Survey Report FPL 77

2010
University of Southern Denmark,

Maritime Archaeology Programme
Report prepared by:

Dr Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente Grundvad, Sarah
Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus and Christian Thomsen
Edited by: Dr Jens Auer
FIELDWORK REPORT
OSTSEE BEREICH IV, FPL 77
(4AM WRECK)
Report on the recovery and recording of site FPL 77, Prerow, Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern, Germany, conducted by the Maritime Archaeology Programme of the
University of Southern Denmark as part of the Field school Course in July-August
2009.
i
Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente Grundvad, Sarah Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus and Christian Thomsen
Fieldwork Report Ostsee Bereich IV, Fischland, Fundplatz 77

University of Southern Denmark
www.sdu.dk/maritimearchaeology
© The authors, Landesamt für Kultur- und Denkmalpflege Mecklennburg-Vorpommern &

ISBN: 978-87-992214-4-8
Subject headings: maritime archaeology, survey techniques, shipwreck, Fischland, wreck, field
school
Published by:
Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10
6700 Esbjerg
Denmark
Printed in Denmark 2010
ii
Acknowledgements
The MAP fieldwork team (Konstantinos Alexiou, Jens Auer, Marja-Liisa Grue, Bente
Grundvad, Sarah Fawsitt, Liv Lofthus, Martin Lonergan, Thijs Maarleveld, Delia Ni
Chiobhain, Andrew Stanek, Christian Thomsen and Cate Wagstaffe) would like to thank the
Landesamt für Kultur und Denkmalpflege, Abteilung Archäologie und Denkmalpflege and in
particular Dr Jens-Peter Schmidt for providing the opportunity to carry out the field school
in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania, supporting the project and organising accommodation
in Prerow. Further thanks go to Dr Michael Schirren for allowing us to recover and record
the FPL 77 wreck and providing a dumpy level. We would also like to thank the
Gesamtschule Prerow, and in particular the caretaker Herr Schütt, for accommodating the
excavation team in the school yard. Further thanks go to Frau Pfeiffer in the Kurverwaltung
Prerow, who provided tables and benches for our outdoor kitchen and organised waste
collection. And last but not least we would like to thank Familie Fiedler for their support, not
only with welcome food on the first day, but also with crockery, a fridge, a handcart and the
construction of our UMA.
iii
iv
Contents
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
Project Background............................................................................................................................................. 1
Aim and Objectives.............................................................................................................................................. 1
Co-ordinate System ............................................................................................................................................. 2
2. Site Location ...................................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Site History ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
4. Fieldwork in 2009 .......................................................................................................................................... 4
Organisation ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Time frame......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Personnel............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Logistics .............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Storage and preparation .............................................................................................................................. 5
Dismantling and recording ......................................................................................................................... 5
Sampling ............................................................................................................................................................. 7
5. Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
The wreck................................................................................................................................................................ 8
Clinker phase .................................................................................................................................................... 8
Carvel phase ................................................................................................................................................... 11
Interpretation ..................................................................................................................................................... 13
Dating and construction sequence........................................................................................................ 13
Site context ..................................................................................................................................................... 15
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 17
6. References....................................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix 1: Plates ................................................................................................................................................. 21
Appendix 2: Timber records ............................................................................................................................. 39
Appendix 3: Report of dendrochronological analysis ............................................................................ 45
v
List of Figures
Figure 1: Location of the Weststrand near Prerow on the Darss Peninsula in Mecklenburg
Western Pomerania. Auer 2010 on the basis of a map prepared by NordNordWest,
Wikimedia Commons. ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2: Recovery of the FPL 77 wreck parts on the beach. MAP 2009 ........................................... 3
Figure 3: The wreck is kept wet with an oscillating lawn sprinkler during daytime. Auer
2009. .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 4: MAP students drawing the overview plan of the clinker layer. The coloured tags
used to identify fastenings are visible in the foreground. Auer 2009. ............................................... 6
Figure 5: Removal of planking from FPL 77. Planks are carefully lifted with plastic wedges
and trenails are cut with a saw. Auer 2009. .................................................................................................. 6
Figure 6: 1:10 recording of frames. Auer 2009. ........................................................................................... 7
Figure 7: Schematic section through FPL 77 showing the construction sequence. Auer 2010
based on a drawing by Thomsen 2009. ........................................................................................................... 8
Figure 8: Toolmarks (axe) on frame 108. Auer 2009. ............................................................................... 9
Figure 9: Trapezoidal mark on frame 103. Auer 2009. ............................................................................ 9
Figure 10: Large mark on the moulded face of frame 106. The damage in the centre of the
mark is recent. Auer 2009..................................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 11: Distribution of scarf joints in the clinker planking of FPL 77. Auer 2009. ...............10
Figure 12: Impression of iron nail head in the outside of clinker planking. Auer 2009. ..........10
Figure 13: Wooden plug used to fill an old nail hole in the plank surface. Auer 2009. .............10
Figure 14: Filling piece 114 after removal. The 1m long and 11cm wide pine plank was held
in place by a single iron nail. Auer 2009. ......................................................................................................11
Figure 15: Plank 123 is the only oak component in the filling layer. The plank was re-used
and fastened to the outside of the clinker planking with a single iron nail. Auer 2009. ...........11
Figure 16: Fastenings on carvel outer plank 100. The impression of an iron nail is visible
below the trenail. The red arrow marks a crescent shaped incision or cut. Grue 2009. ..........12
Figure 17: Plugged trenail on plank 101. Grue 2009. ..............................................................................12
Figure 18: Correlation of the clinker planking and framing of FPL77 with site and master
chronologies in Northern Europe. Daly 2010. ............................................................................................13
Figure 19: Correlation of the carvel planks and frame 104 with master and site chronologies
in Northern Europe. Daly 2010. .......................................................................................................................14
Figure 20: Distribution of registered archaeological sites and find spots in the vicinity of FPL
77. Schmidt 2010. ...................................................................................................................................................16
vi
List of tables:
Table 1: Registered archaeological sites and find spots near FPL 77. Pers. comm. Jens-Peter
Schmidt LKD M-V 2010. ...................................................................................................................................... 16
vii
1. Introduction
Project Background
The Maritime Archaeology Masters Programme (MAP) is a two year international
postgraduate course in Maritime Archaeology. It is part of the Institute for History and
Civilization and based at Esbjerg Campus. One of the components of the Masters programme
is a three week field school course. This course takes place in the period between the 2nd
and 3rd semester. Seen in the context of the curriculum, the field school builds on the
knowledge and skills the students acquire in the 1st and 2nd semester, and requires them to
apply those in a practical setting. The curriculum states the following aims for the field
school: “On completion of the course students should:
 have acquired a satisfactory level of competence in the use of maritime

archaeological techniques and methods in the field;
 be able to place these activities in a broader analytical context with a view to
describing, recapitulating and interpreting significant aspects of an archaeological
excavation.”
For the year 2009, the field school course was organised in co-operation with the Landesamt
für Kultur und Denkmalpflege, Abteilung Archäologie und Denkmalpflege, Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern (LKD M-V), the authority responsible for cultural heritage in the German state
of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
A co-operation agreement regarding the organisation of field schools in Mecklenburg

Western Pomerania was signed in June 2009. In order to facilitate the field school, the LKD
M-V identified a wreck site that was located easily accessible in relatively shallow water and
required archaeological documentation. The chosen site, Fundplatz 17 (FPL 17), near the
village of Prerow, is potentially affected by the construction of a harbour for pleasure craft,
so that the results of the field school can be used to inform the environmental assessment
for the planned project (Auer 2010). However, on the 26.07.09, the field school participants
were informed about the presence of another wreck or part of a wreck, Fundplatz 77 (FPL
77), on the Weststrand, a beach west of Prerow. They were asked to help with the recovery
and recording of this wreck. This led to the field school being split into two projects, the
underwater recording of FPL 17 and the recording of the recovered wreck part FPL 77 on
dry land.
Aim and Objectives

The aim of the field school was twofold: From a University point of view, the field school is
an important part of the curriculum, which allows students to apply their knowledge and
skills in a practical context. Students are supposed to learn the preparation, organisation
and day to day running of field projects, as well as the tasks related to post-excavation
analysis.
In addition, the field school aimed at generating results which contribute to research in the
field of maritime archaeology. With regards to site FPL 77, the specific objectives were:
1
 to disassemble and fully record FPL 77 to sufficient standard in order to understand
the construction and construction sequence of the wreck;
 to obtain samples for dendrochronological dating;
 to prepare a full archaeological report outlining the results of the work, following
the standards of the LKD M-V;
 to prepare an article for a scientific journal on the results of the work.
As FPL 77 will be subject of a master thesis at the University of Southern Denmark, this
report is kept at descriptive level. A full analysis and interpretation of the site will be carried
out as part of the planned thesis project in 2010.
Co-ordinate System
All positions in this report are stated in Easting and Northing based on the Universal
Transverse Mercator co-ordinate system (UTM), using the World Geodetic System 1984
(WGS 84) ellipsoid. The site falls into zone 33U North. Co-ordinate conversions are
conducted using GEOTRANS V 2.41.
2. Site Location
The wreck parts associated with FPL 77 were found on the coast of the Fischland-Darss-
Zingst peninsula in the German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Mecklenburg Western
Pomerania) (Figure 1). They were located on the Weststrand, a westward facing stretch of
beach leading up to the northernmost tip of the peninsula, Darsser Ort. The position was E
337166; N 6037318. The find spot lies in the core protection zone of the coastal national
park (Nationalpark Vorpommersche Boddenlandschaft).
The Fischland-Darss-Zingst peninsula is

heavily affected by coastal dynamics.
Studies based on the evaluation of historical
maps have shown that the beaches on the
western side of the peninsula are subject to
constant coastal erosion. A detailed analysis
for the stretch of beach between coastal
kilometre 186,000 and 192,0001 shows the
varying rate of erosion and allows a
reconstruction of the coastline through time
(Plate 1 – Appendix 1) (Tiepolt et al. 1999;
Thuerkow 2009). With an average of 1.69m
Figure 1: Location of the Weststrand near Prerow on the
Darss Peninsula in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania. per year, the highest rates of coastal erosion
Auer 2010 on the basis of a map prepared by occurred in the period from 1695-1835.
NordNordWest, Wikimedia Commons.
Erosion rates then decreased to ca. 0.55m
per year and are currently increasing again (Tiepolt et al. 1999). The adjacent area between
1Beginning at the western border, in Priwall, the coast of Mecklenburg Western Pomerania has been
subdivided into coastal kilometres. This system, called Küstenkilometrierung (KKM) allows easy
orientation along the coastline. Fixed datum points are spaced a kilometre apart, with additional
points in 200m or 250m distance between them.
2
coastal kilometre 192000 and 195000 includes the sandy hook Darsser Ort and is
characterised by accumulation. The wreck parts associated with FPL 77 were located near
coastal kilometre 190200. According to the reconstruction by Tiepolt and Schumacher, the
beach in this area has receded by approximately 400m since 1695 (compared to 1983)
(Plate 1 – Appendix 1) (Tiepolt et al. 1999). A more detailed analysis of the site location and
the possible association with known sites can be found in section 5.
When first noted, the wreck parts were almost fully exposed on the beach. Just before
recovery on the morning of the 28.07.09, increasing westerly winds led to high water level
and strong surf on the beach. As a result, the wreck parts were almost covered by sediment
with only a few planks visible.
3. Site History
The wreck parts on the beach were first noted by a tourist at the end of July 2009. It is
unclear how long they had been exposed for and where they came from. Weather forecasts
for the period in question report onshore winds, but no gales. The tourist notified the the
national park administration (Nationalparkverwaltung), which in turn contacted LKD M-V
on July 24th, 2009. On the same day, Dr Michael Schirren from the LKD M-V inspected the
site and started to organise a recovery2.
The field school participants were

approached to help recovering and
recording the site on July 26th, 2009.
Recovery was planned for July 28th, 2009,
5am to minimise interference with touristic
activities on the popular beach.
The wreck parts were recovered by a team

consisting of Dr Schirren and his family, all
members of the MAP field school and two
employees of the construction company
Ramm-, Erd- und Wasserbau Gerhard Figure 2: Recovery of the FPL 77 wreck parts on the
beach. MAP 2009
Bossow. An officer from the national park
administration was also present.
The timbers were sketched and photographed in situ. Afterwards they were carefully
excavated by hand and with shovels and lifted with the help of a digger (Figure 2).
Suspended on a large wooden palette they could be transported to a waiting truck. As they
were to be recorded by field school participants, it was decided to store them outside the
gym at Gesamtschule Prerow for the duration of the recording project.
After disassembly, recording and sampling, the loose timbers were stored on the wooden
palette, wrapped in foil and secured with ropes. Old sleeping mats were used to support
fragile timbers. The palette was collected by Ramm-, Erd- und Wasserbau Gerhard Bossow on
2 Pers. Comm. Dr C. Michael Schirren, 13.01.2010.
3
August 13th, 2009. It is currently stored by this company in the harbour of Barth, but will be
transferred to LKD M-V for conservation in the near future.
4. Fieldwork in 2009
Organisation
Time frame
The FPL 77 wreck parts were recovered on July 28th 2009. Recording started the same day
and was finished after 15 days on August 11th, 2009. The timbers were then prepared for
transport and collected on August 13th 2009.
Personnel
As the field school was originally planned around site FPL 17 only, the work programme had
to be rearranged after the discovery of FPL 77. The survey team consisted of 12 divers, ten
students of the Maritime Archaeology Masters Programme and two teaching staff. Dive
teams for FPL 17 were made up of four members with another four preparing the
subsequent dive. Dependent on other tasks and logistics, this left between two and four
people who could work on the recording of FPL 77.
Rather than having a fixed “recording team” each day, the work schedule on FPL 77 followed
the planning for FPL 17 in order to guarantee smooth diving operations. In practice, this
often meant that a drawing started by one person had to be finished by another. This made
good communication essential.
To maximise the learning outcome and provide a realistic work environment, the
responsibility of planning and organising the day to day running of the survey was shared
with the students. Each day one student acted as site director and had to plan the day, carry
out a morning briefing and write the site diary. Days were then discussed during evening
debriefings. Progress was constantly posted on the Maritime Archaeology Programme blog
(Auer 2009). The site director was responsible for both, the underwater work on FPL 17, as
well as the recording of FPL 77 and diaries were kept for both sites.
Logistics
The survey team was accommodated in tents on the school yard of Gesamtschule Prerow in
the village of Prerow. The washroom facilities in the school gym could be used and a gym
changing room was converted to site office and housed computers and survey equipment.
Access to a water hose allowed cleaning the equipment after diving. A field kitchen was
established on the school yard.
It was decided to store FPL 77 outside on the car park of the gym. In this location the
timbers were least affected by sunlight and a ramp allowed photography from a higher
position. The area was within reach of the freshwater supply of the gym and wastewater
drains were present. The wreck parts were left on the wooden palette they had been
recovered on.
4
Methodology
Storage and preparation

The wreck was kept wet with an oscillating
lawn sprinkler in daytime to prevent the
timbers from drying out. A freshwater well
at the gym provided the necessary water
supply (Figure 3).
Overnight, the timbers were covered with

thick black pond liner. After disassembly,
smaller parts were stored in makeshift
freshwater tanks built from old wardrobes
and pond liner. Long planks were kept
wrapped up in pond liner next to the wreck.
They were sprayed with freshwater at
regular intervals.
Prior to recording, the whole wreck was

carefully cleaned with soft brushes and
running water. All visible elements were
marked with waterproof tags with unique Figure 3: The wreck is kept wet with an oscillating lawn
identifiers starting with No 100 (see sprinkler during daytime. Auer 2009.
Appendix 2 for a list of all timbers). This
process was repeated after the removal of each layer.
Dismantling and recording

A first quick survey of the recovered section indicated that it was part of a vessel which had
been converted from clinker to carvel by smoothing out the clinker outline with filling
pieces and subsequently re-planking with carvel outer planks (see section 5). This led to the
presence of three individual layers, each representing a stage in the construction sequence.
After consultation with Dr Schirren from the LKD M-V it was decided to fully dismantle the
section as to be able to record all details of construction and then conserve elements
individually.
In order to understand the construction sequence, it was decided to disassemble the wreck
section layer by layer, starting from the outside with the carvel planking. Each layer was
recorded in situ before removal. Recording consisted of:
 a projected plan view of each layer, drawn at a scale of 1:10;

 photographic documentation;
 a written description;
 and dumpy level spot height measurements along the frames.
The plan view was drawn using offset measurements from a central baseline. As the carvel
outer planking covered underlying layers, and there were no possibilities to fasten a
5
permanent baseline on the wreck section,
the baseline had to be relayed after the
recording of the carvel layer. The same
baseline was used for the remaining layers.
Plan view drawing were drawn with pencil
on millimetric permatrace and inked during
post-processing (see Appendix 1 for all
drawings).
After removal of the first layer, a multitude

of fastenings became visible, all part of
Figure 4: MAP students drawing the overview plan of
different phases of construction.
the clinker layer. The coloured tags used to identify Consequently it was decided to tag all
fastenings are visible in the foreground. Auer 2009. fastenings with coloured tags in order to
gain a systematic overview of construction
sequence. Red tags served to mark all fastenings associated with the outer carvel re-
planking. Blue/ Green tags were chosen for original clinker planking fastenings and yellow
tags marked the fastenings of filling pieces. Further colours were added as necessary
(Figure 4).
A Pentax K10D digital SLR was used for photographic recording. All photographs were
captured as RAW files and processed in Adobe Lightroom 2.5. Each layer was recorded with
overview shots as well as with a number of detail photographs taken from either side of the
wreck section.
For lack of a total station, a dumpy level3

was used to document the elevation of
cross sections in the three planking layers
to get an idea of the horizontal and vertical
curvature of the hull in its different stages.
A reference point with the assumed height
of zero was established on the wooden
palette and height readings were taken in
relation to this point. They were noted on
clear sheets of permatrace overlaid over
Figure 5: Removal of planking from FPL 77. Planks are the 1:10 section drawings. The process was
carefully lifted with plastic wedges and trenails are cut repeated for each layer.
with a saw. Auer 2009.
All elevations were then imported into the
3D modelling software Rhinoceros3D and plotted as 3D lines. Surfaces generated from these
lines show the curvature of the wreck section (Plate 2 and 4, Appendix 1).
As soon as in situ recording of a layer was finished, it was removed. Plastic wedges were
driven underneath the planks from the sides to carefully lift them. Trenails were then cut
with a saw. Once loose, planks were lifted off the wreck, cleaned with brushes and prepared
for further recording (Figure 5).
3 The instrument was kindly provided by Dr Schirren, LKD M-V.
6
First each major timber4 was drawn at a
scale of 1:10 (Figure 6). For planks the
inboard and outboard faces as well as a
number of sections were recorded. For
frames, all four sides were drawn. Initially
drawing was carried out in pencil on
millimetric permatrace. In post-processing
all drawings were inked and finally
digitised (see Appendix 1).
In addition, all timbers were photographed

from all sides, again with a Pentax K10D Figure 6: 1:10 recording of frames. Auer 2009.
digital SLR. Timber details, such as
fastenings or tool marks were also photographed. The RAW files were processed in Adobe
Lightroom 2.5 and XNView was used to catalogue and describe photographs and generate
photo lists for each timber.
Finally all timbers were described and sketched on pre-printed timber recording sheets. A
tabularised summary of the timber records can be found in Appendix 2.
Sampling
In order to date the wreck section, ten dendrochronological samples were cut. It was taken
care to include samples of framing and planking from all three layers of the construction.
Timbers to be sampled were chosen based on their level of preservation, the number of
treerings visible and the existence of sapwood. Their significance for an understanding of
the construction sequence was also considered. In all three frames, four clinker planks and
two carvel planks were sampled. One plank (123) was sampled although the number of
treerings was low, as it was assumed to be a repair in the clinker phase.
Samples were cut with a handsaw. Their locations were photographed and marked on
drawings and timber sheets. All samples were assigned unique numbers. They were
wrapped in cling foil and stored in sealed plastic bags. The dendrochronological samples
were analysed by Aoife Daly (Dendro.dk). More information on the methodology can be
found in the report (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3).
Additionally, samples of the waterproofing material and surface covering from the planking
layer were taken. As waterproofing material and caulking seemed to vary between layers,
two samples were collected for each layer. A surface covering on planks 120 and 135 was
also sampled. All samples were marked and stored in sealed plastic bags. They are currently
being analysed, but the results were not yet available for this fieldwork report.
4The smaller parts of the filling piece layer between clinker planking and carvel planking were not all
drawn individually at 1:10 and only recorded photographically and on timber sheets.
7
5. Results
The wreck
Wreck part FPL 77 is a section of hull from a clinker vessel that was later re-planked with
carvel outer planks (Figure 7). It was found with the outer planking facing upwards, almost
entirely covered by sand (Figure 2). The overall dimensions were 5.23m x 1.8m. The hull
section consisted of eleven frames, all with joggles cut into the outside face to receive the
inboard faces of the clinker hull planking. Five strakes of clinker planking were preserved in
situ (Plate 4, Appendix 1). On the outside of these, a layer of irregular softwood pieces was
attached in order to provide a smooth surface for attaching the carvel outer planks (Plate 3,
Appendix 1). Two carvel planks were still
attached to the section (Plate 2, Appendix
1).
While carvel planks and the outside of

clinker planking and frames were very well
preserved, the inside faces of all clinker
planks and the frames were heavily eroded
by the roots of sea grass. This would
indicate that the wreck section was
originally located on the seabed with the
frames facing upwards and the planking
protected by sediment. The possible origin
of FPL 77 will be discussed at the end of
Figure 7: Schematic section through FPL 77 showing the
this chapter.
construction sequence. Auer 2010 based on a drawing
by Thomsen 2009. In the following section, the construction of
FPL 77 is described by layer, following the
possible construction sequence.
Clinker phase
The eleven clinker frames (103-112, 137) are all of oak. They are joggled on the outside face
to receive the clinker outer planks. Frame lengths range from 0.87m to 1.51m. Average
moulded dimensions are 9.5cm to 15cm while sided dimensions range from 8cm to 21cm
(see Plate 5-10, Appendix 1).
Frame heels either show remains of scarf joints (103, 105, 107, 108) or are cut square or at
an angle (104, 106, 110). Four frames are broken at the heel (109, 111, 112, 137). The
breaks are heavily eroded and thus probably not recent.
With two exceptions, frame heads are broken and/ or eroded. Some of the breaks are fairly
fresh which would indicate recent damage. In frame 107 and 109, the head tapers out,
possibly the remains of a scarf joint.
Judging by the presence of scarf joints at frame heels, it would appear that all preserved
frames are side timbers.
8
While the outside face of most frames was
well preserved, all inside faces were
heavily eroded by sea grass which made it
difficult to recognise toolmarks. However,
visible toolmarks most probably stem from
axes (Figure 8).
On two (104, 105) of the three frames

sampled for dendrochronological dating, a
considerable amount of sapwood was still
present on the inside face. All sapwood had
been removed on the outside face that was Figure 8: Toolmarks (axe) on frame 108. Auer 2009.
in contact with the outer planks (Daly
2009) (Appendix 3).
Trenails from all phases of construction

were observed in the framing timbers.
Those only associated with the clinker
phase were cut flush with the frame on the
inside, probably during the rebuild.
Trenails that fastened the carvel outer
planking protruded from the inside face of
the frames by up to 4.5cm, thus indicating
the presence and possible thickness of
ceiling planks. Ceiling planks seem to have
been fastened only by the "carvel layer"
Figure 9: Trapezoidal mark on frame 103. Auer 2009.
trenails. Concretion around some iron nail
holes on the inside of the frames also
indicates a ceiling plank fastening with iron
nails, possibly as preliminary fastening
before the trenail holes were drilled.
Marks, the purpose of which is currently

unclear, were observed on the moulded
faces of frame 103 and 106. On frame 103
the mark is located at the heel. It consists of
a trapezoid shape with a line connecting
the two pointed ends (Figure 9).
At the heel of frame 106, another, larger

mark was found. This comprises of an X Figure 10: Large mark on the moulded face of frame
with two angled lines at either side and an 106. The damage in the centre of the mark is recent.
Auer 2009.
additional line protruding between the
upper two wings of the X (Figure 10). An additional, very roughly hewn x-shaped mark was
found near the head on the same side of the frame. This coincides with a joggle and might be
marking the position of the step in the frame. Further, very rough marks were observed in
the moulded faces of a number of frames, but these were not as recognisable as those
described.
9
Five strakes of the original clinker planking
are partially preserved. Each strake, but for
the highest one (113) features a scarf and
thus consists of two planks or plank
fragments (132 / 134) (131 / 135) (120 /
133) (102 / 128). As with the frames, outer
surfaces are in a relatively good condition,
while the inside face of all planks is heavily
eroded by sea grass growth (Plate 11 to 14,
Appendix 1).
Figure 11: Distribution of scarf joints in the clinker As far as could be determined, all clinker
planking of FPL 77. Auer 2009.
planks are from radially split oak5.
Toolmarks indicate that the planks were
finished with axes or possibly adzes. On two
of the planks sampled for
dendrochronological dating, there was no
sapwood present. The other two planks
retain very little sapwood (Daly 2009)
(Appendix 3).
Only two of the nine planks are preserved

from end to end (120 and 131). These
measure 3.08m and 3.46m in length. The
length of the fragmented planks varies
between 1.16m and 3.68m, indicating that
Figure 12: Impression of iron nail head in the outside of the longest original planks would have been
clinker planking. Auer 2009.
over 3.68m in length. The average full
width of the planks is 20-25cm and they are
between 20mm and 30mm in thickness.
Overlapping strakes were secured by

square shafted iron nails driven through
augered holes from the outside and
clenched over roves on the inboard face.
Although most of the nails have eroded,
impressions of nail heads and roves are
clearly visible. The nails were placed along
the lower edge of the plank with an average
spacing of 15-25cm. The land varied from
5cm to 8cm. Overlaps were bevelled on all
planks. In some instances hollow grooves
Figure 13: Wooden plug used to fill an old nail hole in
the plank surface. Auer 2009. for luting material were observed, but these
are not present on all planks. In addition all
planks were roughly bevelled along their lower edge. As this bevel has been more roughly
5Three of four clinker planks sampled for dendrochronological dating are definitely split radially, for
one of the planks the method of conversion could not be determined (Daly 2009) 8Appendix 3)
10
worked than the rest of the plank surfaces, it seems likely that it was part of the
smoothening process in which the filling piece layer was applied.
Planks of the same strake are joined with simple scarfs, all oriented in the same direction
(aft) to prevent water entering the seams. The scarf direction indicates that the wreck
section was part of the port side of the vessel. Scarf lengths vary between 20cm and 30cm.
Often scored lines mark the beginning of scarfs. The joints were secured with a number of
iron nails and mats of tarred luting material were used to waterproof the seams. Plank joints
in neighbouring strakes are spaced at least
one or two frames apart to avoid weakening
the hull structure (Figure 11).
For photographic documentation and

drawing purposes all fastening associated
with the clinker phase were marked with Figure 14: Filling piece 114 after removal. The 1m long
blue pins, green pins or white pins. The and 11cm wide pine plank was held in place by a single
three colours were used for supply reasons, iron nail. Auer 2009.
they do not in any way reflect a different
coding. Both, the original fastenings of this layer and any intermediate refastening of it were
marked. Fastenings include iron nails and trenails. Iron nails were used to secure overlaps
between planks and scarf joints, but were also positioned less systematically to fasten
planks to each other or to other elements. They had square shanks (4mm – 5mm square)
and round heads with a diameter of approximately 18mm (Figure 12). In many cases the
nail heads impressions sit in square recesses cut with a chisel or a similar implement. The
nails were clenched over iron roves of similar diameter on the inboard face of the planking.
Often, old iron nails were replaced and
small wooden plugs were used to seal the
nailholes (Figure 13).
Trenails fasten the clinker planking to the

frames. One trenail connects each plank to
every other timber. The treenails are not
wedged or plugged on the outside. They are
31mm to 34mm in diameter. Figure 15: Plank 123 is the only oak component in the
filling layer. The plank was re-used and fastened to the
outside of the clinker planking with a single iron nail.
The waterproofing material between plank Auer 2009.
overlaps and scarf joints was sampled. The
samples have been submitted for analysis, but at the time of writing of this report, results
were not yet available.
Carvel phase
Prior to re-planking with carvel outer planks, the steps in the clinker planking were filled
with roughly hewn, irregular softwood and oak pieces in order to provide a smooth surface
for the carvel planks to rest on. This “filling layer” consisted of 15 pieces (114, 115, 116/
1256 , 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 130, 136). All but three (123,
6 116 and 125 are fragments of the same piece of timber.
11
121, 115) pieces are made of softwood, either fir or pine. Piece 123 is the remains of a re-
used oak clinker plank. Although the plank was sampled for dendrochronological dating, it
did not have enough rings and a date could not be obtained (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3) (Plate
10, Appendix 1).
As they were sandwiched between clinker

and carvel planks, the filling pieces are well
preserved. Toolmarks from axe or adze and
in some cases possibly saw are clearly
visible.
Lengths vary from 30cm to 2m and above

and all pieces are wedge shaped or
triangular in section. Before being held in
place by the carvel planking, the filling
Figure 16: Fastenings on carvel outer plank 100. The pieces were temporarily fastened to the
impression of an iron nail is visible below the trenail.
The red arrow marks a crescent shaped incision or cut. clinker planks with one or two square-
Grue 2009. shanked iron nails each (Figure 14).
Two carvel planks remained in situ on the outboard side of FPL 77 (100, 101). Both are in
good condition, but show traces of abrasion on the outer face. The inside ends are slightly
eroded by sea grass growth. Both planks have been cut tangentially from the parent timber,
using a saw (Daly 2009) (Appendix 3)
(Plate 15, Appendix 1). Saw marks are
faintly visible on the plank surface and the
inside surfaces appear charred, possibly as
a result of deforming the planks over an
open fire, a common practice in the 16th and
17th century7.
The carvel planks have a maximum length

of 5.16m and are up to 48cm wide and 4cm
thick. They were fastened with treenails
(32-34mm) and iron nails. The treenails
Figure 17: Plugged trenail on plank 101. Grue 2009.
were hammered into holes augered
through the filling layer, original clinker
planking and framing. They are either plain, wedged or plugged with a single square plug in
the centre. As the nails protrude from the inside sided face of the frames by two to three
centimetres, it seems likely that they also fastened the ceiling planking.
Iron nails with round head (2cm diameter) and square shaft (ca. 6mm x 6mm) were used at
plank butts and along the upper and lower edge of the planks, probably as a preliminary
fastening before the trenail holes were drilled. While some of the iron nail holes are plugged
with small wooden plugs over iron nail shafts still in place, other iron nails remained in the
plank. On plank 100, crescent shaped incisions or cuts in the outer plank surface seem to
indicate the position of fastenings.
7 See e.g. (Kühn 1999, 63)
12
Interpretation
Dating and construction sequence

In order to help understanding and interpreting the sequence of construction of FPL 77,
dendrochronological samples of all recognisable layers or phases were taken. Sampling
included clinker framing and planking and carvel planking. The filling layer was found
unsuitable for dendrochronological sampling. Plank 123, the only oak component of this
layer was sampled despite of a low tree ring count, but could not be dated. The full
dendrochronology report can be found in Appendix 3 (Daly 2009).
Figure 18: Correlation of the clinker planking and framing of FPL77 with site and master chronologies in
Northern Europe. Daly 2010.
Internal correlation of the tree ring curves of all samples allowed dividing the material in
two distinctive groups, one consisting of the two carvel outer planks (100, 101) and a single
frame (104)8 and the second one containing all remaining clinker planks and frames (102,
113, 120, 131; 105, 109). Two of the clinker planks probably stem from the same tree (120,
131).
A correlation between the two mean curves of the ship and selected chronologies from
Northern Europe shows that the two timber groups originate in different areas. While
clinker planks and frames match best with chronologies from the Øresund region, the carvel
planks and clinker frame 104 achieve the highest correlation with material from the towns
Lübeck, Schwerin and Wismar (Figure 18, 19).
8Frame 104 is the only frame in which no trenails from the clinker phase are present, thus
supporting the assumption that this frame was inserted during the rebuilding.
13
Taking into account all material and allowing for missing sapwood, the felling date is
estimated to ca. AD 1590. It is not possible to differentiate the felling date of the two groups
of timbers and thus the construction phases of FPL 77 (Daly 2009).
Figure 19: Correlation of the carvel planks and frame 104 with master and site chronologies in Northern Europe.
Daly 2010.
However, when using the results of the dendrochronological analysis in conjunction with
the observations made during the recording of the wreck, it is possible to attempt a
reconstruction of the construction sequence.
It would seem that the ship was originally built as a clinker vessel from wood originating in
the Øresund region. All planks were radially split from oak and finished with axes or
possibly adzes. They were fastened to each other with iron nails, and trenails without
wedges or plugs were used to fasten clinker frames to planks. The clinker vessel must have
been in use for a while, as a number of iron nails were replaced and old nail holes were
plugged with wooden plugs.
At some stage, the vessel was completely rebuilt. Softwood filling pieces were nailed to the
outside of the original clinker planking, and the lower edges of clinker planks were bevelled
in order to provide a smooth outer surface. Inside the vessel, the ceiling planking was
removed (if it was present in the first place) and all old trenails were cut flush with the
surface of frames. The dendrochronological analysis indicates that at least one frame (104)
was replaced.
In a next step, carvel outer planks were nailed to the filling layer and clinker planking with
iron nails around their edges. The planks were tangentially sawn and deformed over open
14
fire. Outer planks as well as frame 104 originate from the area around the Hanse town
Lübeck. At the same time ceiling planks were nailed to the inside of the existing framing.
Finally, news holes were augered through carvel outer planks, filling layer, clinker planking,
framing and ceiling planks and new trenails were hammered into place. Some of these nails
were secured with wedges or central plugs on the outside. The iron nails used for temporary
fastening were either left in place, or, where they were damaged or broken, the nail holes
were sealed with small wooden plugs from the outside.
The final result of the rebuilding was a conversion of FPL 77 to a carvel vessel. The original
clinker planking and framing remained sandwiched between carvel outer planks and ceiling
planks.
Site context
In this section an attempt will be made to reconstruct the original location of the wreck part
and thus the possible location of the site which FPL77 was part of. A possible association
with other known sites in the area will also be investigated.
In order to reconstruct the possible original location of FPL 77, three factors have to be
considered: coastal erosion, seabed environment and prevailing wind direction.
Coastal erosion is probably the most decisive factor. FPL 77 was found near coastal
kilometre 190200, and thus in an area of erosion (see section 2 and Plate 1, Appendix 1).
Using the data provided by Tiepolt and Schumacher (Tiepolt et al. 1999) it is possible to
reconstruct the coastline for the year 1696 (Plate 16, Appendix 1). Data for earlier periods is
not available, but the curve for 1696 is probably relevant considering a date of construction
of the vessel around 1590. Plate 16 shows the reconstructed coastline for an area of
approximately one kilometre to either side of the find spot running up to 400m further west
and thus seaward, than the present coastline.
With westerly winds prevailing on the western shore of the Fischland-Darss-Zingst

peninsula, section FPL 77 could have broken loose from a site located near the coastline of
1696 and drifted towards the shore.
A very likely area for the location of the wreck site which FPL 77 was part off would then be
a rectangle covering a 100m wide area 300m to either side of the find spot (Plate 16). Such a
rectangle would have the following corner co-ordinates: E 336981.625, N 6037785.224; E
336709.564, N 6037243.904; E 336621.06, N 6037290.744, E 336898.853, N 6037826.897.
Bearing in mind a westerly wind direction and an alongshore current running northwards,
this search area might have to be expanded towards the south-west. The water depth in this
area would be between 5m and 8m.
As stated before, the erosion of the inside of frames and planks by sea grass roots suggests
that FPL 77 was laying on the seabed with the inside of the vessel facing upwards and the
outer planking buried in sediment. Common sea grass (Zostera Marina) generally grows in
water depths of up to 10m, and could thus be found in the estimated search area9.
9 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gew%C3%B6hnliches_Seegras
15
Figure 20: Distribution of registered archaeological sites and find spots in the vicinity of FPL 77. Schmidt 2010.
To date, eight archaeological sites have been registered in the area around the find spot of
FPL 77. These include four ship wrecks, three loose ship timbers or timber assemblages
found on the beach and an assemblage of posts near the beach (Figure 20 and Table 1)10.
Site (Fischland, Ostsee Description Date

IV)
FPL 28 25m long wreck of a wooden, carvel-built vessel. Unknown
Possibly 3 mast bark “Elisabeth”
FPL 30 Unknown wreck near shore. Possibly fast attack Unknown
craft (Schnellboot)
FPL 31 Logboat from softwood Unknown
FPL 43 Wreck of schooner ”Barbro” 1940
FPL 72 Sternpost assembly 1819
FPL 73 Assemblage of wooden posts near shore Unknown
FPL 74 Wooden decoration Unknown
FPL 75 Fragment of oak plank Unknown
Table 1: Registered archaeological sites and find spots near FPL 77. Pers. comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt LKD M-V
2010.
However, the shipwrecks are unlikely to be associated with FPL 77, as they are either
located too far inshore or known to be of younger date. Of the loose finds, only the
fragmented oak plank (FPL 75) and the wooden decoration (FPL 74) could possibly be
connected with FPL 77. The sternpost assembly (FPL 72) can be seen as a good indication
for the presence of further, undiscovered wreck sites in the vicinity.
10 Pers. Comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt, LKD M-V, 20.01.2010
16
Conclusion
The work on FPL 77 provided a welcome addition to the field school in Prerow. Besides
working with the recording of an underwater site, students had the opportunity to record,
disassemble and study a wreck section in great detail on dry land. This report summarises
the results of the recording and provides preliminary conclusions on character and
construction of the wreck.
Wreck section FPL 77 could be identified as part of the port side of a vessel built around
1590. The vessel was originally constructed in the clinker tradition from trees felled in the
Øresund region. At some point in its career it was re-planked with carvel outer planks and
ceiling planks, and thus practically “converted” to a carvel built ship. The timbers used for
the rebuilding stem from the area around the German Hanse town Lübeck.
With these characteristics, FPL 77 is part of a relatively small group of ship finds from the
Southern Baltic that show signs of a similar clinker to carvel conversion or rebuilding
(Förster 2009; Mäss 1991; Ossowski 2006)11. FPL 77 has been chosen as the subject of a
master thesis at the University of Southern Denmark12. The thesis will attempt to compare
FPL 77 to other wrecks converted in a similar way and investigate the following aspects:
 Which types or kinds of vessels were converted? Is it a specific vessel type that the
double planking is applied to and in that case what kind of vessel is it?
 How were these vessels converted? What construction techniques were used?
 Where they were built? Is there a specific area the converted vessels are
concentrated in or are they common all over Europe?
 And ultimately: Why were these vessels converted? What is the purpose of the
carvel conversion? Was it a part of the original design, a repair to prolong the life
expectancy, or a reinforcement for a specific purpose?
6. References
Gewöhnliches Seegras – Wikipedia. Available at:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gew%C3%B6hnliches_Seegras [Accessed February
16, 2010].
Auer, J. 2009. Prerow Fieldschool 2009 « Maritime Archaeology Programme. Available at:
http://maritimearchaeologyprogramdenmark.wordpress.com/tag/prerow-
fieldschool-2009/ [Accessed December 17, 2009].
Auer, J. 2010. Survey Report Prerow FPL 17. Esbjerg: Maritime Archaeology Programme,
University of Southern Denmark.
11 Another wreck with similar characteristics was part of a ship barrier across the entrance of the
Greifswalder Bodden in Mecklenburg western-Pomerania (Mönchgut FPL 67). This wreck was
recently lifted and fully recorded. It dates to the late 17th century (Pers. Comm. Jana Heinze, site
director LKD M-V)
12 Bente Grundvad, Maritime Archaeology Programme, University of Southern Denmark. Thesis
project due to be completed in autumn 2010.
17
Daly, A. 2009. Dendrochronology Report: 4AM Wreck, Darss, Germany FPL 77. Copenhagen:
dendro.dk.
Förster, T. 2009. Große Handelsschiffe des Spätmittelaters: Untersuchungen an zwei

Wrackfunden des 14. Jahrhundert vor der Insel Hiddensee und Insel Poel 1st ed.
Convent.
Kühn, H.J. 1999. Gestrandet bei Uelvesbüll : Wrackarchäologie in Nordfriesland. Husum:

Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft.
Mäss, V. 1991. Prospects for underwater archaeology in the Eastern Baltic. The International
Journal of Nautical Archaeology 20(4): 313-320.
Ossowski, W. 2006. Two double-planked wrecks from Poland. In L. Blue & F. Hocker (eds)
Connected by the sea : proceedings of the tenth International Symposium on Boat and
Ship Archaeology, Roskilde 2003, 259-265. Oxford: Oxbow
Thuerkow, D. 2009. Entstehung und Dynamik der Landschaft Fischland-Darß-Zingst.

Available at: http://mars.geographie.uni-
halle.de/geovlexcms/golm/geomorph/ausgleichskueste [Accessed December 17,
2009].
Tiepolt, L., & Schumacher, W. 1999. Historische bis rezente Küstenveränderungen im Raum
Fischland-Darss-Zingst-Hiddensee anhand von Karten, Luft- und Satellitenbildern.
Die Küste 61: 22-45.
18
19
20
Appendix 1: Plates
Plate 1: Location of the wreck parts associated with FPL 77. The areas of coastal erosion and accumulation after
Tiepolt and Schumacher are marked in red, the diagram shows coastal erosion in the area between 1695 and
1983 (0-axis). Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ©LAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt &
Schumacher 1999.
Plate 2: Overview of carvel layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in
order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the
dumpy level measurements.
Plate 3: Overview of filling layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in
order to fit into the A3 report template.
Plate 4: Overview of clinker layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in
order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D reconstruction of plank curvature based on the
dumpy level measurements.
Plate 5: Frame 103, 104.
Plate 10: Frame 137; Filling layer: plank 123, piece 115, 116.
Plate 11: Clinker plank 102, 113.
Plate 14: Clinker plank 133, 134, 135.
Plate 15: Carvel plank 100, 101. The planks were recorded at a scale of 1:10, but have been reduced to 1:20 to fit
into the A3 report template.
Plate 16: Proposed search area for the original location of the wreck site associated with FPL 77. The
reconstructed coastline for the year 1696 is shown in white.. Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved
from GAIA M-V, ©LAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999.
21
22
on
ti
ula
um
acc
of
ea
Ar
KKM 190250
KKM 192000
FPL 77
E 337166, N 6037318
sion
ero
a of
Are
Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: Jens Auer

Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by:
Drawing No: Digitised by:
Date: 20.01.10
Scale:
Plate 1: Location of the wreck parts associated with FPL 77. The areas of coastal erosion and accumulation after Tiepolt & Schumacher are marked in red, the diagram shows coastal erosion in the area between 1695 and 1983 (0-axis). Auer 2010, based on aerial
photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ©LAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt & Schumacher 1999
3D reconstruction of carvel plank curvature
made in Rhinoceros3D, based on the dumpy
level measurements taken in the field.
Reconstruction by Andrew Stanek.
Top
forward
aft
Bottom
Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, BGN, CW, ML, PG, KA
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CT
Drawing No: S2 Digitised by: JA
Date: 01.08.2009
Scale: 1:20 (reduced from 1:10)
Plate 2: Overview of carvel layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D recon-
struction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements.
Photograph of filling layer with
fastenings marked by layer.
Auer 2009.
Top
forward aft
Bottom
Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, BGN

Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: AS
0 1m
Date: 03.08.2009
Scale: 1:20
Plate 3: Overview of filling layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template.
Photograph of clinker layer with
fastenings marked by layer.
Auer 2009.
3D reconstruction of clinker plank curvature

made in Rhinoceros3D, based on the dumpy
level measurements taken in the field.
Reconstruction by Andrew Stanek.
Top
forward aft
Bottom
Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, BGN, KA

Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CT
0 1m
Date: 04.08.2009
Scale: 1:20
Plate 4: Overview of clinker layer. The original drawing was produced at a scale 1:10, but has been reduced in order to fit into the A3 report template. The inset shows a 3D recon-
struction of plank curvature based on the dumpy level measurements.
Frame 103 Frame 104
Heel Head Heel Head
A
A
B B
A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face; C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: BGN, JA, CW
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: BGN, CW
Trenail Iron nail Surface Covering
Drawing No: S24, S19 Digitised by: JA
0 50 cm
Trenail, wedged Iron nail hole Eroded surface Date: 12.08.2009
Scale: 1:10
Trenail, plugged Rove head impression
Plate 5: Frame 103 and 104.

Frame 105 Frame 106
Heel Head Heel Head
D D
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: AS, LGL
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: As, LGL
0 50 cm
Trenail, wedged Iron nail hole Eroded surface Date: 12.08.2009, 11.08.2009
Scale: 1:10

Frame 107 Frame 108
Heel Head Heel Head
A
A
B
B
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CW, MLPG
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CW, MLPG
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Frame 109 Frame 110
Heel Head Heel Head
A
A
C C
D D
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, MLPG, DNIC
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CT, DNIC
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Frame 111 Frame 112
Heel Head Heel Head
A
A
C C
D D
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: SF, CT, DNIC
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CT, DNIC
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Frame 137 Piece 116, Filling layer
Heel Head <Bow Stern>
A A
Outboard face
Inboard face
A
C
D Piece 115, Filling layer

A
Outboard face
A= Sided, outside face; B= Moulded, forward face;
C= Sided, inside face; D= Moulded, after face
B
Plank 123, Filling layer

<Bow Stern>
A
Outboard face
B
B
Inboard face
B
A
Inboard face
A
A= upper edge; B= lower edge A= upper edge; B= lower edge
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: KA, LGL; MLPG, CT; AS
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: LGL; MLPG; AS
Drawing No: S20, S11, S9 Digitised by: JA
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10
Plate 10: Frame 137, Filling layer: Plank 123, piece 115, 116.
Clinker plank 102
Waterproofing A
<Bow Stern>
Outboard face
Surface covering
B
Inboard face
Clinker plank 113
Outboard face
A
Inboard face
B
A
A= upper edge; B= lower edge
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: DNIC; KA, CW, SF
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: DNIC, CW
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Clinker plank 120 A
<Bow Stern>
Outboard face
Tar covering B
Area eroded by sea grass

B
Inboard face
Clinker plank 128 A
Outboard face
Inboard face
Area eroded by sea grass
A
Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: BGN, SF; MLPG
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: BGN, MLPG
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Clinker plank 131
<Bow A Stern>
Outboard face
B
Inboard face
Clinker plank 132 A
Outboard face
B
Inboard face B

Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: BGN, BGN
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: BGN, BGN
0 50 cm
Scale: 1:10

Clinker plank 133
<Bow Stern>
Outboard face
Inboard face
Clinker plank 134 Clinker plank 135
A A
Outboard face
Outboard face
B
B
B B
Inboard face
Inboard face
A
A

Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: LGL, CW, CT
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: LGL, CW, CT
Drawing No: S14, S23, S15 Digitised by: JA
0 50 cm
Trenail, wedged Iron nail hole Eroded surface Date: 08.08.09, 10.08.09, 08.08.09
Scale: 1:10
Plate 14: Clinker plank 133, 134, 135.

Carvel plank 100
<Bow Stern>
Marks A
Marks
Toolmark
Outboard face Chisel mark
B Wooden plug Slight dent Incised line

Wooden plug
Chisel mark
Charred material
B Charred material
Inboard face
Carvel plank 101
Outboard face
B
B
Inboard face

Trenail hole Wooden plug Concretion Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: BGN, MLPG
Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by: CT, MLPG
0 1m
Trenail, wedged Iron nail hole Eroded surface Date: 02.08.2009
Scale: 1:20
Plate 15: Carvel plank 100, 101. The planks were recorded at a scale of 1:10, but have been reduced to 1:20 to fit into the A3 report template.
KKM 191100
Proposed search area.

Can be extended to SW.
KKM 192000
FPL 77
E 337166, N 6037318
KKM 191700
KKM 191400
KKM 189800 KKM 191100
KKM 190800
KKM 190500
KKM 190200
KKM 189900
KKM 189800
KKM 189300
KKM 189000
KKM 188700
Coastline reconstruction for the year 1696.

Based on Tiepolt &Schumacher 1999.
Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: Jens Auer

Site Code: FPL 77 Inked by:
Drawing No: Digitised by:
Date: 20.01.10
Scale:
Plate 16: Proposed search area for the original location of the wreck site associated with FPL 77. The reconstructed coastline for the year 1696 is shown in white. Auer 2010, based on aerial photographs retrieved from GAIA M-V, ©LAiV M-V 2010 and Tiepolt &
Schumacher 1999.
Appendix 2: Timber records
39
No. Type Description Fastenings Wood L W-M T M-M S-M Dr.N
species cm cm cm cm cm o.
L (Length), W-M (Width, maximum), T (Thickness), M-M (Moulded maximum), S-M (Sided maximum), Dr. No. (Drawing Number)
100 Carvel Plank was trenailed to Trenails, 30- Oak, DS 516 44 4 S04
plank underlying planking and 40mm in #3
framing. Some saw- and diameter,
axe marks are visible on some are
the outboard face, the wedged, one
inboard face seems to be is plugged;
charred and is affected rectangular
by sea grass growth. A iron nails,
number of wooden plugs 20-25mm,
in iron nail holes could some of
be observed. On the which are
outboard face, plugged with
semicircular, crescent wooden
shaped marks seem to plugs
indicate the position of
trenails. The plank has
preserved butt ends on
both sides.
101 Carvel The plank was nailed to Trenails, 30- Oak, DS 388 48 4 S35
plank underlying planks and 40 mm in #2
frames with trenails. diameter, 2
There are a number of of them are
tool marks on the plank plugged; iron
that seem to have been nails , square
made with a chisel. shank, round
There is a crescent head (20-25
shaped marks on the mm
planks. Near the diameter)
plugged trenails Not
concretion can be preserved,
observed. One of the only the
knots of the timber was holes are left.
plugged. On the inboard
the plank seems to have
been charred
102 Clinker One end is broken off Trenails ,30 Oak, DS 285 265 2,5
plank while the other one is mm in #4
preserved 8scarf joint). diameter
Concretions are visible
103 Frame Joggled, concretions are Trenails, 30 Oak 14 18 S24
visible around the mm in
trenails. Scarf joint at diameter
heel, head eroded.
104 Frame Timber is joggled. One Trenails, 25 Oak; 87 12 9 S19
end of the timber seems mm in sapwood
to have been broken. diameter; on the
The timber is eroded by Trenail holes edge, DS
sea grass on inside sided with #8
face. Sapwood is evident diameter at
on the edge. Cut marks 30 mm.
made with axe or adze.
Angled cut at heel, head
broken.
105 Frame Bevelled edge; many Trenails 30 Oak , DS 150 13 18 S31
tool marks, maybe from mm in #9
adze or axe. Concretion diameter;
from iron nails. Inboard Iron nail
eroded by sea grass. holes 10 mm
Scarf joints at heel and in diameter.
head.
40
106 Frame Timber is joggled to Trenails, 30 Oak 131 12 9 S27

accommodate clinker mm in
planks. Planks have been diameter;
fastened with trenails iron nails,
and iron nails. One side only square
has a builder mark that concretion
is formed as a “X” and left
additional lines can be
connected with the
marks as well. Outboard
side: tool marks from
axe or adze, inboard is
eroded by sea grass.
Sapwood is present.
Trenails protrude by
2.1cm-3cm on inboard
sided face, indicating
thickness of ceiling
planks. Heel cut square,
head broken.
107 Frame Timber joggled for 8 Trenails, Oak 95 11 19,3 S29
clinker planks. Up to 3 30mm –
trenails are connecting 35mm in
the clinker planks to the diameter;
frame. Trenails are likely Iron nails,
to have been used to some eroded,
connect the carvel some
strakes on top of the possible
clinker planks. Some removed.
trenails are cut flush on
the inboard while others
protrude 3cm- 3,5 cm-
indicating the thickness
of the ceiling planks.
Tool marks from axe or
adze are visible on one
side, the other is eroded
by sea grass. Sapwood
was present. Heel: scarf
joint, head tapered.
108 Frame Timber joggled for 7 Trenails, Oak 11,7 12,5 S21
clinker planks that have 30mm –
been fastened with 34mm in
trenails and iron nails. diameter,
On the inside trenails iron nails
are protruding 2,3cm- (only
4,5 cm indicating the concretion
thickness of the ceiling left).
planks. Outboard eroded
by sea grass, inboard:
visible tool marks from
axe or adze. Heel: scarf,
head: fresh break.
109 Frame Timber joggled for 7 Trenails, Oak, DS 11 17,5 S28
clinker planks that were 30mm – #10
fastened with trenails. 34mm in
The outboard side has diameter,
rough and uneven tool one nail
marks from an axe or possibly
adze. Heel: break, head: wedged,
scarf joint. iron nails
(only
concretion
left).
41
110 Frame Timber joggled for Trenails, Oak 151 13 8 S30

clinker planks. The steps 34mm in
have been made by axe diameter. All
or adze. Sap wood is seem to be
present. Heel tapered, from carvel
head, fresh break. phase.
111 Frame Four joggles. Some Trenails, 30 Oak 11 21 S25
trenails were cut during mm in
the second phase and diameter,
new trenails were then some have
added which is indicated been cut
by tool marks close to during
protruding trenail. Both second
ends broken. phase; iron
nails or
concretion
112 Frame Timber joggled for Trenails, Oak 105 9,5 10 S18
clinker planks. Tool 34mm in
marks are visible on all diameter.
sides. Broken on both
ends
113 Clinker Timber contains many 18 trenails of Oak , DS 368 30 2 S16
plank axe/adze marks. In the which 4 from #5
bow end four repairs the original
have been made. scarf. clinker layer;
Joined to plank #102. iron nails
Plank complete with 10mm
scarf joints at both ends. square (head
18mm
diameter)
running
along edge of
plank.
114 Filling Several saw marks Iron nail Soft 100 11 1,5-
timber visible on both sides of (head 12mm wood 0,2
the timber. Fastened diameter,
with one iron nail and shank 7mm
penetrated by trenail square);
from carvel layer. Joined Trenail
to clinker plank 131. 33mm in
diameter
115 Filling Timber has tool marks Trenails Oak 164 13 3 S9
/ timber on both sides. Timber 35mm in
126 appeared to be 2 planks diameter;
from the outside but iron nails
single piece split
partially. One end cut
square, other end
bevelled.
116 Filling Plank broken in 3 pieces. Trenails; Soft 193 9,9 2,2- S11
timber Tool marks visible from iron nails wood 0,2
adze or axe. In the
middle there is an
incised mark resembling
a cross. Butt end joint.
117 Filling Wedge shaped filling Trenail Pine 206 12 2,3-
/ piece piece. Trenail holes run 33mm in 0,5
127 along the edge along diameter;
with iron nails. iron nails,
square shaft,
5mm to
9mm
118 Filling Wedge shaped. Clear axe Trenails, Soft 87 13,2 2,7-
timber marks. some from wood 0,1
the carvel
layer ; iron
nails w.
Square shaft
(5mm)
42
119 Filling Rectangular shaped Trenails Pine 93 10,5 2

timber timber. Joined to clinker 33mm in
plank 183 diameter
120 Clinker A chamfered edge is Trenails Oak 308 27,5 2 S17
plank running along the plank. 3,35mm in
The end of the plank has diameter;
a groove where a frame Iron nails ,
was situated. Brown square
surface covering and tar shanks
on the plank. Tool marks (10mm),
are visible. On the wooden
chamfered area there is plugs 10mm
a row of wooden plugs square
that have replaced iron
nails. Complete with
scarf joints at either end.
121 Filling No sign of toolmarks, Trenails Oak 94 11 2 0,8
timber possible scarf joint at 30mm in
one end diameter;
iron nails,
square shaft,
10mm1 in
diameter.
122 3 filling The smallest piece Soft 34,2
timbers shows axe marks. Joined wood 6, 12
to filling timber #118
123 Filling Clinker plank fragment, Trenail Oak, 73,2 19 1,9- S11
timber reused as filling piece. 34mm in DS#1 2,2
Visible tool marks from diameter,
axe or adze. Surface nine iron
covering on the surface. nails
remains of associated
waterproofing on with plank
underside. Concretion before reuse
around metal fastenings. (head round,
Sea grass between filling 22mm in
piece and clinker layer. diameter,
shank 9mm x
8mm)
124 Filling Wedged shaped timber. Trenails Soft 92 14 4,5-
timber Possible saw marks and 32mm in wood 1,2
axe marks. diameter;
iron nails w.
Square
shanks 7mm
x 7mm
125 Filling Roughly worked adze or Soft 66 12 2-
timber axe marks. wood 0,5
126 See 115
127 See 117
128 Clinker Waterproofing visible. Trenails Oak 182 23 2 S12

plank Concretion along lower 35mm in
edge of plank. Tool diameter;
marks on upper edge. iron nails
that fastened
filling
timbers to
planks as
well as iron
nails
fastening
planks to
each other
129 Filling Very fragile softwood - Soft - - -
timber pieces, broke into five wood
small pieces during
recovery.
43
130 Filling Axe marks and saw Pine 195 5,5 1,5
timber marks visible.
132 Clinker Timber has chamfered Trenail Oak 310 14,5 2,5 S24
plank edges. Heavily eroded by 32mm in
sea grass. Brown surface diameter;
covering. Concretion iron nails w.
around iron fastenings. Square shaft,
Longitudinal edges also 10mm
chamfered. Plank
broken, possible scarf on
one side.
133 Clinker Timber appears to have Trenails; Oak 240 22 1,5 S14
plank burn marks on one side. iron nails,
One side has a groove some seems
for the waterproofing to have been
material. Brown surface removed;
covering. Scarf on one wedged
side, break on other trenail.
side.
134 Clinker Timber eroded by sea Trenails 153 18,5 2,5 S23
plank grass (inside). A 30mm in
waterproofing patch diameter.
was found at scarf
Concretion around iron
nails. One end scarf
joint, other end broken.
135 Clinker Broken fragment, Trenails Oak 24,5 2,5 2,5 S15
plank broken on one end, scarf 32mm in
on the other end. diameter,
some are
from the
carvel layer
and one is
from the
clinker layer;
iron nails w.
Square
shafts, 7mm
x 7mm.
136 Filling Roughly worked timber. Trenails Oak 73 12 1,7
timber Axe or adze marks 32mm in
visible. Remains of tar diameter;
from waterproofing and iron nails w.
sea grass on one side. Square shaft
Concretions around iron (5mm x
nails. 6mm)
associated
with filling
timber.
137 Frame Joggled for two planks, Trenails and Oak 81 25 8,5 S26
head eroded, heel iron nails
broken. Inside sided
surface eroded,
toolmarks from axe
visible.
44
Appendix 3: Report of dendrochronological analysis
45
46

Survey Report FPL 77

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Survey Report FPL 77

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2010

University of Southern Denmark,

Report prepared by:

Edited by: Dr Jens Auer

Maritime Archaeology Programme

© The authors, Landesamt für Kultur- und Denkmalpflege Mecklennburg-Vorpommern &

Printed in Denmark 2010

 have acquired a satisfactory level of competence in the use of maritime

A co-operation agreement regarding the organisation of field schools in Mecklenburg

Aim and Objectives

The Fischland-Darss-Zingst peninsula is

The field school participants were

The wreck parts were recovered by a team

2 Pers. Comm. Dr C. Michael Schirren, 13.01.2010.

Storage and preparation

Overnight, the timbers were covered with

Prior to recording, the whole wreck was

Dismantling and recording

 a projected plan view of each layer, drawn at a scale of 1:10;

After removal of the first layer, a multitude

For lack of a total station, a dumpy level3

3 The instrument was kindly provided by Dr Schirren, LKD M-V.

In addition, all timbers were photographed

While carvel planks and the outside of

On two (104, 105) of the three frames

Trenails from all phases of construction

Marks, the purpose of which is currently

At the heel of frame 106, another, larger

Only two of the nine planks are preserved

Overlapping strakes were secured by

For photographic documentation and

Trenails fasten the clinker planking to the

6 116 and 125 are fragments of the same piece of timber.

As they were sandwiched between clinker

Lengths vary from 30cm to 2m and above

The carvel planks have a maximum length

7 See e.g. (Kühn 1999, 63)

Dating and construction sequence

With westerly winds prevailing on the western shore of the Fischland-Darss-Zingst

Site (Fischland, Ostsee Description Date

10 Pers. Comm. Jens-Peter Schmidt, LKD M-V, 20.01.2010

Gewöhnliches Seegras – Wikipedia. Available at:

project due to be completed in autumn 2010.

Förster, T. 2009. Große Handelsschiffe des Spätmittelaters: Untersuchungen an zwei

Kühn, H.J. 1999. Gestrandet bei Uelvesbüll : Wrackarchäologie in Nordfriesland. Husum:

Thuerkow, D. 2009. Entstehung und Dynamik der Landschaft Fischland-Darß-Zingst.

Plate 5: Frame 103, 104.

Plate 6: Frame 105, 106.

Plate 7: Frame 107, 108.

Plate 8: Frame 109, 110.

Plate 9: Frame 111, 112.

Plate 11: Clinker plank 102, 113.

Plate 12: Clinker plank 120, 128.

Plate 13: Clinker plank 131, 132.

Plate 14: Clinker plank 133, 134, 135.

Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: Jens Auer

Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, BGN

3D reconstruction of clinker plank curvature

Project: Prerow Fieldschool 2009 Drawn by: CT, BGN, KA

Plate 5: Frame 103 and 104.

Plate 6: Frame 105, 106.

Plate 7: Frame 107, 108.

Plate 8: Frame 109, 110.

Plate 9: Frame 111, 112.