Early Work
1988 Season
1989 Season
Methodology
Findings
1991 Season
Methodology
Findings
Prior Research
Early Work
The discovery of the Maple Leaf occurred after a long and systematic literature
search to locate an undisturbed shipwreck in the St. Johns River. In 1980, Keith
V. Holland (personal communication May 5, 1992) began an intensive literature
search to document the locations of vessels sunk in the river and determined if
they had been salvaged, destroyed, or removed. Each vessel was evaluated by type
and the cargo it carried to ascertain its historical significance. The field of
candidates slowly dwindled leaving the Maple Leaf as the most likely prospect to
possess site integrity, significance, and research potential.
Efforts to find the wreck site began with a thorough review of primary sources
and navigation charts relating to the loss of the vessel and later salvage
efforts. The most important resource were navigation charts of the river
produced by the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey between 1876 and 1911.
The 1876 chart (Figure 6) identifies the wreck off Mandarin Point by name and
the 1884 chart (Figure 7) depicts the wreck marked with a beacon. The vessel
posed a hazard to shipping and the U.S. Army Engineers awarded contracts to
Roderick G. Ross in 1882 and 1888 to clear the wreckage (United States Army
Engineers 1882, 1888). After Ross completed this work, a navigation chart issued
in 1911 shows the wreck site as a shaded area (Figure 8). By comparing
landmarks on the nineteenth century charts with modern charts and aerial
photographs, the approximate site location was determined and a search area
defined.
Initial efforts to locate the Maple Leaf began in the summer of 1984. A Fisher
Pulse Metal Detector was towed behind a small boat in an attempt to locate iron
machinery or fittings. Ironically, the towed sensor became entangled in wreckage
protruding above the bottom of the river and divers ground truthed the obstacle
using scuba in zero visibility conditions. The remains of a steam propulsion
system established the existence of a wreck but the condition and extent of the
vessel could not be determined. Work was temporarily halted until matters of
ownership and salvage rights could be resolved. The investigators formed St.
Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. (SJAEI) with Keith Holland of
Jacksonville, Florida as president. SJAEI applied for and received a Florida
Underwater Exploration Permit to effectively exclude other private interests
from the site. Under the stipulations of the permit only remote sensing and
diver verification of targets could be conducted (Keith V. Holland, personal
communication May 5, 1992).
To establish the areal extent of the wreck, Geoscience, Inc. of Gainesville,
Florida conducted a magnetometer survey in April 1985. The survey was made over
a two day period using a Geometrics 806 Proton Procession Magnetometer towed
behind a small boat and a Del-Norte radar ranging system for positioning
control. Two transponder stations were set up and their locations established on
the state plane coordinate system by triangulation with permanent benchmarks.
Buoy markers placed to delineate the four corners of a rectangular search area
were position plotted using the Del-Norte positioning system. On the first day
of the survey the positioning system experienced microwave interference from the
Jacksonville Naval Air Station and no work was accomplished. The following day,
no interference occurred and the survey was completed.
Figure 9 shows a graphic
representation of the survey results (Keith V. Holland, personal communication
May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. 1985).
From June 1985 through the autumn of 1986, several survey dives were made on the
wreck using scuba. Very little material protruded above the bottom sediment to
indicate the site (Figure 2). The paddle wheel shaft lay exposed with the
northern end broken and covered by a log. This feature identified the amidships
area of the vessel and provided a reference point to conduct further searches.
It also suggested the wreck lay on an east-west axis, consistent with historical
accounts of the loss. Scattered timber and metal pipes littered the nearby area
along with a number of entangled crab traps and fishing line. West of the paddle
wheel shaft, the rudder stock identified the stern and confirmed the vessel's
orientation. Forward of the paddle wheel shaft, no evidence of the ship was
found to indicate the bow's location. Random probing with a metal rod revealed
an extensive area of debris buried under 4 to 7 feet of mud. The areal extent of
the wreck was not determined until a systematic probing survey was conducted in
1991 (Keith V. Holland, personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:147).
1988 Season
From the project's start, artifact recovery was St. Johns Archaeological fig 9
Expeditions, Inc.'s primary interest in the wreck. The 1986 court settlement
between the United States and SJAEI allowed the group to legally pursue site
excavation. In the settlement, the United States government retained ownership
of the Maple Leaf through the agency of the United States Army. SJAEI was given
sole salvage rights to the vessel and allowed to keep 80 percent of the
artifacts recovered. The remaining 20 percent was evenly divided between the
Army and the State of Florida (Moseley 1993:174-175).
SJAEI secured all federal, state, and local permits necessary for excavation
work by early 1988. Holland decided to excavate in the aft cargo hold because it
held personal belongings and did not suffer damage from the torpedo explosion
(personal communication, May 5, 1992). Testimony taken after the loss of the
vessel indicated the forward hold was packed with tents and sutler's stores but
the explosion caused extensive damage in this area (Farnham 1864).
All diving activities were conducted from a 28 foot pontoon boat set up with
surface supplied diving equipment. Mooring points were established on the wreck
at the rudder and the paddle wheel shaft to accommodate shifting work areas. A
third mooring was established on the stem in 1989. The diving system consisted
of two band masks with a hard wire communication system supplied and monitored
by a surface dive control center. This system provided diver to surface and
diver to diver communication. Breathing air was supplied by a bank of compressed
gas cylinders carried on a small wooden barge along with a centrifugal pump used
to power a four inch venturi dredge. This dredge worked very effectively on the
overburden but for controlled excavation within the hull, dredge hose size was
reduced to two inches. The exhaust from the dredge passed through a catch cage
made of reinforcing rod covered with ¼ inch hardware cloth (Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992).
The immediate excavation plan called for locating the after cargo hatch to gain
access to the cargo hold. A ¼ inch steel cable marked in 10 foot increments was
stretched between the rudder stock and paddle shaft to act as a baseline and
define search areas. Beginning at the paddle wheel shaft and working aft, divers
using a 7 foot steel rod probed along the baseline in 10 foot intervals. At each
interval, probing extended laterally to the starboard and port sides of the
vessel in 10 foot increments. The deck appeared intact and structurally sound
with very little debris in the overlying sediment. Although the cargo hatch was
not found, probing indicated a small hole in the deck on the port side, 46 feet
aft of the paddle shaft and 13 feet north of the baseline. Eventually, this
point became the north east corner of the access hole SJAEI cut through the deck
(Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:148-149)
An excavation was made to determine if this hole could provide entry into the
cargo hold. Five feet of sediment covered the area and a circular depression six
feet in diameter was dredged to examine the deck. Two broken deck planks, sprung
from a deck beam, accounted for the opening and the surrounding deck structure
appeared sound. SJAEI decided to cut a hole through the deck and enter the cargo
hold at that point. Using the side of a deck beam as a guide, a 4 foot long cut
was made athwart ship through the deck planking. An identical and parallel cut
was made two deck beams aft of the first and the planking removed. The resulting
hole measured 4 feet athwart ship and 42 inches fore and aft with a deck beam
passing through the center. The planks were recovered for conservation and
subsequent documentation. (Cantelas 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions,
Inc. 1988).
Mud completely filled the interior of the hold and the cargo reached to within 3
to 6 inches of the deck beams. The beam running through the center of the access
hole hindered diver entry and posed a safety problem. A search by feel
identified barrels, boxes, trunks and a number of tent poles. The contents of
three boxes were recovered in order to assess preservation conditions inside the
hold and conclusively prove vessel identity. The boxes themselves were not
recovered at the time and only one was recovered at a later date in 1989. During
recovery and subsequent storage, general artifact associations were maintained
by box. Approximately one hundred artifacts were recovered from these boxes (Lee
B. Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:149-150).
By the end of July all project objectives for the season were completed. To
protect the interior of the wreck, a four foot square sheet of plywood was
placed over the access hole and nailed in place. The excavation was then
backfilled (Manley 1993:150).
1989 Season
Methodology
A reevaluation of the methodology used on the site in 1988 brought many
refinements to the field operation. An intensive search located the stem under
one foot of bottom sediment. This allowed an accurate baseline to be established
from the stem post to the rudder for reference and mapping (Keith V. Holland,
personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5,
1992; Manley 1993:152).
The primary objective of the 1989 season was to continue the previous excavation
on a larger scale. The access hole was elongated an additional four feet by
removing deck planking from the starboard end of the hole. The finished opening
measured 8 feet athwart ship by 42 inches bow to stern (Figure 10). The deck
beam running through the center was then removed, cutting it flush with the port
end of the hole and leaving ten inches projecting on the starboard end. The
larger hole expedited artifact removal and increased safety for divers working
inside the hold (Keith V. Holland, personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B.
Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:152-153).
A Cartesian coordinate mapping system was designed to provide localized
provenience using the structural members of the ship. A reference datum was
established on the top center of the protruding deck beam at the starboard end
of the opening. Measurements on the bow to stern axis were taken by counting
deck beams with 24 inch centers; athwart ship measurements were determined by
counting the 5¼ inch wide deck planks. These measurements were then converted to
feet and inches as necessary. Vertical control was maintained by establishing
three arbitrary levels, each approximately 2 feet thick, beginning at the top of
the deck beams. A folding rule was used to record rough depth measurements. Due
to zero visibility conditions, all measurements were relayed to the surface via
the hard wire communication system. With provenience recorded, the artifact or
group of artifacts was given a recovery number which identified them throughout
the recovery process and conservation treatment (Keith V. Holland fig 10
personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5,
1992; Manley 1993:153).
During a nine day period, from May 19 to May 27, divers excavated a four foot
square hole down to the bottom of the hull and removed all material encountered.
In actuality, the hole was slightly larger at the top and tapered towards the
bottom to keep mud and cargo from sloughing into the excavation. The 1988
investigation indicated that most material in this area of the hold was packed
in wooden boxes. Boxes with any degree of structural integrity were recovered by
placing them on a lifting platform. Deteriorated boxes were dismantled and the
artifacts placed in lifting containers for recovery. Artifact clusters not
associated with a box and isolated finds were placed directly into lifting
containers. When the work was completed, the access hole was covered with
plywood without backfilling the interior excavation (Keith V. Holland, personal
communication May 5, 1992; Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992;
Manley 1993:152-153).
Findings
While most activities during this season concentrated on the stern,
investigations at the stem provided structural information on the bow. Once the
stem was found, divers dredged down along the side to determine the condition of
the ship in this area. Six feet below the river bottom, divers found the
detached bow rail from the weather deck and recovered it for conservation and
later display at the Jacksonville Museum of Science and History (Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:152).
Excavation within the aft cargo hold proceeded in three arbitrary levels each
approximately two feet thick. A flat wooden surface was encountered six feet
below deck level. This was initially thought to be the bilge ceiling, but
historical documentation clearly stated the depth of hold as 10.6 feet. The
excavation area was also extended beyond the edges of the access hole, reaching
a maximum dimension of 11 feet athwart ship and 6 feet 3 inches fore and aft in
level two. Level three narrowed to 6 feet 6 inches by 4 feet 6 inches. Only a
small area on the starboard side of the access hole was excavated to the wooden
surface. Artifact associations were maintained as clusters and given recovery
numbers (Keith V. Holland, personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc.
1989).
Observations made during the work identified several possible stowage
procedures. Heavy materials were packed low in the hold, possibly for vessel
stability and to avoid breaking or crushing fragile cargo. Odd sized items, such
as wooden tent poles found floating under the deck, were probably packed last
and laid on top of the cargo. The remains of a possible wooden partition,
oriented along the longitudinal axis of the ship, were found approximately 7
feet from the port side of the vessel. It was constructed of horizontal tongue
and groove planking 6 inches wide and ½ inch thick. The partition was
encountered three feet below the deck beams with three planks exposed for a
distance of four feet and appeared in very poor condition. Whether this was an
actual partition could not be conclusively determined because the terminal ends
of the planks extended beyond the excavation unit and were not observed. (Lee B.
Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological
Expeditions, Inc. 1989, n.d.).
Material removed during the 1989 investigation consisted of the camp equipment
and personal belongings of officers and enlisted men. The belongings of at least
three Union regiments were known to be on board the vessel; 112th New York
Regiment, 169th New York Regiment, and 13th Indiana Regiment (New York Times
April 13, 1864; Towart 1992:14). A total of fifty lots were recovered. Six lots
contained artifacts associated with identifiable individuals. Four were from
112th New York regiment including Regimental Surgeon Charles E. Washburn,
Private Benjamin S. Haight, Company B, Private John Te Culver, Company D, and
Second Lieutenant William H. Potter, Company D (Hyde 1866: 145; Phisterer 1890:
152, 157, 3322, 3324).
1991 Season
Methodology
After a two year hiatus, on site investigation resumed in June 1991. Additional
site survey was necessary to answer management questions before planning future
work. The survey concentrated on mapping exposed structural remains, measuring
the depth of sediment overlying the deck, and defining the outline of the port
side. In addition, the aft cargo hold was briefly opened to examine changes in
the interior condition and an excavation was made at the stern to examine the
rudder. The same surface supplied diving facility and logistical setup used in
1988 and 1989 was put in place for the 1991 work (Lee B. Manley, personal
communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:155).
Mapping activities were confined to the port side of the vessel as defined by
the baseline established in 1989. An XY coordinate grid system was established
using the stem as datum and marking the baseline in ten foot segments. A twenty
foot grid square was then constructed from PVC pipe and subdivided into 10 foot
units corresponding to the mapping system. Placed along the baseline, the grid
could be moved in increments as needed. No vertical control was maintained
although the river bottom is relatively flat. By probing at each corner of the
10 foot sub-divisions with an 8 foot metal rod, measurements of sediment depth
over the wreck were recorded. In addition, all material protruding from the
bottom was identified and then mapped using the grid. The final objective was to
locate the edge of the port side by probing. Each probe transect ran
perpendicular to the baseline and was spaced 5 feet from the next transect.
Beginning on the baseline, divers probed every 5 feet until the port side was
encountered (Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; Manley
1993:155).
During the middle of July, an exploratory excavation was made at the stern to
examine the stern and rudder. Starting at the rudder stock, approximately seven
feet of overburden was removed until the deck was reached at the point where the
stock passes through the deck. The excavation was then enlarged toward the stern
to expose the bulwark. At this point, on the stern edge of the ship, excavation
continued downward eight feet below deck level, along the stern counter and
rudder. Time constraints did not permit excavation to the bottom of the ship.
Construction features on the stern and rudder were noted (Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc.
1991).
On August 10 and 11, the access hole to the rear cargo hold was opened for
inspection. At the conclusion of the 1989 investigation the excavated area
inside the hull was not backfilled. This inspection was made to determine if any
changes had occurred in the hold as a result. Initial probing inside the hold
with a steel rod was followed by re-opening the previous excavation. This
limited operation found and recovered a small amount of loose unassociated
material from the bottom of the excavation. When finished, the unit was not
backfilled but the plywood cover was replaced (Lee B. Manley, personal
communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:155-156).
Findings
Mapping revealed few structural features and little wreckage protruding above
the river bottom. Most of it was found near the wheel paddle shaft. The shaft
location identified the midships area containing the steam power plant. The
heavily encrusted shaft rose 2 feet above the bottom from the cranks to the
starboard end. The broken port shaft was covered by a wooden piling. The paddle
wheels seem to have been removed, broken off, or rotted away. Several metal
pipes in the vicinity of the shaft stuck vertically out of the mud. Their height
varied from roughly two to three feet with diameters ranging from two to three
inches. Unidentifiable wooden timbers and fragmentary lumber also protruded from
the bottom or were felt in the sediment. At the stern, the twelve inch diameter
rudder stock was the only identifiable piece of the ship in that area. A
finished site map was not completed using the recovered data because of several
inconsistencies (Keith V. Holland, personal communication May 5, 1992; Lee B.
Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological
Expeditions, Inc. 1991). Figure 2 is a later site map showing the major features
discovered in 1991. The numerous pipes, rods and other material sticking out of
the mud in the vicinity of the engine room have not been included.
Probing clearly outlined the vessel (Figure 11). Starting at the bow and moving
aft 85 feet, the hull outline is relatively uniform. From 85 to 120 feet a large
irregular concavity appears in the port side of the vessel. This area, slightly
aft of amidships, was the location of the paddle wheel and paddle wheel box that
are now missing. Moving aft from 120 feet to the stern, the shape is fairly
regular. The survey probing successfully revealed the extent of the vessel as
outlined by the deck on the port side. All of the hull seems to be present with
the exception of the missing paddle wheel area. The amount of damage to the deck
and hull could not be determined (Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5,
1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. 1991).
Probing also revealed the depth of sediment overlying the deck and the presence
of obstacles in the overburden. The amidships area, containing the engineering
spaces, displayed the greatest depth variability. The obstacles encountered were
part of the ship's machinery. Metal pipes and the paddle wheel shaft also
protrude from the mud in this area. Probing suggested the foredeck was covered
with debris but the measurements are curiously regular when compared to the
engineering spaces. Very few obstructions were encountered on the after deck,
where depths ranged from five to seven feet. It seems that most of the
superstructure in the stern had been removed (Lee B. Manley, personal
communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. 1991). fig
11 The stern excavation began at the wooden rudder stock and proceeded down to
the main deck. The deck extended three feet aft of the rudder to the rounded
stern bulwark. This bulwark was covered with horizontal tongue and groove
planking on both sides with a cap rail on top. Decorative trim was attached to
the base on the outboard side. Beyond the bulwark, at deck level, a three inch
thick shelf extended aft eighteen inches. A section of the bulwark was recovered
for conservation (Lee B. Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns
Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. 1991).
The stern counter had four through-hull ports placed in pairs of two sizes on
each side of the rudder. The smaller opening is approximately twelve inches from
the rudder. This opening had a cover measuring nineteen inches wide and 14 5/8
inches high with two large brass hinges on top and a brass ring handle near the
bottom. Covers for the other three ports were missing. The second, slightly
larger, port was roughly six inches forward of the first and measured
approximately 23 inches high and 17 inches across. The openings would have
provided convenient access to the rudder and may have been used for loading long
linear cargo such as lumber or iron rails. Brass sheathing covered the hull
beginning 4.25 feet below the deck and extending across the rudder (Lee B.
Manley, personal communication May 5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological
Expeditions, Inc. 1991).
The rudder stock extended from the bottom of the counter at a point two or three
feet below deck with the rudder blade aligned along the axis of the vessel. The
rudder stock remained twelve inches in diameter but the blade thinned to seven
inches and was approximately five feet long on top. A seven inch diameter
octagonal shaped horn rose 36 inches from the rear edge of the rudder and
reached to within three inches of the stern counter. A metal collar was fastened
to the horn eight inches below the top and secured two double block assemblies
extending to the port and starboard sides. These were part of the steering
mechanism. The port assembly was examined and presumed to be identical to the
one on the starboard side but thick concretion made it difficult to distinguish
features. A metal strap, possibly a turnbuckle, attached the first block to the
collar. The iron cheeked blocks were attached to each other by a turnbuckle or
swivel and their eight inch diameter sheaves were spaced on two foot centers.
The first block was oriented in a vertical plane while the second block rested
in a horizontal plane. No draft marks were felt on the stern or rudder and zero
visibility precluded finding any by visual observation. The investigation did
not find evidence of gudgeon straps (Lee B. Manley, personal communication May
5, 1992; St. Johns Archaeological Expeditions, Inc. 1991).
Inspection of the 1989 cargo hold excavation area began by dredging overlying
sediment from the plywood cover. Sediment filled the old excavation to within 18
or 24 inches of the bottom of the deck beams. Buoyant tent poles were floating
in the open area. Water in the hold was much cooler than river water, suggesting
spring water or groundwater intrudes into the site (Lee B. Manley, personal
communication May 5, 1992; Manley 1993:155-156; St. Johns Archaeological
Expeditions, Inc. 1991).
Sediment filling the old excavation was probed with a metal rod to determine if
the walls of the 1989 excavation collapsed. Materials protruded from the walls
but the center of the excavation remained free of obstructions. This suggests
the cargo shifted very little or not at all (Lee B. Manley, personal
communication May 5, 1992).
After probing, the mud was dredged out of the hole for closer examination. This
investigation was confined to a vertical shaft approximately four feet in
diameter at the deepest point of the 1989 excavation. The original walls of the
excavation were easily defined by firm thick sediment. Many loose artifacts lay
on the bottom. These either came from containers excavated in 1989 or fell from
the sides of the hole. When finished with the investigation, the access hole was
covered with plywood without backfilling the interior excavation (Lee B. Manley,
personal communication May 5, 1992).
The 1991 investigation concluded SJAEI site work as the sole investigator.
Beginning in 1992, East Carolina University became a partner with SJAEI in a
three year site research project.