Need help dating an anchor...

[ff404]

Found an anchor yesterday at a site where I had previously thought there might be a historic wreck. The site wasn't what was expected, but finding the anchor kind've made up for it. Can anyone help me date the anchor, or give a time-frame of anchor design that it might fall into?

Unfortunately I can't upload the pics because they are too large, but I will be more than happy to e-mail them to someone for posting, or e-mail them to someone for identification. There are 2 pics.

Any help will be tremendously appreciated!

Matt Green

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[ivan salis]

crop and resize em them, then post em

 

[ff404]

Sorry for the huge pictures.. I cropped them enough to get them to post but I don't have any way to re-size them. Anybody wants to do it I will be happy to remove these monstrosities.

 

[allen_idaho]

It looks like a Fisherman's Kedge anchor. Dating it, however, would be difficult. This particular type of anchor was heavily used in the 1800's and is still in use today.

 

[MD Dog]

Need help dating an anchor...

What's her name ? And are you sure you wanna get involved if your already calling her an anchor ?

 

[ff404]

Allen_idaho:

What size ship (length or tonnage) would carry and anchor that big. The pictures don't really give it much scale, but the part that is sticking up out of the sand was probably around 2 1/2 - 3' if not more.

LOL I knew someone would chime in as a comedian after I realized what I'd typed for the subject line.

 

[MD Dog]

Sorry my bad, I'm a big fan of the forum, but I know nothing so I rarely get an opportunity to post. :P

 

[ff404]

No sweat man... you gotta take shots when you see em...

 

[allen_idaho]

Can't really tell for sure. It's either a Kedge or a Bower. Most likely dated anywhere from the 1600's-1900's. Without knowing how much it weighs, I wouldn't even try to guess what size ship it came off of. It could be anything from a 100 ton vessel and up.

For example, 100 ton ships used to carry 3 anchors. The larger the ship, the more anchors they carried.

 

[ff404]

I don't doubt that I will be back out at the site to try to move some of the sand out of the way around the anchor to get a length and size on it... would there be any identifying marks anywhere on it that might help identify it?

 

[aquanut]

Send me the pictures, uncropped and raw. I'll run them thru photoshop and see if I can enhance them Then I'll compress the file size. Also, do you have a pic of the anchor from a distance, showing where and how it lays? It appears to me that what I'm looking at is just the Fluke.
My email is : john@addesignservices.com

Aquanut

 

[deepsix47]

Yea, send the pictures to Aquanut. It's really hard to tell like they are now but it sort of looks like one he and I brought up.

Deepsix

 

[FISHEYE]

Forget the anchor.You should be picking up all the shiny round objects that are all around the anchor in the first pic!

 

[ivan salis]

anchors only tell you something might be in the area -- now look for a ballast plie * to see if theres a "actual"wreck there or just a lost anchor .

basically you know it s--wooden vessel era * -- say 1900 or sooner (wooden hulled vessels had just about died out by 1900)

 

[RELICDUDE07]

Your right fisheye looks like gold coins

 

[rgecy]

Boy, for not knowing a size, or seeing more than just the fluke, you guys have really narrowed it down!

It would help to know the length, fluke size and shape, does it have an iron or wooden stock, etc., to acurrately date it and tell you more about it.

I think you guys are making a lot of assumptions.

RGecy

 

[ff404]

RGecy,

Gonna try to get back out there Sunday and try to remove a bunch of the sand to get measurements and better photographs... and of course look and see if there is anything else of interest to be found. As far as a ballast pile goes, should I be looking under the sand? Seems that if the anchor is buried that deep in the sand then anything else probably would to? Or am I wrong?

Anybody got any pictures of ballast piles?

Sorry for the stupid questions, just a new guy tryin my best to learn.

 

[rgecy]

The anchor could have been set and doug itself into the sand. But yes, I would be looking under the sand if possible. It would be good to do a Side Scan or Mag Survey to locate any annomolies, but start with the Anchor and get some specifics on it.

See if you can uncover it and take some good measurements and photographs. This will give you a little more insight into the period you are deaing with.

Anchors are lost all the time, and do not necessarily mean there is a wreck. But its a great start!

And as for ballast piles, not all ships may have been carrying a large amount of ballast. Depending on a ships size and design, if it was overloaded with cargo, they may have off loaded a lot of its ballast. If a ship had little or no cargo it had to displace this lost weight by adding ballast and was known to be sailing "in-ballast".

Good Luck,

RGecy

 

[Darren in NC]

Robert is correct. More info is definitely needed. Perhaps the stock will still be intact. Even chain linkage can help date it better if there's any attached.

For a better view of the fluke above...

 

[ff404]

Feel kinda stupid for posting this now, but at the time of my original post I didn't think it was significant. At the beginning of the dive yesterday, well before the anchor was found that I've already posted the pictures of, we found the one in the pictures below. As you can see, the top part of it is sticking up out of the sand, the bottom isn't visible if it is still in fact even there. I didn't think it was significant this morning because of the fact that they were 150-250 yards apart... but now I'm wondering if this might be a match to the second one. It doesn't appear to be to me, but I know absolutely nothing about all this. This one still has the chain attached as well, or at least a portion of it. Take a look at the pics and see what ya think.

BTW: Obviously I finally figured out how to re-size the pics. Thanks for everyones help and input.

Matt