MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2556929205 · doi:10.1111/1095-9270.12152

The Maritime Archaeology of Alum Bay: two shipwrecks on the north-west coast of the Isle of Wight, England Maritime Archaeology Trust Monograph No. 2; BAR British Series 608 JULIE SATCHELL and JULIAN WHITEWRIGHT with 10 Contributors 168 pp., colour and b&

2016· article· en· W2556929205 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Serena Cant

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe International Journal of Nautical Archaeology · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMaritime and Coastal Archaeology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWightArchaeologyMaritime archaeologyBayGeographyHistory

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This monograph aims to present over 20 years’ research on the maritime archaeology of Alum Bay, Isle of Wight, by the Maritime Archaeology Trust (formerly the Hampshire and Wight Trust for Maritime Archaeology). It is the second volume in their monograph contributions to the British Archaeological Reports (BAR) series, following on from the publication of The Archaeology and History of the Flower of Ugie, wrecked 1852 in the Eastern Solent (2011, reviewed IJNA 42.1, 233–4). The focus of the present volume is on two key sites in Alum Bay: the site first recorded as Alum Bay 1, since identified as HMS Pomone, built 1805 and wrecked on the Needles 1811, and Alum Bay 2, for which the Ann and Susannah, lost in 1821, is suggested as a plausible candidate, complemented by coverage of the local site environment and archaeological context. The opportunities afforded by the creation of a dive trail at Alum Bay 1 as an educational resource are also extensively discussed and the future management of both sites is considered. Chapter 1 introduces the volume by providing a useful summary of the phases of archaeological investigation of Alum Bay from initial discovery of Alum Bay 1 in 1991 to the most recent phases of excavation, monitoring and analysis (2010–2013). Two photographs of divers preparing for the water are a form of illustration widely reproduced in maritime archaeology reports, but have no informative value for a wider readership, something that can be difficult for authors, for whom these images are reminders of significant activity, to appreciate in preparing for publication. Chapter 2 covers the historical and natural environment of Alum Bay and is introduced by an essay by Philippa Naylor providing a thematic introduction to its historic environment from the Middle Ages to the present day, including the development of its tourist industry. Today this includes maritime activities, such as sport diving, which in turn contribute to archaeological knowledge. Two essays follow by Julian Whitewright, analysing historical shipwrecks in Alum Bay and its natural environment, in that order. Although the first essay could be said to have arisen naturally out of Naylor's historical essay, it might have been better placed after the discussion of the natural environment, since, for example, the Needles form a natural barrier to the transport of wreck material and have therefore influenced the study area methodology (p. 18). The analysis reveals a logical approach to considerations of drift and subsequent deposition of wreck material from the initial point of impact and is a valuable contribution to wreck-identification studies. The dynamics of sediment deposit and erosion are well illustrated in two sets of comparative photographs from different parts of the site at different times. It is surprising, however, that neither essay does more than touch upon the Needles, since they are a major reference point not only for historical shipping losses in general, but for the specific sites in Alum Bay. Chapter 3 provides a descriptive and analytical interpretation of the Alum Bay 1 site through a number of essays contributed by different specialists who have been involved with the site, presenting a cumulative understanding of the wreck. Scientific analysis, namely dendrochronology and metallurgical analysis of the copper sheathing and bolts, has been crucial to site identification, dating the vessel to a very specific context. Only one candidate plausibly meets all the conditions set out in the historical analytical framework, namely HMS Pomone. Comparative site plans illustrating the extent of remains surveyed on each visit between 1991 and 2010 are particularly revealing, with further plans illustrating the dynamics of the site in recent years. A notable omission is a location plan illustrating the site's relationship to the nearby, but separate, Needles designated wreck-site, which also incorporates material from HMS Pomone (as well as from HMS Assurance). This would usefully have set Alum Bay 1 in context and helped to illuminate the discussion on site formation processes (p. 80). It would also have endorsed the validity of the historical shipwreck analysis methodology discussed in the previous chapter. The archaeological remains are then set in their historical and documentary context, including site formation processes. Quotations from primary sources are well chosen and illustrate that the manner of loss is consistent with the historical framework for the deposit of drifting material in Alum Bay as outlined in Ch. 2. I would have liked to see more made of the rich documentary material for this site. A table at Appendix 8.3 lists the personal letters of Capt. Barrie up to 1812, suggesting that some of his correspondence may have the potential to furnish details of the wreck event, but none is cited in either text or appendices. (If it furnishes no useful evidence, the reader should be told.) The opportunity presented by the review of 20 years’ work would also have been an ideal one to conduct further research into contemporary documentary material. In Ch. 4 the Alum Bay 2 wreck is introduced, its archaeological remains discussed and possible candidates for its identification suggested from documentary sources, which are profiled against the archaeological context of the wreck. This site forms a useful and interesting case study with a real insight into the way documentary and archaeological evidence go hand in hand in the interpretation and identification of wreck-sites. A number of candidates are put forward and extensively discussed within the framework of the finds, including those no longer considered plausible, such as a naval ship's boat perhaps associated with HMS Pomone. One discounted candidate is a record for a site near Alum Bay Pier, but that site would have been better considered as a potential alternative report of the site in question rather than as a candidate for identification. Nevertheless, the consideration of candidates for Alum Bay 2 to arrive at the Ann and Susannah is an exemplary example of documentary research as an aid to archaeological identification. Ch. 5 covers the diverse maritime archaeology of Alum Bay, including the remains of the 19th-century pier and smaller-scale finds. This narrative leads logically to the next chapter highlighting the ground-breaking Dive Trail on the Alum Bay 1 site, together with educational initiatives that demonstrate that the story of these sites is an ongoing one, from archaeological deposit to public resource. The conclusion in Ch. 7 sees no potential for further documentary research, which, given the increasing availability online of primary sources, such as newspaper reports, is not one that I would wish to draw. A niggle is the consistent use of ‘wreck’ as an active verb throughout which does not read well, e.g. ‘… from the loss of HMS Assurance which wrecked on the Needles …’ (p. 80). References to the other Pomone site and to HMS Assurance are scattered throughout the text, but are not considered in depth, despite the otherwise exhaustive nature of the archaeological and documentary research. This seems characteristic of this volume, creating a sense that it is almost too close to its subject, from illustration choice to a focus on the specific site remains outside their wider archaeological and documentary context. On the whole, however, this volume is a valuable contribution to the study and management of wreck-sites in a specific area.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,461
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,024
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,203
Écart entre enseignants0,193 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe International Journal of Nautical ArchaeologyMême sujetMaritime and Coastal ArchaeologyTravaux en français237 207