Page 377 - Green - Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook. 2nd ed

356 Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook, Second Edition
incomplete or unavailable in the written records. More interestingly, when the information does exist, its significance has, at times, been overlooked by the historically motivated research person.
It has been suggested by some historians that maritime archaeology is stimulating the development of new areas of historical research. Some of the most interesting aspects of the historical–archaeological research involves the study of the cargo of a ship and its structure. Both these sub- jects are extremely important, because they provide information about trade patterns and the development of the technology of ships. The study of shipwreck remains is significant for the insight it provides as to how ships were built, how the techniques developed, and why they changed. The ships and the associated artifacts provide a field of study which rarely exists on land. Artifact assemblages are rarely found in such quantities as when they occur as part of a ship’s cargo. Parts of these assemblages relate to a tech- nology that existed on the sea rather than the land and, therefore, are again not commonly recorded from land sites. Additionally, the unique or precise dating that a wreck site has is important. These factors can make maritime archaeology a highly innovative field of study.
The use of the historical–archaeological process will necessarily be adapted according to particular research needs. This can be illustrated by looking at two different time spans. First, in the Classical period in the Mediterranean, where there is a moderate amount of “historical” source material, we can take the example of the study by Professor George Bass of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology of the Cape Gelidonya wreck site (Bass, 1967). This was the first full report of a maritime archaeological site where the archaeology was carried out using the same principles as those applied on land. The report covers the excavation procedure, and then in a series of specialized analyses, various groups of artifacts were examined. It concluded with a discussion of the significance of the ship and its cargo.
This early publication established a benchmark for maritime archaeo- logical reports. The site was quite small and did not involve a large number of artifacts, but it proved, that with careful excavation and thorough sub- sequent archaeological research, maximal information could be obtained from a small quantity of material. It also showed how the proper study and analysis of shipwreck material, together with the study of the associated his- torical sources, could produce interesting and important conclusions. For example, the ox hide and the copper ingots together with the copper and bronze scrap found on the site were shown to be part of the cargo. It was thus suggested that there was possibly a metalworker onboard the ship and that the metal was a trade item. This type of trade showed, through illus- trations in contemporary Egyptian tomb paintings, that the ingots were brought to Egypt in ships by merchants known to have connections with