Re: What's going on in the DR?
ScubaFinder said:
Agreed, but I can also see Alexandre's point. It is true that very little true archaeology has been done on Portugese wrecks. I believe that we have one from the mid to late 1800's that we still need to study. At this point, we have only brought up a few bottles of Dutch/Portugese provenance, and we have done a general site survey. Maybe when we start excavation of that wreck Alexandre will take interest and also take note of the work we are doing. We do like to see artifacts and data get to the people who need it for study, as well as to the general public for appreciation and understanding.
In my opinion, treasure is the nessecary bait that allows amatuer archaeologists to find and study shipwrecks, without the chance of treasure, you'd never find an investor to support an operation.
If somebody could ever make a good argument for keeping all of the redundant artifacts, I might change my mind a bit...but everywhere I've been there seems to be no funding or space to store the wealth of artifacts they already have. If archaeologist's motives were TRULY to preserve and study, then they would try to work WITH well-funded treasure hunters and teach us what we are doing wrong.
The lack of a degree does NOT make me a smash and grab treasure hunter, and I don't see any indication the the same degree makes a degreed archaeologist any better at the job than myself. If they think they care more about history and study than I do, they are wrong.
I am one of those "poor" treasure hunters, because I am not in it for the treasure. Sure it would be nice, and hell yes I'd like to pay back the investors that allowed me to study 30+ shipwrecks while trying to find a valuable one. If I can do that with artifacts that the public would love to own, and that the archaeologists already have more of than they need for study, then what exactly is the problem with that model. Closed minded "academic archaeology" is what is allowing thousands of shipwrecks to be dismantled by mother ocean...isn't "some" data collected by amatuers better than no data and no idea where the ships wrecks are?
I'm of the opinion that there can be some common ground in the middle somewhere where everyone gets what they need. The investors get a little gold, the amatuer archaeologists get the thrill of discovery and a paycheck, and the archaeologists get good data from the wreck. The museums still get beautiful artifacts, the universities still get study collections, the world finally gets to see a small piece of our nautical heritage. If academic archaeology had the funds and resources to find and study maybe 20 new wrecks per year, I might step aside and let them do it. As it stands, if guys like us don't do it, it will not get done at all. The "state of equilibrium" argument is quickly being dismantled by local pirates who are truly desimating and looting the wrecks in every country in the world. THIS is what is robbing you of your heritage, and WE (the treasure hunters) are the only ones doing anything to try to save what we can from the elements and looters.
I'm getting long winded, but one last point. How important is it to most of humanity whether a boat was built on 18" or 24" centers, or what year exactly they switched from astrolabe to sextant, etc. The public wants National Geographic specials showing a little research, a little search, a little diving, and some cool artifacts with the basic mission of the boat, what she was doing, and why she went down. Outside of that what can we really learn that is truly important to humanity or history. Sometimes there are exceptions, but 90% of the shipwrecks are just common sailors on a common mission who had a bad day. The academics act like every single wreck might change the foundations of human history, and we'll all miss it if an amatuer finds the wreck first. This is an absurd, one-sided argument that nobody buys into except the guys spouting it.
Hey Scubafinder, do you have a name?
I can relate to all that you are talking about.
Let me entrust you with a secret: not every guy with a degree in archaeology is an archaeologist and not all archaeologists have a degree in archaeology.
Now, that said, a few points: I really can see where the National Geographic bit is going - been there, done that. Here I am, with the complete hull of a Spanish galleon, all clad in lead sheathing, a complete keel and the starboard surviving for up to the main deck and here's the guy from Geo asking: "where's the gold?".
It's like the Namibia wreck: a ship of gold lost in a beach of diamonds. That do capture your mind, and here come the flashing lights, and the public's recognition. And, yes, you think - I have to keep on looking for treasure wrecks. Fame, glory, investors, they all will come flocking to me. So forget about all those tramp ships that crossed the ocean, forget about slavers and merchantmen carrying wine or molasses, forget about phoenician ships with nothing but millenia old sand inside their holds.
But then, if you look around, you will find that there are people, not funded by taxpayers, that are excavating wrecks, not selling the artifacts but producing solid gold scientific papers.
Take INA, for example.
I have worked with INA for 3 years, and all the money they got for aiplane fares, meals, survey equipment was from private sponsors.
Is it hard? It is. But you can survive also on (god forbids) taxpayers money. I know that that is a very foreign concept to American born and bred people, but in Europe the State is proud of it's heritage. And sometimes, the Heritage gives money back, too. The Wasa Museum is a money making machine. And most of the top visited countries continue to be on the European continent, Spain and France being always number 1 or number 2 (and they certainly are countries that do protect well their heritage).
Anyhow, if you ever want archival research done on that Portuguese wreck of yours, let me know. I love a challenge.
(I have uncovered in the archives a most fantastic Portuguese wreck (no gold inside, alas) in the Caribbean and I might drop by your part of the world next year in order to help search for it. I am afraid I am not at the libertyto discuss it here)
