Survey-Report-FPL-77 by Maritime Archaeology Programme, University of Southern Denmark

2010 University of Southern Denmark, Maritime Archaeology Programme Report prepared by: Dr Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente Grundvad, Sarah Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus and Christian Thomsen Edited by: Dr Jens Auer

FIELDWORK REPORT OSTSEE BEREICH IV, FPL 77 (4AM WRECK) Report on the recovery and recording of site FPL 77, Prerow, MecklenburgVorpommern, Germany, conducted by the Maritime Archaeology Programme of the University of Southern Denmark as part of the Field school Course in July-August 2009. i

Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente Grundvad, Sarah Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus and Christian Thomsen Fieldwork Report Ostsee Bereich IV, Fischland, Fundplatz 77 Maritime Archaeology Programme University of Southern Denmark www.sdu.dk/maritimearchaeology

ÂŠ The authors, Landesamt fĂźr Kultur- und Denkmalpflege Mecklennburg-Vorpommern & University of Southern Denmark

ISBN: 978-87-992214-4-8 Subject headings: maritime archaeology, survey techniques, shipwreck, Fischland, wreck, field school

Published by: Maritime Archaeology Programme University of Southern Denmark Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10 6700 Esbjerg Denmark Printed in Denmark 2010

Acknowledgements The MAP fieldwork team (Konstantinos Alexiou, Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente Grundvad, Sarah Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus, Martin Lonergan, Thijs Maarleveld, Delia Ni Chiobhain, Andrew Stanek, Christian Thomsen and Cate Wagstaffe) would like to thank the Landesamt f체r Kultur und Denkmalpflege, Abteilung Arch채ologie und Denkmalpflege and in particular Dr Jens-Peter Schmidt for providing the opportunity to carry out the field school in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania, supporting the project and organising accommodation in Prerow. Further thanks go to Dr Michael Schirren for allowing us to recover and record the FPL 77 wreck and providing a dumpy level. We would also like to thank the Gesamtschule Prerow, and in particular the caretaker Herr Sch체tt, for accommodating the excavation team in the school yard. Further thanks go to Frau Pfeiffer in the Kurverwaltung Prerow, who provided tables and benches for our outdoor kitchen and organised waste collection. And last but not least we would like to thank Familie Fiedler for their support, not only with welcome food on the first day, but also with crockery, a fridge, a handcart and the construction of our UMA.

iii

Contents 1.

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Background............................................................................................................................................. 1 Aim and Objectives.............................................................................................................................................. 1 Co-ordinate System ............................................................................................................................................. 2

Site Location ...................................................................................................................................................... 2

Site History ........................................................................................................................................................ 3

Fieldwork in 2009 .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Organisation ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 Time frame......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Personnel............................................................................................................................................................ 4 Logistics .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Storage and preparation .............................................................................................................................. 5 Dismantling and recording ......................................................................................................................... 5 Sampling ............................................................................................................................................................. 7

Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 8 The wreck................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Clinker phase .................................................................................................................................................... 8 Carvel phase ................................................................................................................................................... 11 Interpretation ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Dating and construction sequence........................................................................................................ 13 Site context ..................................................................................................................................................... 15

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 17 6.

References....................................................................................................................................................... 17

Appendix 1: Plates ................................................................................................................................................. 21 Appendix 2: Timber records ............................................................................................................................. 39 Appendix 3: Report of dendrochronological analysis ............................................................................ 45

List of Figures Figure 1: Location of the Weststrand near Prerow on the Darss Peninsula in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania. Auer 2010 on the basis of a map prepared by NordNordWest, Wikimedia Commons. ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Recovery of the FPL 77 wreck parts on the beach. MAP 2009 ........................................... 3 Figure 3: The wreck is kept wet with an oscillating lawn sprinkler during daytime. Auer 2009. .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 4: MAP students drawing the overview plan of the clinker layer. The coloured tags used to identify fastenings are visible in the foreground. Auer 2009. ............................................... 6 Figure 5: Removal of planking from FPL 77. Planks are carefully lifted with plastic wedges and trenails are cut with a saw. Auer 2009. .................................................................................................. 6 Figure 6: 1:10 recording of frames. Auer 2009. ........................................................................................... 7 Figure 7: Schematic section through FPL 77 showing the construction sequence. Auer 2010 based on a drawing by Thomsen 2009. ........................................................................................................... 8 Figure 8: Toolmarks (axe) on frame 108. Auer 2009. ............................................................................... 9 Figure 9: Trapezoidal mark on frame 103. Auer 2009. ............................................................................ 9 Figure 10: Large mark on the moulded face of frame 106. The damage in the centre of the mark is recent. Auer 2009..................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 11: Distribution of scarf joints in the clinker planking of FPL 77. Auer 2009. ...............10 Figure 12: Impression of iron nail head in the outside of clinker planking. Auer 2009. ..........10 Figure 13: Wooden plug used to fill an old nail hole in the plank surface. Auer 2009. .............10 Figure 14: Filling piece 114 after removal. The 1m long and 11cm wide pine plank was held in place by a single iron nail. Auer 2009. ......................................................................................................11 Figure 15: Plank 123 is the only oak component in the filling layer. The plank was re-used and fastened to the outside of the clinker planking with a single iron nail. Auer 2009. ...........11 Figure 16: Fastenings on carvel outer plank 100. The impression of an iron nail is visible below the trenail. The red arrow marks a crescent shaped incision or cut. Grue 2009. ..........12 Figure 17: Plugged trenail on plank 101. Grue 2009. ..............................................................................12 Figure 18: Correlation of the clinker planking and framing of FPL77 with site and master chronologies in Northern Europe. Daly 2010. ............................................................................................13 Figure 19: Correlation of the carvel planks and frame 104 with master and site chronologies in Northern Europe. Daly 2010. .......................................................................................................................14 Figure 20: Distribution of registered archaeological sites and find spots in the vicinity of FPL 77. Schmidt 2010. ...................................................................................................................................................16

List of tables: Table 1: Registered archaeological sites and find spots near FPL 77. Pers. comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt LKD M-V 2010. ...................................................................................................................................... 16

vii

1. Introduction Project Background The Maritime Archaeology Masters Programme (MAP) is a two year international postgraduate course in Maritime Archaeology. It is part of the Institute for History and Civilization and based at Esbjerg Campus. One of the components of the Masters programme is a three week field school course. This course takes place in the period between the 2nd and 3rd semester. Seen in the context of the curriculum, the field school builds on the knowledge and skills the students acquire in the 1st and 2nd semester, and requires them to apply those in a practical setting. The curriculum states the following aims for the field school: “On completion of the course students should:  

have acquired a satisfactory level of competence in the use of maritime archaeological techniques and methods in the field; be able to place these activities in a broader analytical context with a view to describing, recapitulating and interpreting significant aspects of an archaeological excavation.”

For the year 2009, the field school course was organised in co-operation with the Landesamt für Kultur und Denkmalpflege, Abteilung Archäologie und Denkmalpflege, MecklenburgVorpommern (LKD M-V), the authority responsible for cultural heritage in the German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. A co-operation agreement regarding the organisation of field schools in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania was signed in June 2009. In order to facilitate the field school, the LKD M-V identified a wreck site that was located easily accessible in relatively shallow water and required archaeological documentation. The chosen site, Fundplatz 17 (FPL 17), near the village of Prerow, is potentially affected by the construction of a harbour for pleasure craft, so that the results of the field school can be used to inform the environmental assessment for the planned project (Auer 2010). However, on the 26.07.09, the field school participants were informed about the presence of another wreck or part of a wreck, Fundplatz 77 (FPL 77), on the Weststrand, a beach west of Prerow. They were asked to help with the recovery and recording of this wreck. This led to the field school being split into two projects, the underwater recording of FPL 17 and the recording of the recovered wreck part FPL 77 on dry land.

Aim and Objectives The aim of the field school was twofold: From a University point of view, the field school is an important part of the curriculum, which allows students to apply their knowledge and skills in a practical context. Students are supposed to learn the preparation, organisation and day to day running of field projects, as well as the tasks related to post-excavation analysis. In addition, the field school aimed at generating results which contribute to research in the field of maritime archaeology. With regards to site FPL 77, the specific objectives were:

   

to disassemble and fully record FPL 77 to sufficient standard in order to understand the construction and construction sequence of the wreck; to obtain samples for dendrochronological dating; to prepare a full archaeological report outlining the results of the work, following the standards of the LKD M-V; to prepare an article for a scientific journal on the results of the work.

As FPL 77 will be subject of a master thesis at the University of Southern Denmark, this report is kept at descriptive level. A full analysis and interpretation of the site will be carried out as part of the planned thesis project in 2010.

Co-ordinate System All positions in this report are stated in Easting and Northing based on the Universal Transverse Mercator co-ordinate system (UTM), using the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84) ellipsoid. The site falls into zone 33U North. Co-ordinate conversions are conducted using GEOTRANS V 2.41.

2. Site Location The wreck parts associated with FPL 77 were found on the coast of the Fischland-DarssZingst peninsula in the German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Mecklenburg Western Pomerania) (Figure 1). They were located on the Weststrand, a westward facing stretch of beach leading up to the northernmost tip of the peninsula, Darsser Ort. The position was E 337166; N 6037318. The find spot lies in the core protection zone of the coastal national park (Nationalpark Vorpommersche Boddenlandschaft). The Fischland-Darss-Zingst peninsula is heavily affected by coastal dynamics. Studies based on the evaluation of historical maps have shown that the beaches on the western side of the peninsula are subject to constant coastal erosion. A detailed analysis for the stretch of beach between coastal kilometre 186,000 and 192,0001 shows the varying rate of erosion and allows a reconstruction of the coastline through time (Plate 1 – Appendix 1) (Tiepolt et al. 1999; Thuerkow 2009). With an average of 1.69m Figure 1: Location of the Weststrand near Prerow on the per year, the highest rates of coastal erosion Darss Peninsula in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania. Auer 2010 on the basis of a map prepared by occurred in the period from 1695-1835. NordNordWest, Wikimedia Commons. Erosion rates then decreased to ca. 0.55m per year and are currently increasing again (Tiepolt et al. 1999). The adjacent area between Beginning at the western border, in Priwall, the coast of Mecklenburg Western Pomerania has been subdivided into coastal kilometres. This system, called Küstenkilometrierung (KKM) allows easy orientation along the coastline. Fixed datum points are spaced a kilometre apart, with additional points in 200m or 250m distance between them. 1

coastal kilometre 192000 and 195000 includes the sandy hook Darsser Ort and is characterised by accumulation. The wreck parts associated with FPL 77 were located near coastal kilometre 190200. According to the reconstruction by Tiepolt and Schumacher, the beach in this area has receded by approximately 400m since 1695 (compared to 1983) (Plate 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Appendix 1) (Tiepolt et al. 1999). A more detailed analysis of the site location and the possible association with known sites can be found in section 5. When first noted, the wreck parts were almost fully exposed on the beach. Just before recovery on the morning of the 28.07.09, increasing westerly winds led to high water level and strong surf on the beach. As a result, the wreck parts were almost covered by sediment with only a few planks visible.

3. Site History The wreck parts on the beach were first noted by a tourist at the end of July 2009. It is unclear how long they had been exposed for and where they came from. Weather forecasts for the period in question report onshore winds, but no gales. The tourist notified the the national park administration (Nationalparkverwaltung), which in turn contacted LKD M-V on July 24th, 2009. On the same day, Dr Michael Schirren from the LKD M-V inspected the site and started to organise a recovery2. The field school participants were approached to help recovering and recording the site on July 26th, 2009. Recovery was planned for July 28th, 2009, 5am to minimise interference with touristic activities on the popular beach. The wreck parts were recovered by a team consisting of Dr Schirren and his family, all members of the MAP field school and two employees of the construction company Ramm-, Erd- und Wasserbau Gerhard Figure 2: Recovery of the FPL 77 wreck parts on the beach. MAP 2009 Bossow. An officer from the national park administration was also present. The timbers were sketched and photographed in situ. Afterwards they were carefully excavated by hand and with shovels and lifted with the help of a digger (Figure 2). Suspended on a large wooden palette they could be transported to a waiting truck. As they were to be recorded by field school participants, it was decided to store them outside the gym at Gesamtschule Prerow for the duration of the recording project. After disassembly, recording and sampling, the loose timbers were stored on the wooden palette, wrapped in foil and secured with ropes. Old sleeping mats were used to support fragile timbers. The palette was collected by Ramm-, Erd- und Wasserbau Gerhard Bossow on 2

Pers. Comm. Dr C. Michael Schirren, 13.01.2010.

August 13th, 2009. It is currently stored by this company in the harbour of Barth, but will be transferred to LKD M-V for conservation in the near future.

4. Fieldwork in 2009 Organisation Time frame The FPL 77 wreck parts were recovered on July 28th 2009. Recording started the same day and was finished after 15 days on August 11th, 2009. The timbers were then prepared for transport and collected on August 13th 2009. Personnel As the field school was originally planned around site FPL 17 only, the work programme had to be rearranged after the discovery of FPL 77. The survey team consisted of 12 divers, ten students of the Maritime Archaeology Masters Programme and two teaching staff. Dive teams for FPL 17 were made up of four members with another four preparing the subsequent dive. Dependent on other tasks and logistics, this left between two and four people who could work on the recording of FPL 77. Rather than having a fixed â&#x20AC;&#x153;recording teamâ&#x20AC;? each day, the work schedule on FPL 77 followed the planning for FPL 17 in order to guarantee smooth diving operations. In practice, this often meant that a drawing started by one person had to be finished by another. This made good communication essential. To maximise the learning outcome and provide a realistic work environment, the responsibility of planning and organising the day to day running of the survey was shared with the students. Each day one student acted as site director and had to plan the day, carry out a morning briefing and write the site diary. Days were then discussed during evening debriefings. Progress was constantly posted on the Maritime Archaeology Programme blog (Auer 2009). The site director was responsible for both, the underwater work on FPL 17, as well as the recording of FPL 77 and diaries were kept for both sites. Logistics The survey team was accommodated in tents on the school yard of Gesamtschule Prerow in the village of Prerow. The washroom facilities in the school gym could be used and a gym changing room was converted to site office and housed computers and survey equipment. Access to a water hose allowed cleaning the equipment after diving. A field kitchen was established on the school yard. It was decided to store FPL 77 outside on the car park of the gym. In this location the timbers were least affected by sunlight and a ramp allowed photography from a higher position. The area was within reach of the freshwater supply of the gym and wastewater drains were present. The wreck parts were left on the wooden palette they had been recovered on.

Methodology

Storage and preparation The wreck was kept wet with an oscillating lawn sprinkler in daytime to prevent the timbers from drying out. A freshwater well at the gym provided the necessary water supply (Figure 3). Overnight, the timbers were covered with thick black pond liner. After disassembly, smaller parts were stored in makeshift freshwater tanks built from old wardrobes and pond liner. Long planks were kept wrapped up in pond liner next to the wreck. They were sprayed with freshwater at regular intervals. Prior to recording, the whole wreck was carefully cleaned with soft brushes and running water. All visible elements were marked with waterproof tags with unique Figure 3: The wreck is kept wet with an oscillating lawn identifiers starting with No 100 (see sprinkler during daytime. Auer 2009. Appendix 2 for a list of all timbers). This process was repeated after the removal of each layer. Dismantling and recording A first quick survey of the recovered section indicated that it was part of a vessel which had been converted from clinker to carvel by smoothing out the clinker outline with filling pieces and subsequently re-planking with carvel outer planks (see section 5). This led to the presence of three individual layers, each representing a stage in the construction sequence. After consultation with Dr Schirren from the LKD M-V it was decided to fully dismantle the section as to be able to record all details of construction and then conserve elements individually. In order to understand the construction sequence, it was decided to disassemble the wreck section layer by layer, starting from the outside with the carvel planking. Each layer was recorded in situ before removal. Recording consisted of:    

a projected plan view of each layer, drawn at a scale of 1:10; photographic documentation; a written description; and dumpy level spot height measurements along the frames.

The plan view was drawn using offset measurements from a central baseline. As the carvel outer planking covered underlying layers, and there were no possibilities to fasten a 5

permanent baseline on the wreck section, the baseline had to be relayed after the recording of the carvel layer. The same baseline was used for the remaining layers. Plan view drawing were drawn with pencil on millimetric permatrace and inked during post-processing (see Appendix 1 for all drawings). After removal of the first layer, a multitude of fastenings became visible, all part of different phases of construction. Figure 4: MAP students drawing the overview plan of Consequently it was decided to tag all the clinker layer. The coloured tags used to identify fastenings are visible in the foreground. Auer 2009. fastenings with coloured tags in order to gain a systematic overview of construction sequence. Red tags served to mark all fastenings associated with the outer carvel replanking. Blue/ Green tags were chosen for original clinker planking fastenings and yellow tags marked the fastenings of filling pieces. Further colours were added as necessary (Figure 4). A Pentax K10D digital SLR was used for photographic recording. All photographs were captured as RAW files and processed in Adobe Lightroom 2.5. Each layer was recorded with overview shots as well as with a number of detail photographs taken from either side of the wreck section. For lack of a total station, a dumpy level3 was used to document the elevation of cross sections in the three planking layers to get an idea of the horizontal and vertical curvature of the hull in its different stages. A reference point with the assumed height of zero was established on the wooden palette and height readings were taken in relation to this point. They were noted on clear sheets of permatrace overlaid over the 1:10 section drawings. The process was repeated for each layer.

Figure 5: Removal of planking from FPL 77. Planks are carefully lifted with plastic wedges and trenails are cut with a saw. Auer 2009.

All elevations were then imported into the 3D modelling software Rhinoceros3D and plotted as 3D lines. Surfaces generated from these lines show the curvature of the wreck section (Plate 2 and 4, Appendix 1). As soon as in situ recording of a layer was finished, it was removed. Plastic wedges were driven underneath the planks from the sides to carefully lift them. Trenails were then cut with a saw. Once loose, planks were lifted off the wreck, cleaned with brushes and prepared for further recording (Figure 5).

The instrument was kindly provided by Dr Schirren, LKD M-V.

First each major timber4 was drawn at a scale of 1:10 (Figure 6). For planks the inboard and outboard faces as well as a number of sections were recorded. For frames, all four sides were drawn. Initially drawing was carried out in pencil on millimetric permatrace. In post-processing all drawings were inked and finally digitised (see Appendix 1). In addition, all timbers were photographed from all sides, again with a Pentax K10D Figure 6: 1:10 recording of frames. Auer 2009. digital SLR. Timber details, such as fastenings or tool marks were also photographed. The RAW files were processed in Adobe Lightroom 2.5 and XNView was used to catalogue and describe photographs and generate photo lists for each timber. Finally all timbers were described and sketched on pre-printed timber recording sheets. A tabularised summary of the timber records can be found in Appendix 2. Sampling In order to date the wreck section, ten dendrochronological samples were cut. It was taken care to include samples of framing and planking from all three layers of the construction. Timbers to be sampled were chosen based on their level of preservation, the number of treerings visible and the existence of sapwood. Their significance for an understanding of the construction sequence was also considered. In all three frames, four clinker planks and two carvel planks were sampled. One plank (123) was sampled although the number of treerings was low, as it was assumed to be a repair in the clinker phase. Samples were cut with a handsaw. Their locations were photographed and marked on drawings and timber sheets. All samples were assigned unique numbers. They were wrapped in cling foil and stored in sealed plastic bags. The dendrochronological samples were analysed by Aoife Daly (Dendro.dk). More information on the methodology can be found in the report (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3). Additionally, samples of the waterproofing material and surface covering from the planking layer were taken. As waterproofing material and caulking seemed to vary between layers, two samples were collected for each layer. A surface covering on planks 120 and 135 was also sampled. All samples were marked and stored in sealed plastic bags. They are currently being analysed, but the results were not yet available for this fieldwork report.

The smaller parts of the filling piece layer between clinker planking and carvel planking were not all drawn individually at 1:10 and only recorded photographically and on timber sheets. 4

5. Results The wreck Wreck part FPL 77 is a section of hull from a clinker vessel that was later re-planked with carvel outer planks (Figure 7). It was found with the outer planking facing upwards, almost entirely covered by sand (Figure 2). The overall dimensions were 5.23m x 1.8m. The hull section consisted of eleven frames, all with joggles cut into the outside face to receive the inboard faces of the clinker hull planking. Five strakes of clinker planking were preserved in situ (Plate 4, Appendix 1). On the outside of these, a layer of irregular softwood pieces was attached in order to provide a smooth surface for attaching the carvel outer planks (Plate 3, Appendix 1). Two carvel planks were still attached to the section (Plate 2, Appendix 1). While carvel planks and the outside of clinker planking and frames were very well preserved, the inside faces of all clinker planks and the frames were heavily eroded by the roots of sea grass. This would indicate that the wreck section was originally located on the seabed with the frames facing upwards and the planking protected by sediment. The possible origin of FPL 77 will be discussed at the end of this chapter. Figure 7: Schematic section through FPL 77 showing the construction sequence. Auer 2010 based on a drawing by Thomsen 2009.

In the following section, the construction of FPL 77 is described by layer, following the

possible construction sequence. Clinker phase The eleven clinker frames (103-112, 137) are all of oak. They are joggled on the outside face to receive the clinker outer planks. Frame lengths range from 0.87m to 1.51m. Average moulded dimensions are 9.5cm to 15cm while sided dimensions range from 8cm to 21cm (see Plate 5-10, Appendix 1). Frame heels either show remains of scarf joints (103, 105, 107, 108) or are cut square or at an angle (104, 106, 110). Four frames are broken at the heel (109, 111, 112, 137). The breaks are heavily eroded and thus probably not recent. With two exceptions, frame heads are broken and/ or eroded. Some of the breaks are fairly fresh which would indicate recent damage. In frame 107 and 109, the head tapers out, possibly the remains of a scarf joint. Judging by the presence of scarf joints at frame heels, it would appear that all preserved frames are side timbers.

While the outside face of most frames was well preserved, all inside faces were heavily eroded by sea grass which made it difficult to recognise toolmarks. However, visible toolmarks most probably stem from axes (Figure 8). On two (104, 105) of the three frames sampled for dendrochronological dating, a considerable amount of sapwood was still present on the inside face. All sapwood had been removed on the outside face that was Figure 8: Toolmarks (axe) on frame 108. Auer 2009. in contact with the outer planks (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3). Trenails from all phases of construction were observed in the framing timbers. Those only associated with the clinker phase were cut flush with the frame on the inside, probably during the rebuild. Trenails that fastened the carvel outer planking protruded from the inside face of the frames by up to 4.5cm, thus indicating the presence and possible thickness of ceiling planks. Ceiling planks seem to have been fastened only by the "carvel layer" Figure 9: Trapezoidal mark on frame 103. Auer 2009. trenails. Concretion around some iron nail holes on the inside of the frames also indicates a ceiling plank fastening with iron nails, possibly as preliminary fastening before the trenail holes were drilled. Marks, the purpose of which is currently unclear, were observed on the moulded faces of frame 103 and 106. On frame 103 the mark is located at the heel. It consists of a trapezoid shape with a line connecting the two pointed ends (Figure 9). At the heel of frame 106, another, larger mark was found. This comprises of an X Figure 10: Large mark on the moulded face of frame with two angled lines at either side and an 106. The damage in the centre of the mark is recent. Auer 2009. additional line protruding between the upper two wings of the X (Figure 10). An additional, very roughly hewn x-shaped mark was found near the head on the same side of the frame. This coincides with a joggle and might be marking the position of the step in the frame. Further, very rough marks were observed in the moulded faces of a number of frames, but these were not as recognisable as those described. 9

Five strakes of the original clinker planking are partially preserved. Each strake, but for the highest one (113) features a scarf and thus consists of two planks or plank fragments (132 / 134) (131 / 135) (120 / 133) (102 / 128). As with the frames, outer surfaces are in a relatively good condition, while the inside face of all planks is heavily eroded by sea grass growth (Plate 11 to 14, Appendix 1). As far as could be determined, all clinker planks are from radially split oak5. Toolmarks indicate that the planks were finished with axes or possibly adzes. On two of the planks sampled for dendrochronological dating, there was no sapwood present. The other two planks retain very little sapwood (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3).

Figure 11: Distribution of scarf joints in the clinker planking of FPL 77. Auer 2009.

Figure 12: Impression of iron nail head in the outside of clinker planking. Auer 2009.

Only two of the nine planks are preserved from end to end (120 and 131). These measure 3.08m and 3.46m in length. The length of the fragmented planks varies between 1.16m and 3.68m, indicating that the longest original planks would have been over 3.68m in length. The average full width of the planks is 20-25cm and they are between 20mm and 30mm in thickness.

Overlapping strakes were secured by square shafted iron nails driven through augered holes from the outside and clenched over roves on the inboard face. Although most of the nails have eroded, impressions of nail heads and roves are clearly visible. The nails were placed along the lower edge of the plank with an average spacing of 15-25cm. The land varied from 5cm to 8cm. Overlaps were bevelled on all planks. In some instances hollow grooves Figure 13: Wooden plug used to fill an old nail hole in for luting material were observed, but these the plank surface. Auer 2009. are not present on all planks. In addition all planks were roughly bevelled along their lower edge. As this bevel has been more roughly Three of four clinker planks sampled for dendrochronological dating are definitely split radially, for one of the planks the method of conversion could not be determined (Daly 2009) 8Appendix 3) 5

worked than the rest of the plank surfaces, it seems likely that it was part of the smoothening process in which the filling piece layer was applied. Planks of the same strake are joined with simple scarfs, all oriented in the same direction (aft) to prevent water entering the seams. The scarf direction indicates that the wreck section was part of the port side of the vessel. Scarf lengths vary between 20cm and 30cm. Often scored lines mark the beginning of scarfs. The joints were secured with a number of iron nails and mats of tarred luting material were used to waterproof the seams. Plank joints in neighbouring strakes are spaced at least one or two frames apart to avoid weakening the hull structure (Figure 11). For photographic documentation and drawing purposes all fastening associated with the clinker phase were marked with Figure 14: Filling piece 114 after removal. The 1m long blue pins, green pins or white pins. The and 11cm wide pine plank was held in place by a single three colours were used for supply reasons, iron nail. Auer 2009. they do not in any way reflect a different coding. Both, the original fastenings of this layer and any intermediate refastening of it were marked. Fastenings include iron nails and trenails. Iron nails were used to secure overlaps between planks and scarf joints, but were also positioned less systematically to fasten planks to each other or to other elements. They had square shanks (4mm â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 5mm square) and round heads with a diameter of approximately 18mm (Figure 12). In many cases the nail heads impressions sit in square recesses cut with a chisel or a similar implement. The nails were clenched over iron roves of similar diameter on the inboard face of the planking. Often, old iron nails were replaced and small wooden plugs were used to seal the nailholes (Figure 13). Trenails fasten the clinker planking to the frames. One trenail connects each plank to every other timber. The treenails are not wedged or plugged on the outside. They are Figure 15: Plank 123 is the only oak component in the 31mm to 34mm in diameter.

filling layer. The plank was re-used and fastened to the outside of the clinker planking with a single iron nail. Auer 2009.

The waterproofing material between plank overlaps and scarf joints was sampled. The samples have been submitted for analysis, but at the time of writing of this report, results were not yet available.

Carvel phase Prior to re-planking with carvel outer planks, the steps in the clinker planking were filled with roughly hewn, irregular softwood and oak pieces in order to provide a smooth surface for the carvel planks to rest on. This â&#x20AC;&#x153;filling layerâ&#x20AC;? consisted of 15 pieces (114, 115, 116/ 1256 , 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 130, 136). All but three (123, 6

116 and 125 are fragments of the same piece of timber.

121, 115) pieces are made of softwood, either fir or pine. Piece 123 is the remains of a reused oak clinker plank. Although the plank was sampled for dendrochronological dating, it did not have enough rings and a date could not be obtained (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3) (Plate 10, Appendix 1). As they were sandwiched between clinker and carvel planks, the filling pieces are well preserved. Toolmarks from axe or adze and in some cases possibly saw are clearly visible.

Figure 16: Fastenings on carvel outer plank 100. The impression of an iron nail is visible below the trenail. The red arrow marks a crescent shaped incision or cut. Grue 2009.

Lengths vary from 30cm to 2m and above and all pieces are wedge shaped or triangular in section. Before being held in place by the carvel planking, the filling pieces were temporarily fastened to the clinker planks with one or two squareshanked iron nails each (Figure 14).

Two carvel planks remained in situ on the outboard side of FPL 77 (100, 101). Both are in good condition, but show traces of abrasion on the outer face. The inside ends are slightly eroded by sea grass growth. Both planks have been cut tangentially from the parent timber, using a saw (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3) (Plate 15, Appendix 1). Saw marks are faintly visible on the plank surface and the inside surfaces appear charred, possibly as a result of deforming the planks over an open fire, a common practice in the 16th and 17th century7. The carvel planks have a maximum length of 5.16m and are up to 48cm wide and 4cm thick. They were fastened with treenails (32-34mm) and iron nails. The treenails Figure 17: Plugged trenail on plank 101. Grue 2009. were hammered into holes augered through the filling layer, original clinker planking and framing. They are either plain, wedged or plugged with a single square plug in the centre. As the nails protrude from the inside sided face of the frames by two to three centimetres, it seems likely that they also fastened the ceiling planking. Iron nails with round head (2cm diameter) and square shaft (ca. 6mm x 6mm) were used at plank butts and along the upper and lower edge of the planks, probably as a preliminary fastening before the trenail holes were drilled. While some of the iron nail holes are plugged with small wooden plugs over iron nail shafts still in place, other iron nails remained in the plank. On plank 100, crescent shaped incisions or cuts in the outer plank surface seem to indicate the position of fastenings.

See e.g. (KuĚ&#x2C6;hn 1999, 63)

Interpretation Dating and construction sequence In order to help understanding and interpreting the sequence of construction of FPL 77, dendrochronological samples of all recognisable layers or phases were taken. Sampling included clinker framing and planking and carvel planking. The filling layer was found unsuitable for dendrochronological sampling. Plank 123, the only oak component of this layer was sampled despite of a low tree ring count, but could not be dated. The full dendrochronology report can be found in Appendix 3 (Daly 2009).

Figure 18: Correlation of the clinker planking and framing of FPL77 with site and master chronologies in Northern Europe. Daly 2010.

Internal correlation of the tree ring curves of all samples allowed dividing the material in two distinctive groups, one consisting of the two carvel outer planks (100, 101) and a single frame (104)8 and the second one containing all remaining clinker planks and frames (102, 113, 120, 131; 105, 109). Two of the clinker planks probably stem from the same tree (120, 131). A correlation between the two mean curves of the ship and selected chronologies from Northern Europe shows that the two timber groups originate in different areas. While clinker planks and frames match best with chronologies from the Ă&#x2DC;resund region, the carvel planks and clinker frame 104 achieve the highest correlation with material from the towns LĂźbeck, Schwerin and Wismar (Figure 18, 19). Frame 104 is the only frame in which no trenails from the clinker phase are present, thus supporting the assumption that this frame was inserted during the rebuilding. 8

Taking into account all material and allowing for missing sapwood, the felling date is estimated to ca. AD 1590. It is not possible to differentiate the felling date of the two groups of timbers and thus the construction phases of FPL 77 (Daly 2009).

Figure 19: Correlation of the carvel planks and frame 104 with master and site chronologies in Northern Europe. Daly 2010.

However, when using the results of the dendrochronological analysis in conjunction with the observations made during the recording of the wreck, it is possible to attempt a reconstruction of the construction sequence. It would seem that the ship was originally built as a clinker vessel from wood originating in the Ă&#x2DC;resund region. All planks were radially split from oak and finished with axes or possibly adzes. They were fastened to each other with iron nails, and trenails without wedges or plugs were used to fasten clinker frames to planks. The clinker vessel must have been in use for a while, as a number of iron nails were replaced and old nail holes were plugged with wooden plugs. At some stage, the vessel was completely rebuilt. Softwood filling pieces were nailed to the outside of the original clinker planking, and the lower edges of clinker planks were bevelled in order to provide a smooth outer surface. Inside the vessel, the ceiling planking was removed (if it was present in the first place) and all old trenails were cut flush with the surface of frames. The dendrochronological analysis indicates that at least one frame (104) was replaced. In a next step, carvel outer planks were nailed to the filling layer and clinker planking with iron nails around their edges. The planks were tangentially sawn and deformed over open 14

fire. Outer planks as well as frame 104 originate from the area around the Hanse town L端beck. At the same time ceiling planks were nailed to the inside of the existing framing. Finally, news holes were augered through carvel outer planks, filling layer, clinker planking, framing and ceiling planks and new trenails were hammered into place. Some of these nails were secured with wedges or central plugs on the outside. The iron nails used for temporary fastening were either left in place, or, where they were damaged or broken, the nail holes were sealed with small wooden plugs from the outside. The final result of the rebuilding was a conversion of FPL 77 to a carvel vessel. The original clinker planking and framing remained sandwiched between carvel outer planks and ceiling planks. Site context In this section an attempt will be made to reconstruct the original location of the wreck part and thus the possible location of the site which FPL77 was part of. A possible association with other known sites in the area will also be investigated. In order to reconstruct the possible original location of FPL 77, three factors have to be considered: coastal erosion, seabed environment and prevailing wind direction. Coastal erosion is probably the most decisive factor. FPL 77 was found near coastal kilometre 190200, and thus in an area of erosion (see section 2 and Plate 1, Appendix 1). Using the data provided by Tiepolt and Schumacher (Tiepolt et al. 1999) it is possible to reconstruct the coastline for the year 1696 (Plate 16, Appendix 1). Data for earlier periods is not available, but the curve for 1696 is probably relevant considering a date of construction of the vessel around 1590. Plate 16 shows the reconstructed coastline for an area of approximately one kilometre to either side of the find spot running up to 400m further west and thus seaward, than the present coastline. With westerly winds prevailing on the western shore of the Fischland-Darss-Zingst peninsula, section FPL 77 could have broken loose from a site located near the coastline of 1696 and drifted towards the shore. A very likely area for the location of the wreck site which FPL 77 was part off would then be a rectangle covering a 100m wide area 300m to either side of the find spot (Plate 16). Such a rectangle would have the following corner co-ordinates: E 336981.625, N 6037785.224; E 336709.564, N 6037243.904; E 336621.06, N 6037290.744, E 336898.853, N 6037826.897. Bearing in mind a westerly wind direction and an alongshore current running northwards, this search area might have to be expanded towards the south-west. The water depth in this area would be between 5m and 8m. As stated before, the erosion of the inside of frames and planks by sea grass roots suggests that FPL 77 was laying on the seabed with the inside of the vessel facing upwards and the outer planking buried in sediment. Common sea grass (Zostera Marina) generally grows in water depths of up to 10m, and could thus be found in the estimated search area9.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gew%C3%B6hnliches_Seegras

Figure 20: Distribution of registered archaeological sites and find spots in the vicinity of FPL 77. Schmidt 2010.

To date, eight archaeological sites have been registered in the area around the find spot of FPL 77. These include four ship wrecks, three loose ship timbers or timber assemblages found on the beach and an assemblage of posts near the beach (Figure 20 and Table 1)10. Site (Fischland, Ostsee IV) FPL 28 FPL 30 FPL 31 FPL 43 FPL 72 FPL 73 FPL 74 FPL 75

Description

Date

25m long wreck of a wooden, carvel-built vessel. Possibly 3 mast bark “Elisabeth” Unknown wreck near shore. Possibly fast attack craft (Schnellboot) Logboat from softwood Wreck of schooner ”Barbro” Sternpost assembly Assemblage of wooden posts near shore Wooden decoration Fragment of oak plank

Unknown Unknown Unknown 1940 1819 Unknown Unknown Unknown

Table 1: Registered archaeological sites and find spots near FPL 77. Pers. comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt LKD M-V 2010.

However, the shipwrecks are unlikely to be associated with FPL 77, as they are either located too far inshore or known to be of younger date. Of the loose finds, only the fragmented oak plank (FPL 75) and the wooden decoration (FPL 74) could possibly be connected with FPL 77. The sternpost assembly (FPL 72) can be seen as a good indication for the presence of further, undiscovered wreck sites in the vicinity. 10

Pers. Comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt, LKD M-V, 20.01.2010

Conclusion The work on FPL 77 provided a welcome addition to the field school in Prerow. Besides working with the recording of an underwater site, students had the opportunity to record, disassemble and study a wreck section in great detail on dry land. This report summarises the results of the recording and provides preliminary conclusions on character and construction of the wreck. Wreck section FPL 77 could be identified as part of the port side of a vessel built around 1590. The vessel was originally constructed in the clinker tradition from trees felled in the Øresund region. At some point in its career it was re-planked with carvel outer planks and ceiling planks, and thus practically “converted” to a carvel built ship. The timbers used for the rebuilding stem from the area around the German Hanse town Lübeck. With these characteristics, FPL 77 is part of a relatively small group of ship finds from the Southern Baltic that show signs of a similar clinker to carvel conversion or rebuilding (Förster 2009; Mäss 1991; Ossowski 2006)11. FPL 77 has been chosen as the subject of a master thesis at the University of Southern Denmark12. The thesis will attempt to compare FPL 77 to other wrecks converted in a similar way and investigate the following aspects:    

Which types or kinds of vessels were converted? Is it a specific vessel type that the double planking is applied to and in that case what kind of vessel is it? How were these vessels converted? What construction techniques were used? Where they were built? Is there a specific area the converted vessels are concentrated in or are they common all over Europe? And ultimately: Why were these vessels converted? What is the purpose of the carvel conversion? Was it a part of the original design, a repair to prolong the life expectancy, or a reinforcement for a specific purpose?

6. References Gewöhnliches Seegras – Wikipedia. Available at: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gew%C3%B6hnliches_Seegras [Accessed February 16, 2010]. Auer, J. 2009. Prerow Fieldschool 2009 « Maritime Archaeology Programme. Available at: http://maritimearchaeologyprogramdenmark.wordpress.com/tag/prerowfieldschool-2009/ [Accessed December 17, 2009]. Auer, J. 2010. Survey Report Prerow FPL 17. Esbjerg: Maritime Archaeology Programme, University of Southern Denmark. Another wreck with similar characteristics was part of a ship barrier across the entrance of the Greifswalder Bodden in Mecklenburg western-Pomerania (Mönchgut FPL 67). This wreck was recently lifted and fully recorded. It dates to the late 17th century (Pers. Comm. Jana Heinze, site director LKD M-V) 12 Bente Grundvad, Maritime Archaeology Programme, University of Southern Denmark. Thesis project due to be completed in autumn 2010. 11

Daly, A. 2009. Dendrochronology Report: 4AM Wreck, Darss, Germany FPL 77. Copenhagen: dendro.dk. Förster, T. 2009. Große Handelsschiffe des Spätmittelaters: Untersuchungen an zwei Wrackfunden des 14. Jahrhundert vor der Insel Hiddensee und Insel Poel 1st ed. Convent. Kühn, H.J. 1999. Gestrandet bei Uelvesbüll : Wrackarchäologie in Nordfriesland. Husum: Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft. Mäss, V. 1991. Prospects for underwater archaeology in the Eastern Baltic. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 20(4): 313-320. Ossowski, W. 2006. Two double-planked wrecks from Poland. In L. Blue & F. Hocker (eds) Connected by the sea : proceedings of the tenth International Symposium on Boat and Ship Archaeology, Roskilde 2003, 259-265. Oxford: Oxbow Thuerkow, D. 2009. Entstehung und Dynamik der Landschaft Fischland-Darß-Zingst. Available at: http://mars.geographie.unihalle.de/geovlexcms/golm/geomorph/ausgleichskueste [Accessed December 17, 2009]. Tiepolt, L., & Schumacher, W. 1999. Historische bis rezente Küstenveränderungen im Raum Fischland-Darss-Zingst-Hiddensee anhand von Karten, Luft- und Satellitenbildern. Die Küste 61: 22-45.

Appendix 1: Plates Plate 1: Location of the wreck parts associated with FPL 77. The areas of coastal erosion and accumulation after Tiepolt and Schumacher are marked in red, the diagram shows coastal erosion in the area between 1695 and 1983 (0-axis). Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ÂŠLAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999. Plate 2: Overview of carvel layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements. Plate 3: Overview of filling layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template. Plate 4: Overview of clinker layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements. Plate 5: Frame 103, 104. Plate 6: Frame 105, 106. Plate 7: Frame 107, 108. Plate 8: Frame 109, 110. Plate 9: Frame 111, 112. Plate 10: Frame 137; Filling layer: plank 123, piece 115, 116. Plate 11: Clinker plank 102, 113. Plate 12: Clinker plank 120, 128. Plate 13: Clinker plank 131, 132. Plate 14: Clinker plank 133, 134, 135. Plate 15: Carvel plank 100, 101. The planks were recorded at a scale of 1:10, but have been reduced to 1:20 to fit into the A3 report template. Plate 16: Proposed search area for the original location of the wreck site associated with FPL 77. The reconstructed coastline for the year 1696 is shown in white.. Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ÂŠLAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999.

on um ula ti acc of Ar ea

KKM 190250 KKM 192000

Are

a of

ero

sion

FPL 77 E 337166, N 6037318

Project: Site Code:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77

Jens Auer

Inked by: Digitised by:

Drawing No: Date:

Drawn by:

20.01.10

Scale:

Plate 1: Location of the wreck parts associated with FPL 77. The areas of coastal erosion and accumulation after Tiepolt & Schumacher are marked in red, the diagram shows coastal erosion in the area between 1695 and 1983 (0-axis). Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ÂŠLAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999

3D reconstruction of carvel plank curvature made in Rhinoceros3D, based on the dumpy level measurements taken in the ďŹ eld. Reconstruction by Andrew Stanek.

Top

forward aft

Bottom Project: Site Code: Drawing No:

Plate 2: Overview of carvel layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to ďŹ t into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements.

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S2

Date:

01.08.2009

Scale:

1:20 (reduced from 1:10)

Drawn by:

CT, BGN, CW, ML, PG, KA

Inked by:

Digitised by:

Photograph of ﬁlling layer with fastenings marked by layer. Auer 2009.

Top

aft

forward

Bottom Project: Site Code: 0

Plate 3: Overview of ﬁlling layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to ﬁt into the A3 report template.

Drawing No: 1m

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S6

Date:

03.08.2009

Scale:

1:20

Drawn by:

CT, BGN

Inked by:

Digitised by:

Photograph of clinker layer with fastenings marked by layer. Auer 2009.

3D reconstruction of clinker plank curvature made in Rhinoceros3D, based on the dumpy level measurements taken in the ďŹ eld. Reconstruction by Andrew Stanek.

Top

aft

forward

Bottom Project: Site Code: 0

Drawing No: 1m

Plate 4: Overview of clinker layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to ďŹ t into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements.

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S8

Date:

04.08.2009

Scale:

1:20

Drawn by:

CT, BGN, KA

Inked by:

Digitised by:

Frame 103

Frame 104

Heel

Head

A A

C C

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 5: Frame 103 and 104.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S24, S19

Date:

12.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

BGN, JA, CW BGN, CW JA

Frame 105

Frame 106

Heel

Head

B B

C C

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 6: Frame 105, 106.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S31, S27

Date:

12.08.2009, 11.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by:

AS, LGL

Inked by:

As, LGL

Digitised by:

Frame 107

Frame 108

Heel

Head

A A

B B

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 7: Frame 107, 108.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S29, S21

Date:

12.08.2009, 08.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by:

CW, MLPG

Inked by:

CW, MLPG

Digitised by:

Frame 109

Frame 110

Heel

Head

A A

B B

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 8: Frame 109, 110.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S28, S30

Date:

11.08.2009, 12.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

CT, MLPG, DNIC CT, DNIC JA

Frame 111

Frame 112

Heel

Head

A A

B B

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 9: Frame 111, 112.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S25, S18

Date:

10.08.2009, 09.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

SF, CT, DNIC CT, DNIC JA

Frame 137

Piece 116, Filling layer

Heel

Stern>

<Bow

Head

A Outboard face

B B B Inboard face

Piece 115, Filling layer A Outboard face

A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face

Plank 123, Filling layer <Bow

Stern> A

Outboard face

B B

Inboard face

Inboard face A A= upper edge; B= lower edge

A= upper edge; B= lower edge

Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 10: Frame 137, Filling layer: Plank 123, piece 115, 116.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S20, S11, S9

Date:

09.08.2009, 04.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

KA, LGL; MLPG, CT; AS LGL; MLPG; AS JA

Clinker plank 102 <Bow

WaterprooďŹ ng

Stern>

Outboard face B

Surface covering

B Inboard face

Clinker plank 113 Outboard face A

Inboard face B

A A= upper edge; B= lower edge Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 11: Clinker plank 102, 113.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S13, S16

Date:

08.08.2009, 09.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

DNIC; KA, CW, SF DNIC, CW JA

Clinker plank 120

Stern>

<Bow

Outboard face

Tar covering

Area eroded by sea grass

Inboard face

Clinker plank 128

Outboard face

Inboard face

Area eroded by sea grass

A= upper edge; B= lower edge Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 12: Clinker plank 120, 128.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S17, S12

Date:

09.08.2009, 05.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by: Inked by: Digitised by:

BGN, SF; MLPG BGN, MLPG JA

Clinker plank 131 A

<Bow

Stern>

Outboard face

B Inboard face

A A

Clinker plank 132

Outboard face

Inboard face

A A= upper edge; B= lower edge Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 13: Clinker plank 131, 132.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S22, S26

Date:

09.08.2009, 10.08.2009

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by:

BGN, BGN

Inked by:

BGN, BGN

Digitised by:

Clinker plank 133 Stern>

<Bow A Outboard face

Inboard face

Clinker plank 135

Clinker plank 134

A Outboard face Outboard face B

B B

B Inboard face Inboard face A

A= upper edge; B= lower edge Trenail hole

Wooden plug

Concretion

Project: Site Code:

Trenail

50 cm

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 14: Clinker plank 133, 134, 135.

Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Surface Covering Eroded surface

Drawing No:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77 S14, S23, S15

Date:

08.08.09, 10.08.09, 08.08.09

Scale:

1:10

Drawn by:

LGL, CW, CT

Inked by:

LGL, CW, CT

Digitised by:

Carvel plank 100 Stern>

<Bow

Marks

A Toolmark

Outboard face

Chisel mark

Wooden plug

Slight dent

Incised line

Wooden plug Chisel mark

Charred material

Inboard face

Carvel plank 101 A

Outboard face B B Inboard face

A= upper edge; B= lower edge Trenail hole Trenail

Trenail, wedged Trenail, plugged

Plate 15: Carvel plank 100, 101. The planks were recorded at a scale of 1:10, but have been reduced to 1:20 to ďŹ t into the A3 report template.

Wooden plug Iron nail Iron nail hole Rove head impression

Concretion Surface Covering Eroded surface

Project:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009

Drawn by:

Site Code:

FPL 77

Inked by:

Drawing No:

S4, S5

Digitised by:

Date:

02.08.2009

Scale:

1:20

BGN, MLPG CT, MLPG JA

KKM 191100

Proposed search area. Can be extended to SW.

KKM 192000

FPL 77 E 337166, N 6037318

KKM 191700 KKM 191400

KKM 189800

KKM 191100 KKM 190800 KKM 190500 KKM 190200

KKM 189900

KKM 189800 KKM 189300 KKM 189000

KKM 188700

Coastline reconstruction for the year 1696. Based on Tiepolt &Schumacher 1999.

Project: Site Code:

Prerow Fieldschool 2009 FPL 77

Jens Auer

Inked by: Digitised by:

Drawing No: Date:

Drawn by:

20.01.10

Scale:

Plate 16: Proposed search area for the original location of the wreck site associated with FPL 77. The reconstructed coastline for the year 1696 is shown in white. Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ÂŠLAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999.

Appendix 2: Timber records

No.

Type

Description

Fastenings

Wood species

L cm

W-M cm

T cm

M-M cm

S-M cm

Dr.N o.

L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)

100

Carvel plank

101

Carvel plank

102

Clinker plank

103

Frame

104

Frame

105

Frame

Plank was trenailed to underlying planking and framing. Some saw- and axe marks are visible on the outboard face, the inboard face seems to be charred and is affected by sea grass growth. A number of wooden plugs in iron nail holes could be observed. On the outboard face, semicircular, crescent shaped marks seem to indicate the position of trenails. The plank has preserved butt ends on both sides. The plank was nailed to underlying planks and frames with trenails. There are a number of tool marks on the plank that seem to have been made with a chisel. There is a crescent shaped marks on the planks. Near the plugged trenails concretion can be observed. One of the knots of the timber was plugged. On the inboard the plank seems to have been charred One end is broken off while the other one is preserved 8scarf joint). Concretions are visible Joggled, concretions are visible around the trenails. Scarf joint at heel, head eroded. Timber is joggled. One end of the timber seems to have been broken. The timber is eroded by sea grass on inside sided face. Sapwood is evident on the edge. Cut marks made with axe or adze. Angled cut at heel, head broken. Bevelled edge; many tool marks, maybe from adze or axe. Concretion from iron nails. Inboard eroded by sea grass. Scarf joints at heel and head.

Trenails, 3040mm in diameter, some are wedged, one is plugged; rectangular iron nails, 20-25mm, some of which are plugged with wooden plugs

Oak, DS #3

516

S04

Trenails, 3040 mm in diameter, 2 of them are plugged; iron nails , square shank, round head (20-25 mm diameter) Not preserved, only the holes are left.

Oak, DS #2

388

S35

Trenails ,30 mm in diameter

Oak, DS #4

285

265

2,5

Trenails, 30 mm in diameter

Oak

Trenails, 25 mm in diameter; Trenail holes with diameter at 30 mm.

Oak; sapwood on the edge, DS #8

Trenails 30 mm in diameter; Iron nail holes 10 mm in diameter.

Oak , DS #9

S24

S19

150

S31

No.

Type

Description

Fastenings

Wood species

L cm

W-M cm

T cm

M-M cm

S-M cm

Dr.N o.

L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)

106

Frame

107

Frame

108

Frame

109

Frame

Timber is joggled to accommodate clinker planks. Planks have been fastened with trenails and iron nails. One side has a builder mark that is formed as a “X” and additional lines can be connected with the marks as well. Outboard side: tool marks from axe or adze, inboard is eroded by sea grass. Sapwood is present. Trenails protrude by 2.1cm-3cm on inboard sided face, indicating thickness of ceiling planks. Heel cut square, head broken. Timber joggled for 8 clinker planks. Up to 3 trenails are connecting the clinker planks to the frame. Trenails are likely to have been used to connect the carvel strakes on top of the clinker planks. Some trenails are cut flush on the inboard while others protrude 3cm- 3,5 cmindicating the thickness of the ceiling planks. Tool marks from axe or adze are visible on one side, the other is eroded by sea grass. Sapwood was present. Heel: scarf joint, head tapered. Timber joggled for 7 clinker planks that have been fastened with trenails and iron nails. On the inside trenails are protruding 2,3cm4,5 cm indicating the thickness of the ceiling planks. Outboard eroded by sea grass, inboard: visible tool marks from axe or adze. Heel: scarf, head: fresh break. Timber joggled for 7 clinker planks that were fastened with trenails. The outboard side has rough and uneven tool marks from an axe or adze. Heel: break, head: scarf joint.

Trenails, 30 mm in diameter; iron nails, only square concretion left

Oak

131

S27

Trenails, 30mm – 35mm in diameter; Iron nails, some eroded, some possible removed.

Oak

19,3

S29

Trenails, 30mm – 34mm in diameter, iron nails (only concretion left).

Oak

11,7

12,5

S21

Trenails, 30mm – 34mm in diameter, one nail possibly wedged, iron nails (only concretion left).

Oak, DS #10

17,5

S28

No.

Type

Description

Fastenings

Wood species

L cm

W-M cm

T cm

M-M cm

S-M cm

Dr.N o.

S30

S25

9,5

S18

L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)

110

Frame

Timber joggled for clinker planks. The steps have been made by axe or adze. Sap wood is present. Heel tapered, head, fresh break. Four joggles. Some trenails were cut during the second phase and new trenails were then added which is indicated by tool marks close to protruding trenail. Both ends broken.

111

Frame

112

Frame

113

Clinker plank

114

Filling timber

Several saw marks visible on both sides of the timber. Fastened with one iron nail and penetrated by trenail from carvel layer. Joined to clinker plank 131.

115 / 126

Filling timber

116

Filling timber

117 / 127

Filling piece

Timber has tool marks on both sides. Timber appeared to be 2 planks from the outside but single piece split partially. One end cut square, other end bevelled. Plank broken in 3 pieces. Tool marks visible from adze or axe. In the middle there is an incised mark resembling a cross. Butt end joint. Wedge shaped filling piece. Trenail holes run along the edge along with iron nails.

118

Filling timber

Timber joggled for clinker planks. Tool marks are visible on all sides. Broken on both ends Timber contains many axe/adze marks. In the bow end four repairs have been made. scarf. Joined to plank #102. Plank complete with scarf joints at both ends.

Wedge shaped. Clear axe marks.

Trenails, 34mm in diameter. All seem to be from carvel phase. Trenails, 30 mm in diameter, some have been cut during second phase; iron nails or concretion Trenails, 34mm in diameter.

Oak

105

18 trenails of which 4 from the original clinker layer; iron nails 10mm square (head 18mm diameter) running along edge of plank. Iron nail (head 12mm diameter, shank 7mm square); Trenail 33mm in diameter Trenails 35mm in diameter; iron nails

Oak , DS #5

368

Soft wood

100

1,50,2

Oak

164

Trenails; iron nails

Soft wood

193

9,9

2,20,2

S11

Trenail 33mm in diameter; iron nails, square shaft, 5mm to 9mm Trenails, some from the carvel layer ; iron nails w. Square shaft (5mm)

Pine

206

2,30,5

Soft wood

13,2

2,70,1

151

Oak

S16

No.

Type

Description

Fastenings

Wood species

L cm

W-M cm

T cm

M-M cm

S-M cm

Dr.N o.

L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)

119

Filling timber

Rectangular shaped timber. Joined to clinker plank 183 A chamfered edge is running along the plank. The end of the plank has a groove where a frame was situated. Brown surface covering and tar on the plank. Tool marks are visible. On the chamfered area there is a row of wooden plugs that have replaced iron nails. Complete with scarf joints at either end. No sign of toolmarks, possible scarf joint at one end

120

Clinker plank

121

Filling timber

122

3 filling timbers

123

Filling timber

124

Filling timber

Wedged shaped timber. Possible saw marks and axe marks.

125

Roughly worked adze or axe marks.

126

Filling timber See 115

127

See 117

128

Clinker plank

Waterproofing visible. Concretion along lower edge of plank. Tool marks on upper edge.

129

Filling timber

Very fragile softwood pieces, broke into five small pieces during recovery.

The smallest piece shows axe marks. Joined to filling timber #118 Clinker plank fragment, reused as filling piece. Visible tool marks from axe or adze. Surface covering on the surface. remains of waterproofing on underside. Concretion around metal fastenings. Sea grass between filling piece and clinker layer.

Trenails 33mm in diameter Trenails 3,35mm in diameter; Iron nails , square shanks (10mm), wooden plugs 10mm square

Trenails 30mm in diameter; iron nails, square shaft, 10mm1 in diameter.

Trenail 34mm in diameter, nine iron nails associated with plank before reuse (head round, 22mm in diameter, shank 9mm x 8mm) Trenails 32mm in diameter; iron nails w. Square shanks 7mm x 7mm

Trenails 35mm in diameter; iron nails that fastened filling timbers to planks as well as iron nails fastening planks to each other -

Pine

10,5

Oak

308

27,5

Oak

Soft wood

34,2 6, 12

Oak, DS#1

73,2

1,92,2

Soft wood

4,51,2

Soft wood

20,5

Oak

182

Soft wood

S17

0,8

S11

S12

No.

Type

Description

Fastenings

Wood species

L cm

W-M cm

T cm

M-M cm

S-M cm

Dr.N o.

L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)

130 132

Filling timber Clinker plank

Axe marks and saw marks visible. Timber has chamfered edges. Heavily eroded by sea grass. Brown surface covering. Concretion around iron fastenings. Longitudinal edges also chamfered. Plank broken, possible scarf on one side. Timber appears to have burn marks on one side. One side has a groove for the waterproofing material. Brown surface covering. Scarf on one side, break on other side. Timber eroded by sea grass (inside). A waterproofing patch was found at scarf Concretion around iron nails. One end scarf joint, other end broken. Broken fragment, broken on one end, scarf on the other end.

133

Clinker plank

134

Clinker plank

135

Clinker plank

136

Filling timber

Roughly worked timber. Axe or adze marks visible. Remains of tar from waterproofing and sea grass on one side. Concretions around iron nails.

137

Frame

Joggled for two planks, head eroded, heel broken. Inside sided surface eroded, toolmarks from axe visible.

Pine

195

5,5

1,5

Trenail 32mm in diameter; iron nails w. Square shaft, 10mm

Oak

310

14,5

2,5

S24

Trenails; iron nails, some seems to have been removed; wedged trenail.

Oak

240

1,5

S14

153

18,5

2,5

S23

Oak

24,5

2,5

S15

Oak

1,7

Oak

Trenails 30mm in diameter.

Trenails 32mm in diameter, some are from the carvel layer and one is from the clinker layer; iron nails w. Square shafts, 7mm x 7mm. Trenails 32mm in diameter; iron nails w. Square shaft (5mm x 6mm) associated with filling timber. Trenails and iron nails

8,5

S26

Appendix 3: Report of dendrochronological analysis