Big underwater discoveries

[JahMan2003]

Not really treasure hunting, but heres an artical on new underwater sites found. Most are overseas, but theres a couple in the U.S.

http://www.archaeology.org/0907/underwater/

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Salvor6]

Thanks Jahman. This is a real eye-opener into what the nautical archaeologists are really up to. Let me run down the 10 wonders of the institutional nautical archaeology world:

1. The Roman stone carrier. This ship had just one thing on board; a stone collum. How exciting.

2. The HMS Ontario, well no one will EVER excavate this one so we will never know whats inside.

3. Min of the Desert. This is not a wreck, just a reproduction of one!

4. Heroine; what was found? Pork barrels, machinery. Tells us a lot about civilization. Wait, it only gets better.

5. Corinthian wreck; roof tiles, amphorae. More excitement.

6. Chios wreck; Texas A&M archies used DNA to find out the jars contained olive oil, oregano and tree resin. I wonder who paid for that?

7. Kahn's Fleet lost in Vietnam; nearly 400 of the Kahn's ships were lost and the archies (from Texas A&M again) have yet to find ONE. "If we could find a ship it, would be wonderful." Archaeologist Randal Sasaki said.

8. Tristin de Luna's fleet. U. of W. FL students found jars that contained olive oil, wine and water (without any DNA testing!). Also rat bones and cockroaches. Gee, I wonder if they will display all that in a new museum so everyone can enjoy it.

9. Phonecian Wreck; they found acorns, hazelnuts and olives. Also a small stone cube that the brilliant archies (from you-know-where) determined was dice. They could open a whole museum with that. People will rush to see it.

10. Liman Tepe Harbor- Turkey. Our favorite archaeologists have been working there since 1979. No ship has yet been found but the archies are still getting paid.

I gotta hand it to Archaeology Magazine. They really know how to get us excited with the latest finds from archaeological institutes.

Now, what have the private salvors found; Pirate ships loaded with gold & silver (Whydah), galleons loaded with gold & silver and emeralds (Atocha), the Queen's jewels (1715 fleet), 17 tons of coins (you-know-who). People flock to see these things in museums. Thats what they want to see, not rat bones and dead cockroaches.

Disclaimer: this is just my opinion, nothing else.

6. Chi

 

[RELICDUDE07]

8. Tristin de Luna's fleet. U. of W. FL students found jars that contained olive oil, wine and water (without any DNA testing!). Also rat bones and cockroaches. Gee, I wonder if they will display all that in a new museum so everyone can enjoy it. LMAO Got a new one soon to be under construction and a 12 million dollar fishing bridge......

 

[inletsurf]

IMO, the big difference between treasure hunting and underwater archeology is the primary source of motivation: treasure (monetary) or the opportunity to expand on knowledge of past civilizations (learning). A couple cockroaches and lima beans in a 2000 yr old jar may not be important to you, but as they say, one man's junk is another man's treasure...

 

[mad4wrecks]

I don't know of any professional archaeologist working for free.

On the other hand, most salvors I know have an authentic interest in maritime history and a desire to gain & disseminate knowledge from the objects they rescue from the sea.

 

[Salvor6]

The marine acchaeologists tend to concentrate on things that really don't matter to the research on human civilization. They just want more funding for their weekly paycheck. And then they come up with way off base theories that don't fit in with common sense.

 

[JahMan2003]

The marine acchaeologists tend to concentrate on things that really don't matter to the research on human civilization. They just want more funding for their weekly paycheck. And then they come up with way off base theories that don't fit in with common sense.

I'm interested in all aspect of underwater treasures, not just shiny metal but what the finds can tell us, which is why i like thi site. I've done some ship models, mainly sail but am looking to do an early sidewheeler. The heroine site in Oklahoma seems like a heck of a find-- an early steamboat from the 1830s, part of the ways that people found themselves transit out west, etc. So, this doesn't matter to the research on human civilization?!!!!! I would love to get my hands on that steam engine and see how it worked.

 

[4theMoney]

The marine acchaeologists tend to concentrate on things that really don't matter to the research on human civilization. They just want more funding for their weekly paycheck. And then they come up with way off base theories that don't fit in with common sense.

I'm interested in all aspect of underwater treasures, not just shiny metal but what the finds can tell us, which is why i like thi site. I've done some ship models, mainly sail but am looking to do an early sidewheeler. The heroine site in Oklahoma seems like a heck of a find-- an early steamboat from the 1830s, part of the ways that people found themselves transit out west, etc. So, this doesn't matter to the research on human civilization?!!!!! I would love to get my hands on that steam engine and see how it worked.
In respective terms, 1830s wasnt really all that far back. I wonder what knowlege we have lost about coal or wood fired steam technology that we need to rediscover?

 

[Salvor6]

We already know about early steamboat technology from the excavation of the Arabia: http://www.glswrk-auction.com/102.htm. They estimate there are about 200 riverboats lost in the midwest.

 

[JahMan2003]

I'm a novice and wannabe model builder, but from the poking around that I've done, it seems like steamboat machinery and design from the Heroine's era (1830s) and the Arabia (1850s) was very different. I dont think you can assume that you know all about early steamboats from one site the dates to one period., at least thats my opinion. And if I'm gonna take the time to build a model, I want the latest and best information. And I would think wrecks have differnt things to offer-- better machinery on one, better hull on another. Why do you think we have all the information we can get just because one wreck was excavted? Just my opinion.

By the way, here's a great site for model ship bulding that some may find interesting: http://modelshipworld.com/phpBB2/portal.php

-JM

 

[Salvor6]

JahMan we have all the information on 1830's to 1850's steamships from the blueprints that survive in the archives. So there is nothing new we can learn from steamship design. Its just that those early steam engines were very ineficcient until the triple expansion steam engine came out in the 1890's.