| More information : Designation History:
Application made to designate the wreck by English Heritage, April 2006. (2)
It is recommended that an area of 100m radius around position 50 48.1767N 000 24.6380E (WGS 84) be protected. (2)
29-MAY-2006: Designation order coming into force, with a protected area of 100m radius. (3)
Updated 2 February 2022:
Designation Order: No 1392, 2006
Made: 23rd May 2006
Laid before Parliament: 24th May 2006
Coming into force: 14th June 2006
Protected area: 100 metres within 50 48.1767 N 000 24.6380 E (13)
Archaeological History:
1985: The Nautical Museums Trust heard of salvors looking for the wreck of the RESOLUTION. The MOD was approached with a view to acquiring the wreck to prevent its destruction and together with the NMR the Warship RESOLUTION Trust was set up, to which the wreck was given. (4)
1989: The Nautical Archaeology Society searched for the remains of the RESOLUTION by beach-walking and shore diving, but no archaeological remains were found by these means. A proton magnetometer search over an area 500m either side of Pevensey Haven also yielded no results. (4)
A hand-made brick, possibly of 17th century date, 2.5 x 8 x 4", and a sheet of copper approximately 20 x 20cm, recovered from this site in a position erroneously given as 50 802951N 000 410633E, in Norman's Bay, and thought to represent the remains of the RESOLUTION. (Droit 199/05) (1)
2005: Site found by local divers attempting to free a lobster pot, when they came across a large anchor and guns. They contacted Peter Marsden of the Shipwreck Heritage Centre, Hastings, and EH, and the dive team came across the remains of an iron bolt or nail, a small iron shot, and a brick. (2)
September 2005: Investigated by Government Diving Contractor, Wessex Archaeology. (2)
A piece of tile, slightly curved, with a residue of pitch on the inside, of terracotta colour, and estimated to be post-medieval, recovered from Norman's Bay. (Droit 044/06) (6)(7)
A small piece of pelt, 10 x 5 x .5cm, discovered on the Norman's Bay site lining a run of timbers. A small section was recovered for further analysis - light grey on the outside with black fibres/hair in the middle. (Droit 045/06) (6) [This item is described as "felt" in source (7).]
2006: Fieldwork by Wessex Archaeology 2-6 May. (7)
A brass cauldron, max 48.5cm wide x 23cm high; a brick, 18 x 18 x 4.5cm; a wrought iron bolt and concretion, 20cm long; a cast iron shot, 45mm diameter, recovered by divers some years ago and anonymously handed in; thought to be from the Norman's Bay site. (Droit 158/06) (6)
Fieldwork assessing suitability of timbers for dendrochronological sampling undertaken in 2007, with 11 timbers selected for analysis from the hull structure, since these appeared to still be in situ. (8)
10 large samples of wood, eroded, exposed sections of framing timbers, taken from the eastern side of the wreck mound at the Norman's Bay site for dendrochronological analysis; partly exposed but buried in the seabed, in position 50 48.1767N 000 24.6380E. (Droit 308/07) (9)
2011: The site became the focus for a marine archaeological dive trail opened that year. (10)(11)
A musket ball recovered from the Norman's Bay Wreck, from the seabed between areas CP5 and CP6. (Droit 196/11) (12)
Environment and Archaeological Remains:
The seabed within the area searched by divers appears to be largely flat with a compressed clay/aggregate mixture overlain by silt and fine, loose, sand, which seemed to be highly mobile. The wreck mound, largely composed of ballast stones and iron guns, is surrounded by a slight scour trench. The mound is not continuous but is highest at the northern end of the site, approximately 1.5 metres high, although individual guns may project another 0.5 metre higher than this. (4)
The site consists of at least 45 iron guns, other artefacts and a timber hull structure.
The gun cluster lies on top of ballast material. The area of the wreck appears to measure approximately 40 x 11.5 metres, aligned orthogonal to the shore. A large anchor was recorded in situ in the middle of the site, and an intact area of galley brick, found in association with copper sheets, and a number of iron ingots. (2)(3)
Substantial sections of the hull of the wrecked warship exist beneath a mound of ballast. (3)
Approximately 45 guns were seen on the seabed by divers, of which 40 were tagged, all appearing to be cast-iron muzzle-loading weapons. All but one were perceived to lie within the area defined by the hull timbers and ballast. Many of these guns, especially on the eastern side of the wreck, are positioned facing outwards. (4)
A single iron anchor lies in the centre of the artefact spread, and is partially buried. (4)(7)
Two iron rings and two iron ingots, together with flat pieces of concreted iron from the ballast area were also seen in 2005. (4) These are described as three iron ingots, which were not found in 2006, possibly owing to changes in sediment levels, but a stone masonry block and a lead ingot were noted instead. (7)
In 2005 a number of red clay bricks were recorded on the northern half of the site, both as individual bricks and as part of a mortared structure. The same site was recorded in 2006, along with at least four other structures of a similar type. (4)
Several pieces of thin copper sheeting were also observed in the same area as the bricks, fragments of a much larger artefact. It was initially thought to have been sheathing, but after raising and analysing a sheet this has now been discounted, and its function remains unknown. (4)
In 2005, it was noted that ballast is scattered over the site, while elements of the timber structure of the hull emerges from the ballast mound at several locations. Some frames, and outer hull and ceiling planking appear to have survived in situ, while two longitudinal beams were also recorded, and a section of detached planking protruding from the seabed was also seen. (4) On the outboard face of the frames is a large longitudinal timber, very gribbled, angling down into the seabed, apparently one of the upper wales from the side of the vessels, identified as such from a diagonal scarf joint, outer hull planking normally being butt-jointed. (7)
In 2006 six ballast samples were recovered and analysed, five of which were flint or mudstone from SE England, and one a piece of granite from SW or NW Britain. (7)
The main feature of the site comprises 42 known cannon, one of these being to the north of the main wreck site, otherwise distributed in an approximately oval pattern, circa 40 metres long and 12 metres wide; these were recorded in 2005. There are no obvious gun carriage remains. Of these cannon 41 were recorded in 2006, i.e. excluding the single outlying cannon. Three further cannon were added to the site plan in 2006, having been seen in 2005, but their locations not fixed. (7)
The concreted impression of a barrel was located underneath two cannon on the eastern side of the wreck very close to some of the frames. (7)
In 2007 the timbers remaining on the site were observed prior to selection for dendrochronological sampling. All scarfed timbers displayed visible timber working marks but provide few clues as to the role they played in the ship's structure. These timbers remain substantially exposed, as previously recorded, and are heavily overgrown with sessile marine growth, obscuring individual components of the structure.
The impressions of at least two barrels remain in concretions beneath guns 13 and 14. (8)
Interpretation of the Site:
The site may be the wreck of the RESOLUTION, a 70-gun Third Rate ship of the line which was lost during the Great Storm of 1703. However, documentary research indicates that there are at least three other recorded losses within the Bay which might relate to the remains. All that can currently be said with certainty is that the archaeological remains are consistent with a large warship of the period 1600 to 1800. (2)
The visible guns fall into two main categories: cast iron guns about 3m long with a bore of 0.15 to 0.16m, and shorter cast iron guns of 2.5m long with a bore of 0.12 to 0.13m, consistent with 32-pounders and 18-pounders cannon. The size and number of guns present indicate the likelihood of this ship being a warship. The guns are broadly consistent with those prsent on the main and upper gun decks of a 70 gun third rate ship of the line of the 17th/18th centuries. The WA divers saw no smaller ordnance and therefore the smaller guns would appear to be missing from the vessel's complement. (4)
The ordnance found on the site appears to be biased towards smaller guns, the number of guns also being lower than that of the RESOLUTION, even in her peacetime armament of 62 guns; possibly ruling out the RESOLUTION, but the bore of the extant cannon is compromised by concretion. Allowing for concretion, the armament, although still lower than the gazetted complement of guns, shows a higher number of high-bore cannon and therefore comes closer to the armament of the RESOLUTION. Before allowing for concretion it would appear that, if this site is the RESOLUTION, then most of the visible cannon have come from the upper deck of the vessel, and would appear to conflict with contemporary reports of the bronze 6-pounders being salvaged. After allowing for concretion, the numbers of 24 and 12-pounders on site, suggest that the majority of the cannon of a vessel such as the RESOLUTION remain in situ. (7)
Contemporary reports do not mention any ordnance being jettisoned but this does not preclude this having taken place, and it is also possible that some of the larger cannon remain buried, the seabed being mobile and silty. (7)
Only one anchor has been located, in the middle of the wreck on top of the ballast mound, indicating that it is possibly the spare bower anchor. The lack of other anchors on the site is perhaps indicative of their deployment during the wreck event. The full extent of the anchor is not visible, but from what can be ascertained, the size is broadly consistent with that of a spare bower anchor carried by a vessel of 800 to 1000 tons in the 17th to 18th centuries.(4)
The galley bricks are hand made, and again, broadly consistent with a date from the 16th to the 18th centuries for this wreck. (4)
The copper sheeting is not attached to the hull planking so does not suggest that it is hull sheathing. The fact that it is in close proximity to the galley bricks may indicate that it represents the remains of copper kettles, copper being the predominant material for kettles to the 1780s. (4) By the 1680s, all ships of the Sixth Rate and above had two kettles, which were constructed of several plates riveted together. (7)
The length of the visible remains suggests the size of the vessel as 40m or 131 feet long, with the approximate breadth being 12m (39 feet.) The number and size of the guns and anchor size appear to support the suggestion that the vessel might be a third-rate warship of 800 to 1000 tons, although the absence of smaller guns requires explanation. (4)
The position of the galley bricks, and copper fragments, if they do represent kettles, suggest that the vessel lies bows to the north, indicating that she was sailing towards the shore when lost. The presence of a single large anchor and its position at the centre of the site, suggests that it is the spare bower anchor, not an anchor in use, and the absence of other anchors may indicate that they were deployed and lost prior to the sinking event, and may be circumstantial evidence for the loss of the vessel in a storm. (4)
[The vessel may have "cut and run" to attempt to run the vessel ashore, an accepted practice in extremis.] (5)
The absence of copper sheathing on the vessel and the infrequent use of iron in her construction would appear to rule out a 19th century vessel, while the size and type of ordnance appear to make a 16th century date less likely. Thus the wreck would appear to be roughly consistent with a 17th to 18th century date. (4)(7) The felt appears to be indicative of early hull sheathing, known from the Elizabethan period onwards; in the 1600s it was only applied to vessels sailing to areas known for worm infestation, but continued to be in use until the 1750s, broadly consistent with the 1667-1703 date range for the RESOLUTION. (7)
The RESOLUTION is not the only possible candidate for this wreck site; there was an unnamed Dutch vessel which sank in Pevensey Bay, 1667; two further Dutch warships also foundered in the Bay in 1690. (4) The number and type of cannon listed as found also matches the normal armament of late 17th century Dutch vessels, and so these cannot, as yet, be ruled out as possible candidates for the identification of the wreck site. (7)
The dendrochronological analysis is consistent with tree-ring sequences from Germany and the Low Countries, indicating the vessel's likely origin. The number of cannon suggests a warship, and it is possible that the vessel is one of a number of 17th century Dutch warships lost at the Battle of Beachy Head, 1690.
The identification of the vessel as the RESOLUTION is particularly difficult to prove in view of the changes to the coastline since 1703.
The galley bricks provide no conclusive evidence as to the identity of the vessel. (8)
The ordnance manifest of 20 demi-cannon, 2 culverins, 22 x 12pdrs and 10 sakers, totalling 54 guns [i.e 32pdrs on the main gun deck and 12pdrs on the upper gun deck], is at odds with the characteristic armament of an English Third Rate of the 18th century, which would have had 32 and 18pdrs, both of which were found on the site. However, this manifest dates from before the ship refit of 1697-8. (4)
Contemporary accounts suggest that the wreck sank in fairly shallow water, and that it was possible to walk around her, which would appear to preclude the possibility of this site being the RESOLUTION. However, the vessel may have moved from her original point of sinking, or the contemporary reports may actually have meant that people were able to walk on her upper decks at low tide [at the lowest tide encountered by WA there was only 7m of water on the seabed.] (4)
RESOLUTION definitively foundered in Pevensey Bay, and archival research by Ernest Perry has identified a probable area for the position of loss, fairly close to the wreck site as investigated. (4)
Owner: Nautical Museums Trust (2)(3)
|