Category: Archaeology

Pondering the Belgammel Ram

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ Leave a comment

Interesting item from the National Oceanography Centre (UK)/University of Southampton:

Known as the Belgammel Ram, the 20kg artefact was discovered by a group of British divers off the coast of Libya near Tobruk in 1964. The ram is from a small Greek or Roman warship – a “tesseraria”. These ships were equipped with massive bronze rams on the bow at the waterline and were used for ramming the side timbers of enemy ships. At 65cm long, the Belgammel Ram is smaller in size and would have been sited on the upper level on the bow. This second ram is known as a proembolion, which strengthened the bow and also served to break the oars of an enemy ship.

Leading marine archaeologist, Dr Nic Flemming a visiting fellow of the National Oceanography Centre, co-ordinated a team of specialists from five institutes to analyse the artefact before it was returned to the National Museum in Tripoli in May 2010. Their results have been published in the International Journal of Nautical Archaeology.

Dr Flemming said: “Casting a large alloy object weighing more than 20kg is not easy. To find out how it was done we needed specialists who could analyse the mix of metals in the alloys; experts who could study the internal crystal structure and the distribution of gas bubbles; and scholars who could examine the classical literature and other known examples of bronze castings.

“Although the Belgammel Ram was probably the first one ever found, other rams have since been found off the coast of Israel and off western Sicily. We have built a body of expertise and techniques that will help with future studies of these objects and improve the accuracy of past analysis.”

Dr Chris Hunt and Annita Antoniadou of Queen’s University Belfast used radiocarbon dating of burnt wood found inside the ram to date it to between 100 BC to 100 AD. This date is consistent with the decorative style of the tridents and bird motive on the top of the ram, which were revealed in detail by laser-scanned images taken by archaeologist Dr Jon Adams of the University of Southampton.

It is possible that during its early history the bronze would have been remelted and mixed with other bronze on one or more occasions, perhaps when a warship was repaired or maybe captured.

The X-ray team produced a 3-D image of the ram’s internal structure using a machine capable of generating X-rays of 10 mevs to shine through 15cm of solid bronze. By rotating the ram on a turntable and making 360 images they created a complete 3-D replica of the ram similar to a medical CT scan. An animation of the X-rays has been put together by Dr Richard Boardman of m-VIS (mu-VIS), a dedicated centre for computed tomography (CT) at the University of Southampton.

Further analysis was carried out by geochemists Professor Ian Croudace, Dr Rex Taylor and Dr Richard Pearce at the University of Southampton Ocean and Earth Science (based at the National Oceanography Centre). Micro-drilled samples show that the composition of the bronze was 87 per cent copper, 6 per cent tin and 7 per cent lead. The concentrations of the different metals vary throughout the casting. Scanning Electron Microscopy, SEM, reveals that the lead was not dissolved with the other metals to make a composite alloy but that it had separated out into segregated intergranular blobs within the alloy as the metal cooled.

These results indicate the likelihood that the Belgammel Ram was cast in one piece and cooled as a single object. The thicker parts cooled more slowly than the thin parts so that the crystal structure and number of bubbles trapped in the metal varies from place to place.

The isotope characterisation of the lead component found in the bronze (an alloy of copper and tin) can be used as a fingerprint to reveal the origin of the lead ore used in making the metal alloy. Up until now, this approach has only provided a general location in the Mediterranean. But recent advances in the analysis technique means that the location can be identified with higher accuracy. The result shows that the lead component of the metal could have come from a district of Attica in Greece called Lavrion. An outcome of this improved technique means that the method can now be applied to other ancient metal artefacts to discover where the ore was sourced.

Micro-X-Ray fluorescence of the surface showed that corrosion by seawater had dissolved out some of the copper leaving it richer in tin and lead. It is significant that when comparing photographs from 1964 and 2008 there is no indication of change in the surface texture. This implies that the metal is stable and is not suffering from “Bronze Disease,” a corrosion process that can destroy bronze artefacts.

The Belgammel Ram was found by a group of three British service sports divers off the coast of Libya at the mouth of a valley called Waddi Belgammel, near Tobruk. Using a rubber dinghy and rope they dragged it 25 metres to the surface. It was brought home to the UK as a souvenir but when the divers discovered that it was a rare antiquity, the ram was loaned to the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

Ken Oliver is the only surviving member of that group of three and the effective owner. He decided in 2007 that is should be returned to a museum in Libya. With the help of the British Society for Libyan Studies this was arranged in 2010. During the intervening period Dr Nic Flemming invited experts to undertake scientific investigations prior to its return to Libya. These services were offered freely and would have cost many tens of thousands of pounds if conducted commercially. The team’s objective was to understand how such a large bronze was cast, the history and composition of the alloy, its strength, how it was used in naval warfare, and how it survived 2,000 years under the sea.

Since the Belgammel Ram was discovered, other rams have been found, some off the coast of Israel near Athlit, and more recently, off western Sicily. The latter finds look to be the remains of a battle site. On 8 April there is a one-day colloquium hosted by the Faculty of Classics, University of Oxford, to discuss the finds of the Egadi Islands Project.

Nic Flemming continued: “We have learned such a huge amount from the Belgammel Ram and have developed new techniques which will help us unpick future mysteries.

“We will never know why the Belgammel Ram was on the seabed near Tobruk. There may have been a battle in the area, a skirmish with pirates. It could be that it was cargo from an ancient commercial vessel, about to be sold as salvage. The fragments of wood inside the ram show signs of fire, and we now know that parts of the bronze had been heated to a high temperature since it was cast which caused the crystal structure to change. The ship may have caught fire and the ram fell into the sea as the flames licked towards it. Some things will always remain a mystery. But we are pleased that we have gleaned so many details from this study that will help future work.”

The Libyan uprising of 2011 resulted in many battles in the area around the museum. Fortunately the museum suffered no damage. The Belgammel Ram is safe.

Additional coverage worth checking out:

Folks seeking comparanda might want to check out the articles/coverage associated with the Acqualadrone ram:

Roman Finds from Manisa

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ Leave a comment

A pair of painfully brief items, but if we post both, the picture isn’t too vaguae. First, from Turkish Press:

A number of historical artifacts believed to date back to the Roman period have been unearthed by a backhoe operator in the Sarigol district of the western province of Manisa.

Salih Sari was digging in a field when he hit something. He stopped the backhoe and searched the area with a shovel and found numerous artifacts that are believed to belong to the Roman period.

The artifacts were taken to the Manisa Museum.

… and from Sanliurfa:

3 marble tombs of children along with a vat, a pot, and a bowl of Roman era were discovered in a field near Afsar village of Manisa province’s Sarigol district in western Turkey during a routine work in the field.

A gendarmerie unit was informed about the discovery, and the historical artefacts were delivered to Manisa Museum.

The latter includes a really bad photo of what are apparently the finds. FWIW …

Grumbling About the Lod Mosaic Exhibit

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ Leave a comment

I’m sure this sort of thing could be said about a number of exhibitions … from the Daily Pennsylvanian:

The “Lod Mosaic” at the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology has garnered a lot of praise, but has also drawn criticism from Penn faculty.

The mosaic is on the last part of its tour in the United States. After the exhibits ends on May 12, it will head to the Louvre museum in Paris.

Limited information is known about the history of the Lod Mosaic, but a number of Penn faculty have voiced concern that the piece is presented without any archaeological context. “We don’t want to celebrate a master work in isolation,” said Professor of Roman architecture Lothar Haselberger, who initiated the conversation on how the mosaic is presented.

“Nothing is conveyed to the public that [the mosaic] is more than a carpet,” Haselberger said, referencing the fact that mosaics like the “Lod Mosaic” were popular in this time period as floor decorations in many buildings.

“This is an exhibit that really focuses on the meticulous conservation by the Israel Antiquities Authority of a dazzling Roman mosaic that was found during highway construction,” said Brian Rose, Curator-in-Charge of the Mediterranean Section at the Penn Museum.

On March 28, Haselberger met with colleagues from the Penn Museum, as well as the art history, classics and building conservation departments to draft and submit a statement to the Director of the Penn Museum, Julian Siggers, outlining their critiques on the exhibit.

Haselberger said they are still waiting on final approval, but that sometime this week the statement will be published on the Penn Museum’s website and will be featured on a poster set up in conjunction with the exhibit.

In 1996, the Israeli government was expanding the highway between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv when they unearthed the remains of a Roman villa dating to about 300 A.D. — now known as the “Lod Mosaic”. “It took 13 years to assemble the money to excavate and conserve the mosaic,” Rose said, making this a prime example of “rescue archaeology.”

Jacob Fisch, executive director of the Israel Antiquities Authority — the group that has custody over the mosaic — said this critique of the exhibit was a first for him, but he does not see it as a serious issue.

“The theory behind what he says is relevant,” Fisch said, but he said the mosaic will be shown in its original context and location when it returns to Lod, Israel after its tour, where it is to be permanently housed in a new museum exclusively devoted to the mosaic.

The new Shelby White and Leon Levy Lod Mosaic Center will be open to the public in 2014, but Fisch pointed out that not everyone would have the opportunity to visit the mosaic in Israel. The benefit of this tour is that “you can see an incredible work of art produced 6,000 miles away from 2,000 years ago,” he said.

Siggers agreed that he didn’t see a problem with the presentation of the mosaic’s context. He described the exhibit as a “story in progress” that displays the immediate story of the discovery and conservation of the mosaic itself.

Additionally, since very little information is actually known about the context of the mosaic, “It is presented in the fullest context we have the ability to do,” Rose said.

While it can’t be known for sure, Rose said that the mosaic likely came from the reception room of a villa owned by a wealthy businessman.

“It’s very possible that the combination of fish and exotic animals point to the fact that the owner was a wealthy Roman who lived in Lod and who somehow dabbled in supplying animals to the gladiator games,” Fisch said. Rose agreed that this is the theory that most experts have agreed upon so far.

Next year, an excavation report will be published to provide an “in-depth exploration of this mosaic in the context of the Roman world,” Siggers said.

Haselberger added that he is glad that the faculty were able to “articulate misgivings in a collegiate and forward-looking way” so that the debate surrounding the mosaic can be used as a teaching and learning opportunity.

“I’m happy to say that I initiated the conversation on this and I’m happy to see that we seem to come to a reasonable result,” he said.

Finding the site of the Battle of Baecula

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ 1 Comment

Tip o’ the pileus to @PunicOctopus on twitter who alerted us (and the world) to this rather important study in Spain … from El Pais:

Año 208 aC. Los ejércitos romano y cartaginés, a las órdenes de Escipión el Africano y Asdrúbal Barca (hermano de Aníbal), están a punto de entablar batalla. Asdrúbal domina un cerro estratégico en el que se ha instalado ante la llegada de su enemigo. Las tropas de Escipión, que han acampado a unos cuatro kilómetros, atacan a los cartagineses: primero con la infantería ligera y luego con el grueso de su ejército, desplegando una maniobra de tenaza para rodear al ejército enemigo. Asdrúbal pierde el combate y huye, llevándose, eso sí, el tesoro y los elefantes. “Es la batalla de Baécula, una de las importantes de la Segunda Guerra Púnica, que enfrenta a las dos potencias del momento por el dominio del Mediterráneo, casi una guerra mundial”, apunta el arqueólogo Arturo Ruiz.

La historia, los detalles de esta batalla, la cuentan los historiadores romanos Polibio y Tito Livio. Pero, ¿dónde se libró exactamente? ¿Qué cerro era ese en el que se defendió Asdrúbal y atacó Escipión? ¿Por dónde avanzó uno y huyó el otro? Un equipo de arqueólogos de la Universidad de Jaén afirma haber descubierto el lugar del combate y encontrado el rastro de las tropas en sus movimientos sobre el terreno. Los investigadores están leyendo los vestigios directos para entender qué pasó. Lanzas, puntas de flecha y de jabalina, tachuelas de las sandalias, proyectiles de los honderos baleares que lucharon en las filas cartaginesas, broches de los ropajes, espuelas… incluso piquetas de las tiendas de acampada o los agujeros donde clavaron los de Asdrúbal la empalizada de protección, han salido a la luz en los últimos años. En total, estos arqueólogos han recuperado ya más de 6.000 objetos, dos tercios de ellos asociados al acontecimiento del 208 a C. Los ejércitos de las dos potencias, afirman, se enfrentaron en el cerro de Las Albahacas cerca de la actual localidad de Santo Tomé (Jaén), un lugar estratégico de acceso a la cuenca del Guadalquivir desde Cartago Nova (Cartagena) que Escipión había conquistado el año anterior. Asdrúbal estaba a tiro de las minas de cobre y plata de Cástulo. Una región importante para unos y para otros.

Es arqueología de una batalla, de un acontecimiento efímero, algo insólito en la tradición de unas investigaciones que suelen ocuparse de ciudades, templos, tumbas o infraestructuras que perduran durante siglos. “Hasta ahora solo se había excavado así una batalla de la antigüedad, la de Teotoburgo, en Alemania, de romanos contra los germanos, y es muy posterior, del año 9 aC.”, recalca Juan Pedro Bellón, del Instituto Universitario de Investigación en Arqueología Ibérica (Universidad de Jaén). “Hay alguna batalla excavada con una metodología similar, pero del siglo XIX, en concreto la de tropas estadounidenses contra indios en Little Big Horn, y algunos campamentos militares, pero nada más”, añade su colega Manuel Molinos. Por ejemplo, las batallas de Aníbal en Italia se sabe que fueron en Tesino, Trebia, Trasimeno y Cannas, pero no en qué sitio exactamente, dice Bellón, ni hay restos arqueológicos de ellas.

Con las detalladas descripciones de los historiadores romanos, los investigadores del Instituto de Jaén se plantearon, hace una década, encontrar los vestigios de la batalla de Baécula. “El general cartaginés recorría entonces los parajes de Cástulo, alrededor de la ciudad de Bécula, no lejos de las minas de plata. Informado de la proximidad de los romanos cambió de lugar su campamento y se procuró seguridad por un río que fluía a sus espaldas”, escribió Polibio. Y Tito Livio: “El ejército de Asdrúbal estaba cerca de la ciudad de Bécula y por la noche Asdrúbal replegó sus tropas a una altura. Por detrás había un río. La altura, que tenía una explanada en la parte más alta, por delante y por los lados ceñía todo su contorno una especie de ribazo abrupto”.

Los arqueólogos emprendieron una labor casi detectivesca para dar con el lugar de los hechos, con la ayuda de los textos clásicos y técnicas topográficas avanzadas, además de la observación directa sobre el terreno. “Schulten, en 1925, situó la batalla de Baécula al sur de Bailén, pero lo descartamos, porque la geografía no se ajustaba a las descripciones de Polibio y Tito Livio”, cuenta Arturo Ruiz, arqueólogo de la Universidad de Jaén que puso en marcha el proyecto de Baécula. También se habían propuesto otras localizaciones. Poco a poco, el equipo fue identificando posibles cerros y haciendo catas arqueológicas con detectores de metales, hasta que en el cerro de Las Albahacas empezaron a aparecer restos acordes con un enfrentamiento entre dos ejércitos. Desde 2006, realizan excavaciones en el lugar y participan en los estudios una veintena de expertos: topógrafos, numismáticos, conocedores de armamento antiguo, especialistas en paleoclima y en análisis químicos.

La investigación, financiada por el Plan Nacional de Investigación Científica, es una labor ardua y extensa. El teatro de operaciones se extiende por 400 hectáreas, aunque las prospecciones más intensas se centran en 20 hectáreas. Los arqueólogos han hecho decenas de transectos (líneas de prospección con los detectores de metales) y centenares de cuadrículas.

En el 209 a C los romanos han tomado Cartagena y, un año después entran en la zona del alto Guadalquivir, dominado por los cartagineses. Aníbal ha estado en ese territorio de importancia estratégica antes de dirigirse a Italia, recuerda Bellón. Y en la península Ibérica permanecen tres ejércitos cartagineses: dos de ellos al mando de los hermanos de Aníbal, Asdrúbal Barca y Magón Barca, y otro al mando de Asdrúbal Giscón. “La batalla de Baécula abre el control de la Bética a Roma y, en adelante, Andalucía será su almacén de aceite, trigo y minas de plata y plomo”, explica Ruiz. “Según una teoría, Escipión entra en Andalucía por Despeñaperros, pero nosotros sostenemos que lo hace por el valle del río Guadiana Menor”, apunta Bellón. Quiere evitar que Asdrúbal llegue a Italia para apoyar a su hermano Aníbal y, a la vez, evitar que se unan los otros dos ejércitos cartagineses.

La historia solo contaba con las fuentes de una de las partes en conflicto, explica Ruiz. “Y los romanos ensalzan a Escipión como gran estratega que planifica el movimiento envolvente de su ejército, que afronta la dificultad y dureza de la batalla de Baécula y que, al final, derrota a Asdrúbal”, comenta Bellón. Pero ahora los arqueólogos intentan leer directamente las pruebas para averiguar qué paso. Apenas aparecen en el cerro armas cortas, lo que indica que el enfrentamiento cuerpo a cuerpo fue limitado. Sin embargo, añade Bellón, hay muchas armas arrojadizas, como lanzas, flechas, proyectiles de los honderos baleáricos y dardos.

“Asdrúbal elige el cerro sabiendo que es un punto defensivo estratégico para defenderse y para preparar la huida”, continúa Bellón. “Los romanos establecen su campamento a unos cuatro kilómetros e, inmediatamente, fuerzan la batalla atacando a los cartagineses. Tienen desventaja teórica sobre el terreno ya que atacan cuesta arriba, pero tienen ventaja numérica”. No está claro cuántos hombres participaron en la batalla. Tito Livio habla de 70.000 (40.000 romanos y 30.000 cartagineses). Puede ser exagerado. Los arqueólogos de Jaén lo dejan en unos 15.000en total.

“Ni Polibio ni Tito Livio son contemporáneos de los hechos, y escriben basándose en la abundante documentación romana, aunque el primero, que nació en 200 a C, se considera una fuente más fidedigna porque escucharía datos de primera mano. De los cartagineses no hay testimonios porque la ciudad de Cartago fue arrasada al final de la Tercera Guerra Púnica, cuando los romanos finalmente se hicieron con el poder absoluto del Mediterráneo”, apunta Molinos.

Después de Baécula, Escipión permanece poco tiempo en el campamento del cerro que ha tomado al enemigo. Asdrúbal huye y llega a Italia, en el 207 a C. Una vez allí, envía dos emisarios a Aníbal, pero los romanos los interceptan y atacan: Asdrúbal muere en la batalla de Metauro.
El rastro de las tachuelas de sandalia

Las sandalias de los romanos, que no de los cartagineses, llevaban unos remaches de hierro en la suela de cuero, para proteger el material frente al deterioro del uso y para mejorar el agarre. Las tachuelas se desprendían. O el calzado quedaba abandonado por alguna causa. Entonces esas piezas, denominadas clavi caligarii, de un centímetro de diámetro aproximadamente y dos o tres milímetros de alto, con una punta curvada para sujetarlas al cuero, quedan sembradas por el campo. Para los expoliadores carecen de valor, así que permanecen en el lugar durante siglos, hasta convertirse en un tesoro para los arqueólogos.

“Hemos encontrado cientos de tachuelas en Baécula y, gracias a ellas hemos podido localizar no solo el campamento romano, su punto de partida, sino también el camino de unos cuatro kilómetros que recorrió el ejército de Escipión para atacar al enemigo en el cerro, así como la zona donde se desplegó y la batalla”, explica el arqueólogo Juan Pedro Bellón. Es una forma de arqueología dinámica importante, e incluso se han hecho estudios para estimar cuántas tachuelas perdería un soldado romano caminando, añade Bellón.

Las tachuelas salen ahora a la luz con los detectores de metales (apoyados con GPS para una localización exacta de cada pieza), y los arqueólogos de Baécula han analizado los resultados del barrido del territorio con ellos identificando las zonas de mayor densidad de tachuelas (campamentos y batalla) y piezas más dispersas en el camino. Cuando los investigadores han comparado la ruta que marca el rastro de las tachuelas con el mejor camino trazado sobre la topografía de la zona han visto que los romanos acertaron.

¿Y de los movimientos de los cartagineses? Puede haber un rastro de sus monedas, sus armas… El plan de investigación ahora es seguir a las tropas de Asdrúbal en la retirada y profundizar el conocimeinto del campo de batalla.

Folks whose Spanish is reasonable will want to visit the project webpage (Tras los pasos de Asdrúbal Barca: de Baecula al Metauro), which includes links to a number of papers spawned by the research. This sort of thing (and the techniques for locating the battefields and camps) is clearly something that can be used elsewhere …

UPDATE (a few minutes later): I note that Adrian Murdoch mentioned this article a few weeks ago (and we Blogosphered it) … still worth repeating though as AM links to a report in English. Why doesn’t this sort of thing get greater coverage in the English press?