Page 29 - Green - Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook. 2nd ed

8 Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook, Second Edition
in Asia, where countries had little interest or ability in dealing with underwa- ter cultural heritage. Additionally, as many of the sites belonged to their post-colonial masters there was an even greater lack of interest. The fact that these sites that had little to do with their indigenous heritage but had promised opportunities of access to a share of the fortunes, often resulted in arrangements where sites were salvaged for their financial resource, the material cataloged and then sold at auction, and the country taking a per- centage of the proceeds, occasionally in artifacts, but often in straight cash. Even today Malaysia, Viet Nam, the Philippines, Indonesia, and other Southeast Asian countries make deals with treasure hunters. They license them to search and share in the proceeds. This is often against the wishes of the heritage managers, but the decisions are driven by the finance depart- ments and the politicians. It is quite legitimate, a country has every right to decide how it wishes to dispose of its heritage. It is unfortunate that these decisions have short-term benefits and rarely result in a positive outcome. The UNESCO Convention will make this process more difficult.
In the past four decades, great developments have been seen in the mar- itime archaeological field. Pioneering this was the raising of the 17th century Swedish warship Wasa in Stockholm Harbor in 1961 (Franzen, 1961). This was a landmark for maritime archaeology. For the first time, an almost com- plete ship was brought to the surface, not for salvage, but for archaeology. This immense project brought home the impact of the past in that dramatic moment when the vessel first broke surface and floated into the dry dock. The raising of the Mary Rose in 1982 was also a landmark in maritime archaeology. However, strangely, neither projects have become spring- boards for advancement in the field. Admittedly both projects have stu- pendous displays, but between the Wasa and the Mary Rose there has been no more than a handful of academic papers, a fact that has to be deplored.
The work in the Mediterranean, popularized in the 1950s and 1960s by Jacques Cousteau, and later developed into a scientific discipline by George Bass (and other organizations in the Mediterranean), also stimulated the popular imagination. Here, it was not really the material, but more the great age of the sites. The fact that they dated from pre-Christian times amazed many and brought home the closeness of the past.
However, in the United States there was a different situation. First, the sites involved were relatively modern. It was therefore argued that they came under salvage laws and that the question of antiquities was irrelevant. Secondly, as mentioned above, there was little interest (in the beginning), either from government, academics, or institutions. Everyone, generally, either tried to avoid responsibility or was disinterested. Finally, the divers were usually locals, and the material, which was mainly sold for profit, attracted interest, tourism, and more divers. It was thus plain good business