The Promise of Underwater Archeology^ 



By George F. Bass 



Research Associate, University Museum, University of Pennsylvania 



The great historical wealth lying on the bottom of the Mediter- 

 ranean has been known to archeologists only since the turn of the 

 century. At that time a group of Greek spongeclivers stumbled onto 

 a wreck at Antil?ythera that yielded quantities of marble and bronze 

 statues, pottery, glass, and a remarkable astronomical computer 

 that has greatly increased our respect for Greek technology. After 

 the addition of the magnificent "Antikythera Youth" to the Athens 

 Museum, sculptures continued to come from the sea: the Marathon 

 Boy, the marbles from the Piraeus harbor, the jockey and horse 

 from Artemision, and above all the Artemision Zeus. 



These were chance finds and, while important in themselves, their 

 excavation can hardly be called scientific. Only with the invention 

 of the aqualung by Cousteau and Gagnan in 1943 did divers gain 

 the mobility necessary for the delicate work demanded by systematic 

 archeology. Soon after, notably along the French and Italian coasts, 

 expeditions were able to concern themselves with hull construction, 

 methods of lading and even the daily life on ancient ships. These 

 excavations used the technique of sketching underwater on frosted 

 plastic, and established the airlift, a type of suction hose, as the 

 primary excavating tool of the marine archeologist. Unfortunately, 

 however, the supervision usually came from nondiving archeologists 

 who could follow the work only through sketches, photographs, and, 

 occasionally, underwater television. 



The primary duty of the field archeologist is to record and present 

 the smallest details of his excavation so that the proof of his inter- 

 pretation is readily available to other scholars. At least one ancient 

 wreck has puzzled some experts on ancient pottery who claim that 

 various pieces of the cargo are divided by two centuries. Their 

 thesis, that two wrecks were involved, may be denied by the ex- 

 cavators of the wreck, but the proof of the denial is not to be found 

 in the excavation report since it contains not a plan or section of 



1 Reprinted by permission from the American Scholar, Spring 1963. Drawings are by 

 Eric J. Ryan. 



461 



