Throughout antiquity, the port of ‘Akko was one of the most important deployment centers for large military and commercial fleets. ‘Akko Bay, which appears calm for most of the year, was a trap for many ships due to its shallow rocky reefs and seasonal sandbars. These factors, combined with the prevailing winds and waves, limited the maneuverability of vessels entering and exiting the port, and many ships sank. The twelfth-century German pilgrim, Theoderich, wrote that “the harbor, or roadstead of Ptolemais [‘Akko] is difficult and dangerous of access when the wind blows from the south, and the shores tremble under the continuous shocks which they receive from the waves, which are there heaped into great masses. For since the fury of the sea is not broken by the intervention of any mountain, the terrible waves boil over more than a stone’s throw on to the land” (Theoderich:59).
Despite these difficult and hazardous environmental conditions, the extensive activity that took place in and around ‘Akko resulted in many shipwrecks and cargoes lying on the seabed of the bay and and of the ancient port, partially buried beneath the sand (Galili et al. 2003; Galili et al. 2010:191–211). In view of the great potential for discovering numerous shipwrecks in ‘Akko bay, underwater archaeological and sonar surveys were carried out in the area as early as the 1960s (Galili et al. 2003:13–14; Flinder, Linder and Hall 1993:199–225). In June 2010, a joint expedition was undertaken by the IAA Marine Archaeology Unit, the University of Rhode Island and the University of Louisville, Kentucky, using ground-penetrating sonar technology (a Syqwest Stratabox), installed on the IAA research vessel, Qadmonit. In a Stratabox survey conducted parallel to the Ha-Temarim Beach (Permit No. S-249/2011), a number of acoustic targest were later revealed to be ship hulls covered with sand. In a diving survey conducted after the winter storms later that year, the wooden hulls of three shipwrecks were identified. Following preliminary documentation and measurements, wood samples were taken from each ship. The southern ship was designated Ha-Temarim 3 (map ref. 207738/757903; length c. 20 m; Fig. 1), the central ship—Ha-Temarim 1 (map ref. 207748/75795; length c. 30 m), and the northern ship—Ha-Temarim 2 (map ref. 207813/757678; length c. 20 m).
It was decided to initiate the archaeological investigation of the central ship, Ha-Temarim 1, as it was found partially exposed. This shipwreck lay in ‘Akko Bay, c. 100 m from the shoreline, at a depth of 2.2–3.0 m below the sea surface. The first excavation season focused on assessing the ship’s state of preservation, taking measurements and collecting data that would help determine the requirements for the excavation of this large wreck site.
 
The excavation focused on the documentation of the exposed part of the ship, from the stern up to the sixth frame heading toward the bow. From the wreck’s position on the seabed, it could be seen that the stern faced the shoreline (north-northeast, 33o), and the bow faced the open sea (south-southwest, 213o). The ship was leaning at an angle of c. 45o on its port side. The port side was flattened on the seabed and mostly covered by sand, and was therefore well preserved (Fig. 2). The ship’s remains were spread over an area of c. 8 × 30 m, and included frames, external planks, floor timbers, components of the stern, support beams of the deck, a set of deadeyes (iron rings) from the rigging to secure the mast in place, and bronze rudder attachments (Figs. 3, 4).
The Ha-Temarim 1 ship was built of a series of frames with square cross-sections. Each frame consisted of two thick beams joined together with nails inserted from the side (width of each frame 0.14 m, width of each pair of frames 0.28 m, space between the frames c. 0.24 m; Fig. 5). In the excavation, about 40 non-contiguous frames, still upright and partially exposed, were counted on the starboard side. Based on the length of the ship (c. 30 m) and the close spacing of the frames, it was estimated that the ship had c. 56 frames, some of which were buried in the sand. Wood-working marks of carpenters’ tools could be seen on some of the well-preserved frames. The frames that had lain exposed for a long period of time were perforated with holes made by shipworms (Teredo navalis) and by sand and wave erosion. Within a few more years of exposure, the worms will completely destroy the exposed wood (Muller 2009). The frames appear to be of equal size in the central area of the ship; however, they become closer to each other towards the stern, where the intervening spaces are very small. On the port side, lying on the seabed, frames measuring two meters or more in length were visible lying on and nailed to the keel. The frames on the turn of the bilge hint at the shape of the ship's hull section (Figs. 3, 6). The frames are made of Quercus ceris, also known as Turkish oak (Lipschitz 2012a).
On the port side of the ship, the remains of ten planks (width 0.14–0.23 m, thickness 6.5 cm), made of brutia pine (Pinus brutia; Lipschitz 2012a), and carvel-built—laid edge-to-edge without touching—were identified (Fig. 7). The planks were attached to the frames with bronze nails with square cross-sections, and round, flattened heads (length c. 0.14 m). Teeth-like marks or sharp projections were cut along the nails, facing the nail head and in the opposite direction to which the nail was hammered in. These projections were designed to become embedded in the wood and prevent the nails from moving (Fig. 8: A). Two of the nails underwent metallurgical analysis (Table 1). In the side planks, wooden nails with a round cross-section were found (length c 0.13 m, diam. 1.9 cm). Wooden pegs (length 0.36 m, diam. 6.8 cm; Fig. 8B) were uncovered near the planks. Copper sheathing affixed to the planks with small nails (length c. 3 cm; Fig. 9) was exposed on the starboard side. The sheathing was intended to protect the underside of the vessel from shipworms and barnacles.
Two ceiling planks were uncovered on the port side (Fig. 3), and six in the center of the ship (width 8–15 cm; Fig. 10).
The thesternpost, found near the post, was made of a thick tree branch (width c. 0.23 m). A wooden post, the inner sternpost, was affixed to it vertically to reinforce or protect it. Two deep grooves were carved into both sides of the sternpost, into which the ends of the outer planks were inserted and nailed. On the exterior of the sternpost, the bronze gudgeon— a U-shaped socket that held together all the parts of the sternpost (Milne, McKewan and Goodburn 1998:31)—was found. The gudgeon (length c. 0.4 m; outer width c. 0.27 m, inner width c. 0.23 m, thickness c. 4 cm) was fixed in place with bronze nails; there was a round hole (diam. 6.5 cm) in the center of the rudder socket, into which the rudder pin would have been inserted (Figs. 4, 11).
On the inner side of the sternpost, a thick branch, with a natural split into Y-shape, was found, its arms reaching as far as the fourth plank from the stern. Nearby lay a cluster of roughly worked kurkar stones bearing signs of burning and soot, as well as animal bones and a bronze candlestick (Figs. 10, 12). The stones seem to have served as flooring for a cooking stove, to protect the ship’s wooden hull from direct or indirect contact with fire or extreme heat that could potentially ignite the ship. The discovery of the cluster of stones and the other finds, indicate that the kitchen was located on the lower deck in the stern of the ship.
On the starboard side, a series of five diagonal support beams was clearly visible, spaced at a distance of five frames from each other (2.5–2.7 m between the beams). Toward the bow, these beams were also seen on the port side. The beams apparently extended from the frames, and from the floor beams to the central axis of the deck. They were intended to support the deck and to relieve the stress of the deck's weight on the hull walls. A diagonal beam, to which a pinewood plank was affixed, was visible next to the stones on the starboard side (Fig. 13). This beam leaned diagonally toward the central axis of the ship and was part of the bulkhead that separated compartments in the stern (Steffy 1994:287, Fig. G-6).
On the port side, in the central area of the ship, a thick plank (length c. 4.5 m), which had been torn away from the ship’s side, was found attached to four round and convex deadeyes (diam. 0.18–0.20 m) with three holes (diam. 2–3 cm; Fig. 14). On the plank's external surface, a rabbet or groove was carved, into which a metal strip was tightly affixed. This arrangement of four deadeyes attached to the side of the ship belonged to the rigging, which was stretched taut to hold the mast in place. The location of the wooden beam and the four deadeyes attests to the location of the mast in the center of the ship. Near the deadeyes, a lead pipe (length c. 1.5 m) was found, one end of which was widened and bore holes from nails that once attached it to the side of the ship. This pipe was part of the bilge pump, which pumped out water that accumulated from the bottom of the ship near the keel.
The deadeyes help estimate the earliest date for the ship. Having an iron strip, they closely resemble those found in ships from the eighteenth century CE (Raban 1986); in the seventeenth century CE, rope leads were attached by an iron chain to the hull. The metallurgical analysis (Table 1), however, indicates that the nails were manufactured later than nails that were found in the ‘Akko 1 wreck, which was dated to the second quarter of the nineteenth century CE (Cvikel and Kahanov 2013). Thus, the construction of the Ha-Temarim 1 ship probably took place in the second half of the nineteenth century.
 
Table 1. Metallurgical analysis of two nails (S, L)
Object description
Compositions weight percentage (wt%)
Cu
Zn
Al
Si
P
Fe
Sn
Pb
Brass nail S (head)
72.9
10.4
1.4
1.3
0.2
0.2
4.1
9.5
Brass nail S (body)
76.7
14.6
0.3
0.1
--
0.1
0.6
7.6
Brass nail S (tail, area 1)
75.4
14.8
0.4
0.3
--
0.1
0.5
8.5
Brass nail S (tail, area 2)
77.1
14.4
0.3
0.1
--
0.1
0.5
7.5
Brass nail L (head)
75.1
14.7
0.6
0.2
--
0.1
0.6
8.7
Brass nail L (body)
76.6
11.0
0.7
0.9
0.1
0.1
1.1
6.3
Brass nail L (tail)
72.2
15.5
0.5
0.4
--
0.1
1.8
9.5
 
As noted, two types of wood were found in the hull of Ha-Temarim 1 wreck. One was brutia pine (Pinus brutia), a subspecies of Aleppo pine, which accordig to Theophrastus (286–371 BCE; Theophrastus Inquiry 7, 5) was considered good shipbuilding wood. This is the wood preferred by shipbuilders to this day in Greece (Damiandis 1989:234–241; Davis, Cullen and Coode 1965:74). The current distribution zone of brutia pine is primarily the eastern Mediterranean. It grows naturally from sea level up to 1200 m asl, mainly in the region of Izmir in southern Turkey, although it is sometimes also found in the northwest of Turkey. It also grows on the Athos Peninsula in Greece, as far as the Turkish border, and in the Aegean Islands, including Crete, Samos, Lesbos, Rhodes, Cyprus. Pinus brutia is also found in Calabria in southern Italy, in northern Iraq, along the Syrian coast and in Lebanon (Davis, Cullen and Coode 1965:74–75). The other wood is Turkish oak (Quercus ceris). This species has a straight, broad trunk that can reach a height of 25 m or more, and it is characterized by straight branches (Davis, Cullen and Coode 1965:74–75). The tree is suitable for building long, straight components. This is a Mediterranean tree, occasionally found in France and Italy and common in the forests of the Balkans and Turkey. Mount Hermon, on the Lebanese–Syrian border is the southern boundary of its distribution (Shmida and Darom 1992:216).
The two tree types identified in the Ha-Temarim 1 shipwreck were also identified in several shipwrecks along the coast of Israel and Turkey that were dated to the seventeenth–nineteenth centuries CE (Lipschitz 2012b; 2015). It is assumed that the wood used to build these sailing vessels was cut from a nearby grove or forest (Muller 2009). For the construction of larger ships like Ha-Temarim 1, a shipyard near the source of the wood was necessary.
 
The preliminary study of the ship’s structure shows that it was a massive vessel with thick, closely spaced frames and sides (average thickness c. 0.27 m), constructed of outer and inner planks. This reinforcement gave the hull considerable structural strength. The use of high-quality bronze nails, copper sheathing and a cast-bronze rudder suggest that this was a warship that belonged to one of the fleets that frequented the port of ‘Akko during the nineteenth century. The provenance of the two species of wood indicates that the ship may have been built in the region of Turkey or perhaps in southern Italy. The metallurgical analysis of two of the ship’s nails reveals that both were made of the same raw material and using the same technologies, an indication that they were made at the same foundry; these results reinforce the dating of the ship to the late nineteenth century.
At this point in the excavation, the precise measurements of the wreck cannot be determined apart its length (c. 30 m). Its size is very impressive, even in comparison to other vessels that have been discovered and studied from the eighteenth–nineteenth centuries CE in the port of ‘Akko and in the bays of Dor-Ṭanṭura (Yovel 2003; Cvikel 2010; Cvikel and Kahanov 2013).
In the seventeenth century CE, the region around ‘Akko saw political changes following the rise to power of the Druze Emir Fakhr ad-Din II of southern Syria and northern Palestine. In his efforts to free himself from Ottoman rule and to attain political independence, Fakhr ad-Din II developed diplomatic, military and commercial relationships with the royal House of Tuscany and with Maltese pirates. The latter raided Ottoman ships and attacked the coastal cities of Syria and Palestine. In 1613, the Ottoman sultan decreed an assault on Fakhr ad-Din II, responded by ordering the destruction and blockage of the ports, in order to prevent the Ottoman forces from disembarking. In the seventeenth century, a merchant of Arvieuxwrote wrote in his journal that “although ‘Akko was very important commercially, ships preferred to anchor opposite the Carmel coast” (Lewis 1963:55–56).
The rise in ‘Akko’s political and economic importance in the latter half of the eighteenth century did not lead to the rehabilitation of the port, as can be deduced from the reports of travelers and pilgrims, including Richard Pococke (1704–1756) and ‘Ali Bey al-‘Abbasi (1766–1818), both of who describe the port as narrow and shallow (Shor 1994).
The status of ‘Akko’s port at the end of the nineteenth century is recorded in hte important description of Charles Wilson, a British military engineer and one of the founders of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Wilson reported that the port, built on a narrow reef, was 1000 feet long, 700 feet wide and 3 feet deep. He also noted that the port was shallow after having been blocked by Fakhr ad-Din II at the beginning of the seventeenth century, and therefore described it as unsafe for anchorage in stormy weather (Wilson 1975:124–126).
Due to the physical state of ‘Akko's port in the nineteenth century, ships with a deep draft, such as Ha-Temarim 1, could not enter it. These ships had to anchor either in the bay of ‘Akko or in Haifa Bay, where anchorage was more secure (Shor 1990:187). Local marine commerce at that time was controlled by European, Jewish, Greek and Armenian merchants, while overland commerce was in the hands of Muslims. Merchandise brought to the port of ‘Akko aboard small merchant ships and off-loaded there was mainly intended to be loaded onto European vessels for sale in Europe. These trading ships were larger than the ships used for local coastal transport (lighters), and they sailed mainly in the summer; this was also the season when the Ottoman fleet left Istanbul for Egypt to collect taxes. Even large mechant ships were armed like warships to be able to deal with the anarchy that prevailed in the Mediterranean Sea at the time, due to extensive piracy (Harlaftis 2002). They were outfitted with a variety of cannons that required a special structure that could bear their weight and withstand the recoil when fired. The excavation of the Ha-Temarim 1 shipwreck is in its preliminary stages, but judging by its size and structure the working hypohesis is that it was associated with this commercial activity, and that its excavation would improve our understanding of commerce and seamanship in ‘Akko and the Levant in the nineteenth century.