Final Report
Grant #2610-83
THE HERCULANEUM BOAT PROJECT
J. Richard Steffy, Professor Emeritus, Institute of Nautical Archaeology and
Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843.
Mailing Address: P.O. Drawer HG, College Station, Texas 77841-5137. Phone:
409/845-6398
Mr. Steffy is a specialist in wooden ship construction and has been associated
with numerous shipwreck excavations in the United States, Europe, and Asia over
the past twenty years. He was awarded a MacArthur Fellowship in 1985 for his
work in this field. He became a member of the Institute's staff in 1974 and joined
the Texas A&M faculty in 1976, retiring from both positions in 1990.
Steffy - 1
ABSTRACT
THE HERCULANEUM BOAT: EXTERIOR DETAILS
During the summer of 1982, archaeologists uncovered an inverted Roman boat
while excavating an area of the ancient beach near the Suburban Thermae at
Herculaneum. The boat was a victim of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in A.D. 79,
whose hot surges and pyroclastic flows carbonized the hull and buried it beneath
23 m of overburden. More than two-thirds of the hull was exposed when this
study was made, the rest of it being in a displaced or fragmentary state.
The vessel is estimated to be 8.6 m long, 2.2 m wide, and about 85 cm
deep. The stem has not been found, but the curved sternpost is preserved
extensively. The keel, sided 7.2 cm and molded 6 cm, was protected by a false
keel 2.1 cm thick. There were eight strakes of bottom planking on the port side
(seven on the starboard side); a wale, side stake, and caprail completed the
planking plan on each side. Planking was about 2.5 cm thick and was edge-joined
by means of closely spaced mortise-and-tenon joints, each locked by a pair of
tapered pegs.
Although the frames are not yet visible, the fastening pattern reveals that
the framing plan consisted of floor timbers alternating with paired half-frames.
Frames were fastened to planks with treenails and bronze nails. A through-beam
penetrated the sides of the stern above the wales.
Steffy - 2
The Herculaneum boat is briefly compared with the Kinneret boat, a well-
preserved hull recently excavated at Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee), Israel. Both
boats are similar in size and dating.
Steffy - 3
CAPTIONS FOR ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1. Plan of the ancient beach area at Herculaneum, showing the
location of the boat. (From Sigurdsson et al 1985:367)
Figure 2. Stratigraphy surrounding the boat. The boathouse sheltering
the vessel is modern. (From Sigurdsson et al 1985:367)
Figure 3. The boat in situ. The white cords reveal sectional hull shapes
at 50 cm intervals.
Figure 4. The author's tentative reconstruction of the port side of the
Herculaneum boat, showing the planking arrangement and approximate locations
of topside appointments. This is a sketch, not a scaled drawing.
Figure 5. (a) A cross-section of the keel at a location 2 m forward of the
after perpendicular (sternpost rabbet/caprail intersection). (b) Cross-sectional
shape of the port side of the sternpost, about 30 cm below its juncture with the
caprail.
Figure 6. Hull section near amidships, as found. Distortion influences
this shape; the hull probably was narrower and had a harder bilge.
Figure 7. Typical mortise-and-tenon joints.
Figure 8. Wale, side strake, and caprail
arrangement at a point 50 cm from the sternpost on the starboard side. The sketch
at right illustrates the hooding end of the wale at the sternpost.
Steffy - 4
Figure 9. Arrangement of nails and treenails attaching port strake 3 to
frame 5 near the stern; surrounding tenon pegs are also shown. Details of two
typical bronze nails are illustrated below. Their lengths are unknown.
Figure 10. Top and port side view of the through-beam arrangement in
the stern.
Figure 11. Sectional and side views of the patch tenon on starboard
strake 3. The sternpost rabbet is 24 cm to the left.
Figure 12. Staples (or metal shafts resembling parts of staples) and patch
tenons along the seams of port strakes 3, 4, and 6. The stern is toward the right.
Figure 13. The inserted piece in port strake 7.
Figure 14. The author's preliminary lines drawing of the Kinneret boat.
(From Wachsmann et al 1990)
Note: The photograph and all drawings except Figures 1 and 2 are by the author.
Steffy - 5
THE HERCULANEUM BOAT: EXTERIOR DETAILS
J. Richard Steffy
Many of the ships and boats uncovered by archaeologists were victims of violent
events, but few, if any, were wrecked more dramatically than the Herculaneum
boat. First century Herculaneum was a prosperous and luxurious Roman city of
about 5,000. The view from the city must have been magnificent--to the east was
Mt. Vesuvius; to the west, the blue waters of the Bay of Naples lapped at the
shore beneath a bluff, along which a series of arched chambers surrounded the
city's Marine Gate and supported the Sacred Area above (Figure 1). At the
southern end of the row of chambers were the elegant Suburban Thermae, which
could be entered by a stairway from the beach or through a hanging garden above.
THE SITE
The city and all who remained in it (after initial ashfall had sent some
residents fleeing toward safety in Naples) were destroyed on the morning of
August 25, A.D. 79, when Vesuvius unleashed a series of surge clouds and
pyroclastic flows. The eruption and its resulting geological patterns were
documented previously by scientists sponsored by the National Geographic
Society (Sigurdsson et al 1985). Haraldur Sigurdsson, who made an extensive
Steffy - 6
study of the stratigraphy surrounding the boat, deduced that the vessel was on the
beach south of the Thermae before the first surge struck at about 1 a.m. It was not
moved any great distance by this surge, but the first pyroclastic flow that followed
probably engulfed the boat and carried it to its final inverted position about 5 m
west of the seaward wall of the Thermae. Along the way it was rolled over and
battered by timbers and other dislodged materials, causing its sides to separate
and its bow to break and partially fold inside the hull. The boat came to rest atop
the first surge layer and was carbonized by the heat of the pyroclastic flow
(Figure 2). A second surge blasted the exposed bottom of the hull; a second
pyroclastic flow completely buried it. Subsequent surges and flows deposited 23
m of volcanic material in the area.
Archaeologists uncovered the keel and bottom planks of the Herculaneum
boat while excavating this area of the ancient beach in 1982. By the summer of
1983, when most of this information was compiled, two-thirds of the exterior
surface of the hull had been exposed. The seaward one-third of the hull remained
partly unexcavated, including a two-meter-long section that had been folded
under the rest of the structure. Although cracked, distorted, and extremely fragile
due to its carbonized state, most of the excavated part of the hull was preserved
from keel to gunwale (Figure 3). Until the boat's interior and seaward end have
been recorded, some reservation remains concerning the orientation of its bow
and stern. I will henceforth call the inshore end the stern because a through-
Steffy - 7
beam, a bulkhead, and a pair of bitts at that end strongly suggest that a pair of
quarter rudders were mounted there.
The sternpost disappeared into the pyroclastic material at its juncture with
the caprail; its upper end has yet to be excavated. Both sides of the aftermost 2
meters of the hull survived completely except for the lower post and keel.
Forward of this location the sides of the hull had separated from the keel and were
uneven, sometimes with gaps or broken areas caused by the weight of overburden
on randomly supported surfaces. Carbonization had shrunk most of the wood, so
that planking seams were now separated and dimensions were unreliable in some
cases. It also made interpretation, even recognition, of some features difficult.
Furthermore, the interior of the hull, always more important in ancient boat
studies than the exterior surfaces, could not be recorded at all.
Hull shapes were recorded at 50 cm intervals, and I have been informed
that extensive mapping and stereophotography have been done since this
information was compiled. Nevertheless, the nature of the wreck is such that an
extensive reconstruction--hull lines, detailed section drawings, etc.--would be
partly conjectural and probably misleading. After the hull has been removed from
the site, freed of its present protective coatings and completely stabilized, it
should be possible to align the garboards with the keel, smooth out and
reassemble the broken areas, record the interior construction, and develop an
accurate set of hull lines. This report, then, will deal with hull design only
Steffy - 8
superficially and concentrate largely on exterior construction details.
The boat was exposed over a continuous length of 7.6 meters, although the
forward end of the side that had folded under was visible, indicating that nearly
another meter of hull had survived. Since one of these planks appeared to be a
hooding end which fit into the stem rabbet, the suggested overall length of the
Herculaneum boat is calculated tentatively at 8.6 meters. Its beam was about 2.2
meters and its depth from keel to caprail was just under a meter (85 cm in its
current form) near amidships (Figure 4). The wood analysis is being done by
others, although preliminary samples taken in 1982 indicated that the boat was
framed in hardwood and planked in softwood. This was a common feature of
Roman boatbuilding, as was its form of construction in which the planks were
edge-joined and some or all of them were erected before the permanent
framework was installed.
KEEL AND STERNPOST
The keel was sided (wide) 7.2 cm and molded (deep) 6 cm throughout
(Figure 5). Its upper edges were chamfered for the seating of the garboards,
which were attached by means of mortise-and-tenon joints to be described in the
planking section below. No scarfs could be found: the area where it probably was
joined to the sternpost was missing.
The keel was protected by a shoe, or false keel, whose original thickness
Steffy - 9
was determined to be 2.1 cm. Either by wear or manufacture, its sides tapered to
a lower width of 4.9 cm and its lower edges were rounded. About 3.2 m of this
member survived in relatively good condition. It was attached to the keel by
means of tapered hardwood pegs whose heads were flared to a diameter of 1.2 cm
at the bottom surface of the shoe; they are 0.87 cm in diameter in the center of the
piece and 0.6 cm at the keel surface. Although these fastenings were driven at
varying angles, preservation was not sufficient to determine fastening patterns
and spacing.
In Figure 4 the keel is shown to be straight: that is, it follows a level
baseline. Preliminary reconstruction suggests a straight keel, although subsequent
research may well reveal the presence of a longitudinally curved, or rockered,
keel. Excavations of other ancient vessels, along with contemporary illustrative
material, establish the likelihood of a rockered bottom on a boat such as this. At
present the keel is somewhat distorted and is cracked at several locations.
The lower part of the sternpost curvature begins with the same dimensions
as the keel. In the middle of strake 2 the chamfered upper edge gradually changes
into a rabbet to seat the after ends of the planks. Thirty cm below the top of the
hull it is shaped as indicated in the cross-sectional drawing in Figure 5. At the top
of the hull, the fore-and-aft dimension of the post is reduced; whatever shape it
assumed above this point was probably decorative. Nothing is known about the
boat's stem or bow construction at present.
Steffy - 10
PLANKING
There are eight strakes of bottom planking on the port side of the hull and
seven on the starboard side. Only four of them reach the sternpost rabbet on each
side. In addition, each side has a two-piece wale, a single side strake, and a
caprail. Figure 4 shows a side view of the port planking as found and Figure 6
illustrates the port side of the hull in section.
Most of the bottom planking is now between 1.7 and 2 cm thick, although
some thickness may have been lost because of the heat and the blast of volcanic
ash preceding the pyroclastic flow. Measurements taken at nails and protected
areas yielded thicknesses of between 2.1 and 2.7 cm, and one loose nail revealed a
distance of 2.5 cm between its head and inner concretions. I believe that these
latter measurements are more accurate indicators of original planking thickness in
the lower part of the hull. At the after end of the hull, their thicknesses were
reduced nearly a centimeter where their hood ends entered the post rabbet.
None of the strakes exceeded 23 cm at their greatest widths; strake 6A, the
extra portside strake, had a maximum width of 6 cm in the exposed areas of the
hull. Table 1 below indicates starboard planking widths at 50 cm intervals for the
areas exposed in 1983. The locations are distances from the point where the
caprail meets the sternpost rabbet. All values are in cm.
Table 1
Steffy - 11
Sta. S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
1 --- --- 10.2 --- --- 16.5 14.3
2 --- 16.2 15.8 --- --- 16.8 15
3 6* 16.2 17.6 4 --- 16.5 15
4 14 16.1 16.7 11.1 --- 17 16
5 16 17.1 16.4 11.6 7.7 17.2 16.3
6 17 16 17.4 12.8 12.7 17.8 17.2
7 16.5* 17.5 17.6 14.9 16.8 17.5 18
8 15.4* 17.4 17 17.5 19.5 16.8 18
9 19* 16.8 18 18.5 21.3 17 18.8
10 18* 16.3 18.2 20 22.8 17.5 **
11 13.2* 17 17.6 21.1 ** ** **
12 9* 17 14.7 ** ** ** **
* garboard edge is broken along keel
** not cleared of overburden or damaged
Probably all bottom strakes were single planks, since no scarfs or butts
were found on the exposed hull surfaces. Strakes 1, 4, 5, and port strake 6A did
not reach the sternpost rabbet.
The hull planks were edge-joined to the keel and to each other in the
classical fashion by means of pegged mortise-and-tenon joints (Figure 7). Joint
spacing was inconsistent, although measurements taken between the centers of
about 200 tenon pegs resulted in an average spacing of 13.3 cm. The smallest
Steffy - 12
space between joint centers was found near the lower aft end of the port garboard
(at frame 6), where two sets of joints were centered 5.5 cm apart. The greatest
distance between joint centers was 25.7 cm along the upper edge of starboard
strake 7, just aft of the through-beam. There was no concentration (reduced
spacing) of large groups of joints in any particular area. However, the above
tabulations probably represent fewer than one-fourth of all the mortise-and-tenon
joints in the hull.
The few mortises which could be examined averaged 5.1 cm in depth, 5.2
cm in width, and 0.4 to 0.5 cm in thickness, although five mortises along a
detached plank edge in the port bow were only 4.5 cm wide. The only exposed
tenon that could be considered unaltered by carbonization was 4.5 cm wide in a
5.8-cm-wide mortise. It was 0.5 cm shorter than the 5.2 cm mortise depth (Figure
7) but fit tightly in thickness. All tenon pegs were tapered and appeared to have
been driven outward from the inner planking surfaces. They were unusually
large for such small joints, having outer diameters (most were multi-sided rather
than round) varying from 0.6 cm to 1 cm, with an average outer diameter of 0.9
cm. Inner surface diameters, measured on a few detached pieces of planking,
averaged 1.8 cm. Pegs were centered 1.5 cm from seams on the average; many
were not central in their mortises.
The wales were complex, carefully-made strakes (Figure 8). Their lower
edges matched strake 7 in thickness, but 3 cm or less above this seam, depending
Steffy - 13
on location, the wale thickness increased to nearly three times that of the bottom
strakes. The wale was 6 to 9 cm wide, and its cross-sectional angles changed
constantly with hull curvature.
Outer pieces were nailed to the wales at intervals yet to be determined.
Although they appear to have served as rubbing pieces, they added considerable
longitudinal strength as well. Their thicknesses varied from 3.6 to 5.7 cm. A
vertical diagonal scarf was found in the starboard outer wale near the middle of
the hull.
A side plank of approximately the same thickness as the bottom strakes
separated the wale and the uppermost piece, the caprail. The caprails had widths
ranging from 2.8 to 3.5 cm and a thickness of about 6.1 cm. No mortise-and-
tenon joints were observed in association with the caprail, although near the stern
a nail was driven through it into the side strake below. Another nail appeared to
attach it to a frame top about two meters forward of the stern. Both of these
fastenings were found on the starboard side.
The side planks (and probably the caprails) terminated at a point about 3
m forward of the sternpost; they did not reappear within the excavated area, a
distance of more than 2 m. The planking ends appeared to be framed or braced
where they terminated, indicating a deliberate opening here. Most likely this was
a recessed area for oars as seen on some Roman iconography, although further
excavation might reveal another purpose.
Steffy - 14
FRAMES
Little is known about the frames, since most of them were obscured by the
overturned hull. They were attached to the planking by an irregular pattern of
bronze nails and treenails. On a typical 21-cm-wide plank there were two nails
and two treenails per frame; on occasion, only a single nail or treenails was used.
Most nails had head diameters of 1.7 to 2.2 cm (figure 9). One nail fastening the
wale to a frame near the stern had a shaft 0.9 cm square, while a broken planking
nail had a round shaft with a diameter of 1 cm. Nails were not clenched over
inner frame surfaces, as was sometimes done in ancient construction. Treenails
ranged in section from square to round, although most were approximately
hexagonal and averaged 1.5 cm in diameter. Treenails were driven completely
through the frames, but no wedges were found in their ends.
One detached frame fragment and the exposed upper end of another had
sided dimensions of 5 cm and were molded 4.5 cm. Probing between seams
indicated similar dimensions. Just forward of the through-beam, however, a
portside frame continued beyond the caprail and into the pyroclastic flow; it was
sided about 5 cm and molded about 8.5 cm. At the midship termination of the
portside plank and caprail there was a frame whose molded dimension was at
least 7.5 cm. The significance of these apparently special frames will not be fully
understood until excavation is completed.
Steffy - 15
Although the framing pattern was not directly visible, its arrangement
could be interpolated from the rows of external fastenings. Undoubtedly this
framing system was similar to other excavated hulls from the classical period
where floor timbers alternated with paired half-frames (Steffy 1985:84-87). Floor
timbers, as indicated by their fastenings, had arms extending to strakes 4, 5, or the
lower edge of strake 6. Half-frames usually began near the centers of the
garboards and extended to the caprail. What appeared to be a double frame (or at
least double rows of fastenings) coincided with the termination of the side planks
and caprails. One of them may have been the oversized frame mentioned earlier.
A meter or so forward of this double frame were two pairs of adjacent floor
timbers spaced 26 cm apart.
At a broken area on the port side near amidships, a small portion of ceiling
planking could be seen. It was about 2 cm thick and two nails attached the visible
section to a frame. It appeared to line the inside of the hull to a height of about 40
cm below the wale.
THROUGH-BEAM
Exactly one meter forward of the point where the caprail met the stern, a
beam projected through each side of the hull for a distance of 43.5 cm beyond the
wales (Figure 10). It rested on the upper wale surfaces and was 8.1 cm high and
6.1 cm fore-and-aft at the side plank, tapering to 7.5 by 5.4 cm near its rounded
Steffy - 16
outer ends. Nails were driven through the wale and into the beam to fasten it;
probably it was nailed to the frames that crossed its forward edge as well. A
charred rope, about 1 cm thick and of coarse lay, passed beneath the beam and
into the fill. Because of its obvious fragility, this rope was left untouched to await
conservation.
EXTERIOR ODDITIES
Several curiosities found on the exterior of the hull in 1983 remain to be
confirmed. On both sides of the hull, patch tenons (the name was first given to
similar tenons on the Kyrenia ship because they resembled patches) were noted
aft of the through-beam. One was found above the 3/6 seam on the starboard
side, just aft of the bulkhead beneath the steering beam (Figure 11). Three were
found in a row at the same location on the port side, spaced about 12 cm between
centers, and two more were recorded in the port 3/6 seam just forward of the
bulkhead (Figure 12). Such tenons were found on the 4th-century B.C. Kyrenia
ship, where they were used to attach replacement planking (Steffy 1985:84,97).
Whether or not they represent repairs here cannot be confirmed until the inside of
the hull can be examined. It should be noted, however, that on the Kyrenia ship
patch tenons only occurred on exterior surfaces where they coincided with
frames; otherwise, the square heads were located inside the hull. On the
Herculaneum boat, they were found externally between the frames. These joints
Steffy - 17
also differed from their Kyrenia counterparts in that there was a locking peg on on
the patch side of the seam.
Metal fragments, perhaps the remains of bronze staples or a cleat for a
rudder pendant, were found at the aft end of port strake 4 and above the port 3/6
seam just aft of the bulkhead (Figure 12). Only the shafts remained, and these
were rectangles 0.8 x 1.7 cm. At the end of strake 4, however, traces of bronze
survived in a slight depression to suggest that these were the shafts of a 1.7 cm
wide, 6.5 cm long staple.
Yet another curiosity, perhaps an indicator of repair or alteration, should
be mentioned. A 47 cm long, 7 cm wide piece of plank was inserted into the
lower edge of port strake 7 about 70 cm forward of the through-beam (figure 13).
A similar insert, but only 32 cm long, was found at the same location on the
starboard side. Two unexplained nail heads were found in the bottom of the port
wale (but not the starboard) above this inserted piece. Although these inserts may
have been used to close a hole used for some previous assignment, examination of
the interior of the hull will be necessary to clear up the matter.
ANALYSIS
Eventually the Herculaneum boat will be moved to a museum where
conservators will complete their work and the separated sections of the hull can
be joined. Only then will we be able to project reliable hull lines and answer
Steffy - 18
some of the nagging questions about the construction and operation of this small
Roman vessel. But several features are already clear, and others need to be
pondered while we await the project's completion.
The most important question concerns the boat's purpose. Was it a
tugboat, a fishing vessel, or simply a pleasure craft at the disposal of wealthy
patrons of the nearby suburban thermae? Certainly it was not a coastal cargo
vessel or lighter; it seems too shallow and lightly built for that. Undoubtedly it
was intended to be primarily a rowed vessel; the suggested open area, low
freeboard, relatively narrow beam, and what appears to be a poor lateral
resistance for sailing all point to oars as the primary means of propulsion. This
does not mean the vessel could not also have been sailed, however. Those two
closely-spaced floor timbers in the middle of the hull most likely provide the
extra strength required to support the mast step for a square sail. Such a sail
might have been used only to arrive at a work station or to rest the oarsmen. For
these reasons I suspect one of two functions for this vessel--that of a tugboat or of
a fishing vessel used in large seining operations.
ADDENDUM--THE KINNERET BOAT
In the spring of 1986 I examined an extensively preserved boat discovered
along the shore of Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee) in Israel (Wachsmann et al
1990). Archaeologists removed the hull intact and immediately placed it in a
Steffy - 19
specially-constructed conservation tank, where it will be preserved in a solution
of polyethylene glycol over the next several years. Because rising Galilee waters
did not permit a thorough in situ study, a more exhaustive analysis can be done
only after conservation treatment is complete. Enough is known, however, to
make some interesting analogies between the Kinneret and Herculaneum boats.
They are more or less contemporary, the Kinneret boat being tentatively dated
from the mid-first century B.C. to about the time of the eruption of Vesuvius.
Both are approximately the same length--the Kinneret boat's length was about 8.2
m--and both were constructed shell-first with similarly-spaced edge joinery and
frames. There were other similarities as described below but, so far as design and
fabrication are concerned, the analogy must end there. Comparing the
Herculaneum boat to the Kinneret boat is like comparing a sleek sports car to a
delivery truck.
The Herculaneum boat was built by a well disciplined boatwright. There
is a lot of good joinery work in evidence, and construction as a whole indicates
plenty of pride and expertise. Our builder obviously had an abundance of good
materials available, too. Planks are broad and, as far as can be determined, run
their full lengths without scarfs. The planking plan is ideal for such a hull. Nails
are bronze and are made well. Those parts of the frames which were visible were
relatively straight and of constant dimension. The wales and sternpost were
works of art; one can only appreciate the expertise required to shape such wales
Steffy - 20
and fit them to adjacent planks with several dozen mortise-and-tenon joints along
each carefully fitted seam. The design is pleasing, too, even in this carbonized,
broken state. This was a strong, graceful hull, a fine example of boatbuilding
expertise in the heart of the empire.
Apparently things were different in the provinces. Not that the boatwright
who constructed the Kinneret vessel was an inferior craftsman. Indeed, I would
say that he was every bit as capable as his counterpart in Herculaneum. It was
just that he had to do so much with so little, and the nature of Galilee maritime
activities probably demanded a much less aesthetically pleasing hull (Wachsmann
et al 1990:29-47).
The Kinneret boat was deeper, broader, and far less graceful (figure 14).
We believe that this hull was used for fishing, freighting, or whatever else was
required of it. Its bottom was relatively flat, it had an unusually sharp turn of the
bilge for this type of construction, and its sides were much deeper than those of
the Herculaneum boat. The wales, beams, upper decks, stem, and sternpost were
all gone, cannibalized for use on a newer boat we believe, but much of the
contrast lies in the planking and frames. The cedar planks of the Kinneret boat
were frequently scarfed to make up strakes, and they were narrow and less well
arranged than on the boat at Herculaneum. The frames were noticeably different,
too, a statement we can make solely on the basis of nail patterns and examination
of a few fragments. The Kinneret builder had to use extremely crooked oak
Steffy - 21
frames to arrive at anything remotely resembling the desired curvatures. In some
cases the frames did not touch the planking and always they were crooked and
crude. Fastenings were solely of iron; there were no treenails or bronze
fastenings. Even the staples--this vessel was repaired with staples--were made of
iron.
When conservation of both hulls is completed and more thorough studies
of them are possible, they should provide the basics of some interesting
technological comparisons between Rome and her provinces.
Steffy - 22
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to Giuseppina Cerulli Irelli, Soprintendenza Archaeologica
di Pompei, for permission to record and study the exterior of the boat as well as
for her cooperation and thoughtfulness. Thanks also go to Giuseppe Maggi,
director of Ercolano Scavi at the time, who was especially enthusiastic and
helpful. I appreciate the friendship and instructions in vulcanology and
anthropology by Haraldur Sigurdsson and Sara Bisel, the hospitality of Walter
Silva, and the assistance and cooperation of the staffs of Ercolano Scavi and the
National Geographic Society. I am especially grateful to the National Geographic
Society for providing the financial support for this fieldwork, and to the Institute
of Nautical Archaeology and Texas A&M University for funding and facilities for
laboratory studies.
Steffy - 23
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sigurdsson, H.; Carey, S.; Cornell, W.; & Pescatore, T.
1985 The eruption of Vesuvius in A.D. 79. National Geographic Research
1(3):332-387.
Steffy, J. R.
1985 The Kyrenia ship: an interim report on its hull construction. American
Journal of Archaeology 89:71-101.
Wachsmann, S.; et al
1990 Excavations of an ancient boat in the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret).
Atiqot (English Series) XIX. The Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem.
Top Related