 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Director: Frederick M. Hocker |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Excavation date: 1992 Bibliography |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
The text of this page
originally appeared as Edited for online use February 2003 Images are clickable thumbnails
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
As
we motored around the bend in the slow, muddy river and up the Murray
Hill Canal, a dozing alligator well over 12 feet long was startled by
the sudden appearance of our boat from behind the roots of a dead
cypress tree. He arched his
back to turn around; with a single slap of his tail he plunged from the
bank into the canal and was gone, leaving a scar in the mud and a
gurgling eddy in the brown water. We
were used to seeing alligators, two or three a day, but they usually
slid into the river well ahead of us as we approached the site.
It had become a game to spot them before they were spooked or to
distinguish the twin bumps that marked them watching us from the
shallows. With this grand
old man of the swamp, there had been no time to point, or yell
"'Gator!," before he disappeared.
It was difficult to tell who was the more surprised.
We saw others later in the season, some quite large, and a small
fellow, perhaps six feet long, took up residence at the foot of the bank
where we worked, but none reminded us as forcefully that we were
strangers to the landscape.
We
were out in the swamp, near Savannah, Georgia, excavating an
eighteenth-century coastal sloop buried under a river levee.
The vessel was one of 19 derelicts discovered in the fall of 1991
during a survey of the Back River, a secondary channel of the Savannah
River, by Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc., a contract archaeology firm
directed by INA adjunct professor Gordon Watts. The
remains of numerous nineteenth-century wharves and buildings, including
the boilers from a steam threshing machine, were also found.
I was contacted in January of 1992 by the local U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers archaeologist, Judy Wood, who had commissioned the 1991
survey and is responsible for the management of the vessels found. She felt that this sloop, the oldest vessel yet found in the
Savannah River, was similar to the Brown's Ferry vessel (see INA
Quarterly 19.1) in construction and age, and might help explain
some of the ferry's more unusual features. I was immediately intrigued,
and the few slides she showed me suggested that the vessel might indeed
be another flat-bottomed periauger, a log-based river transport.
Kevin
Crisman (from the Nautical
Archaeology Program faculty at Texas
A&M University) and I arranged to evaluate the site as a
possible excavation project. We
arrived in Savannah in the middle of February and traveled the
circuitous route to the wreck on a raw, rainy, windy day, along with Ms.
Wood, Rusty Fleetwood, a local expert on inland craft, and Larry
Shaffield, a local volunteer. What we found was not at all what we expected, but much more.
Rather than a flat-bottomed riverboat, what was eroding out of
the bank was a sharp, fast coastal or deepwater vessel built on a heavy
keel. The sizes of the
visible timbers, which included the sternpost and its knee, the after
ends of the starboard planks, and several frames under a pile of green
stones, suggested a medium-sized vessel, perhaps as long as 20 meters.
The wood used in the hull, rather than European oak, appeared to
be yellow pine, cypress, and live oak, all southern American species.
If the suspected colonial date held up, the vessel might be the
oldest American-built seagoing vessel yet discovered. In
addition to the vessel itself, which ran back into the bank at an angle
of about 45 degrees, a line of heavy pilings, now reduced to worm- and
gribble-eaten stumps, could be seen protruding from the foreshore
parallel to the bank. The mud around the exposed stern and pilings was littered
with eighteenth-century trash (similar to the objects found in the upper
layers at Port Royal, Jamaica), as well as the occasional crushed beer
can, but there was a curious absence of clearly identifiable
nineteenth-century material. The
earlier artifacts included large numbers of broken wine bottles, ceramic
sherds, and buttons. This was all typical domestic trash, suggesting that a house
had probably sat behind the bank and that the pilings were the remains
of a pier or wharf that had served the house through much of the second
half of the eighteenth century but had fallen out of use around 1800. Dr.
Crisman and I were excited about the possibilities offered by the site.
The vessel offered illumination into the early history of
shipbuilding in the Southeast, an important but largely overlooked
corner of American maritime history.
Furthermore, the pier and burial seemed to date to shortly after
the settlement of the area and the foundation of the colony of Georgia
in 1733. Local interest in
an excavation would be high, and the excavation of the bank itself might
shed some light on early labor organization on the Savannah River. The
site posed several logistical problems even though no diving was
involved--we planned to dig during low tides, when the vessel was
exposed. Not the least of
our problems was accessibility. Although
the vessel lay high enough to be exposed even when the tide was
approaching the high mark, the effective window for excavation was only
about four hours each day since the only practical approach to the site
meant shooting the Savannah Tidegate, which is only passable either side
of low tide. The tidal
range averages 2.5 meters, rising and falling rapidly; we soon learned
to judge our departure time from the site accurately.
One day, when the boat motor failed, we discovered how difficult
it was to walk the mile back to the nearest bridge, through the swamp,
against the rising tide. Accessibility
was also limited to small craft, so heavy equipment could not be brought
in to remove any of the overburden.
All excavation had to be by hand, with spoil stored on top of the
bank. Simply moving around
required major effort: The thick clay was only shin-deep during the
February survey, but it softened with repeated traffic during excavation
and recording until we often stood waist-deep in mud the consistency of
pudding or warm peanut butter.
We
began work on the first of June with a crew of seven: Nautical
Archaeology Program graduate students Tina Erwin, Noreen Doyle, and
Betsy Rosenthal, Texas A&M undergraduates Leslie Brown and Charlie
Harris, Emma Hocker (as field conservator), and myself.
A boat, pump, and shovels were provided by the South
Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology (SCIAA), and a
grant for some operating expenses was kindly provided by the Coastal
Heritage Society, as was lumber for work platforms (the lumber had
originally been sets from the film Glory). Work
began with the establishment of datum points (4 x 4 posts driven into
the mud) and the collection of surface artifacts.
These lay so thick on the ground that they hindered access to the
site, so we mapped and recovered them first.
In all, over 270 items were recovered from the foreshore.
Most were found during the early stages of the project, but
others appeared later as our feet disturbed the mud.
Among the surface artifacts, the most common objects were nails
(most of them from the vessel), green glass wine bottle fragments, and a
mixture of mid to late eighteenth-century domestic ceramics.
We found fragments of English and Chinese porcelain, cast
stoneware plates made by Josiah Wedgwood, a variety of English
earthenwares, some American stoneware, a respectable assemblage of Colono
ware (a yellow pottery made by slaves in the southeastern colonies),
and a few fragments of German stoneware.
None of these was particularly surprising in itself, but the
group as a whole suggests that someone of reasonably substantial means
lived nearby with his slaves. Research
in South Carolina archives and a map of 1752 showed us that Patrick
MacKay, at one time chief judge of the Senior Court of Georgia, had been
granted much of the land on the north bank of the lower Savannah River
in 1737 and lived in a house directly behind the site.
After
a topographic survey to establish the contours of the bank and
foreshore, excavation began. In
the course of three weeks, the seven of us (with regular help from local
volunteer Stanley Lester) removed between 80 and 90 tons of clay from
the hull and piled it on top of the bank.
Artifacts found in the clay, as well as sediment stratigraphy, indicated that the bank had been heightened in the middle of the nineteenth century (probably during extensive bank improvements made all along the river in the early 1850s) and that parts of the vessel had protruded from the old bank. The artifacts found closer to the hull suggested the vessel had been buried after Mr. MacKay had been living on the river for some time. The vessel did not seem to have been placed as cribbing to support the wharf, as I had first thought, but was probably used to repair a blowout in the bank, possibly as late as the end of the eighteenth century.
The
laborers who buried the hull had sorely abused it.
The sides (especially the port side) had been partially
dismantled and cut down, but the greatest disappointment of the season
was encountered on July 2, when we excavated along the port side.
The changing angles of the frames indicated that we were
approaching the bow. Preservation had been excellent in the bank, and there were high hopes that much of the stem might survive. Just past the nineteenth frame, I came upon an angled cut in the port garboard, the plank next to the keel. The cut continued into the keel and keelson, and it soon became apparent that the entire bow had been cut off in order to fit the vessel into the hole in the bank it was intended to plug. The backbone was cut cleanly through with an axe just behind the scarf that joined the keel to the stem. Much of the starboard planking continued forward for another meter or more, but no sign of the stem could be found. Excavation further forward uncovered the remains of a large fire just off the starboard bow, and clumps of nails mixed with charcoal were found in the forward part of the hull. I believe the stem and its associated timbers were burned for the iron bolts they contained. Fortunately, enough of the planking survived to reconstruct the curvature of at least the lower part of the bow.
Three
weeks of excavation were followed by three weeks of careful recording of
the hull. Few artifacts had
been found in the vessel (a rigging block and a sewing palm were the
only nautical items still associated with the hull), but much of the
starboard side was preserved, and the frames amidships were complete.
The stern, despite its exposure, was also in relatively good
condition. By means of
sections, offsets, detailed measured sketches, and photographs; we made
a complete record of the hull remains. After the ceiling planks were
drawn they were removed to expose the frames, and further measurements
were made.
After
recording, the hull was reburied to preserve it against further decay.
The mud that had kept it in such good condition could be pressed
back into service, but the lower end of the hull had to be protected
from further erosion. Not
only did we have to fill a hole with 80 tons of mud, but we had to build
a hole first. After some discussion with Charlie Harris, who is an
engineering rather than archaeology student, we designed and built a low
wall of recycled plastic railroad ties, held together with steel rod and
a large number of wooden pilings, around the stem. After
the remains were covered, the loose mud was consolidated with GeofabricTM
and GeowebTM, commercial erosion control products.
It is hoped that these will hold the fill in place until next
spring, when bank vegetation will grow back over the site and stabilize
it.
Work in the Ship Reconstruction Laboratory at Texas A&M concentrated on developing a picture of the ship as built. Its shape suggests a combination of shallow draft and sail-carrying ability, with appreciable deadrise in the sections and moderately soft bilges. The stem is fine and probably carried a small transom. At the bow, the stem probably displayed a large amount of rake but easy curvature. All of these features together present a picture of a coastal version of the fast sloops and schooners that sailed out of American ports in the middle and later eighteenth century. At just under 14 meters long (about 45 feet), the vessel was not very large and required only a single mast, set far forward. This sloop rig was common in the colonial Carolinas for both smaller coastal craft and deepwater merchantmen sailing to the Caribbean, and such craft were often known for their speed.
The
hull's construction was at first rather perplexing.
The keel, a single yellow pine timber, is much heavier than
expected, as are the other components of the backbone.
The extra keel depth offers great strength and stiffness to the
hull and contributes to its sailing qualities.
The planks are made of long, wide lengths of pine (one of the
strakes appears to be made of a single piece of wood nearly 15 meters
long) and are fastened to the frames with iron nails and a small number
of haphazardly placed treenails. The
ceiling planks, which are set carefully against each other and nailed to
the frames, are also made of long, wide planks.
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of construction is in the
frames. Unlike
most other Western vessels of the post-medieval period, in which each
floor timber (the central member of the frame) is associated with two or
more futtocks fastened to or at least set against the floor timber, the
Clydesdale vessel has frames almost identical to those of an ancient
Greek or Roman ship. The
live oak frame components are separate and evenly spaced, so that floor
timbers fastened to the keel alternate with half-frames that run from
the garboard to the deck. Futtocks
in line with the floor timbers continue up to the deck as well.
The bulwarks are supported by short, separate top timbers set
between the half-frames and futtocks.
None of these timbers is attached to any other.
The only other vessel in North America framed in a similar manner
is the Boscawen, a Royal Navy sloop built on Lake
Champlain in 1759, although the naval sloop includes several
complete "made" frames used to define the shape of the hull. Between
the Clydesdale Plantation vessel and the Brown's Ferry vessel, we can
now paint detailed pictures of the design and construction of two of the
three major classes of substantial watercraft in the colonial Southeast.
The Brown's Ferry vessel is most likely a periauger, the most
common form of river transport in the Carolinas; the Clydesdale vessel
is a rare survivor of the coastal sloops that kept Savannah, Charleston,
Georgetown, and other major ports in contact with each other.
In addition, the two vessels share certain details that hint at
the existence of a distinct tradition of construction practiced in the
Carolinas in the eighteenth century.
Both vessels are built of similar woods, used in similar ways.
The pine planks are deliberately weakened with axe cuts in areas
of tight curvature, particularly in the bow, and nails and softwood
treenails are used together to fasten planks to frames.
Further investigation of other wrecks and derelicts in the
Savannah River system should reveal much more about early shipbuilding
and seafaring in the American colonies. Acknowledgements I would like to
thank the following groups and individuals for their contributions of
funding, materials, and time to the Clydesdale Plantation Vessel
Project; without their support, the excavation would not have been
possible: The Institute of Nautical Archaeology; the South Carolina
Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology; the Coastal Heritage Society
of Savannah, Georgia; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah
District; the Museum of the 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort
Stewart, Georgia; the Mosquito Control Board of Chatham County, Georgia;
Bay Camera; and the Clydesdale Club.
Also, Judy L. Wood, Stanley and Craig Lester, William Haile,
Wanda and David Scott, Mr. and Mrs. William E. Saunders, John Parrott,
Jr., Ernest Quarles, Lynn Harris, Lawrence Babits, Rusty Fleetwood,
Larry Shaffield, Richard Goff, and David, Heather, and Callum Crampton. -Fred Hocker
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Bibliography
Fleetwood, R. Tidecraft: An Introductory Look at the Boats of Lower South Carolina, Georgia, and Northeastern Florida: 1650-1950. Coastal Heritage Society, Savannah, 1982. Hocker, F. "The Brown's Ferry Vessel: A River Transport of the Early Eighteenth Century," INA Quarterly 19.1 (1992): 10-14. Reprint Available Hocker, F. "The Clydesdale Plantation Vessel Project: 1992 Field Report," INA Quarterly 19.4 (1992): 12-16. Reprint Available Hocker, F. and Amer, C.F. "A Comparative Analysis of Three Sailing Merchant Vessels from the Carolina Coast." In Tidecraft: The Boats of South Carolina, Georgia and Northeastern Florida, 1550-1950, by W.C. Fleetwood, Jr., WBG Marine Press, Tybee Island, Georgia. 1995, pp. 295-304. Steffy, J. R. "The Thirteen Colonies: English Settlers and Seafarers." In Ships and Shipwrecks of the Americas. Edited by George F. Bass, Thames and Hudson, New York, 1988, pp. 107-128. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Citation Information
Fred Hocker |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Edited by Ralph K. Pedersen |
Design and map colorization by Ralph K. Pedersen |
||||||||||||||||||||
| © Institute of Nautical Archaeology, 2003 | HOME | ||||||||||||||||||||
