Latest / El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín / Arqueología marítima, lo que debe saber con José Bettencourt

Transcript

Arqueología marítima, lo que debe saber con José Bettencourt · El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín

0:05
The future was yesterday a podcast of archaeology where ghosts, conspiracy theories and aliens
0:15
have no place. I am Jua Guillermo Martín archaeologist and university professor and with
0:25
the hand of different specialists, would be scientifically addressing our fascinating past, a
0:32
past that offers us answers to face in the future. Welcome to The Future
0:47
Feyer podcast. I am Juan Guillermo Martín archeol Today we are going to talk
0:52
about archaeology that studies the relations of human beings with the sea, rivers,
0:56
lakes and lagoons. This is why we are going to dedicate this episode to
1:00
the marine, underwater, nautical or port archology to talk about this fascinating topic.
1:07
I have a very special guest. This is José Batán Courts welcome.
1:11
Thank you to those who don' t know him. José Bede encur is
1:15
an archaeologist and Ph D in Maritime History from the Nova University of Lisbon in
1:19
Portugal. He has more than fifteen years of professional experience leading underwater archaeology projects,
1:25
particularly in the Port of Lisbon and the Azores archipelago, in Portugal,
1:29
as well as in Cape Verde in Africa. His research experience focuses on navigation,
1:34
touching on aspects of port archaeology and naval architecture of the seventeenth and eighteenth
1:40
centuries, with emphasis on documentation three d is specialized in harbour contexts and underwater
1:46
photogrammetry. He is currently a professor at the University of Nova in Lisbon.
1:53
And a researcher at the Humanities Center, the Faculty of Social and Human Sciences
1:57
of the same University. So good. To enter into matter I have mentioned
2:02
maritime archaeology, its aquatic, nautical and port. You could tell us,
2:09
please, what each of them is dedicated to, what makes them different,
2:14
or what makes them similar. Yes, it' s interesting because the truth
2:19
we often give them as analogous terms as they were, all the same coed.
2:24
The truth has nothing to do with the terms. They have to do
2:28
with the evolution of discipline itself and are complete. They are played in some
2:34
respects, but they are complementary in others. For example, and speaking a
2:38
little bit of the main terms of underwater cations is for me a management that
2:43
can always be discussed, but it is simply a method. It' s
2:46
a way to access the andropicus dresses that are all under water. So it
2:50
' s not a different scientific perspective. That archaeology just made a different environment.
2:54
We have to adapt the same methods, the same principles of psychology.
3:00
This but for an environment that' s different from what we' re usually
3:06
working on. And it has been the term that has begun, it has
3:09
been used in the early decades of the development of discipline. But over time
3:15
it has begun to extend the scope of research, to have a broader approach
3:20
to all aspects of the relationship with man and the sea, then it has
3:24
begun to use a term that is broader, that is marine ecology, than
3:29
the truth the archaeology that makes a study of the relationship of man with the
3:34
sea and that is interested in the vestiges that are shamed, but that also
3:38
by the intera dressings that carry that recording that man has had with the sea
3:45
over time. In addition, it interests not only the material dresses, but
3:51
also the symbolic aspects of that recording. Then it uses as sources given about
4:00
the and material So it is a broader term and that includes in its analysis
4:05
aspects of the nautical and aspects of the life of the people that were ration
4:13
in their day to day with the water with the sea. It is general,
4:16
and the term naval archology or nautical archogtion is very specific of the archaeology
4:20
of the ships then it is a work area that has been surrounded since the
4:26
nine hem. Initially you worked, especially from iconographic data from written sources,
4:30
and that has had a very significant change with the development of underwater archology,
4:34
because underwater ideologies have allowed access to material gestures demarcations of the past. But
4:44
the truth is the origin of cycles nine, in which other sources such as
4:48
icnographics and writings are important. So this type of archaeology has a special place
4:56
within maritime archology and uses and material sources such as record or written sources.
5:03
Similarly, there is not one that would be more important than another to speak
5:08
naval fuck then, these terms, the truth has to do with this from
5:14
the discipline itself. As for the scientific disp of the humanities, of course
5:20
yes and I believe that in that sense, shipwrecks have finally become as a
5:28
main objective and perhaps as the image of this archaeology. But, of course,
5:33
as you well mentioned, they are not the only contexts. We have
5:39
cities, for example, underwater and other evidence of past human activity that are
5:42
underwater for different reasons. About the wrecks. It is usually said that they
5:50
are time capsules, that is, that they are contexts that capture a specific
5:56
moment in the history of humanity. In addition to that split moment, what
6:00
information does a shipwreck give us? First, that idea of shipwreck as a
6:08
time capsule has been deconstructed to the something of the last decades, because in
6:13
many shipwreck sites they are in particularly teleprote areas for navigation or in areas with
6:18
a very large intensity of purturary telation. Ports are donuts where there are more
6:23
shipwrecks. Thus, in many cases it is difficult to determine whether the whole
6:30
material culture we find in a price is the same historical view of the same
6:35
shipwreck or whether it is the result of different shipwrecks that have been left from
6:42
the same space. Then you have to deconstruct it. In addition, there
6:47
is an interesting aspect to the fact that the truth is that many times,
6:53
also when talking about maritime nautical supaquatic archaeology. We think of shipwrecks, but
6:59
the truth, as he has said before, the marine arcology is interested in
7:02
all the evidences of the relationship of man coel sea, even those that are
7:06
then integrated to the FRAGAA is only one more, a more studo source,
7:12
It is a source with a very particular trest, because it allows us to
7:18
address different aspects immediately, allows when we have conserved part of the hull and
7:26
estr naval architecture, the techniques, the metros of conception. As a ship
7:28
it has been thought over time and how it has been built. And there
7:30
are very big changes throughout history, because ships have to adapt to various education,
7:34
to their function, has to be adapted to the environment from where they
7:40
are going to sail. Then its causes changes to the something of time and
7:45
space in the structure of the ships, and that is an aspect that we
7:47
can study in a very clear way. From the material expenses, there is
7:53
a weight and besides, we have all the material culture that is associated container
7:58
and content. And this content, context in which the objects appear, allows
8:03
us to respond to aspects related to life on board, but also to the
8:07
area of operation of the ship, the areas of origin in the ship,
8:11
its fusion in time. Then there are a multiplicity of aspects that we can
8:16
study about the societies of the past from the study of an archaeological site submerged
8:24
by shipwreck, of the communities on board and of the society of its time,
8:28
because a ship is a reflection of society is general of its time.
8:35
Indeed, not only daily life on board, but networks of exchange, of
8:41
commerce and distant production centres. In other words, they are vehicles that finally
8:48
developed what we know as globalization. They are a reflection of an exit area,
8:54
of a destination area. They were in the middle because they have been
8:58
lost in this process, but they are the reflections of society, of the
9:03
areas of this life, the area of the destination airport, of the ship
9:09
that has not been sheltered in its journey and so they are very rich as
9:13
starting points to analyze the societies on board. But the whole society, a
9:18
wide geographical space, because we are a reflection of the header that during the
9:24
mundane era, from Sidolo XV desa is a tornado gloo whalers and that a
9:28
weight being able to be the head of a multiplicity of globallers hear that is
9:35
have been in contact since the fifteenth century of truth, when we talk about
9:39
prices of period, to move it clearly that yes. Inevitably, shipwrecks,
9:41
particularly those associated with the race of the Indies, have aroused the interest not
9:48
only of archaeology, but also, unfortunately, of hunters. The idea of
9:52
finding objects that can be marketed has led to the creation of numerous companies in
9:58
the world that finally obtain permits in some countries, such as Colombia, where
10:03
the looting of submerged cultural heritage is legal in one way or another. What
10:09
do hunters do with a nafragio, what does it mean for archaeology the activity
10:16
of hunters and what threats they pose to the shared archaeological heritage. Yeah,
10:22
that' s a very old tradition, the recuperation of sea Saturdays. It
10:28
is a tradition that has been very well documented since at least antiquity in Europe.
10:31
I' m talking about human times where there was a class of professional
10:37
caron boxers who were engaged in recovering cargo from sunken ships. And that is
10:41
that tradition of carrying out cargo this ships sunk in the bottom of the seas
10:45
has been maintained until the ixthiun century until today. And that' s where
10:50
it fits the truth. The practice of the treasure house atual. The practice
10:54
of the house hard you act is very damaging for the archaeology, because anarchology
11:00
interests is the context, it is not the object then every site that is
11:03
interventional, if a systematic documentation methodology that is the one that we use,
11:07
a sub- quatic marine archaeology, we need to lose this association between the
11:16
objects and for the archaeology is as important in a gold coin, as a
11:20
small piece of ceramic or in some cases of other ceramics, can give us
11:24
more information than a gold coin or a small piece of ceramic of two cintinustres
11:28
can give more information or as much information as a complete weight that has an
11:33
artistic interest. Then the worst thing for the archaeology of Casa Tezoro is to
11:41
distort that association between the contents and the container, between the ship and its
11:48
contents and between the various elements that are on the ship from the national objects,
11:54
such as life on board, the objects related to the cargo or to
11:56
the equipment of the ship. So, this loss of contexts is the worst
12:00
thing for archaeology, because, as a historical sytive document intervened by married persons,
12:09
it has a very limited potestar, because we do not get circumstituted to
12:13
that relationship between objects. In addition, it is a patrimonial loss, because
12:18
every object that is not accessible to the scientific community or to the community in
12:24
cinema is a loss of heritage, because all the advisors that we can count
12:28
from an archaeological context. If we don' t keep a cohan in an
12:35
accessible public space, it' s missing. All they want to do is
12:39
buy back the objects that have the largest balbo of nowt or the objects that
12:43
have an artistic mold and sell them for private albums. So, that'
12:46
s your o, those objects are limited from the moment you entered a market
12:52
of your own antiques and so you lost a scientific potential, but also a
13:01
potential to raise stoars, to communicate to the past for today' s society.
13:07
So those are the two movements that I think are the most important in
13:11
the process. The context will be lost, of losing access to a common
13:16
country, which is humanity, which is not owned by any State or individual.
13:22
Yes, it has to be said, just like hunters, they have
13:26
also changed their image and come to destroy directly with texts. They have even
13:33
begun to hire professional archaeologists on their teams to show and show that their work
13:39
is serious, at least technically speaking, although it is clear that the ultimate
13:46
purpose is to market shared cultural heritage. Yes, the objective of the companies
13:50
of gold has been to profit from the provisions of the objects and, at
13:54
the same time, now, this new residence of the companies of treasure house
14:00
is to sell a product, a history to the bulk of their work.
14:03
It is increasingly difficult to distinguish between an archology team and a treasure case team,
14:09
because, as in some cases even the documentation methodology they use is so
14:13
good or better in which we then have access and published the data. It
14:22
is very difficult to distinguish, It is very easy, especially from a superquatic
14:28
archaeology and made in deep waters, where archaeologists or only very recently hypothesis work.
14:35
It is very difficult to distinguish between one practice and another, and it
14:39
is very complicated. In addition, companies in the near- hardlands have learned
14:46
that having a story executes a story for the objects they are going to market
14:52
gives them more value. It' s a bigger mind for the client powers.
14:56
A goal is to have an object taken from a weight in the Caribbean
15:01
without any origin. Another thing is to have an object of pressure in the
15:05
Caribbean, where you know the whole story, all its percourse since the construction
15:09
is the loss, involving in some cases historical characters like Columbus or like another
15:16
any historical character and its value the object itself. So, this transformation that
15:22
we have in the last decade of academy in the very difficult ton archaeology in
15:26
some cases to make a clear distinction between the archaeological practice or the archaeology that
15:31
has scientific objectives and since atmosphere, and a practice of treasure house of solvados,
15:37
which has as main objective a sale of the objects, the conversion of
15:45
the objects, but at the same time is transvestite of archology. Then there
15:50
is science and science and truth uses scientific methods of its work, but the
15:56
main objective was not to be science. Agreement, It should be noted that
16:02
not all evidence of human activity of the past is under the waters of the
16:06
sea. Some are found in rivers, lakes and lagoons, as mentioned above.
16:10
Perhaps one of the most striking cases is that of the ships of Caligula,
16:15
which had Lake Nemi and used as an imperial village. Everything seems to
16:18
indicate that after his death in the year forty- one of our era,
16:22
they were intentionally sunk. You could tell us the story of the recovery of
16:27
these ships, because they are an interesting anecdote within the framework of maritime archaeology.
16:34
Interesting. In addition, the ships of the BUNDEME accompany the development of
16:41
interest for the submerged heritage, because the first attempt of recovery or the first
16:47
attempt of documenting the ships of the Bagnmes is of the thanks of the decades
16:52
of thousand five hundred thirty, when it is attempted to yield to the sites
16:56
to exude the methods of construction, to recover information on the techniques of naval
17:07
course to use them in the period in the centuries of the cies. So
17:07
this is one of the first attempts at documentation with scientific objectives made in underwater
17:15
archaeology. Then we have a renewed interest. In the 20th century A decade
17:21
of nineteen hundred and twenty, when the Linea Museum is in power in Italy,
17:26
making part of its imperialist project to demonstrate human superiority to its Italian proriety
17:33
in the supto- fascist world, decides that digging the boats of the lake
17:41
would be an important tool for spreading its political ideas. Then he decides to
17:49
drain the lake to yield to the important palaces. The contras are documented photographically.
17:56
He has taken out material to expose for all his imperialist discourse during the
18:04
1930s, but during the war, the World War Zone, the two ships
18:10
ended up being destroyed during the boycotts made by the Allies, during the German
18:15
eprobas, during the departure, during the departure of the Germans who were occupying
18:25
Italy in World War II and who ended up destroyed and we have appeared totally
18:30
and were not entirely available to us. We need to see this imperialist aspect.
18:37
The use of underwater archaeological heritage as a strategy of political affirmation is very
18:48
interesting and, as Sablin has not done so. Several mainly authoritarian states have
18:53
done so throughout history, after archology, as a vehicle for the dead a
18:56
political ideal. Yes, in the end, archaeological heritage has an important political
19:06
component of reaffirming in many cases or of supporting a particular model, a particular
19:14
system, and not just in the shallow. Of course, I would believe,
19:18
for example, that the Basa project or the Mary Rose, are also
19:22
the remnants of state that have, in addition to the scientific, a strong
19:27
political component of the two, just as the origin of the process ends up
19:34
being the same. It is a necessity to show technical, scientific and political
19:41
superiority at any stage of human history. Those two without having a very important
19:48
scientific dimension. We have had a very important scientific impact on the main objective.
19:52
He' s been the scientist in those two cases, or phaser Ross.
19:56
But the dimension of opro already toxo pre has obtained. It has been
20:02
possible because there was a national objective, a political objective of demonstrating scientific technical
20:11
capacity greater than the others. That' s the point. Finally, I
20:18
know that it is a long topic and we will surely have to devote other
20:22
episodes in the future to this. But now that I have to close,
20:25
I would like to ask you today, in addition to recent experiences, that
20:33
it is possible to do underwater archaeology without intervention. We already have very sophisticated
20:37
equipment available, such as the side- scanning sonar, the magnetometer the multis
20:44
the subsoil profiler that we get information so precise about the remains archaeological evidence that
20:52
there is at the bottom of the sea of Lago Laguna Ríos. But also,
20:56
based on good photo- ogrammetric documentation, it is possible to study in
21:02
great detail and the archaeological contexts under water, what are the great recent advances
21:07
of discipline and perhaps the challenges that we will have to face towards the future.
21:14
Yes, what has been learned from projects such as the waltz of amer
21:17
Ros that we talked about is that conservation of the archean heritage, the heritage
21:26
that recovers for the surface, is an endless problem. Emery Ross base.
21:34
They are both seeing two monographic museums that have many visitors, but the truth
21:37
is that the custodian of their maintenance is very large. Such poyatos projects like
21:42
these are currently impossible to do because the costs are too great for what we
21:48
are going to waste from the scientific point of view, from the even patrimonial
21:52
point of view, even the head a paraba, the opcuatic cultural heritage,
21:59
has as one of the measures to adopt in a global way the conservation in
22:06
situ as first option. And this measure is the result of that experience of
22:10
the first decades of discipline, where it has been excavated, a lot of
22:14
material has been extracted that has not been achieved. You can manage it,
22:18
because it was impossible, but conservation is very expensive, because you need a
22:22
space to expose or preserve this material. But it is also a measure that
22:27
has been adopted by the scientific community because we must maintain for the future this
22:38
heritage that we have received from our ancestors and that we want it to be
22:44
maintained for the future. So, for both reasons. And in addition,
22:47
the technological bolus testa has allowed to document and extract multiple scientific information from an
22:53
archaeological site without fencing it. The methods or physicists that allow us to map,
22:59
to make a very systematic mapping, to make a monitoring or a follow
23:03
- up that is happening in the archaeological site, without intervention, without touching
23:10
on the site, are examples. Photogrammetry, which is not difficult to visualize
23:12
and, based on its documentation, replanting the sites, create virtual geneity or
23:18
augmented degree to expose the sites and to make these sites assis for the general
23:26
population, for example, and our personal experience is that submerged archeological sites are
23:32
living sites in permanent moving. So, what we' ve done several projects
23:44
have been documenting the changes in the sites. And that strategy allows us to
23:51
document different parts of the site without digging it and to accumulate knowledge that allows
23:57
us to answer questions about the sites, about the chronology, the providence of
24:03
the ship, its commercial juta, its variation without digging it, and that
24:15
allows us to maintain an investigation with a historical plume identifies itself at the same
24:21
time that we preserve a site that we bequeath for the future by doing an
24:27
active management of the submerged archaeological heritage. So I think that' s the
24:30
future, because we have so many sites to document that it' s not
24:37
necessary to advertise in cases and sessions, to do inclusive interventions and the same,
24:45
when you do inclusive work that can be justified, because if you have
24:52
a special scientific potential that you can ponder very concrete questions, when there'
24:56
s a questionnaire that justifies, you can just make a survey a sample to
25:00
answer those questions. It was necessary to respond to a well- defined scientific
25:03
custural. They dug up place you' re going Your authority is obviously not
25:07
yours. It is possible to mediate part of the wanted ones to the fences
25:11
of risk. That is another matter that to the extent that it is at
25:15
risk and depending on the type of risk and if it can be avoided,
25:18
then archaeological intervention becomes inevitable there as nothing. I really know that thank you
25:26
so much for your time and for sharing your valuable experience in this subject.
25:30
It' s been as usual, a pleasure, a privilege to talk to
25:34
you. We thank the recording studio of an inorte femestereo for this space.
25:38
We will continue to produce scientific content on this podcast. The future was yesterday,
25:44
for example,