere deel.

Putting zie: chain plate

Stuk scheepsbeslag dat dient on1 het spanmechanisme van een hoofdtouw* met het scheepsboord te verbinden.

Rantsoenhout zie: fashion piece

Het achterste spant* van een schip dat met een platte achterkant [spiegel] is gebouwd. Het sluit aan op de achtersteven* en de hekbalk [zie worp].

Rondlzout zie: spar

Algenzene benaming voor de ronde stukken hout die in de tidigage worden verwerkt zoals bijvoorbeeld masten, stengen, ra's, gieken, gaffels en bomen.

Ruim zie: hold

Het onderste gedeelte van de inwendige ruimte van een schip. Het ruim begint onder het [onderste] dek. Het onderruim of onderste gedeelte daarvan wordt in het Engels aangeduid met bilge.

Ruimbalk zie: hold bean1

Dwarsscheepse ve~.bindingsbalktussen de boorden* die door het ruinz loopt en waarop geen dek rust.

Schaapskop zie: ram's head block

ECnschij~sblokdat wordt gebruikt als onderblok van een take1 waalmee een voorzeil wordt gehesen en dat tevens dienst doet onz de bovenste punt van het zeil [de kop] voldoende sprei te geven. Het is daartoe voorzien van twee haken die het blok* wanneer men het o~ndraaithet aanzien van de kop van een ram geven.

Schaarstok vgl.: side-binding strake

Zwaar uitgevoede dekgang, in de dekbalken* ingelaten, m.n. lungs luikizoofden*.

Scheergang zie: sheer strake

* iets dikker uitgevoer-d. Bovenste gang* van de h ~ ~ i dveelal

Scheg zie: I . skeg

I . De driehoek die bestaat uit kiel*, achtersteven* en slemphout*. 2. De driehoek die voor de voorsteven* het galjoen en de boegspriet ondersteunt.

Schoener zie: schoener

Langsscheeps getuigd schip met twee masten waarvan de achterste de grote mast is.

Schoor zie: shore

Paal of balk die tijdens de bouw als stut onder een of ander constructie-element wordt geplaatst.


Schrank [bok, bokkepoot] zie: sheers

Eenvoudig hijswerktuig bestaande uit twee of drie palen met daartussen een takel.

Sent zie: ribband

Strooklat* die aan de buitenzijde op de inhouten* wordt aangebracht en die tevens dienst doet om deze tijdens de bouw op hun plaats te houden.

Slemphout zie: deadwood

Langsscheeps verbanddeel in het voor- of acliterschip dat kiel* en steven* naar binnerz toe aanvult tot een massief geheel.

Smarten zie: parcelling

Het omwinden van touwwerk met stvoken zeildoek. Na het smarten wordt het touw gekleed*.

Snauw zie: snow

Brik* waarbij achter de grote mast op eel7 hr~lpmasteen langsgetuigd snauwzeil wordt gevoerd.

Spant zie: I . frame 2. section

I . Dwarsscheeps verbanddeel, it e'en of nteer inlio~lterr opgebouwd; 2. Dwarsscheepse doorsnede.

Spant van oprichting zie: framed timbers

Spant [ I ] dat in het begin van de bouw wordt opgericht, te onderscheiden van een spant van aanvulling.

Spantafstand zie: room and space

Afstand tussen vergelijkbare vlakken in opeenvolgende spanten.

Spil zie: windlass

Horizontale windas voor het hieuwen van a17ker.sof het bedienen van I-ondhouten* als ra's. Her spil wordt bedielid met handspaken* die in vierkante uitsparingen wo~.deiigestoken. Een ankerspil in de boeg wordt veelal braadspil genoe~nd.

Spilklamp zie: whelp

Vervangbare rib op de trommel van een spil of kaapstander:

Spijker zie: spike

Vierkant gesmede nagel.

Spijkerpen zie: plug

Houten pennetje waarmee een spijkergat is afqedicht, in het bijzonder spijkergaten die zijn ontstaan door tijdelijke bevestigingen tijdens de bouw.

Spuikoker zie: scupper pipe

Koker die van een dek door het hoord voert om water te lozen.

Staand want zie: standing rigging

Gedeelte van de tuigage* dat dient om de masten re ondersteunen. In het bijzonder nlordt de zijrlelir~~se ondersteuning waarvan de hoofdtouwen* I~etbelang~.ijkste onderdeel zijn ook we1 als want aangeduid.

Stag zie: stay

Draad of touw dat een nlast naar voren of achteren steunt.

Steng zie: top mast

Rondhout dar dient om een mast re verlengen.

Steven vgl.: stem

Opgaande voortzetting van de kiel* ofwel opgaande balk, waarop de boorden* te zamen komen.

Strooklat vgl.: ribband

Buigzame lat die tijdens de bouw wordt gebruikt om strokende lijnen en een vloeiende rompvorm te bereiken.

Stuik zie: butt [joint]

Aansluiting tussen [wee recht of sckuin afgezaagde delerz van een gang* of dergelijke waarbij de delen elkaar niet overlappen; soms versterkt met een opgezet stuk.

Stut I . Zie dekstut*. 2 . Bovenste oplanger* in een samengesteld zie: I . stanclziotz 2. top timber spant*. Teen vgl.: heel

01zder.stegedeelte van een opgaand inhout*

Tilling zie: deadrise

Mate waarin het vlak* zijwaarts omhoogkomt.

Driehoekige lat die in de lengterichting tussen de leggers* en de zat~dstrook*aangebracht is om deze Iaatste wanneer deze varzuit de sponning* in de kiel* enige tilling* heeft meer steun te geven. Wanneer tlrssen kiel en tingel enige ruimte is gehouden zijn tevens loggaten* verkregen zonder verzwakking van de leggers. Tonnemaat zie: tonnage

De inhoudsmaat waarmee het laadvermogen van koopvaardijschepen wordt aangeduid. Van oudsher zijn er twee systemen, een inhoudsmaat en eel7 gewichtsmaat. Engeland hoorde bij de landen waar een it7houdsmaat werd gehanteerd, terw~ijlin de Nederlanden de gen~ichtsmaatwerd aangehouden. Bij oor.logsschepen wordt get-ekend met tonnen waterve~~laatsing, het eigen gewicht dus. In Engeland kwam de inhoudsmaat oorspronkelijk overeen met het aantal wijnvaten [tuns] dat kon worden gestuwd. De formules waarmee de tonnemaat werd berekend hielden in dat de klellengte, de wijdte en de holte met elkaar werden vernzenigvuldigd, waarna her produkt werd gedeeld door een getal dat rvnd de 100 lag. De regel die gold tussen 1773 en 1836 was op dat principe gebaseerd, waarbij voor het meten van zonlel de wijdte als de lengte bijzondere regels golden en de deler 94 was. Het was een onnauwkeurige methode, waarbij geen rekening werd gehouden met de rompvorm. In 1836 werden de voorschriften aanzienlijk gecompliceerder: Vanaf dat moment moesten veel meer maten genomen worden. In de Luge Landen volgde men van oudsher het Noordeuropese systeern waarin de draagkracht in lasten werd gebruikt, een gewichtsmaat van graan, bij benadering 4.000 ponden. Vanaf de I7e eeuw werd her aantal lasten eveneens berekend door lengte, wijdte en 11oltemet elkaar te vermenigvuldigen en te dele11door een factor die van scheepstype tot scheepstype verschilde. De factor werd proefondervindelijk vastgesteld door 66n schip van een bepaald type af te laden met kanonskogels van bekend ge~liclzten vervolgens op alle schepen van dat type toegepast. 111 1819 girzg men over tot de tonnemaat, waarvoor een conzplese meetmethode werd voorgeschr-even [Tideman 1861, 359-3631, In her intel.natlonale verkeer- werden tonnen en lastetz aan de hand van vuistr-egels geconverteerd. Bij betladering geldt: e'en last is twee ton.

Travelaar [loopring] zie: tra\leller

Ring die ruim om een boegspr-iet*, kluifhout*, of kluiverboom* ~ ~ ael7 s tmet behulp waarvan het aangrijpingspunt [de hals] van een voorzeil naar voren, resp. naar achferen kan worden gebracht.



Treknagel [pen] zie: treenail

Houten pen door middel waarvan constr.uctiedele~zniet elkaar worden verbonden.

Trenzen zie: worming

Het leggen van eeii dur~neIijrz tusseri de streizgen van geslagen touwwerk om dit een gladder boitenoppervlak re geven \~oor.dat ket wordt gesmart* en gekleed*.

Tuigage zie: rigging

Het totaal van rondhouten*, zeileti, loperid* en staatidX want.

Verscherven zie: shift

zo georzlend De delen van de hlrid- of dekbeplanking ~~orclen dat de stcriken* in aatisluiterzde gangen;':niet te zelfr(e1.hoogte vallen.

Vioolblok zie:fiddle block

Tweescl?ijfsblok waarvan de schijven niet dezelfde rliameter hebben en in hetzelfde vlak op twee evenwijdige assen zijn gemonteerd. Het blok" heeft Izet aanzien van een viool.

Vlak vgl.: bilge

Dee1 van de huidX dat de bodem van het schip o or nit.

Volschip vgl.: ship rig

Vierkant getuigd schip met drie of meet. master^.

Voorsteven zie: stem

Zie steven

Vullinggang zie: limber str-ake

Eerste gang* van de wegering* naast het zaathout*.

Vullingplank zie: limber board

Losliggende afdekplank van de wate~.loop*.

Want vgl.: rigging

Zie lopend en in het bijzoncler staand want

Waterloop zie: linzber

Dicht lungs de kiel" zijn de ruiniteri tussen de inhouten" cloorloggaten* vel.bonden tot de waterloop waarin zic.11het lekujater verzamelt.

Waterloopsklos zie: waterway

La~zgsscheepsverbanddeel dat ener-zijds als bovenafsliriting van het boord en anderzijds als buitenste deel van het delc fungeert. Her lijfhout* sl~niterop aan. De naam is ontleericl aan de goot die er mirz of meer in is uitgespaatzl.

Weger vgl. :stringer

Langsscheeps verbanddeel, aan cle binnenzijde over de inhouten* bevestigd.

Wegering zie: ceiling

Beplanking van de binnenzijde v a ~cle i i~ilio~~teti:~.

Werk [breeuwwerk] zie: oakum

Tot strengen ineengedraaid breeuw*-mater.iaa1, veelal uitgeplozen touw.

Wrang vgl.: floor, crutch

Krom of V-vorniig ilzhout*, dwiarsscheeps over kiel* of steveiiX geplaatst.

Worp [spiegelwrang] zie: tr.arisom

Dwarsscheepse horizontale balk die over de achtersteven geplaatst is en het spantwerk van de spiegel vormt. De bovenste worp wordt hekbalk genoemd.

Worpknie [slaper] zie: sleeper

Knie die de verbinding tussen het boord en de worpen versterkt.

Zandstrook zie: garboard [strake]

Eerste gang* aan weerszijden van de kiel*, vaak zwaarder uitgevoerd.

Zaathout zie: keelsorl

Zwaar langsscheeps verbanddeel, boven de kiel* over de inhouten* bevestigd.

Zitter vgl.: futtock, first futtock

Kr-om inhout* dat de verbinding tussen vlak* en boord verzorgt. Het liggende eind reikt niet tot over de kiel*.

Zwieping zie: cross-pall

Plank die tijdens de bouw dwarsscheeps wordt aangebracht tussen de boveneinden van spanten*. Schuin gestelde steunlatten in hetzelfde vlak heten schranklatten. Pas als de dekbalken* zijn aangebracht worden de zwiepingen verwijderd.



Abell, Sir Westcott, 1948,

The Shipwright's Trade. Londen (1981 2).

Adams, J.J., 1985,

Sea Venture 2nd Interim report; part 1. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 14.4,275-299.

Albion, R.G., 1926,

Forests and Sea Power. Cambridge, MA.

Albion, R.G., 1952,

The timber problem in the Royal Navy 1652 - 1868. Mariner's Mirror 38,4-20.

Aniol, R.W., 1983a,

Procedures and statistics in dendrochronology. In: D. Eckstein, S. Wrobel & R.W. Aniol (eds.) Dendrochronology and Archaeology in Europe. Mitteilungen der Bundesforschungsanstalt fur Forst- und Holzwirtschaft 141, 2131.

Aniol, R.W., 1983b,

Tree ring analysis using Catras, Dendrochronologia 1 , 4 5 5 3 ,

Aniol, R.W. and B. Schmidt, Chronology development and analysis. Comment. In: Hughes 1982 et al. (eds.) 1982.


Ashton, T.S. and J. Sykes, 19642,

The Coal Industry of the eighteenth century. Manchester.

Atkinson, F., 1968,

The Great Northern Coalfield 1700 - 1900. London.

Baillie, M.G.L. and J.R. Pilcher, 1973,

A simple crossdating program for tree ring research. Tree ring Bulletin 33,7-14.

Baillie, M.G.L., 1982,

Tree ring dating and archaeology. London.

Baillie, M.G.L., 1983,

Dendrochronology: Accuracy and Limitations. In Eckstein D., S. Wrobel and R.W. Aniol (eds.) Dendrochronology and archaeology in Europe. Mitteilungen der Bundesforschungsanstalt fur Forst- und Holzwirtschaft 141.

Beylen, J. van, 1975,

Zeilvaart Lexicon. Weesp.

Beylen J. van et al. (eds.), 1970-1973,

Maritieme Encyclopedic. Bussum.

Blankley, T.R., 1750,

The Naval Expositor, London.

Bramwell, M., 1976,

The International Book of Wood. London.

The Yorktown Shipwreck Archaeological Project: an interim Broadwater, J.D., report on the excavation of shipwreck 44Y088. International R.M. Adams and M.Renner, Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 14.4, 301-314. 1985,

Cederlund, C.O., 1981,

Vraket vid klvsnabben. Fartygets byggnad. Statens Sjohistoriska Museum, Rapport 14, Stockholm.

Cederlund, C.O., 1982,

Vraket vid Jutholmen. Fartygets byggnad. Statens Sjohistoriska Museum, Rapport 16, Stockholm.

Cederlund, C.O., 1983,

The Old Wrecks of the Baltic Sea. Oxford.

Chapman, F.H., 1768,

Architectura Navalis Mercatoria. Stockholm.

Comte, P. le, 1831,

Afbeeldingen van schepen en vaartuigen in verschillende bewegingen. Amsterdam.

Davis, R., 1972.

The Rise of English Merchant Shipping in the 17th and 18th centuries. Newton Abbot.

Dirkzwager, J.M., 1970,

Dr. B.J. Tideman 1834- 1883. Grondlegger van de moderne scheepsbouw in Nederland. Leiden.

Eckstein, D., 1969,

Beitrag zur Rationalisierung eines dendrochronologischen Verfahrens und zur Analyse seiner Aussagesicherheit. Forstwissenschafftliches Centralblatt. 80, 230-50.

Eckstein, D., 1980,

Dendrochronologische Beitrage zur Datierung der slawischen Besiedlung Ostholsteins In: Bosau, Untersuchung einer Siedlungskammer in Ostholstein IV, 108-1 16.

Eckstein, D. und J. Bauch, 1974,

Dendrochronologie und Kunstgeschichte dargestellt an Gemalden hollandischer und altdeutscher Malerei. Mitteilungen der Deutsche Dendrochronologischen Gesellschaft 67,234-243.

Eckstein, D., S. Wrobel and R.W. Aniol (eds.), 1983,

Dendrochronology and archaeology in Europe. Mitteilungen der Bundesforschungsanstalt fiir Forst- und Holzwirtschaft 141.

Falconer, W., 1769,1780,

A Universal Dictionary of the Marine. London.

Falconer, W., 1815,1830,

A New Universal Dictionary of the Marine (edited by W. Burney). London.

Fenwick, V. (ed.), 1976.

The Graveney Boat. Oxford.

Fincham, J., 1851.

A History of Naval Architecture. London.



Finch, R., 1973,

Coals from Newcastle. Lavenham.

Galloway, R.L., 1882,

A History of Coal Mining in Great Britain. Newton Abbot.

Galloway, R.L., 1940, 19712,

Annals of Coal Mining and the Coal Trade. Newton Abbot.

Gemeente Rotterdam et al., 1984,

Projectnota/Milieu-effectrapport.Grootschalige Locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied. Rotterdam.

Gemeente Rotterdam et a1.,1984,

Geotechnisch Onderzoek. Werkgroeprapport in het kader van projectnota/MER Grootschalige Locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied 4. Rotterdam.

Gemeente Rotterdam et a1.,1985,

Grootschalige Locatie voor berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied. Alternatief 111. Optimalisering, veiligheid en stabiliteit. Rotterdam.

Gemeente Rotterdam eta1.,1986,

Vooronderzoek Archeologie. Rapport van de werkgroep archeologisch onderzoek in het kader van de voorbereiding/uitvoering van de aanleg van de Grootschalige Locatie voor de berging van baggerspecie uit het benedenrivierengebied. Rotterdam.

Greenhill, B., 1976,

Archaeology of the Boat. London.

Greenhill, B., 1980,

The Life and Death of the Merchant Sailing Ship. London.

Groenewegen, B., 1789,

Verzameling van vier en tachtig stuks Hollandsche schepen. Rotterdam.

Hallewas, D.P. en J.F. van Regteren Altena,

Bewoningsgeschiedenis en landschapsontwikkeling rond de Maasmond. In: A. Verhulst en M.K.E. Gottschalk (eds.), Transgressies en occupatiegeschiedenis in de kustgebieden van Nederland en Belgie. Gent. 155-207.



Hedderwick, P.,1830,

A Treatise on Marine Architecture. Edinburgh

Hofland, T.H., 1986,

De historisch-geografische informatie. In: Gemeente Rotterdam et al., 1986,29-61.

Holk, A.F.L. van, 1986,

Jaarringonderzoek van scheepsresten. Typescript, Groningen.

Holk, A.F.L. van, 1987,

Jaarringonderzoek van scheepsresten. In: Reinders, R. (ed.) Raakvlakken tussen scheepsarcheologie, maritieme geschiedenis en scheepsbouwkunde. Lelystad.

Hollstein, E., 1965,

Jahrringschronologischen Datierung von Eichenholzern ohne Waldkante, Bonner Jahrrbuch 165, 12-27.

Hollstein, E., 1980,

Mitteleuropaische Eichenchronologie. Trierer dendrochronologische Forschungen zur Archaologie und Kunstgeschichte. Mainz am Rhein. Trierer Grabungen und Forsch~~ngen 11.

Hughes, M.K., S.J. Milson and P.A. Legget, 1981,

Sapwood estimates in the interpretation of tree ring dates. Journal of Archaeological Science, 8, 381-390.

Hutchinson, W., 1777,

A Treatise on Practical Seamanship. 19792 London.

Kaijser, I., 1981,

Vraket vid ~ l v s n a b b e nDokumentation, . Last och Utrustning. Statens Sjohistoriska Museum, Rapport 13, Stockholm.

Kaijser, I., 1983,

Vraket vid Jutholmen. Last och Utrustning. Statens Sjohistoriska Museum, Rapport 17, Stockholm.

Kemp, P.K., 1976,

The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea. London.

Ketting, H., 1979,

Prins Willem. Een zeventiende-eeuwse Oostindievaarder. Bussum.

Klok, R.H.J., 1987,

Archeologie en grote ontwikkelingsprojecten. Cultuurtechnisch tijdschrift 27, 145-153.

Koldam, W. van, H. van der Veen en J.N. Wilkens, 1979,

Veenkoloniale Zeevaart. Veendam.

Konijnenburg, E. van, 1913.

De scheepsbouw vanaf zijn oorsprong. Brussel.

Kuipers, K.J., 1844,

Een Groninger Zeeman in Napoleontische Tijd. Kleine handelsvaart contra Continentaal stelsel. (Reprinted with introduction by Klatter, Zutphen, 1980.)

Lavery, B., 1983,

The Ship of the Line, volume 1. London.

Lavery, B., 1984,

The Ship of the Line, volume 2. London.

Lees, J., 1984,

The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War 1625-1860. London.

Lewis, B., 1971,

Coal Mining in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, London.

Lloyds' Register of Shipping, (annually, London).

Lloyds' List, (annually, London).

Longridge, C.J.N., 1955,

The Anatomy of Nelson's Ships. London.

Loomeyer, F.R., 1980,

Met zeil en treil. De tjalk in binnen- en buitenvaart. Alkmaar.

Loon, F.N. van, 1838,

Handleiding tot den burgerlijken scheepsbouw. Workum.



Louwe Kooijmans, L.P., 1985,

Sporen in het land. De Nederlandse delta in de prehistoric. Amsterdam.

Maarleveld, Th.J., 1982,

1981 een jaar archeologie in Nederlandse wateren. Rijswijk.

Maarleveld, Th.J., 1983,

1982 een tweede jaar archeologie in Nederlandse wateren. Rijswijk.

Maarleveld, Th.J., 1989.

Marine archaeology and the planning of large-scale sandextraction. An example from the Netherlands. In: G. Trotzig and G. Vahlne (eds), Archaeology and society. Stockholm. 247-255.

MacCregor, D.R., 1973,

Fast Sailing Ships. Lymington.

MacCregor, D.R., 1984a,

Merchant Sailing Ships 1815-1850. London.

MacCregor, D.R., 1984b,

Merchant Sailing Ships 1850-1875. London.

MacCregor, D.R., 1985,

Merchant Sailing Ships 1775-1815. London.

McCowan, A.P., 1981,

Tiller and Whipstaff. London.

McCowan, A.P., 1980,

The Century before Steam. London.

McKee, J.E.G., 1976,

Identification of timbers from old ships of north-western European origin. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 5.1, 3-12.

Martin, C.J.M., 1978,

The Dartmouth An English Frigate Wrecked off Mull in 1690. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 7.1,29-58.

Mechelen, P.A.A. van, 1929,

Zeevaart en zeehandel van Rotterdam. Rotterdam.

Murray, A., 1863,

Ship-Building in Iron and Wood. Edinburgh.

Nef, J.U., 1932,

The Rise of the British coal Industry. Volumes 1, 2. London.

Niessen, A.C.H.M., 1986,

De geologische informatie. In: Gemeente Rotterdam et al., 1986. 11-27.

Normann, @., 1987,

Het Oostvoornse wrak. Onderzoek van een scheepsrestant in het Oostvoornse Meer, uitgevoerd door Nederlandse sportduikers. Lelystad.

Richardson, T., 1833,

Mercantile Marine Architecture. London.

Rule, M., 1982,

The Mary Rose. The Excavation and Raising of Henry VIII's Flagship. London.

Salaman, R.A., 1975,

Dictionary of tools: used in the woodworking and allied trades c. 1700-1970. London.

Schiittenhelm, R.T.E., 1980,

The superficial geology of the Dutch sector of the North Sea. Marine Geology 34, M27-M37.

Seppings, Sir R., 1820,

On a new Principle of Constructing Ships in the Mercantile Navy. Philosophical Transactions. (Proceedings of the Royal Society) London.

Smith, A.H.V. and M.A. Butterworth, 1967,

Miospores in the Coal Seams of the Carboniferous of Great Britain. Special papers in palaeontology 1. London.

Sneller, Z.W., 1946,

Geschiedenis van den Steenkolenhandel van Rotterdam. Groningen.

Steel, D., 1805,18223,

The Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture. London

Sutherland, W., (1729 edition)

Britain's Glory: or Ship-Building unvail'd. London.

Sutherland, W., 1776',

The ship-Builder's Assistant, or Marine Architecture. London.

Tideman, B.J., 1861,

Woordenboek van Scheepsbouw. Vlissingen.

Trierum, M.C. van, and H.E. Henkes (eds.), 1986,

Rotterdam Papers V. A contribution to prehistoric, and medieval archaeology. Rotterdam.

Trueman, A., 1954,

The Coalfields of Great Britain. London.

Unger, R.W., 1978,

Dutch shipbuilding before 1800: ships and guilds. Amsterdam.

Verhart, L.B.M., 1988,

Mesolithic barbed points and other implements from Europoort, The Netherlands. Oudheidkundige Mededelingen van het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden 68, 145-194.

Vervoort-Kerkhoff, Y. and T. van Kolffschoten, 1988,

Pleistocene and Holocene mammalian faunas from the Maasvlakte near Rotterdam (The Netherlands). Mededelingen van de Werkgroep voor Tertiaire en Kwartaire Geologic, Vol. 25. 87-98.

Verwey, G., 1983,

Geschiedenis van Nederland. Amsterdam.

Zagwijn, W.H. en C.J. van Staalduinen, 1975,

Toelichting bij geologische overzichtskaarten van Nederland. Haarlem.



It is a clear thing that an archaeological endeavour like the one that was undertaken as part of the Slufter project is fully dependent on the cooperation of many. In the preparatory phase the working party and the last author were greatly assisted by the ad hoc consultative body for the archaeological survey of the Slufter area, in which a great many disciplines were enthusiastically represented by: Prof. Dr. G.J. Borger [University of Amsterdam] Historical Geography Kap1.t.z. b.d. H. Dekker Offshore and underwater engineering Ir. F.A. Dongen [Public Works Department, North Sea Directorate] Offshore surveying P. van Empelen [Prins Hendrik Maritime Museum] Public Relations, History, Seafaring and Rotterdam D.P. Hallewas [State Service for Archaeological Investigation] Archaeology, archaeological heritage management C . Hoek [Bureau for Archaeological Investigations in the Rotterdam area] Archaeology, Historical Geography C. Laban [Geological Survey of the Netherlands] Marine Geology K.A.H.W. Leenders [Province of South-Holland] Historical-Geography, Urban and rural planning Prof. H.H. Regreren Altena [University of Amsterdam] Medieval and Post-medieval archaeology L.B.M. Verhart [University of Leiden] Prehisory, Mesolithic research Dr.M.D. de Weerd [University of Amsterdam] Archaeology As soon as it came to implementation it was Peter Stassen of W.V.C. who shifted a lot of

work. Later on he amongst other things carried out the wood species analysis. Of incredible importance of course was the broad support encountered during the field work phase of the research. First to be mentioned is the on-site assistance given by the direction represented in particular by Arie de Bode and Rien van Zetten, and the contractor, mr. Frank Broekhoven and their very, very extensive crews, of which the crews of the surveying vessels and the smallcraft that served as diving platform merit special mention as no significant on-site work could have been carried out without them. The same does apply for the volunteer archaeological divers Jef van den Akker, Aad van Es, Boudewijn Goudswaard, Arent Vos, Jos van Wolde and the Ecuador team from Terschelling. Many others assisted in transport and facilities for temporary storage. Mourik Services B.V. from Groot-Ammers put a container at our disposal and whenever necessary we got assistance from the local Rijkswaterstaat group under mr. A. Jans. In the post-excavational research, analysis and assessment it proved possible to rely on the particular knowledge and skills of many others far and near. Some carried out technical analyses or discernable parts of research or artefact treatment and their results have been entered into the text. Others have been as vital by giving general back up, essential information or a cross-checking of ideas. With the risk forgetting some we would like to credit the following persons in no particular order. Dr. W.A. Casparie and Dr. P. Baas who assisted P. Stassen in wood analysis. Mr. D. Duco who commented on clay pipes. Mr. Bas Kist of the Rijksmuseum and Charles Hull, curator of the worshipful Company of Pewterers in London for their help with respect to porcelain and pewter. Rob Oosting of the Ketelhaven Institute for comments on ship construction. Cathy Giangrande, Royal Amouries, Tower of London for the analysis of Copper Alloys. John Evans, North East London Polytechnic for the analysis of Caulking and Luting. The Yorkshire Regional Laboratory of British

Coal, Rotheram, in particular Dr. A.V.H. Smith and Pamela Spriggs. Pat Leggat, Jennifer Hillam and Ian Oxley. David McGregor, MA, FSA, FRHists who commented on many aspects of the ship from SL 4. The Director and staff of the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich and the Prins Hendrik Maritime Museum, in particular the librarians who were of great help. Jerzy Gawronski and the archaeological team of the Stichting V.O.C. Schip Amsterdam for the loan of a computer and printer and Marjan Paardekoper and Chris Vastenhoud for help in conservation, software and computing. Furthermore much useful comment and advice was received from David Lyon, Brian Lavery, Colin Martin and Robert Prescott, Carl Olof Cederlund, Peter Barrie and Axel Lindberg. Gert van de Hof made some of the drawings, Kester Keighley helped in many ways and last but not least we would like to credit the assistance of Jan Pauptit, photographer of the Leiden University Institute for Prehistory [IPL] who called forth his highly professional skills in all phases of research and report production.

COLOPHON DESIGN Tel Design, The Hague Stephan van Rijt Paul Vermijs DESKTOP PUBLISHING Tel Design, The Hague Niels Poppe with Peter Dees Martijn Hazelzet PRINTING AND BINDING GDR, Rotterdam


Adams, J., van Holk, A. F. L., Maarleveld, T. (1990). Dredgers and Archaeology. Shipfinds from the Slufter. Alphen aan den Rijn.


Adams, J., van Holk, A. F. L., Maarleveld, T. (1990). Dredgers and Archaeology. Shipfinds from the Slufter. Alphen aan den Rijn.