Assume nothing.

Crim Wreck site plan

I used to dive this unidentified wreck a lot when I was younger. It was an interesting site and one that Roland Morris thought was English and part of HMS Romney. However, I dived it extensively to find out for myself what it was. My findings were that it was a small frigate from the Mediterranean area, possibly even a Turkish vessel from the  mid 1600's. I found 3 types of pottery on the site that were identified as either Spanish or eastern Mediterranean and all dated into the 17th century. The anchors looked Spanish to me also. The oddity was that I kept finding clay pipes like the one pictured below. These were identified to be ottoman empire and mid to late 17th century. I was informed that these dated to no earlier than 1630. However, these particular clay pipes seem to be unchanged in their use for a long time- and that seems to be the case as one exactly like the ones seen on my wreck were recently found on another dateable wreck  that sank in 1682. Oddly that wreck was English but the information was still interesting. They only found one pipe like mine and many English ones which makes their one out to be more of an anomaly than a norm for that wreck. Whereas I only found Turkish pipes and no English ones. So my ship seems to be from the Mediterranean and sank here sometime between 1630 & 1690. So the new information is merely that my wreck could be a bit later in date than I first thought. Every little bit of information helps. This is why I regularly visit museums and shipwreck displays all over the world. You can often see something you have seen before but didn't know the date or context or nationality of the object. Then you spot something in a display that is from a known historical context and bam! -suddenly, one day, things begin fall into place. It really annoys me when I watch on TV (usually in America) they find one thing on a wreck and call it conclusive proof of something when it can merely be an anomaly or even contamination. In this game one must always keep an open mind.  I had that lesson reinforced upon me when we found a large naval Anchor near the wreck of HMS Colossus. Being so close to that wreck I naturally assumed it must be her long lost missing anchor. Made perfect sense to me! Over the years I have even found the odd item from the Colossus in the vast areas between the wreck and that anchor. But blow me down if the anchor didn't turn out to be mere contamination. It was dated to 1707 but arrived there on the sea bed after the Colossus sank in 1798. An easy mistake to make given the prevailing circumstances at the time. However, it was only my own research into the naval records that proved the case conclusively for me -as other peoples published research on this anchor (namely that of Mr Richard Larns) was so contradictory and unreliable that I had to totally ignore it and go back to the very beginning. I not only found a record of the navy putting the anchor in that exact spot  themselves in 1967, I even found a written record of a third party who witnessed the navy as they salvaged it off a wreck 7 miles away from where we found it.  A third more local record even gave me the reason why the navy put it where we then discovered it  over 40 years later. This was all hard conclusive evidence- whereas this little clay pipe is merely trying to tell me a little something. Another small piece of evidence in a very big aquatic jig saw puzzle out at the Crim. And another small lesson is being learnt. This is one of the reasons why I love this diving wreck hunting game- Im always learning something new... even if its by my mistakes. Assume - makes an ASS of U and ME.

Ottoman Empire clay pipe. 1630 to 1682 -and possibly beyond.