Aplicación.­

THE WRECKS

By the early 18th century the profits from the New World colonisation and trade had fed the Spanish economy for over two hundred years. Spain ’ s monopoly on export goods to the New World colonies, however, was far less prosperous and secure than it had been during its first century of colonisation.

In July 1724 the Conde de Tolosâ (Tolosd) and the Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe {Guadalupe) departed from Cadiz en route to Veracruz via Havana loaded with over 1200passengers and 400 tons of royal mercury. The mercury, used in the refining of gold and silver, would be enough to supply the mines for a year (Peterson, 1979: 852). Just over a month after leaving Spain, having reached the West Indies, the two ships anchored off Aguada, Puerto Rico, where they took on provisions (James, 1985: 1, after Borrell, 1980). On their way west towards Havana, sailing along Hispaniola’s north coast, the two ships were struck by a hurricane on the night of August 24 1724,

Both ships were driven into Sam ana Bay, on the north east coast of today’s Dominican Republic. The Guadalupe managed to pin herself to a sandbar and weather the storm for two days. Of the 650 passengers, 550 reached the shore to begin their march along the coast to Santo Domingo, 200 miles to the south (Peterson, 1979: 852). Separated from the Guadalupe, the Tolosâ stayed at anchor at the mouth of the bay attempting to ride out the storm, but at dawn the next day her lines severed and she broke up on the reef with less than forty of the 600 on board surviving (Peterson, 1979: 853).

In the mid 1970’s, Caribe Salvage S.A. gained approval from the Dominican govern­ ment to search for the two ships in the hope of salvaging the vast amounts of mercury believed to be lying on the seabed. In order to impose supervision of the salvage, the Dominican government created the Commission for Underwater Archaeological Recov­ ery now headed by Pédro Borrell. In 1976 Tracy Bowden, director of salvage operations, located the remains of the Guadalupe. Attempts to retrieve the mercury, however, proved difficult. As reported to Mendel Peterson (ibid.) Mr. Bowden found that the entire second deck was encapsulated in a thick iron encrustation caused by the concretion of a cargo of fittings for the manufacture of vessels in the New World. The reason for such a cargo, Mr. Bowden reported, was because of the scarcity of trees in Spain due to its centuries of shipbuilding. A deforrestation problem has also been argued as a reason for Spain’s increasing dependence on ceramics for storage containers because wood for barrels was likewise in short supply (Fairbanks, 1973: 143).

The areas of the Guadalupe wreckage that could be penetrated, however, did produce a large assortment of artifacts. In 1977 the remains of the Tolosd were identified and work produced a wide assortment of artifacts, many of which are now on display at the Museo de las Casas Rales in Santo Domingo, Republica Dominica.

REFERENCES

The olive jar-type botijas from the wreck were initially recorded in a report by James (1988) A Reassessment o f the Chronological andTypological Framework of the Spanish Olive Jar which deals exclusively with the botija material and provides valuable

CATALOGUE OF SHIPWRECKS AND THEIR CERAMIC COLLECTIONS

quantitative information on the collection. The finds have also been included in Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500 -1800 by Deagan (1987). The story of the wreck is chronicled by Peterson (1979) and Borrell (1980).

THE COLLECTIONS

The pottery finds from the two ships, including over 600 intact botijas (James, 1988), represent the largest collection of intact ceramics ever to be recovered in the Americas. In November 1986, through Senior Pedro Borrell, I was permitted to undertake a brief study of the ceramic assemblage recovered from the two wrecks now housed in the buildings of the Museo de las Casas Reales in Santo Domingo.

Upon my arrival. Senior Borrell assigned Francis Tejeda, Dargelos Castillo, and Mario Barinas to assist my study. Due to a change in the Presidency of the country many governmental changes were occurring and the new museum director had not yet taken office. In spite of uncertainty as to who might authorise entry to different parts of the museum these three gentlemen kindly managed to accommodate almost every request. On three different occasions I was permitted, under guard, to enter the museum while it was closed to the public.

The ceramics from the various excavated wrecks are housed in three main reposito­ ries, in three separate buildings. The part of the museum open for public display contains a large permanent display containing artifacts recovered from the Tolosd and the Guadalupe. The majority of the larger olive jar-type botijas {botijas peruleras) are

displayed on shelves in this part of the museum. The majority of the intact majolica and glazed ware collections are also displayed behind glass in this exhibit. Two large tinajas are also part of a display although they are not kept behind glass.

A building one block away from the main building houses the ceramic department which contains samples from all the museum collections. The third building housing shipwreck material serves as the main shipwreck repository and conservation lab. Here the large assemblage of 112 arroba botijas are kept along with the hundreds of other intact vessels and ceramic sherds undergoing conservation and reconstruction.

The shipwreck repository and conservation lab served as my general headquarters and a table was cleared where I was permitted to set up recording equipment. Because of the limits of time, it was decided that a representative selection of wares from the two wrecks would be recorded and used as a comparative sampling of the large number of examples available. Unique wares were individually recorded while a random representative sample was chosen from each of the wares that had similar characteristics. This collection undoubtably merits fuller study. The country encourages outside involvement, for although rich in human and historical resources, it lacks trained researchers and the financing necessary to carry out such a study.

Because all shipwreck material is housed and treated in the same facility, the chance of confused provenience is an inherent risk associated with study of the collections. The Tolosâ and Guadalupe botijas are all shelved together, along with some completely unassociated materials which can easily be differentiated. For the most part, the botijas

CATALOGUE OF SHIPWRECKS AND THEIR CERAMIC COLLECTIONS

are not numbered and differentiation between Tolosâ and Guadalupe examples is not possible. Because the two ships were provisioned, sailed, and lost together, the two collections may be regarded as one assemblage for the purposes of this study.

Identification of the remainder of the pieces studied was usually facilitated by a catalogue number inked on the ceramic piece. The code consisted of a shipwreck code followed by the artifact number. The codes were as follows: Tolosâ "# 3S" followed by the artifact number, Guadalupe "# IM'* followed by the artifact number, Concepcion "#4P" followed by the artifact number. In a few cases, numbers were missing. If there was any doubt as to the origin of an item my three associates were asked and in most cases identification was unanimous. Any items identified this way will be addressed as such. Pieces in the museum displays were not generally marked, and removal from the cases was not possible. Francis Tejeda served as a diving liaison officer for the government for several years and was my primary identification resource for these pieces.