Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 1 – uploaded by Fabrizio Ciacchella

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 1. Location of the Mortella II and III wrecks. The sites are named after the Genoese tower located at the western end of the bay of Saint-Florent, which is the nearest land reference point. Mortella I is an anchorage site located at the foot of the tower, where shards of ceramics attest to its activity over the past centuries. Figure 1. Location of the Mortella II and II wrecks. The sites are named after the Genoese tower

Figure 1 Location of the Mortella II and III wrecks. The sites are named after the Genoese tower located at the western end of the bay of Saint-Florent, which is the nearest land reference point. Mortella I is an anchorage site located at the foot of the tower, where shards of ceramics attest to its activity over the past centuries. Figure 1. Location of the Mortella II and II wrecks. The sites are named after the Genoese tower

Related Figures (40)

Figure 3. (a): The U Saleccia, boat of the Center for Nautical Archaeology (CEAN). (b): Oxygen decompression stop. Photos: S. Jamme. To ensure optimum safety of the operation, and taking into account the nitrogen accumu- lation in human tissues, it was decided to limit the procedures to one 25’ dive per day with oxygen decompression (Figure 3b). The dredge was supplied by a high-pressure water pump (5 bars—60 m?/h) located on the U Saleccia, our base operation boat (Figure 3a).
Figure 3. (a): The U Saleccia, boat of the Center for Nautical Archaeology (CEAN). (b): Oxygen decompression stop. Photos: S. Jamme. To ensure optimum safety of the operation, and taking into account the nitrogen accumu- lation in human tissues, it was decided to limit the procedures to one 25’ dive per day with oxygen decompression (Figure 3b). The dredge was supplied by a high-pressure water pump (5 bars—60 m?/h) located on the U Saleccia, our base operation boat (Figure 3a).
Figure 4. Covering the trench area with geotextile (a) and re-siltation (b). Photos S. Jamme. At the end of the operation, complete covering of the survey area was carried out: a sheet of geotextile was first laid over the remains. Then, the dredge was reversed so as to return the sediment and ballast gravels that had initially been extracted from the excavation area (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Covering the trench area with geotextile (a) and re-siltation (b). Photos S. Jamme. At the end of the operation, complete covering of the survey area was carried out: a sheet of geotextile was first laid over the remains. Then, the dredge was reversed so as to return the sediment and ballast gravels that had initially been extracted from the excavation area (Figure 4).
Figure 5. SONAR image of the Mortella II site. Negative view with delimitation of a layer of concretions (in red). Image: CEAN. An initial evaluation to the arrangement of the site was made at the time of its discovery in 2005, thanks to analysis of its SONAR image. This revealed an archaeological complex with a central tumulus made up of gravel and ballast stones extending over 28 x 15 m, i.e., slightly more than 400 m? (Figure 5). The frequency of the acoustic waves (800 kHz) enabled sufficient penetration of the sediment to distinguish a regular and curved line of concretions on its northern slope, which seemed to mark the limits of the surviving hull (red line in Figure 5). Its measurements are 25 x 7 m, with a longitudinal axis oriented 260-80°.
Figure 5. SONAR image of the Mortella II site. Negative view with delimitation of a layer of concretions (in red). Image: CEAN. An initial evaluation to the arrangement of the site was made at the time of its discovery in 2005, thanks to analysis of its SONAR image. This revealed an archaeological complex with a central tumulus made up of gravel and ballast stones extending over 28 x 15 m, i.e., slightly more than 400 m? (Figure 5). The frequency of the acoustic waves (800 kHz) enabled sufficient penetration of the sediment to distinguish a regular and curved line of concretions on its northern slope, which seemed to mark the limits of the surviving hull (red line in Figure 5). Its measurements are 25 x 7 m, with a longitudinal axis oriented 260-80°.
Figure 6. Mortella II: Estimated central axis of the site and distance between the S1 clamp.
Figure 6. Mortella II: Estimated central axis of the site and distance between the S1 clamp.
Figure 7. Photogrammetric profile of the Mortella II site.
Figure 7. Photogrammetric profile of the Mortella II site.
Figure 9. Planimetry (a) and cross-section (b) of the architectural remains in the trench S. Drawing A. Cazenave de la Roche.
Figure 9. Planimetry (a) and cross-section (b) of the architectural remains in the trench S. Drawing A. Cazenave de la Roche.
Figure 10. Cross-section of architectural remains (Trench S).
Figure 10. Cross-section of architectural remains (Trench S).
Figure 11. Cross-section of the architectural remains at the same level as Figure 10 on Calvi I (left) and Mortella II wrecks.
Figure 11. Cross-section of the architectural remains at the same level as Figure 10 on Calvi I (left) and Mortella II wrecks.
Figure 12. Hypothesis of the arrangement of the hull structures of the Mortella II ship and comparison with that of the Mortella III. Drawing: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche.
Figure 12. Hypothesis of the arrangement of the hull structures of the Mortella II ship and comparison with that of the Mortella III. Drawing: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche.
Table 1. Mortella II hull timbers.
Table 1. Mortella II hull timbers.
Figure 13. Isometric sketch of the arrangement of the architectural remains (Trench S). Diagram: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche.
Figure 13. Isometric sketch of the arrangement of the architectural remains (Trench S). Diagram: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche.
The clamps are spaced 15 to 20 cm apart and cover the frames on which they are notched. As the frames are placed edge to edge under the clamps in a continuous manner, without any space left, the notches are morphologically adapted to the different frame heights (Figure 14).
The clamps are spaced 15 to 20 cm apart and cover the frames on which they are notched. As the frames are placed edge to edge under the clamps in a continuous manner, without any space left, the notches are morphologically adapted to the different frame heights (Figure 14).
Figure 15. (a) Lower face of the S2 clamp. Note the notches adapted to the morphology of the planking and the traces of iron nails. (b) Planking fastening system: nail tips are clenched over the inner face o! the frame. The metal concretions stuck to the wood retain their print. Photo: Fabien Langenegger. Figure 15. (a) Lower face of the S2 clamp. Note the notches adapted to the morphology of the planking The longitudinal section of the clamps allows us to see how their lower part was literally ‘sculpted’ to fit the irregular upper surface of the frames (Figure 15). Finally, it should be noted that the S1 clamp pieces are assembled with a flat horizontal scarf, similarly to those observed on the Mortella III wreck.
Figure 15. (a) Lower face of the S2 clamp. Note the notches adapted to the morphology of the planking and the traces of iron nails. (b) Planking fastening system: nail tips are clenched over the inner face o! the frame. The metal concretions stuck to the wood retain their print. Photo: Fabien Langenegger. Figure 15. (a) Lower face of the S2 clamp. Note the notches adapted to the morphology of the planking The longitudinal section of the clamps allows us to see how their lower part was literally ‘sculpted’ to fit the irregular upper surface of the frames (Figure 15). Finally, it should be noted that the S1 clamp pieces are assembled with a flat horizontal scarf, similarly to those observed on the Mortella III wreck.
Figure 16. Summary of the chronology highlighted by the dendrochronology study. (F. Langenegger).
Figure 16. Summary of the chronology highlighted by the dendrochronology study. (F. Langenegger).
Figure 17. The East anchor F-MII-AE. Photogrammetry: Stéphane Jamme.
Figure 17. The East anchor F-MII-AE. Photogrammetry: Stéphane Jamme.
Figure 19. The West Anchor F-MII-AW. Photo: Stéphane Jamme.
Figure 19. The West Anchor F-MII-AW. Photo: Stéphane Jamme.
Table 3. Concretion thickness measured at the fracture points of anchor F-MII-AW. Missing the upper part of its shank, the original length of F-MII-AW is unknown, yet it is possible to estimate it. Based on the hypothesis that its proportions were similar to those of the other anchors of the Mortella wrecks, some ratios have been examined, between the shank length and: (a) arm’s length (from crown to tip); or (b) anchor’s beam (from tip to tip); or (c) shank maximum width. According to the calculations, the anchor original length was estimated at 255 + 65 cm. The results related to (a) and (b) are almost identical (265-315 cm and 260-320 cm); on the contrary, the results related to (c) are very different, ranging from 190 to 225 cm. The latter range has no overlap with the other two: this means that F-MII-AW could not be similar to the other Mortella wreck anchors for all the proportions. Even if the overall range is quite broad, these estimates are important, because they can lead to a mass estimate, and finally to understanding the function of the anchor (see Sections 7.3 and 7.4). Ly SE EE POC EE | RA Ee) (eek ee. Mee ye ee geese Sey ein 0 wees Crewe | ee fen i mT, eee ene sie a ww eo
Table 3. Concretion thickness measured at the fracture points of anchor F-MII-AW. Missing the upper part of its shank, the original length of F-MII-AW is unknown, yet it is possible to estimate it. Based on the hypothesis that its proportions were similar to those of the other anchors of the Mortella wrecks, some ratios have been examined, between the shank length and: (a) arm’s length (from crown to tip); or (b) anchor’s beam (from tip to tip); or (c) shank maximum width. According to the calculations, the anchor original length was estimated at 255 + 65 cm. The results related to (a) and (b) are almost identical (265-315 cm and 260-320 cm); on the contrary, the results related to (c) are very different, ranging from 190 to 225 cm. The latter range has no overlap with the other two: this means that F-MII-AW could not be similar to the other Mortella wreck anchors for all the proportions. Even if the overall range is quite broad, these estimates are important, because they can lead to a mass estimate, and finally to understanding the function of the anchor (see Sections 7.3 and 7.4). Ly SE EE POC EE | RA Ee) (eek ee. Mee ye ee geese Sey ein 0 wees Crewe | ee fen i mT, eee ene sie a ww eo
Table 4. Measurements, proportions, and morphology of the Mortella wreck anchors.
Table 4. Measurements, proportions, and morphology of the Mortella wreck anchors.
Table 4. Cont. All dimensions in cm, calculated after subtracting average concretion thickness, except where indicated with (§). L = length; W = width, T = thickness. (#) Ring mid-diameter is the average of external and internal diameters, measured where concretions are thinner. (§) Rectangular cross-section can be observed in the fractures of the broken shank of F-MII-AW, where measurements were directly taken under concretions.
Table 4. Cont. All dimensions in cm, calculated after subtracting average concretion thickness, except where indicated with (§). L = length; W = width, T = thickness. (#) Ring mid-diameter is the average of external and internal diameters, measured where concretions are thinner. (§) Rectangular cross-section can be observed in the fractures of the broken shank of F-MII-AW, where measurements were directly taken under concretions.
(Measurements in dm, calculated after subtracting measured or estimated concretions thickness, 0.15 dm each side). ° To calculate the volume of the shank and arms, their average cross-section was multiplied by their length. * Two estimates of shank length were considered: 19 dm and 32 dm. Table 5. Mass estimation of the anchors of the Mortella II wreck.
(Measurements in dm, calculated after subtracting measured or estimated concretions thickness, 0.15 dm each side). ° To calculate the volume of the shank and arms, their average cross-section was multiplied by their length. * Two estimates of shank length were considered: 19 dm and 32 dm. Table 5. Mass estimation of the anchors of the Mortella II wreck.
All the ordnance found on the Mortella II wreck, as well as on the Mortella III, belongs to the same typology of wrought iron port pieces, in Italian called bombarde in the strict sense. These guns consisted of a barrel (tromba), a breech chamber (mascolo in Italian, canono '° in Latin), and a wooden stock or carriage (/etto or fusto) (Figure 21). Barrels were cylindrical tubes open at both ends, which could be loaded from the rear (breech-loading). Usually their construction was similar to casks, made of held toget ribs’) over her by short cylindrical sleeves, rein could be made of two or three iron plates rolled and hoops such as those made of staves. Breec they could forged or cast iron. Wooden stocks were usual log reinforced with iron, to which barrels were tethered. A hole was present in the rear part, probably to drain the water mixed with vinegar said to be used to refresh guns when necessary. ong iron staves of trapezoidal cross-section forced with thick hoops (sometimes called apping the many sleeve seams. Alternatively, probably on smaller pieces, barrels up to form a tube, reinforced with sleeves h chambers were loaded with gunpowder; be made either of staves and hoops similarly to barrels, or a single piece of y monoxyle, made of half a hollowed-out
All the ordnance found on the Mortella II wreck, as well as on the Mortella III, belongs to the same typology of wrought iron port pieces, in Italian called bombarde in the strict sense. These guns consisted of a barrel (tromba), a breech chamber (mascolo in Italian, canono '° in Latin), and a wooden stock or carriage (/etto or fusto) (Figure 21). Barrels were cylindrical tubes open at both ends, which could be loaded from the rear (breech-loading). Usually their construction was similar to casks, made of held toget ribs’) over her by short cylindrical sleeves, rein could be made of two or three iron plates rolled and hoops such as those made of staves. Breec they could forged or cast iron. Wooden stocks were usual log reinforced with iron, to which barrels were tethered. A hole was present in the rear part, probably to drain the water mixed with vinegar said to be used to refresh guns when necessary. ong iron staves of trapezoidal cross-section forced with thick hoops (sometimes called apping the many sleeve seams. Alternatively, probably on smaller pieces, barrels up to form a tube, reinforced with sleeves h chambers were loaded with gunpowder; be made either of staves and hoops similarly to barrels, or a single piece of y monoxyle, made of half a hollowed-out
Table 6. Number and distribution of the Port pieces of the Mortella II and IIT wrecks. Ordnance is concentrated at both extremities of each site and is absent midship. The distribution of barrels is similar in the two wrecks: two at the (presumed) bow of each site, and with the rest on the (presumed) stern: four at Mortella II, and eight at Mortella III. Four breech chambers were found at the stern of each wreck, four at the bow of Mortella II, and one at the bow of Mortella II.
Table 6. Number and distribution of the Port pieces of the Mortella II and IIT wrecks. Ordnance is concentrated at both extremities of each site and is absent midship. The distribution of barrels is similar in the two wrecks: two at the (presumed) bow of each site, and with the rest on the (presumed) stern: four at Mortella II, and eight at Mortella III. Four breech chambers were found at the stern of each wreck, four at the bow of Mortella II, and one at the bow of Mortella II.
Table 7. Characteristics of the Mortella wrecks’ ordnance.
Table 7. Characteristics of the Mortella wrecks’ ordnance.
Figure 22. Artillery layout on the Mortella II wreck. (a) General layout. (b) Artillery layout at eastward artillery layout. (c) Restoration of the eastward artillery layout. Photos: S. Jamme. Sketch: J. Guevara.
Figure 22. Artillery layout on the Mortella II wreck. (a) General layout. (b) Artillery layout at eastward artillery layout. (c) Restoration of the eastward artillery layout. Photos: S. Jamme. Sketch: J. Guevara.
Figure 23. Barrel MII-Cn1. (a) Side view. (b) Front view. Photos: Stéphane Jamme. All measurements taken over concretions. # Maximum internal diameters at the two extremities of the barrel. * Distance from the middle of adjacent hoops. § A hoop is probably missing at one extremity of the barrel.
Figure 23. Barrel MII-Cn1. (a) Side view. (b) Front view. Photos: Stéphane Jamme. All measurements taken over concretions. # Maximum internal diameters at the two extremities of the barrel. * Distance from the middle of adjacent hoops. § A hoop is probably missing at one extremity of the barrel.
Figure 24. Barrel MII-Cn1. (a) Side view. (b) Top view. Sketch: Jess Guevara.
Figure 24. Barrel MII-Cn1. (a) Side view. (b) Top view. Sketch: Jess Guevara.
Figure 25. Breech chamber MII-Cl1. Photo: Stéphane Jamme. Breech chambers (Figures 25 and 26). The presence of hoops on a few breech chambers of the Mortella wrecks suggests a structure similar to the barrels present on both sites, rather than made of solid iron; unfortunately in many cases they are too covered with sediments or encrustations to even detect the presence of hoops. ‘Handle’ rings were observed on a chamber of each of the Mortella wrecks. The breech-chamber MII-CL1, c. 70 cm long, is nearly 3 palmi di canna (74 cm) (Figures 25 and 26). Its hoops are evenly distributed, and the ratio between their distance and chamber length (0.20, i.e., 1/5 of the length) is twice as the average one of the barrels (0.10, i.e., 1/10 of the length). This is strange enough as chambers had to resist the energy of the gunpowder explosion.
Figure 25. Breech chamber MII-Cl1. Photo: Stéphane Jamme. Breech chambers (Figures 25 and 26). The presence of hoops on a few breech chambers of the Mortella wrecks suggests a structure similar to the barrels present on both sites, rather than made of solid iron; unfortunately in many cases they are too covered with sediments or encrustations to even detect the presence of hoops. ‘Handle’ rings were observed on a chamber of each of the Mortella wrecks. The breech-chamber MII-CL1, c. 70 cm long, is nearly 3 palmi di canna (74 cm) (Figures 25 and 26). Its hoops are evenly distributed, and the ratio between their distance and chamber length (0.20, i.e., 1/5 of the length) is twice as the average one of the barrels (0.10, i.e., 1/10 of the length). This is strange enough as chambers had to resist the energy of the gunpowder explosion.
Figure 26. (a) Breech chamber MII-Cl1. (b) Hypothesis of reconstruction. Diagram: Jess Guevara.
Figure 26. (a) Breech chamber MII-Cl1. (b) Hypothesis of reconstruction. Diagram: Jess Guevara.
Table 8. Stone shot recovered from the Mortella II site. Figure 27. Stone shot recovered from the Mortella II site. Photo: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche All the shot found on the Mortella wrecks are made of stone; their study is of great interest and can give information on their geographical provenance, as well as on port piece caliber. During the 2021 campaign, six stone shot were found at the Mortella II site (see Table 8 and Figure 27); another one had been previously recovered during the 2007 preliminary survey. They have different calibres: 21 cm, 17 cm, 15.8 cm, and 11.5 cm. Two of them have an irregular polyhedral form (minimum/maximum dimensions of 15/18 cm and 16/18 cm), as if they were being shaped by the crew during navigation, probably to make a shot of the same caliber as the 15.8 one. Petrologic analysis of the Mortella II stone shot is still in progress; to date, the only available result concerns a 15.8 cm shot weighing 5.7 kg, made of serpentinite, a hard siliceous metamorphic rock common on the shores of the Gulf of Genoa and in the Piedmont.
Table 8. Stone shot recovered from the Mortella II site. Figure 27. Stone shot recovered from the Mortella II site. Photo: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche All the shot found on the Mortella wrecks are made of stone; their study is of great interest and can give information on their geographical provenance, as well as on port piece caliber. During the 2021 campaign, six stone shot were found at the Mortella II site (see Table 8 and Figure 27); another one had been previously recovered during the 2007 preliminary survey. They have different calibres: 21 cm, 17 cm, 15.8 cm, and 11.5 cm. Two of them have an irregular polyhedral form (minimum/maximum dimensions of 15/18 cm and 16/18 cm), as if they were being shaped by the crew during navigation, probably to make a shot of the same caliber as the 15.8 one. Petrologic analysis of the Mortella II stone shot is still in progress; to date, the only available result concerns a 15.8 cm shot weighing 5.7 kg, made of serpentinite, a hard siliceous metamorphic rock common on the shores of the Gulf of Genoa and in the Piedmont.
Figure 28. Frescos by Giovanni Battista and Stefano Perolli, c. 1570. Castle of Alvaro de Bazan, Maritime Museum of Viso del Marqués, Spain. (a) Nave of small dimensions with an arrangement of her artillery similar to the one of the Mortella II wreck. (b) Nave of a greater tonnage with two batteries with port-pieces arranged all along her starboard side. Photos: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche. Maritime Museum of Viso del Marqués, Spain. (a) Nave of small dimensions with an arrangement of
Figure 28. Frescos by Giovanni Battista and Stefano Perolli, c. 1570. Castle of Alvaro de Bazan, Maritime Museum of Viso del Marqués, Spain. (a) Nave of small dimensions with an arrangement of her artillery similar to the one of the Mortella II wreck. (b) Nave of a greater tonnage with two batteries with port-pieces arranged all along her starboard side. Photos: Arnaud Cazenave de la Roche. Maritime Museum of Viso del Marqués, Spain. (a) Nave of small dimensions with an arrangement of
Table 9. Technical terms mentioned in the article.
Table 9. Technical terms mentioned in the article.
Table 10. Measure units mentioned in the text.
Table 10. Measure units mentioned in the text.
Author Contributions: A.C.d.1.R.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Validation, Visual- ization, Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Writing—Review Editing. F.C.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Writing—Review Editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Author Contributions: A.C.d.1.R.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Validation, Visual- ization, Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Writing—Review Editing. F.C.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Writing—Review Editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Related topics:
ArchaeologyArtilleryMaritime HistoryUnderwater ArchaeologyNautical ArchaeologyMaritime and Underwater ArchaeologyMaritime and Nautical ArchaeologyHistory of Shipbuilding
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved