4.5 Article

Temporary solidification and extraction of marine archaeological wood underwater at a depth of seven meters: A further contribution

Journal

JOURNAL OF CULTURAL HERITAGE
Volume 62, Issue -, Pages 13-20

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2023.05.012

Keywords

Underwater archaeology; Cultural relics; Temporary solidification; In -situ solidifying; Veratraldehyde

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A prospective study was conducted to investigate the use of veratraldehyde for in-situ solidifying extraction of underwater wooden artifacts. The study showed that the method was successful in solidifying and extracting waterlogged ship wood from a shipwreck, without causing significant damage to the wood microstructure.
In-situ solidifying extraction of large-volume and severely damaged underwater fragile artifacts is still one of the major issues in underwater archaeology. Recent evidence suggests that veratraldehyde can be used to temporarily solidify artifacts underwater; however, it is still challenging to use it in actual archaeological sites. This prospective study was conducted in a seven-meter-deep pool wherein vera-traldehyde was used to solidify and extract waterlogged ship wood from the Nanhai I shipwreck. The entire underwater extraction process was recorded using a camera. The change in the wood surface color before and after extraction was relatively minor. Scanning electron microscopy analysis revealed that the wood microstructure was not significantly damaged, while nuclear magnetic resonance analysis showed no residues of veratraldehyde and its oxidation products. Overall, the proposed method utilizes a set of scientific techniques for successful in-situ solidifying extraction of underwater fragile wooden artifacts.(c) 2023 Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available