|
|

|
Mapping the Treasures
by Colin Clement
For many years, tales were told in Alexandria of fabulous
statues and engraved blocks that were littered across the
seafloor just outside the eastern harbor, but the area was a
military zone—off-limits to scientific investigation.
All that changed in the fall of 1994, when a team of
archaeologists started to explore the area in earnest. (To
learn more about what has been found, watch the NOVA program
"Treasures of the Sunken City"
or read our interview with
archaeologist Jean Yves Empereur.)
As with any archaeological site, the plotting of a detailed
and accurate map of the mass of ruins is a necessary first
step to figuring out what one has actually found. And in this
case, the very nature of the underwater site precluded the
possibility of returning day after day in whatever
|
Diver attaching lead line to corner of block.
|
|
weather to have a look at the site. The map making has been a
major undertaking, for two main reasons. First, the field of
ruins under examination extends over
5.5 acres, making it one
of the largest underwater archaeological sites in the
Mediterranean. To further complicate matters, the pieces often
lie on top of each other; in some areas there were veritable
hillocks of blocks. In order to map the site effectively, the
team set about to create a giant and detailed database, the
likes of which has never been used in archaeology before.
The team began by establishing a fixed position Electronic
Distance Measurement station (EDM)—effectively, an
electronic theodolite—on the shore. This is used to
"spot" the underwater blocks, which are indicated by a
reflector mounted upon a floating mast. The mast is connected
to a lead line that in turn is placed against the four corners
of the submerged block and held in position by a diver.
Another diver, on the surface, ensures that the correct
tension is maintained and that the floating mast doesn't move
too much. This technique was accurate to between 4 and 12
inches, depending on sea conditions, and was the sole option
given the need to relate the underwater site to other
archaeological sites on land in Alexandria.
|
Diver holding mapping line steady at surface.
|
At the end of each day's dive, the information stored in the
memory of the EDM is imported into computers by means of a
specialist topography software, called Caltop, which was
designed in France. This permits the plotting of the general
map of the site, and it also means that partial charts can be
given to the divers the following day to help orientate them
underwater and to allow the divers to plot and sketch
complementary features of the blocks. (The divers are able to
draw underwater using synthetic calque paper and plastic lead
pencils.)
This rapid, 24-hour turnaround in what began as an
experimental method has contributed enormously to the progress
of the excavation. It also seems clear that this technique can
now be applied to other underwater sites around the world. In
theory, it doesn't matter how far underwater the
|
Diver stretching measuring tape across block
|
|
archaeological site is, as long as calm conditions prevail.
The only constraint is the distance of the site from the
shore, because the EDM has an effective radius of about one
and a quarter miles. However, the majority of underwater
archaeological sites are usually within this distance.
Two other methods are used to map the site: triangulation,
using several permanently fixed underwater reference markers;
and the Global Positioning System (GPS). The expedition was
fortunate enough to be loaned a state-of-the-art GPS (accurate
to within one centimeter, or 0.4 inches) by the Swiss company
Leica. When this GPS device is mounted on a rubber dinghy and
combined with a sonar device, it gives an exact reading of the
contours of the seabed. This information is particularly
relevant in analyzing the formation of the site, given the
strong possibility that part of what is now the seabed was dry
land in antiquity.
The mass of data accumulated over almost ten months of diving
has all gone into a giant computerized database. Three types
of information on each registered block—written, drawn,
photo and/or film—has been recorded and can be combined
to produce either on-screen or hard copy
identification sheets. The
addition of extensive photography and video film, which can be
paused and rewound, makes the site much easier to study, since
the blocks themselves are underwater. Furthermore, a simple
click on any individual
|
|
Divers record the position and size of blocks,
columns, and statues.
|
element on the map can bring up the relevant block
identification sheet. The system can also respond to specific
demands to plot only those blocks corresponding to certain
criteria (form, volume, orientation, material, etc.). For
example, at the push of a button, the computer will bring on
screen a map of only those blocks identified as columns, or
statuary, or those over a certain weight.
The creation of the block identification sheets has made it
possible to define the type of blocks discovered and to
develop a terminology. In architecture, terminology is linked
to the function of a block in the construction—a lintel
is only so-called because it serves as a lintel—but here
we are dealing with an essentially unknown construction or
constructions and the majority of elements are lying
completely out of context. The new terminology that is being
established must ignore the idea of function and look,
instead, at four criteria: form, dimension, volume, and
decoration. Obviously, this very activity brings blocks
together into identifiable groups and is the first step on the
road to interpretation.
What the database has already made clear is that the site is
made up mostly of materials that have been recycled or
pillaged, in the time-honored Egyptian fashion, from
pre-existing structures in the Nile Delta and at Heliopolis.
There are clear signs of the application of Graeco-Macedonian
technological savoir faire to thoroughly Egyptian
architectural materials (more than 90 percent of the blocks
are of granite), and this juxtaposition, in itself, will throw
light upon the style and method of construction of the Pharos
lighthouse. In other words, it is likely that the Pharos was
not built in purely Greek style, because the Greeks had no
experience of building with granite and would have had to use
local labor. On the other hand, the Pharos would not have been
purely Egyptian, because the Greeks
|
Block with compass rose and identification number
scratched by divers in algae covering.
|
|
commissioned it. In addition, the significant amount of
statuary discovered and the evidence of other complete
structures underwater could lead to a new notion of the Pharos
as part of a greater complex, and spur interpretations as to
its civic and or religious function.
Clearly, the architectural analysis of the Pharos site is
still in its infancy and presents a formidable challenge. The
only blocks that can be dated even approximately are those
bearing decoration—moldings, inscriptions, statuary,
etc.—and there are relatively few of these. The fact
that the majority of the material has been recycled also
presents a challenge. Any masons' marks or traces of
construction techniques could either be from the original
structure or from the building of the Pharos itself.
In fact, before any architectural analysis can be definitively
broached, the long, painstaking, and at times tedious
accumulation of data must be completed. The 2,110 blocks
recorded as of the end of June 1997 may comprise the totality
of the upper layers, but until access can be gained to what
lies beneath, the study of the site will not be complete. (It
is anyone's guess how many more artifacts have yet to be
uncovered.) At the same time, there is a need to polish and
fine-tune the established database.
However, the aim of the game remains to produce hand-drawn and
computer-generated reconstitutions of architectural elements
that now lie in pieces on the bed of the Mediterranean Sea and
to advance a clear hypothesis as to the spatial arrangement of
the site. Given enough time and resources, this is indeed
possible.
Colin Clement, originally from Edinburgh, Scotland, is a
writer and translator who has lived in Alexandria for the
past eight years. Since 1994 he has been working closely
with the Centre d'Etudes Alexandrines (Center for
Alexandrian Studies) researching, compiling and editing
reports and closely following the various archaeological
excavations of the Centre.
Mapping the Treasures
| Empereur |
Unforgettable Moments
Seven Wonders |
Resources |
Guide
|
Transcript
| Treasures Home
Editor's Picks
|
Previous Sites
|
Join Us/E-mail
|
TV/Web Schedule
About NOVA |
Teachers |
Site Map |
Shop |
Jobs |
Search |
To print
PBS Online |
NOVA Online |
WGBH
©
| Updated November 2000
|
|
|