Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries 4-1 (October 2012)Joep Verweij; Wouter Waldus; André van Holk: Continuity and change in Dutch shipbuilding in the Early Modern period. The case of VAL7 and the watership in general.

TOC | article | PDF

4 Constructional differences

Table 1 Watership wrecks not documented enough and no future potential

Designation	Exploration year	Excavation year	Hull construction	Remains of interest in addition to ship bottom fragments	Bracket of live span
OG64	1963	1968	lap	stem, stern, hanging knees	15d 16ab
ZN113	1972,198		flush	deck, stem, stern	16ab
ZJ40/41	1972,198		flush	deck, stern	16ab
OK84-2	1964	1971	lap	fairly complete	16abc
ZG13	1981		lap	stem, rudder, possibly not watership	16abc
OQ55	1957,1964		flush	two bulkheads	16bc
ZO39	1982		flush	stem, stern	16bcd
ZG80	1978,1980,2003		flush	deck aft, stern, covering board	16bcd
ZN61	1979		lap	deck aft	16cd
OB20	1964,1975		flush	no information	16cd
OU41	1965,1989		flush	stem, stern	16d 17a
OJ9	1963,1989		flush	heavily fragmented	16d 17abcd
NC12	1983		flush	deck, stem, stern, covering board	16d 17abcd
NP4-1		1944	flush	deck aft, stern, frame	17ab
ZO69	1975,1976		flush	deck, bulkheads, frame, hanging knees	17abc
OT23	1964	1969	flush	fairly complete, built after 1628 (dendro)	17bc
OU113	1968,1981		flush	hanging knees	18bcd
ON10/11	1958,1981	2001	lap	deck aft, stern, frame, covering board	unknown
ZK53	1984	1985	flush	heavily fragmented, possibly not watership	unknown
NQ65-1		1944	flush	no information, covering board	unknown
ZO73	?	?	?	no information	unknown

Table 2 Watership wrecks not documented enough but future potential

Designation	Exploration year	Hull construction	Remains of interest in addition to ship bottom elements	Status	Bracket of live span
ZO31	1972,198	lap	deck, stem, stern	preserved in situ	15d 16a
ZK47	1984	flush	almost complete	monument request	16abc
OC18	1983,1994	flush	fairly complete	monument request	16cd
ZA79	1975,198	flush	deck, stem, stern	monument request	16d 17a
OF12	1974,1982	flush	deck, stem	preserved in situ	around 1600
ZH9	1979	flush	deck, stem, stern	preserved in situ	16d 17abcd
OC60	1967,198	flush	deck, stern, hanging knees	preserved in situ	17abcd

Table 3 Watership wrecks documented enough and excavated

Designation	Excavation year	Hull construction	Live span indicators	Construction year estimate
ZN44	1979	lap	coins 1521-1555 & 1507-1520; ceramics & sintel type F 16ab	15d 16a
NP33	1958	lap	ceramics & sintel type F16ab; stratum 16c	16a
ZM22	1978	lap	dendro 1520-1532; coins 1496, 1519; sintel type F 16ab	16b
ZN42-1	1979	lap	dendro 1527-1531; sintel type F 16ab; ceramics 16bc	16b
ZN74-1	1982	lap	dendro 1525-1526; sintel type F 16ab; stratum 16c	16b
ZN74-2	1982	lap	dendro 1525-1627; sintel type F 16ab; stratum 16c	16b
NP40	1950	lap	ceramics 16bc; stratum before 1600	16b
OW10	1975	flush	dendro 1547; floor tiles 1561; sintel type F 16ab	16b
OG33/34	1967	flush	ceramics & tiles 16cd; stratum after 1600	16d
VAL7	2009	flush	dendro after 1585; coin1596; ceramics 16d-17a	16d
OU86	1972/73	flush	ceramics 1608; coin 1610; ceramics 17ab	17a
NR13	1946	flush	coin 1623; ceramics 17ab	17a
NE160	1954	flush	dendro 1642-1654; tiles 17cd	17c

Tables 1, 2 and 3 do indicate that flush hulls started to appear from the second quarter of the sixteenth century onwards, while lap-strake hulls disappeared from the archaeological record in the early second half of that same century. Table 4 indicates that the transition from keel plank to a heavier keel beam did not fully coincide with the transition to a flush hull, OW10 and VAL 7 being the exception. The record however only lists keel beams from the seventeenth century onwards.

The bottom of the VAL7 wreck was differently shaped in the stern than older shipwrecks. The garboard strakes aft did not end up in a rabbet in the sternpost but extended alongside the sternpost (table 4). This helped to create a better S-shape in the underwater hull aft. Only late sixteenth century and seventeenth century wrecks have this trait. The stem of VAL 7 was also differently constructed than observed in older wrecks. It was much less curved in the vertical plane and positioned on top of a longer keel (fig 2, fig. 5 and fig 11). The stem post was extended with a skeg and cutwater. The net effect was an increase in the lateral surface area of the forward underwater hull. The exact stem construction differed from ship to ship, but a gradual change in curvature and extension over time is observed (table 4).

Table 4 Ship construction details.

Designation	Hull construction	Keeltype	Garboard strake to sternpost connection	Stem well rounded	Stem extended	Compass timbers	Stringer configuration	Spike plugs	Construction year estimate
ZO31	lap						open		15d 16a
OG64	lap	plank							15d 16ab
ZN44	lap	plank				no	open		15d 16a
OK84-2	lap						open		16abc
NP33	lap	plank	rabbet	++	-	no	open	no	16a
ZM22	lap	plank	rabbet	++	-	no	open	no	16b
ZN42-1	lap	plank	rabbet	++	-	no	open	no	16b
ZN74-1	lap	plank	rabbet	+	+	no	open	no	16b
ZN74-2	lap	plank	rabbet	+		no	open	no	16b
NP40	lap	plank	rabbet	+	+	no	open	no	16b
OW10	flush	plank	rabbet	+	+	yes	less open		16b
ZN113	flush							yes	16ab
ZJ40/41	flush						closed		16ab
ZK47	flush						closed		16abc
OQ55	flush						open		16bc
ZO39	flush						open		16bcd
ZG80	flush						closed		16bcd
OB20	flush						closed		16cd
OG33/34	flush	beam	along	-		yes	less open		16d
VAL7	flush	plank	along	-	++	yes	open	yes	16d
OU86	flush	beam	along	-	+	yes			17a
NP4-1	flush	beam	along						17ab
NR13	flush	beam		-	++	yes	closed		17a
ZO69	flush	beam		-			closed		17abc
OT23	flush	beam	along	-	++	yes	closed		17bc
NE160	flush	beam		-	++	yes	less open		17c
OU113	flush								18bcd

The frame system of VAL7 was different from what is known in lap-strake ships, where futtocks are connected on top of the floor timbers. In VAL7 futtocks were scarfed in several different ways to the floor timbers, and compass timbers were added in between two successive floor timber-futtock combinations. The whole arrangement was less regular but more robust then what is observed in lap-strake ships. The lack of standardization is obvious. In OW 10 the framing system was more regular like in lap-strake ships, but it was the first flush hull ship that included compass timbers in its design. This may suggest that OW10 is an example of a design in transition. The frame construction differed in detail from ship to ship, but in flush hull ships they all included compass timbers in the framing system.

Figure 8 One fish well compartment with relatively few rounded timbers and numerous water inlet holes in VAL7 ( ). This is similar in all waterships. The smoothly finished frame construction served the purpose of maximising space and minimising damage to the fish swimming inside the fish well.

All waterships have in common that the framing system in the fish well was not robust (fig. 8). Heavy bulkheads compensate for the loss of lateral strength in the fish well area.

Table 4 indicates a tendency toward increased density in the stringer configuration in flush hull wrecks. Lap-strake wrecks featured an open configuration, while in flush hull wrecks the stringers were positioned at closer intervals or even edge-to-edge (closed). VAL 7 is an exception having an open cofiguration.

The variability observed in stem construction, frame construction, stringer density and keel type hint toward a unknown degree of variability in ship construction methods. The differences from wreck to wreck may partially indicate a pattern of change, but different shipyards possibly also employed different methods as an individual signature. The dataset does not allow for a more detailed analysis on this matter.

In the VAL7 wreck several construction details were observed that point to a shell first assembly sequence of the flush hull. In the first place small dents were detected in the middle of the keel plank and the garboard strake near the stern. This indicates that the shipwright marked the location of the frame timbers to be positioned after the first strakes were put in place. Secondly spike plugs, filling former iron nail holes on the inside and outside of the planking, indicate the use of clamps (fig. 9). The only other wreck in which spike plugs were observed is the ZN113, but a combination with scratch marks is missing. The function of former iron nails was to temporarily connect the strakes while the frame timbers were not put in position yet. Finally the absence of interconnections between the floor timbers, futtocks and compass timbers indicate that the strakes were positioned prior to positioning frame timbers. The assembly sequence as described is called the Dutch flush method (Maarleveld 1992, 156). It is typical of the Dutch approach to ship construction.

Figure 9 The square small spike plug fills a former nail hole in a starboard strake. Its dimension is 0.5 x 0.5 cm. Left of the spike plug a treenail is protruding. ( ).

In the case of the VAL7 the information on deck construction, deckhouse and rigging is lost. As a result of post depositional processes the remains beyond the level of the fish well bulkheads were gone. Even the bulkhead itself did not fully survive in its original dimensions, which could have been helpful in calculating the fish well volume. In the next paragraphs the shipwrecks from table 3 will be geometrically assessed. Are there any clues that may reveal continuity or change in ship design and construction?