Atlantis Online
November 22, 2017, 12:31:26 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Giant crater may lie under Antarctic ice
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn9268
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

BLACKBEARD - Recovering "Queen Anne's Revenge"

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: BLACKBEARD - Recovering "Queen Anne's Revenge"  (Read 8569 times)
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #30 on: December 08, 2008, 04:13:09 pm »









                      JUSTIFICATION FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF QUEEN ANNE'S REVENGE






Although the identity of Beaufort Inlet shipwreck 31CR314 cannot yet be positively established, archaeologists are fairly confident that the site represents the remains of Blackbeard's flagship Queen Anne's Revenge. Mounting circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that the site is in the correct location, and the vessel is the appropriate size and was carrying the right arms and equipment. The artifact assemblage dates the wreck to the proper time period, artifacts compare well with a contemporary pirate vessel, and historical records lack any other candidate vessel lost in the area that has not already been disqualified.

By comparing historical and modern charts, researchers have determined that the Beaufort Inlet shipwreck is located in the vicinity of the offshore bar near the entrance to the early-eighteenth-century channel. The site location corresponds favorably to historical accounts of the loss of Queen Anne's Revenge. During questioning in Charleston, David Harriot, who sailed with Blackbeard, deposed that "the said Thatch's ship Queen Anne's Revenge run a-ground off of the Bar of Topsail Inlet." Harriot's account is corroborated by Royal Navy captain Ellis Brand of HMS Lyme, who wrote:

On the 10 June or thereabouts a large pyrate Ship of forty Guns with three Sloops in her company came upon the coast of North carolina ware they endeavour'd To goe in to a harbour, call'd Topsail Inlett, the Ship Stuck upon the bar att the entrance of the harbour and is lost.
The small portion of the shipwreck's hull structure examined in 1998 provides additional evidence. Frame size and spacing in relation to plank size indicates that the original vessel was not heavily built, as would be expected of naval construction during that period. This conflicts with the vessel's heavily armed profile evidenced by the presence of at least eighteen carriage-mounted cannons and accompanying ordnance. A tempting conclusion is that the shipwreck represents a merchantman that was overarmed, as was the case with Concorde, reportedly overequipped with guns by Blackbeard after its capture. Unfortunately, historical records have not yet provided a clear understanding of the size, classification, or country of origin for Concorde. It is, however, relatively certain that the ship captured by Blackbeard was a 200- to 300-ton vessel. The three anchors closely associated with the shipwreck are the size rated for a ship ranging from 250 to 350 tons. The size of the deadeyes, calculated from the iron strops found on the site, also fit a vessel of that size.

Based on the date that appears on the bell (Figure 13), researchers have narrowed their search for shipwrecks in the Cape Lookout area to a one-hundred-year period beginning in 1709. The majority of artifacts recovered from the Beaufort Inlet shipwreck date the site to the first quarter of the eighteenth century. A bronze bell dated 1709, ceramics and glassware that fit within dated typologies, pewterware produced by craftsmen known to have worked in London from the 1690s to the 1730s, a blunderbuss barrel that was proofed between 1672 and 1702, and surveying instruments that are illustrated in a contemporary treatise published in 1723, all effectively date the site to the appropriate period.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2008, 04:14:31 pm »










The absence of carronades, a type of naval cannon in wide use by the first quarter of the nineteenth century, supported by the lack of creamwares, a predominant pottery type by the Revolutionary War, strongly suggests that the shipwreck dates to before the nineteenth century. The search for ship candidates that match the Beaufort Inlet wreck has been thorough, and eleven vessels sunk during the eighteenth century were located in the literature. Since none were military vessels and the majority were small, lightly armed or unarmed merchant ships, only Blackbeard's flagship Queen Anne's Revenge was large enough or contained the armament suggested by the historical and archaeological evidence.





Figure 13. A bronze bell dated 1709 was the first artifact to indicate the date of the wreck.

 

The Whydah Galley, under the command of the pirate Sam Bellamy, was lost off Cape Cod in 1717. In 1982 the ship was located, excavated, and reported in three volumes. Whydah Galley and Concorde/Queen Anne's Revenge were remarkably alike in a number of ways. Both vessels were similar in size, both were engaged in the African slave trade, and both ended their careers as pirate ships. The artifacts recovered from the Beaufort Inlet wreck, particularly the cannons and munitions, gun parts, wine bottles, ceramics, and pewterware, compare favorably with those found on the Whydah. Some, such as the decorative lead tacks, dividers, serpentine side plate, and grenades, are nearly identical.

Perhaps the strongest circumstantial evidence supporting the identity of the Beaufort Inlet shipwreck comes from the smallest of the artifacts so far recovered. Approximately seventy flakes of gold (2 grams) in its natural form were found on the wreck, and several historical accounts place gold dust on board the Concorde. According to Lt. Ernaut, for example, "fourteen ounces of gold in powder" was loaded on board the slaver at Judas on July 8, 1717. Pierre Dosset, captain of the Concorde, claimed that the pirates stole twenty pounds one-ounce of West African gold dust from the officers and crew of the Concorde. Henry Bostock, master of the sloop Margaret, also refers to gold dust on board the pirate vessel: "this deponent further saith that among other riches he believed they had much gold dust on board."
« Last Edit: December 08, 2008, 04:15:41 pm by Bianca » Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2008, 04:16:53 pm »









                                          DESCRIPTION OF THE PROTECTED AREA






The North Carolina state historic preservation officer has determined that site 31CR314, which represents the remains of Queen Anne's Revenge, is historically significant on a local, state, and national level and is therefore eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. On March 3, 1997, DCR Secretary Betty Ray McCain designated the Queen Anne's Revenge site a protected area (Appendix D). That designation applies to the shipwreck and the surrounding sea floor within 300 yards of the site. North Carolina General Statute 121-23 grants the department title to and management authority for lost and abandoned vessels in state waters. Furthermore, DCR has the authority to designate as protected areas certain abandoned shipwrecks and underwater artifacts of primary scientific, archaeological, or historical value as set forth in North Carolina Administrative Code T07 04R.1009. The designation also calls for the development of a management plan to guide all access, recovery, and conservation of Queen Anne's Revenge and dictates that all artifacts shall be kept as an intact collection in an appropriate repository.

The protected area, marked by a white buoy, lies 1.2 nautical miles off Fort Macon and is to be avoided by all vessels. Surveillance equipment consisting of land-based radar, infrared video cameras, and human observers constantly monitors the site. Unauthorized diving or anchoring in that area is strictly prohibited by law, and violators are subject to arrest by the Carteret County Sheriff's Department. Vessels or dive gear may be confiscated upon arrest, and criminal and civil penalties may be assessed in accordance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (NCGS 70-15,16,17).
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2008, 04:19:23 pm »









                                                  PRESERVATION OPTIONS






This management plan provides options for the protection, preservation, and development of the Queen Anne's Revenge site. The development of those options was based on the DCR's current understanding of the site after two years of study, as well as a review of archaeological investigations and protective measures for other shipwreck sites throughout the world. Two projects that were particularly useful were the recent investigations of the Emanuel Point shipwreck, sunk in 1559 inside Pensacola Bay, Florida, and La Belle, lost in 1686 off the coast of Texas. The recently developed management plan compiled by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for the USS Monitor, another significant shipwreck lying off the North Carolina coast, was also extremely useful.

The advantages, disadvantages, necessary activities, and cost estimates accompany a discussion of each preservation option for Queen Anne's Revenge. Included in the appendixes are detailed proposals concerning archaeological recovery, the conservation facility, and the staff needed to support a full-scale recovery of site 31CR314.






Nonintervention



This option is provided should funding and resources be unavailable to enable research on and protection of Queen Anne's Revenge to be conducted through the current surveillance and monitoring arrangement. The DCR would continue to oversee the shipwreck site as it does all submerged archaeological sites in state waters, primarily responding on a reactionary and/or public-request basis. This option could allow private or university research teams an opportunity to conduct limited studies on the shipwreck as part of the underwater permitting system.






Advantages



1. No additional commitments are necessary.

Disadvantages

1. The exposed portions of Queen Anne's Revenge will continue to be susceptible to natural deterioration, including catastrophic affects from storms and continued biological and chemical degradation.

2. Without proper surveillance and periodic site monitoring, an accelerated loss of cultural material and archaeological information is expected through illegal human activities (i.e., anchoring, fishing, looting).

3. Fund-raising efforts, educational opportunities, and benefits from tourism would be dramatically reduced; public perception would be that the state does not consider Queen Anne's Revenge an important cultural resource.






Action Required:

None. The department would include management of the shipwreck under its current underwater permitting system.



Estimated cost:

None. This option requires no additional funding.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2008, 04:21:36 pm »









In Site Preservation (burial)






This option involves covering the exposed portions of Queen Anne's Revenge to diminish its deterioration and the likelihood of damage from storms and human interference. Although a variety of covering agents such as plastic mats or rocks can be used, the simplest method would be to deposit sand on the shipwreck from the surrounding area. A system of reference stakes placed across the site would provide a means of determining how much sand remains over the site at any given time.






Advantages



1. Exposed and slightly buried remains of Queen Anne's Revenge would be protected from an oxygenated marine environment, strong currents, anchors, divers, and commercial fishermen.

2. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducts annual maintenance dredging of Beaufort Inlet, and sand from that operation may be available to cover the site.

3. This option would minimize damage and loss at the site through a vigorous program of surveillance, monitoring, and stabilization or recovery.

4. Project staff would be available to continue conservation and analysis of the backlog of artifacts that have been previously recovered from the site.

5. This option may be very cost effective since the staff will be able to identify and solicit funding for future research, a conservation facility, and public exhibition space.





Disadvantages



1. Queen Anne's Revenge would remain exposed and therefore susceptible to impacts from natural and human agents.

2. The long-term maintenance of a sophisticated radar, video surveillance system, and site-marker buoy would require constant upkeep, as well as contracts for repairs and law enforcement.

3. If excavations extend over a long period of time and there are personnel changes, the collection of consistent archaeological data may be negatively affected, thus posing major secondary problems for site conservation, protection, and public interpretation.

4. Without a major conservation laboratory dedicated to this project, preservation, analysis, and storage of the Queen Anne's Revenge artifacts would be limited in quantity and size according to the capabilities of the UAU conservation laboratory at Fort Fisher and the temporary laboratory of the NCMM at Gallants Channel in Beaufort.







Action Required -


Three staff members dedicated to the Queen Anne's Revenge project would be required for this option. Office facilities and the temporary conservation laboratory at Gallants Channel would have to be upgraded and supplied. Existing dive equipment and boats will have to be maintained to allow staff to monitor the shipwreck. Contracts for the upkeep and enforcement of the surveillance system will continue. Strategies for long-term study and recovery at Queen Anne's Revenge will need to be developed. A plan for coordinating fund raising efforts within the department and with MRI, participating universities, and other entities will need to be developed.




Estimated Cost-

At the current annual spending level of $250,000 per year.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2008, 04:24:33 pm »









Excavation (large-scale recovery)






This option involves the recovery of all or a large portion of Queen Anne's Revenge's cannons, anchors, hull structure, and associated materials. The majority of those items would be analyzed, conserved, and made available for public display and interpretation. Fieldwork could proceed at varying rates but would depend in large part on the ability to conserve and store recovered materials. Thorough excavation of Queen Anne's Revenge would require the equivalent of several years of continuous field investigations, including artifact and data recovery. Many more years will be needed to conserve and analyze artifacts and report the findings. A staff of permanent archaeologists, conservators, and technicians would be needed, along with vessels, excavation and recovery equipment, office space, and a major conservation laboratory. Volunteer and student labor and supporting equipment will be necessary to complement the main staff.







Advantages:



1. The proper recovery of Queen Anne's Revenge artifacts and archaeological information will avoid further losses from natural or human impacts.

2. Archaeological recovery can proceed in a methodical manner and with an established professional crew that will maximize data recovery.

3. The artifacts and information from Queen Anne's Revenge will be preserved for public study and display.

4. Large-scale excavations would keep public interest at a very high level, provide educational opportunities for a wide audience, and enhance tourism.

5. With the completion of the field portion of this option, surveillance and monitoring would no longer be necessary.






Disadvantages:



1. This option will require significant funding to construct and staff the conservation lab and to support full-scale archaeological excavations.

2. Archaeological excavations will dismantle and, in effect, destroy the site. If the highest archaeological standards are not adhered to, irreplaceable information concerning Queen Anne's Revenge will be lost.

Action Required - Nine staff members dedicated to the Queen Anne's Revenge project would be required for this option. Funds would have to be obtained for the planning, excavation, and conservation phases. Detailed plans addressing the equipment, recovery, conservation, curation, and display of materials for Queen Anne's Revenge will need to be developed. Federal and state permits will have to be obtained. Contracts for upkeep and enforcement related to the surveillance system will be necessary until the project is completed.






Estimated Cost -

Current estimates for the implementation of this option call for $900,000 for the first year and $643,000 for several years thereafter. Cost estimates for a new conservation laboratory to be built at Gallants Channel range from $1 to $2.5 million, depending on final size and design.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2008, 04:26:22 pm »









                            CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING PRESERVATION OPTIONS






Many factors affect decisions concerning Queen Anne's Revenge and how it should be protected, preserved, and developed. Underwater archaeological investigations often require perseverance, flexibility, and ingenuity to arrive at a satisfactory end product. Working in the unpredictable and unstable ocean environment near Beaufort Inlet will test investigators' abilities to record and collect accurate scientific data. This concern for detail does not end when leaving the site but, to the contrary, just begins for the large body of artifacts from Queen Anne's Revenge. Those materials are generally delicate, variable in condition, and are almost always contained in cementlike concretions. It will be a challenge to properly separate, stabilize, preserve, and document the artifacts, and prepare them for exhibit or store them for future study. When making decisions about Queen Anne's Revenge, site managers will be obliged to take into account the following considerations:




 

Archaeological/Technological



Maintaining a high degree of archaeological control and accuracy while recording and recovering materials from Queen Anne's Revenge is of utmost importance. All artifacts must be thoroughly documented through mapping and photography, and then properly tagged, cataloged, and curated after recovery. All work must be conducted under the direction of trained archaeologists and conservators and should proceed at a methodical pace. Archaeology supervisors, in consultation with dive safety officers and equipment managers, must have the authority to delay or halt operations that threaten to compromise the accurate or safe recovery of artifacts and archaeological information from Queen Anne's Revenge.

A long-term excavation plan must be developed to focus research and maximize results. Whether excavations are carried out over a few years or decades, an archaeological recovery plan must first be established. While that plan will provide a guideline for research, it should remain flexible to accommodate changing site conditions, new technologies, and availability of funding and resources. Investigations at Queen Anne's Revenge should incorporate a wide variety of interdisciplinary studies to heighten analysis and findings. Furthermore, prior to entering the field, archaeologists need to consider what questions can be asked about the vessel, its loss and subsequent deterioration, shipboard life and how information can be gathered to best answer those questions. While the specifics of an archaeological recovery plan remain to be developed, a framework for this plan can be found in Appendix A.

Excavation and recovery of materials from Queen Anne's Revenge do not pose insurmountable difficulties, although working in the Atlantic Ocean will always present certain problems. Days lost to unworkable conditions and disruption from major storms are to be expected. It will be a challenge to maintain archaeological controls while excavating artifacts from a fluid sand bottom 20 feet below the water's surface. The retrieval of artifacts will not be easy since they vary both in type and material, as well as in size ranging from gold specks to iron objects weighing a ton or more. The technology currently exists, however, to record and recover the cultural remains from Queen Anne's Revenge according to vigorous archaeological standards. Options that involve burial or backfilling are also quite feasible. While the technology exists to complete the full recovery of Queen Anne's Revenge, success depends on a well-thought-out plan, proper equipment, an experienced crew, scheduling flexibility, and the patience to take advantage of good weather.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2008, 04:27:40 pm »









Conservation/Curation



While several thousand artifacts have already been recovered from Queen Anne's Revenge, the number thus far has been limited by the need for a proper conservation facility. The existing UAU laboratory at Fort Fisher, along with the NCMM's maritime archaeology conservation laboratory at Gallants Channel, is unable to handle large quantities of artifacts requiring treatment. The conservation of objects contained in the exposed mound alone will be a formidable task. Buried remains will number in the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands. Some of those items may be as large as actual portions of the ship's structure. The visible section of the hull, for example, measures approximately 27 by 8 feet and will require heavy lifting equipment to bring to the surface, an adequately sized storage and conservation vat, and suitable quantities of bulking or impregnating agents to preserve the delicate wood.

At least fifteen cannons remain on the site. Each of these weapons will require its own storage and treatment tank, sacrificial anodes, and electrical power supply. Tanks measuring 10 by 3 by 3 feet require considerable space, and because the electrolytic reduction procedure emits hydrogen gas, the tanks must be well ventilated with fume hoods, or placed outdoors. Other large artifacts on site include four large and very heavy iron anchors, two of which still have wooden stocks attached. These composite artifacts will have to be disassembled before treatment can begin, and tanks must be made for each of the components.

One hundred tons of ballast stone is not an unrealistic estimate of the quantity of rocks on the shipwreck. Although relatively easy to store and clean, many will undoubtedly be concreted to other artifacts of differing material types. The vast majority of objects remaining on the site are encrusted groups of artifacts. Each concretion will need to be x-rayed, photographed, and disassembled, using the utmost care. The larger, more complex concretions will take a single conservator months to process. If complicated problems arise, specialists may have to be consulted, and artifacts such as clothing, fabric, or large quantities of cordage may have to be preserved elsewhere.

Conservation of artifacts recovered from a saltwater environment is a never-ending process. Long-term curation of a shipwreck artifact assemblage involves special considerations. Storage and exhibit areas must be climate controlled and secured, yet accessible for future study and analysis. Each artifact must be cataloged, measured, photographed, and all pertinent information entered into a computer database. Artifacts in storage must be continually inspected for corrosion and immediately re-treated if necessary.

Ideally, a new conservation facility should be constructed to store and process the entire variety of artifacts recovered from Queen Anne's Revenge while the assemblage is kept intact and available for display and study (see Appendix B). A laboratory located adjacent to permanent exhibit areas is also recommended to facilitate re-treatment of artifacts when necessary. Current trends utilize conservation facilities and personnel as living exhibits viewable by the general public, and a new facility will permit students and volunteers to become directly involved in artifact conservation.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2008, 04:28:39 pm »









Public Education/Exhibits



The public was immediately attracted to the discovery of Blackbeard's flagship, and the exhibition of its artifacts will draw large crowds. This is evidenced by the small Queen Anne's Revenge traveling exhibit that has been shown around the state and viewed by tens of thousands of people. The presence of NCMM's maritime archaeology conservation facility with viewing gallery planned for Gallants Channel will be a significant tourist attraction.

Exhibition of materials from Queen Anne's Revenge will draw people's attention, but the artifacts must be interpreted in context. This means presenting the process of archaeology and its interrelationship with associated social sciences (history and anthropology) and physical sciences (geology and biology) as a holistic educational package. The exhibit A Slave Ship Speaks, The Wreck of the Henrietta Marie, is a good example of how the interpretation of archaeological remains not only contributes to an understanding not only of life aboard a ship itself but also reflects worldwide socioeconomic practices at the time of its sinking. Information from Queen Anne's Revenge can contribute to a better public understanding of topics such as seafaring in the early eighteenth century, life as a pirate, the relationship between enslaved Africans and pirates, and the long-term effects of the coastal environment on man-made objects.

Professional educators have been quick to recognize the potential that Queen Anne's Revenge has to "hook" people, particularly school-aged children. Through a variety of programs and exercises related to the shipwreck, educators are able to promote hands-on learning and integrate history, language arts, mathematics, and science. Students are encouraged to use teamwork, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills to investigate and interpret the shipwreck remains. Thus far, major educational initiatives for Queen Anne's Revenge have included: a.) the development of outreach programs and teacher workshops by the NCMM and the Cape Fear Museum; b.) a public documentary by UNC-TV; c.) a Division of Archives and History (DAH) Web site dedicated to the Queen Anne's Revenge project (www.ah.dcr.state.nc.us/qar/default.htm); d.) an educational Queen Anne's Revenge Web site by the ECU Center for Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education (blackbeard.eastnet.ecu.edu/bbeard/main.html); e.) an interactive Internet program called "Teacher's Connect/ A Town Meeting" sponsored by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction; and f.) a national scholastic publication (Superscience, February 1999), which focused on Queen Anne's Revenge and the conservation of materials from the site. One futuristic plan being explored is to link archaeologists working on the site 20 feet below the ocean with students in classrooms throughout the state and beyond to provide a live, interactive dialogue. Educational coordinators see an unlimited potential for presenting Queen Anne's Revenge's findings to all ages and educational levels.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2008, 04:29:54 pm »









Participants/Volunteers



The DCR has designated the UAU, an agency that has been studying and protecting the state's submerged cultural resources for the past thirty-five years, as the lead agency for the management of Queen Anne's Revenge. Within the Office of State Archaeology and under the direction of the DAH, the UAU realized the importance of shipwreck 31CR314 and therefore committed to a two-year assessment in order to determine the significance of the site.


The unit works in close cooperation with the NCMM, which was founded as a private museum in the 1970s and recently brought into the DCR. The secretary has designated the museum as the main repository for the Queen Anne's Revenge artifact collection. The museum, which exhibits and interprets North Carolina's maritime past, recently acquired property on Gallants Channel and there established a temporary office space and conservation laboratory for the Queen Anne's Revenge project. A permanent shipwreck exhibit hall and conservation laboratory featuring Queen Anne's Revenge will be the cornerstone of the museum's expansion at Gallants Channel.

A unique and exciting partnership has been established between the DCR, Intersal, and MRI to "research, survey, search, recover, preserve, protect, conserve, curate, and promote Queen Anne's Revenge." Intersal has relinquished rights to the artifacts recovered from the site while retaining profits from sales of replica artifacts and commercial documentaries. The cooperative effort among public, private, and academic entities is reinforced by the formation of an Advisory Committee on Archaeological Operations, which is responsible for planning and for oversight at the Queen Anne's Revenge site, as well as the recovery and preservation of artifacts found there. Members of the committee consist of the state archaeologist, the supervisor of the UAU, a representative of MRI, a representative of Intersal, and a representative selected by the secretary of DCR from outside DAH. An at-large seat is currently filled by a faculty member from ECU.

ECU's Program in Maritime Studies, which was developed in 1980, offers the Queen Anne's Revenge project an invaluable source of assistance through faculty and graduate student participation. Classroom instruction, field schools, and graduate research projects, conducted in conjunction with the department's excavation and preservation of Queen Anne's Revenge, will enhance collection and analysis of archaeological data. Other state universities, colleges, associated institutes, and private groups provide a rich and diverse field of scientists, scholars, and technicians that can greatly enhance understanding of the shipwreck through interdisciplinary research. Over the last two years, participants from UNCW, IMS, UNCA, ASU, VPI, LQCS, and CFCC provided assistance with excavation, recovery of large artifacts, detailed field and laboratory analysis, and many other aspects associated with the assessment project. These and additional relationships should be cultivated by the department.

The use of volunteers in underwater archaeological research and conservation is generally limited because of the difficult and hazardous nature of the work and the need for close professional supervision. Ideally, trained and experienced avocationalists can perform tasks without draining staff to the point of diminishing returns. Groups such as Surface Interval Diving Company, a Beaufort-based volunteer dive group, can provide highly motivated and archaeologically trained participants. Retirees and student interns can also fill valuable niches in the volunteer work force, particularly in the conservation laboratory and with exhibit development and interpretation.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2008, 04:30:50 pm »









Funding



The protection, preservation, and development of Queen Anne's Revenge will be costly. Major excavation cannot proceed without the construction of a conservation laboratory, and a large funding appropriation is therefore needed. The state of North Carolina and local governments in the Cape Lookout region should be expected to take the lead in raising funds, since economic returns through public awareness and tourism will benefit them the most. A tremendous amount of money may also be available from other funding sources, because of the high visibility of the Queen Anne's Revenge project. A good example of the potential for raising money can be seen with the accomplishments of the USS North Carolina Battleship Foundation, which has raised millions through public and corporate sponsorship to restore and maintain the historic ship. The Friends of the Museum, North Carolina Maritime Museum, Inc. has already shown its effectiveness by raising funds needed to purchase the property at Gallants Channel. Since much of the initial costs for Queen Anne's Revenge will involve scientific research, federal- and university-sponsored grants may partly fund work in the field and laboratory. A comprehensive fund-raising program needs to be implemented within the framework of the Queen Anne's Revenge project to help sustain it and ensure the highest degree of success.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2008, 04:32:55 pm »








                                                        C O N C L U S I O N






Queen Anne's Revenge is a significant archaeological site and a very valuable cultural resource for the state of North Carolina. It is the oldest shipwreck discovered in the state, holds a wealth of information concerning early eighteenth-century seafaring, and is capable of providing a window into a unique period of piracy in the New World. The ship's association with Blackbeard draws worldwide attention. The shipwreck's benefits are, and will continue to be, demonstrated through a rise in public awareness, educational opportunities, and tourist-generated revenues. It is the responsibility of the people of North Carolina to utilize this valuable resource to its fullest capacity. This management plan is the first step of the project that will make citizens of the state proud to learn from and share their maritime heritage.





                         

                                         Figure 14. Blackbeard.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2008, 04:35:57 pm by Bianca » Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2008, 04:38:06 pm »









                                                           APPENDIX A


                                                Archaeological Recovery Plan






A variety of underwater archaeological equipment and techniques are acceptable for use on Queen Anne's Revenge; their selection will be mainly dictated by available resources and funding. Archaeological recovery plans are directly tied to the availability of a conservation facility where recovered artifacts will be stabilized, analyzed, conserved, and stored. Without a major conservation laboratory, archaeological activities can be only exploratory in nature, as outlined in the Maintenance and Exploration option. If site managers are faced with the loss of portions of the site through natural or man-caused threats, difficult decisions will have to be made to determine what course of action is in the best interest of the threatened remains. Not having an adequate conservation facility available will complicate this matter. During exploratory testing and emergency recovery, smaller vessels may be able to handle the majority of the work, leaving the heavy lifting to larger vessels as needed. A core staff of three archaeologists/conservators should be retained indefinitely to monitor the site, react to emergencies, and continue conservation and analysis of recovered materials.

The most desired approach to maximize information recovered from the site is the Excavation option, which calls for the full and systematic recovery of Queen Anne's Revenge while adhering to professional archaeological standards. A large vessel is needed to act as a stable dive- and equipment-platform for excavation and recovery, preferably one that offers crew accommodations and a galley, thereby allowing work to continue nonstop during periods of calm weather. Compressors, pumps, artifact sluices, and hoisting capabilities are needed. Several small vessels should be available to support these operations.
Regardless of the speed in which investigations are conducted on Queen Anne's Revenge, the following progression is likely:

1. Determination of artifact dispersion. This process would consist of detailed remote sensing surveys and shallow test excavations with limited artifact recovery to allow investigators to explore the extent and type of buried cultural remains associated with Queen Anne's Revenge. It would represent a continuation of the 1998 investigations, during which the limits of the site were determined for the north and east sides of the exposed wreckage. Exploratory testing is still needed to the south and west. A remote sensing survey using a differential magnetometer shows the most promise for revealing large buried objects such as cannons or other buried remains without using intrusive methods such as probing or excavation.

2. Development and installation of a unit control system. Successful archaeological investigations on Queen Anne's Revenge will depend on a sturdy, well-established reference and grid system that is both easy to set up and maintain, and capable of withstanding the effects of storms. While working on the sandy bottom, an ability to control unit walls during excavation and in periods of foul weather will be essential to ensure accurate data retrieval.

3. Excavation and recovery of buried remains. Based on results of the 1997 and 1998 field investigations, equipment and methods will be devised to recover the maximum amount of information from excavation units. The progression of unit excavation will be based on the archaeological research plan, which may call for a sampling strategy over the entire site or unit-by-unit excavations from one end of the site to the other.


The recovery of smaller artifacts and eco-facts (natural objects associated with the archaeological record), is problematic. It is impossible to recovery every bit of information contained on Queen Anne's Revenge. Archaeologists can minimize the loss of information through various means, however. Most importantly, a plan must be developed to identify research questions that can be asked of the site and then collection strategies that will provide evidence to test and answer those questions must be formulated. The highest-quality and most appropriate tools should be employed to maximize data recovery. Such recovery can be greatly facilitated by involving researchers in associated fields such as marine geology and biology. An interdisciplinary approach can strengthen the collection and interpretation of the whole realm of archaeological materials. Sampling strategies can greatly expedite the recovery of viable information by reducing the amount of materials that require processing. Lastly, the collection and storage of representative materials such as sediment samples and unpreserved artifacts can ensure that future researchers will have original evidence to study. That evidence will be increasingly important in the future as technologically advanced tools become available for laboratory analyses.

4. Disassembly and recovery of the exposed wreckage. Presumably this will be the final activity conducted at the site. Specialized tools and heavy lifting equipment will be needed to properly disassemble and recover the large mass of concreted wreckage, including two anchors, a grappling hook, numerous cannons, and a variety of other cultural debris. Such operations will require considerable planning to ensure that each object is freed from surrounding artifacts without damage, lifted off the bottom, brought safely aboard the recovery vessel, and then transported to the conservation laboratory. Some large artifacts, such as the anchors with wooden stocks and sections of wooden hull, may require disassembly on the bottom or a support system designed to avoid damage during recovery.

Prior to field investigations, a detailed archaeological research plan must be developed and approved by the Advisory Committee on Archaeological Operations. A committee-approved archaeologist should be selected as project director and placed in charge of all field activities, while an approved project conservator should oversee associated laboratory operations. During archaeological investigations, the project archaeologist, in consultation with the lead conservator, dive safety officer, vessel operators and/or equipment managers will have the authority to halt operations if, in his/her opinion, continuation of the project will compromise archaeological integrity of Queen Anne's Revenge or the safety of personnel and equipment. Additional staff should include a team of three archaeologists, three technicians, and an office administrator for logistics and conservation laboratory management.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2008, 04:40:01 pm »









                                                          APPENDIX B


                                                     Conservation Facility






The DCR currently operates two facilities dedicated to the conservation of artifacts retrieved from underwater environments. The primary facility is located on the property of Fort Fisher State Historic Site in Kure Beach, North Carolina. It currently consists of a 1,200-square-foot laboratory and a 1,500-square-foot open-air pavilion used to store and conserve large artifacts. Offices and support are provided in adjacent buildings occupied by the UAU. Most conservation procedures, artifact analyses, and storage of finished artifacts take place in the laboratory. Space has always been a limiting factor, however, and the Fort Fisher laboratory has proven to be inadequate for processing large collections such as would be recovered from Queen Anne's Revenge.

A second facility is operated by the NCMM in Beaufort, North Carolina. This 1,500-square-foot building has provided much-needed space for the wet storage, analysis, and illustration of artifacts. The Friends of the Museum, North Carolina Maritime Museum, Inc. are currently expanding this facility by constructing a 2,700-square-foot conservation outdoor pavilion. Artifact conservation, however, has been limited because of the lack of staff. With additional equipment and staffing, this building could become a viable conservation facility. The Office of State Archaeology's Lane Street Center in Raleigh and East Carolina University's lab in Greenville may also be used to treat and store artifacts.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2008, 04:41:18 pm »









Facility






Conserving material recovered from a marine environment begins as a messy process that eventually yields an artifact requiring a fairly pristine environment for final analysis and storage. It is necessary to compartmentalize the laboratory to avoid contamination of clean areas. At least six components are required: a wet-storage and large-artifact electrolysis facility, a workshop, a cleaning room, a finishing room, an analysis room, and a finished artifact storage area. All areas must include security and fire detection systems.



1. A 3,000-square-foot well ventilated pavilion should be adequate for wet storage of artifacts, electrolytic reduction of the cannons and anchors, and treatment of large structural remains. Conducting electrolysis outdoors eliminates many of the problems associated with hydrogen evolution. The pavilion should be provided with lighting and electrical outlets, power supplies for electrolysis, potable and deionized water outlets, a system of drains to empty tanks, an overhead chain hoist to lift heavy objects, and variously sized vats and storage bins.
2. A workshop (approximately 750 square feet) can provide space for repairs and fabrication of lab equipment. Portable tools and carts can be stored, while larger items such as a drill press, band saw, vice and anvil, and welding equipment can be permanently installed. The air compressor should be enclosed in its own room to reduce noise within this area. Electrical outlets (120- and 240-volt) and air drops should be provided. This area will not require heating or air conditioning, but forced ventilation should be installed.

3. Wet artifacts stored outdoors will begin the conservation process in the cleaning room, which should be approximately 1,250 square feet. The ability to hose down the floor will be essential, but containment of chemical spills is also a factor. Laboratory sinks and faucets should be installed, along with acid- and solvent-resistant counter tops. A substantial fume hood is needed, capable of venting gasses from small electrolysis and acid vats. A chemical storage cabinet should be provided in this area for acids and caustic materials, and air drops and power outlets should be conveniently installed throughout the room. A sandblasting cabinet with dust collectors will also be placed in this room. The x-ray room and film-processing station should be located in this area. A water deionizer and associated storage tanks should be installed with connections to this room, as well as to the large artifact-electrolysis area outdoors. A water supply and 240-volt power supply should be installed for the water still, and an area should be set aside for grinding concretions, water screening, and panning sediments. Several potable water hose outlets should be placed throughout the room. This room should be environmentally controlled for the comfort of the workers.

4. The finishing room, approximately 1,250 square feet, will be a semiclean, environmentally controlled area. Electrical outlets and air-drops should be abundantly provided throughout this area. Though it is not essential for this area to be hosed down, the containment of chemical spills must be considered. This room should be provided with an explosion-proof exhaust hood for handling solvent fumes. Flammable liquid and corrosive storage cabinets must be provided. A walled-off area of about 250 square feet would be adequate for the installation of a freeze dryer, conventional freezer, refrigerator, and a range. A paint booth, about 80 square feet, with laminar airflow ventilation and explosion-proof lighting, should also be installed.



5. The analysis room, approximately 580 square feet, should be environmentally controlled and completely separated from the finishing room to avoid contamination of artifacts, computers, and analytical equipment. This is an ideal place for the installation of a darkroom and artifact record storage, and should include a photographic copy stand, drafting table, microscopes, scales, and other tools required to fully document and record all stages of an artifact's preservation. This room should adjoin the storage area for easy access to artifacts.

6. The 1,000-square-foot finished artifact storage area should be provided with adjustable acid free shelving to accommodate items of various sizes. This room must be temperature and humidity controlled. Since metal artifacts require lower relative humidity levels than wooden and organic artifacts, some compartmentalization within the storage room will be required. The entrance to this room should be designed to limit contamination of the storage environment. Space should also be provided for dehumidifiers, desiccants, and environmentally controlling and monitoring devices.



Male and female lavatory facilities will be necessary, and handicap access in accordance with ADA regulations should be addressed. Most importantly, safety equipment must be provided in compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the American Association of Museums regulations. Since artifact conservation involves the use of strong acids, alkalies, and flammable solvents, facilities must be readily available to handle accidents involving those materials. Offices, public viewing areas, and rest room facilities will require an additional 1,200 square feet of space.
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum | Buy traffic for your forum/website
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines