<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<itemContainer xmlns="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd" uri="https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/items?output=omeka-xml&amp;page=18&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CCreator" accessDate="2026-10-25T03:51:24+00:00">
  <miscellaneousContainer>
    <pagination>
      <pageNumber>18</pageNumber>
      <perPage>10</perPage>
      <totalResults>700</totalResults>
    </pagination>
  </miscellaneousContainer>
  <item itemId="490" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="282">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/77672662d9c01da33bb028fc65000c93.pdf</src>
        <authentication>b6d1299224c66e8e489a69f59c34a38c</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="5623">
                    <text>Who Were the Africans in Eastern Asia? : The Christian
European Period 1500-1900 AD
Clifford Pereira
Royal Geographical Society
cliffjpereira@hotmail.com
Abstract
Seaways, especially monsoonal ones, allow movement on two directions.
However Eurocentric approaches have tended to create hierarchies of
cultures which have biased movements in particular directions to the
historical exclusion of some narratives. This is a fresh look at a cultural
connection from a perspective that has evaded investigation and seeks to
balance the research on Chinese interactions with Africans in Africa.
Africans have been trading with Asia for hundreds of years, yet their
history and presence in East Asia has been barely suggested or
investigated. The role of African crewmen is an important part of this
narrative and one that brings a new dimension (if not challenges) to
ethnographic studies of maritime cultural landscapes and seascapes.
Key words: Africa, China, interactions, exchange, ethnography

Introduction
In this paper an African is defined as a person whose ancestors were born
in Africa, Therefore discourse not limited to people who are perceived or
perceive themselves as Black or indeed Black African.
Eastern Asia is defined as the territory roughly east of a line 92⁰ East of
the Meridian to 146⁰ East, that is inclusive of Japan, North and South
Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, China and both mainland and maritime
Southeast Asia.
The paper proposes to answer four fundamental yet simple questions:
1) Who were the Africans that came to Eastern Asia (Origins)?
2) How did they get to Eastern Asia (Routes)?
3) What were they known as in Eastern Asia and why (Exonyms)?

�4) What was the nature of their lives in Southeast Asia (Socio-economic
and Political Agency)?
After intense research on the lengthy topic of Africans in Eastern Asia,
much of it from African perspectives, taking in important research
evidenced by Timothy Powers (2010 and 2012), Li Anshan (2015),
George Hatke (2013), Jacques Gernet (1999), William Clarence-Smith
(2006), de Verre Allen (1993), John Sutton (1990), Marina Tolmacheva
(1993), Louise Levathes and Shihan de Silva Jayasuraya (2008a and
2008b) a possible chronological framework consisting of four periods
based on the above criteria was produced:
1) The Hindu-Buddhist Asian period 300BC-700 AD.
2) The Islamic Asian period 700-1500 AD
3) The Christian European period 1500-1900 AD
4) The Modern Period 1900-2000 AD.
It is impossible to cover such an immense timeframe within this paper;
however, a concise bibliography is included for reference and future
research. This paper will concentrate on the evidence provided for period
3, which has been termed ‘The Christian European period 1500-1900 AD’
for the simple reason that the majority of the evidence for this period is
from European sources. The paper examines this and other available
evidence before reaching the conclusion.

The Evidence
Prior to the sixteenth century, Africans that were not Christians or Muslims
were regarded as infidels or Qaffiri (‫كافر‬, singular) by the Arabs and
Persians in Africa and in India (Pankhurst, 2003) and were allowed by the
tenants of Islam to be enslaved. Generally, Christians in the Horn of Africa
were mainly from the Amhara, Tagaru (or Tigrayna) people, and Muslims
were from the coastal Tigre, Tagaru, Afar and Somali peoples. The major

�pagan peoples at this time were mainly Oromoo and Sidama. All of these
were Cushitic speakers. The coastal peoples were in-part the
descendants of the Axumites – an important African maritime people.

Research has already established that the main flow of Africans in the
Islamic Asian period 700-1500 AD (including the Tang, Yuan and
Early Ming Dynasties) was ultimately from the Horn of Africa and along
the Maritime Silk Route to Eastern Asia (Pankhurst, 2003 and Powers,
2010). This trend continued into the sixteenth century when the majority
of Africans arriving in India, including pre-Portuguese Goa came through
the port of Zeila which was the main exporter enslaved pagan Oromoo
and free Abyssinians destined for India where they were called Habshis
(Pankhurst, 2003) and this is confirmed by Linschoten (2005) ‘there are
many Arabians and Abexiins in India’ and he notes that ‘there are many
of them [Abexiins] in India that are captives and slaves’.

From the sixteenth century European records provide evidence of African
presence in East Asia, starting in succession with the Portuguese,
Spanish, Dutch, English and the finally the French.

Portuguese experiences in the Iberian Peninsula and in the Maghreb, had
led them to describe all Muslims as Mouros or Moors. They understood
that the process of Arabisation meant that Arabs were not a race, but a
people. Arriving in East Africa in 1498 the Portuguese regarded the
Muslim people that they encountered on the coast (i.e. Arab, Persian,
Somali and Swahili) all as Moors – a term that they extended with their
travels right across the Indian Ocean to the spice-producing Sultanates of
the Malukas and Southern Philippines. Mistrust and trading necessities
meant that they were reluctant to enslave these Moors. In fact, vastly

�outnumbered and economically reliant on these Muslims produced a
‘keep your enemies close’ approach.

After the Portuguese established themselves in Southeast Africa (modern
day Mozambique) enslaved Africans increasingly came from through
Mozambique Island which they held from 1507, but this trade was still far
below the Arab-Persian trade from the Horn of Africa. The Portuguese
were quick to adopt the Arabic term as Kaffirs or Cafres for the enslaved
pagan Africans as a trading commodity, a labour force, militia, and a
prospective Catholic convert (de Silva Jayaruraya, 2008a).
There were in Goa ‘Many Persians, Arabians and Abexijns, some [of
them] Christians and some [of them] Moors’. Linschoten (2005) notes the
tattoos that identify the Christians and makes it clear that ‘these
Abexiins… such as are free doe serve in al India for sailors and seafaring
men with such merchants as sailed from Goa to China, Japon, Bengala,
Mallaca, Ormus and all the Oriental coast.’ Linschoten explains that after
arriving in India the Portuguese sailors are ‘ashamed to live in that order
and think it is a great discredit unto them’. Interestingly he also explains
that the Abexiins are hired on low wages and travel with their wives under
a Portuguese Captain but possibly an Arab boatswain who oversees the
Abexiins.

Charles Boxer (1997), historian of the Portuguese Empire noted that
‘Portuguese shipping in the inter-port trade of Asia was increasingly
operated from the days of Albuquerque onwards, by Asian seamen
working under a very few white or Eurasian officers. Even the great
carracks of 1,000-2,000 tons which plied between Goa, Macao and
Nagasaki might be entirely crewed by Asians and negro slaves’. However

�Boxer is incorrect. The reputation of the Christian and Muslim Abyssinians
as good sailors was widespread, though the enslaved Abexiin were
actually animist (i.e. kaffir) Oromoo tribesmen, who had a strong military
tradition and were often good horsemen. In several areas of the Indian
Ocean and Western Pacific, piracy was endemic and Africans were rare
enough for their presence to cause fear. It was therefore wise for the
Portuguese to man their ships with Abexiin crew and for the Jesuits to
have kaffir retainers and body guards. This explains the Africans arriving
in Macau from the 1550’s on Portuguese ships and those depicted on the
Japanese Nanban Byobu (southern Barbarian folding screens) in Japan.

In Siam (Thailand) King Chairacha entered relations with the Portuguese
and allowed a trading and religious presence at Ayutthaya. In 1538 as an
assurance against Burmese invasion and eager for Portuguese military
technology he requested that the Portuguese actually retain a military
presence which resulted in 130 Portuguese men being based in the
established Portuguese settlement. Bearing in mind the paucity of
Portuguese men in Asia, it could well be that many of these “Portuguese”
were in fact Africans. There were definitely Japanese and Chinese
Christians, and other Luso-Asians at the settlement which lasted until
1767 when the Burmese destroyed Ayutthaya.

During the early years in Goa the Jesuits employed slaves, and the
Church Provincial Council of 1567 laid down precise rules for the keeping
of slaves (Borges, 1994). Though in reality this was not the case in
Eastern Asia. Perhaps the best known African of this period in East Asia
was the one called Yasuke, who was an African retainer of the Japanese
warlord Oda Nobunaga (1534-1582). Yasuke appears to have arrived in
Japan in 1579 as part of the entourage of the Jesuit Visitor Alessandro

�Valignano. It was Nobunaga who gave the African the name Yasuke
(Lockley, 2017). Both free and bonded helpers were members of the
domestic staff of the Jesuits in the Japan Province, the majority of the
former were Japanese, while the enslaved ones were Africans, Indians,
Malays, Koreans or Japanese (Borges, 1994). Another African is
mentioned in Japanese sources as a gunner in the service of Arima
Harunobu in 1584.

The unification of the Portuguese and Spanish crowns between 1580 and
1640 resulted in the wars with the Dutch and ultimately the downfall of the
Portuguese Eastern Empire. The same wars resulted in an acute shortage
of soldiers throughout the seventeenth century. But the Portuguese
considered sepoys (Indian soldiers) as physically unfit and preferred the
more robust African soldiers (Sequeira-Antony, 2004). By the early
seventeenth century, slaves were the largest non-Goan group living in the
city of Goa, most of these were Africans who had come through
Mozambique Island and other parts of Eastern Africa, and the rest were
Asians. They served as caretakers, guards, servants, concubines and
artisans. From Goa slaves were shipped to other Portuguese settlements
and even to Lisbon (Borges, 1994). The first recorded African to enter the
territory of modern South Korea was a personal servant attached to the
Portuguese trader João Mendes, who was on a Japanese vessel blown
off course by a typhoon while travelling between Phnom Penh and
Nagasaki. They drifted on to the island of Tong Yong in 1604. It appears
that João Mendes was on a diplomatic mission for Shogun Tokugawa
Ieyasu (1543-1616) to the Khymer Kingdom (Kim, 2008). There was a
Portuguese merchant and a Jesuit presence at Hoi An in Vietnam, but no
substantial research has been done on the community to confirm an
African presence.

�Friar Domingo Navarette recorded the presence of African soldiers in
Guangzhou in 1618 and confirmed that they were runaways from Macau
(de Silva Jayaruraya, 2008a). In 1622 enslaved Africans defended the
Portuguese base at Macau which the Dutch attacked with a force of 13
ships and 1300 men. The Portuguese numbered only 150 – two thirds of
which were residents, mostly mestiços. Additionally there were Jesuit
artillerist and decisively up to 100 armed African slaves. There are also
observations in 1637 of the few Portuguese cavalleros (horsemen) being
accompanied by Africans servants dressed in expensive red damask
bearing lances on which were placed the crests of the Portuguese
families. It appears that there were two Africans in Macau who acted as
interpreters between the Portuguese and the Chinese. One of these,
Antonio was a ‘Capher Eathiopian Abissen’. The other is described as a
‘Chincheo runaway from the Portugal’s at Macau’. He was therefore an
enslaved African who had escaped from Macau possibly to the Chenghai
District of Eastern Guangdong Province. Both men appear to have learnt
Cantonese and therefore to have been in Southern China for some time
(Pankhurst, 2003).

By the time Portugal gained her independence from Spain in 1640 as
many as 5000 Africans lived in Macau and there were even special
masses for their wives. They were employed mainly as enslaved personal
servants to the men, as labourers and guards or soldiers. Enslaved
Chinese females were preferred as household maids, cooks, wet-nurses
and personal servants to the ‘Portuguese’ wives who were often mestiços
(de Silva Jayaruraya, 2008a). By the early Qing Dynasty (1644-1912)
Africans were definitely present in small numbers in Guangdong province
as well as at Macau (de Silva Jayaruraya, 2008a). In 1651 the Governor
of Macau requested ‘Negro’ soldiers rather than Mestiços from India (de

�Silva Jayaruraya, 2008b). Friar Domingo Navarette again recorded the
presence of African soldiers in Guangzhou in 1686 (de Silva Jayaruraya,
2008a). According to Brother José de Jesus, in 1745 there were in Macau:
‘twelve thousand men who at the same time dwelt there […]
between Portuguese, half-castes, Nhons [Japanese], Malays,
Canarins [Goans], Timorese, Mozambicans [Mixed heritage
from Mozambique Island], Malabars, Moors [Muslims], Kaffirs
[Non-Muslim Africans], and other nations……’ (Puga, 2013).
No information is available on the African presence in Spanish Formosa
(1626-1642). The people of the Philippine islands had their own form of
slavery before the arrival of the Spanish. In Tagalog these were called
alipin. Africans must have arrived on the Spanish vessels across the
Pacific from Acapulco as sailors, servants and slaves. The Spanish in the
Philippines initially had their local Asian slaves, but in 1586 Philip II of
Spain proposed to slowly eliminate enslavement of his Spanish Indies
subjects by requesting all children to be born free and banning new slave
purchases. The laws proved very successful but started a trend of
purchasing foreigners (including Indians, Chinese and Malays, Koreans
and Japanese) who were not subject to the king’s laws. The Portuguese
seized the trading opportunity and brought enslaved Africans from the
Indian Ocean for sale to the Spanish in the Philippines, these were known
as esclavavos negros (negro slaves). By 1621 Africans constituted about
a third of the Intramuros population at Manila. A Little work has been done
on the African presence in the Spanish Indies in the Marianas which
suggests an African presence from at least 1602. With the termination of
Portuguese interaction, Africans disappear after 1640 and for the entire
Tokugawa period. However, it would be interesting to know of any

�evidence of Africans resident at Hirado or Deshima, or in Taiwan attached
to the Dutch presence in the East Indies.

While the European trade in Africans from the Horn of Africa decreased
the late eighteenth century saw Africans sold at Mozambique Island
arriving at Macau through the Portuguese colonies of Diu, Damman and
Goa. One of the traders was a Portuguese called Joaquim do Rosario
Monteiro (Machado, 2003).

There is no information on Africans in the Maluku Islands. Considering
their troubled history and the use of Africans as soldiers in Sri Lanka by
the Dutch since the mid-seventeenth century one would expect some
African presence in the region. Between 1831 and 1842 the Dutch
attempted to recruit no fewer than 2,200 Africans for service in their
colonial army, primarily in the Dutch East Indies. In the end they only
contracted 44 men from Elmina Castle (Ghana). But another push for men
recruited from Kumasi, mainly from non-Ashanti peoples in the North of
present-day Ghana produced 2,200 men serving 15-year contracts. While
a second attempt among the Ashanti produced 235 men. A consequence
was that this militia was composed of men from different ethnic groups
that spoke different languages. Mistrust among them was a challenge to
the Dutch. To ensure against a mutiny the Dutch distributed them into
separate companies and battalion. It appears that African liaisons with the
Javanese and Sumatrans resulted in many of them being more fluent in
Malay then Dutch. This gave them an advantage when organising
themselves and making demands for equal pay or better living standards.
By December 1841 there were 1,318 Africans in the Koninklijk
Nederlandsch-Indisch

Leger

(Royal

Netherlands-Indies

Army).

Recruitment had been vastly reduced at Africa, but in 1850 The Dutch

�decided to resume African military recruitment in Elmina and 800 were
recruited between 1860 and 1872, mainly from the Ashanti. In the Indies
they were known by the term Londo Ireng in Javanese or Belinda Hitam
(Black Dutch) in Malay. This recruitment ended in 1872 when Britain took
over the Dutch possessions in the Gold Coast (i.e. Ghana), but many of
these Africans stayed in Indonesia (mainly in Java) and married Malay
women. They also had their own area of Purworejo called Kampung
Afrikan. Here the community retained its distinct Afro-Indonesian culture.
Soldiers who lived in other areas and were simply assimilated into
Indonesian societies (van Kessel, 2008).

Around 1879 the Portuguese Governor of Timor had a battalion which
included 200 Africans who the Timorese called Falikas. The 1881 census
of Singapore includes Africans though their numbers were small (de Silva
Jayaruraya, 2008a).

Conclusion
Initially most of the Africans who came to Eastern Asia on board
Portuguese ships where from the present day Ethiopia and Eritrea,
including the Tigre and Tagaru crewmen and pagan Oromoo or Sidama.
Then increasingly from the seventeenth century onwards Africans came
from among the Makua, Yao/Nyanja, and Maravi, of Mozambique, Malawi
and Zimbabwe though the island of Mozambique from the seventeenth
centuries.

Africans arriving with the Dutch in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
initially came from West Africa, among the Akan and Dagbane language
groups in modern day Ghana, Burkina Faso. There may have been a few
Malagasy boarded at Cape Town.

�Three distinct routes to East Asia for enslaved Africans can be discerned;
the first and oldest route is from Zeila to Oman or Hormuz and on to the
Gujarat on Arab Persian or Gujarati vessels. After purchase in Gujarat the
route was through Goa to Macau and then to any Portuguese or Spanish
port. From around 1600 the route was entirely on Portuguese vessels from
Mozambique Island to Macau via Goa. The nineteenth century Dutch
route was from Elmina in Ghana to Cape Town and directly to Batavia on
Dutch vessels.

This period stands in stark contrast to previous ones for Africans and other
people of colour arriving in Eastern Asia. Formally Africans had arrived as
envoys, merchants, soldiers and slaves into a realm that was composed
roughly of the same elements of stratified society that existed in Eastern
Asia.

But the arrival of Africans with the Europeans was different. Africans of
this period (1500-1900) arrived on European ships as sailors under
European captains, or often in the entourage of the European merchants,
and Jesuit missionaries. The Chinese used the term Gui-nu (Ghost-slave)
for Africans, or in Cantonese Gui-lo (ghost man). In Japanese Africans
were called Kurobo (Lockley, 2017) or Kuronbo in the Nagasaki dialect
(Screech, 2017). So the Africans often arrived in a position subservient to
Europeans who themselves were perceived, at least by the Chinese and
Japanese, as Southern barbarians (Nanbanjin in Japanese) and therefore
below the status of the Chinese and Japanese. This is perhaps most
evident in the seventeenth century use of the Cantonese term Gui-Nu
(ghost-slave) for Africans in Guanghzhou, but also in the Japanese term
Kuronbo (black novice monk). Both of these terms place the Africans as

�subservient to the Europeans. The range of this servitude from novice or
page to slave reflected the reality.

African features and physique were clearly admired for strength (Lockley,
2017), however the subservient status that Africans held almost
everywhere in Eastern Asia (in contrast to South Asia) fed into indigenous
concepts of colour based on working status, caste, or in the case of the
Burmese, Thais, Filipinos and Taiwanese on the perception of subjugated
peoples such as the Mons, Khymers, enslaved Ternate Islanders,
Taiwanese Aboriginals or Philippine Aboriginals (Blussé, 2009) who they
thought of as Blacks. With the exception of Korea, Japan and much of
China, Asians themselves would be colonised by Europeans adding to the
stigma of dark colour, and its association with race, enhanced by the
Atlantic

Slave

Trade

and

Euro-American

concepts

of

racism.

Nevertheless, the adoption of Catholicism brought the Africans some
support from the Catholic Church that effectively managed the civic life of
both Portuguese and Spanish Asia. Friar Domingo Navarrete mentioned
the wives of the “negroes” in Macau at mass, and in 1637 Peter Mundy
mentions that these wives were Chinese slaves. So legitimate
intermarriage between Africans and Chinese took place in Macao (de
Silva Jayasuraya, 2008) and the resulting Afro-Chinese were absorbed in
the Macanese community. Little work has been done on the African
presence in the Philippines or in the Marianas, but presumably the same
Catholic system was at work.

It seems that during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the largest
concentration of Africans in Eastern Asia was at Portuguese Macau. Of
course Macau was governed from Goa which was the terminus of all

�Asian trade to and from Europe via Mozambique Island, and the African
presence in both cities continues to the present day. But foci shifted to the
Dutch city of Batavia in the nineteenth century. Africans arriving with the
Dutch were concentrated in the Batavia area, where they served the Royal
Dutch Indies Army. They married Indonesian and Luso-Indonesian
women and settled mainly in Java. In 1965 when Indonesia gained
independence the Belinda Hitam were offered Dutch citizenship and
immigrated to the Netherlands. Little work has been done on the African
presence prior to the twentieth century in French Indo-China (Laos,
Cambodia and Vietnam).

Acknowledgements
I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr. Shihan De Silva Jayasuraya
(London), Dr.Thomas Lockley (Tokyo), and Dr. Ineke Van Kessel
(Lieden).
References
Anshan, L., 2015. African diaspora in China: reality, research and
reflection. The Journal of Pan African Studies, Vol.7 (10): 10-43.
Blussé, L., 2009. The cave of the black spirits: searching for a vanished
people. In D. Blundell (Ed.), Austronesian Taiwan: Linguistics, History,
Ethnology, Prehistory, Rev. Ed., University of California, Berkeley: 134152.
Borges, C. J., 1994. The Economics of the Goa Jesuits, 1542-1759.
Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.
Botas, J. F. O., 2016. Macua 1937-45: living on the edge, economic
management over military defences. In G. Gunn (Ed.), Wartime Macau:
Under the Japanese Shadow, Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong:
55-71.

�Boxer, C. R., 1997. The Portuguese Seaborne Empire 1415-1825.
Carcanet, Lisbon.
Clarence-Smith, W. G., 2006. Islam and the Abolition of Slavery. C. Hurst
and Company, London.
de Silva Jayasuriya, S., 2008a. African Identity in Asia: Cultural Effects of
Forced Migration. Marcus Wiener Publishers, Princeton.
de Silva Jaysuriya, S., 2008b. Identifying Africans in Asia. In S. de Silva
Jaysuriya and J-P. Angenot (Eds.), Uncovering the History of Africans in
Asia, Brill, Leiden: 7-36.
de Verre Allen, J., 1993. Swahili Origins. East African Educational
Publishers, Nairobi.
Gernet, J., 1999. A History of Chinese Civilisation. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Gibb, H. A. R., 1962. The Travels of Ibn Battuta A.D. 1325-1354.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hatke, G., 2013. Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce and Political
Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York University Press, New
York.
Kim, B. R., 2008. African presence in Korea. In K. K. Prasad and J-P.
Angenot (Eds.), Tadia: The African Diaspora in Asia Explorations on a
Less Known Fact, Jana Jagrati Prakashana, Bangalore: 435-444.
Levathus, L., 1994. When China Ruled the Seas :The Treasure Fleet of
the Dragon Throne, 1405-1433. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Linschoten, J. H., 2005. The Voyage to the East Indies, Vol. 1. Elibron
Classics, London.

�Lockley,
T.,
2017.
『信長と弥助：本能寺を生き延びた黒人侍
(Nobunaga and Yasuke: The Black Samurai Who Survived the Homoji)』
Ohta Publishing, Tokyo.
Mach, J., 1986. Madagascar : Island of the Ancestors. British Museum
Publications, London.
Machado, P., 2004. A forgotten corner of the Indian ocean: Gujarati
merchants, Portuguese India and the Mozambique slave trade, 17301830. In G. Campbell (Ed.), Structure of Slavery in the Indian Ocean,
Africa and Asia, Routledge, London: 17-32.
Pankhurst, R., 2003. The Ethiopian diaspora to India: the role of Habshis
and Sidis from medieval times to the end of the eighteenth century. In S.
de Silva Jayasuraya and R. Pankhurst (Eds.), The African Diaspora in the
Indian Ocean, Africa World Press, Asmara:189-221.
Pereira, C. J., 2008. Nineteenth century European references to the
African diaspora in the Arabian peninsula. In S. de Silva Jaysuriya and JP. Angenot (Eds.), Uncovering the History of Africans in Asia, Brill, Leiden:
121-129.
Pereira, C. J., 2012. Zheng He and the African horizon: an investigative
study into the Chinese geography of early fifteenth-century eastern Africa.
In Chia Lin Sien and S. Church (Eds.), Zheng He and the Afro-Asian
World, Melaka Museums Corporation, Melaka: 248-279.
Powers, T., 2010. The Red Sea Region during the ‘Long’ Late Antiquity,
AD 500-1000. D.Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford.
Powers, T., 2012. The Red Sea from Byzantium to the Caliphate, AD 5001000. The American University in Cairo Press, Cairo.
Puga, M. G., 2013. The British Presence in Macau 1635-1793. Hong Kong
University Press, Hong Kong.

�Screech, T., 2017. The image of the black in Japanese art: from the
beginning to 1850. In D. Bindman, S. P. Blier and H. L. Gates Jr. (Eds.),
The Image of the Black in African and Asian Art. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge: 235-340.
Sequeira Antony, P., 2004. The Goa-Bahia Intra-Colonial Relations 16751825. Institute for Research in Social Sciences and Humanities MESHAR,
Tellichery.
Sutton, J., 1990. A Thousand Years of East Africa. British Institute of
Eastern Africa, Nairobi.
Tolmacheva, M., 1993. The Pate Chronicle. Michigan State University
Press, East Lansing.
van Kessel, I., 2008. Becoming Black Dutchmen: West African Soldiers in
the Dutch East Indies. In K. K. Prasad and J-P. Angenot (Eds.), Tadia:
The African Diaspora in Asia Explorations on a Less Known Fact, Jana
Jagrati Prakashana, Bangalore: 361-381.
Biography
Clifford Pereira is a Historical Geographer
specialising in ‘hidden histories’ and migrations
from and within the Indian Ocean World. A
graduate of Geography and Asian Studies from
the University of Ulster, he is a long-term fellow
of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG),
where he was also curator, consultant and
facilitator on outreach projects (2006-2013).
Pereira was Honorary Research Assistant with
Royal Holloway, University of London (2010-2013), and Visiting Assistant
Researcher for Dalian Maritime University, China (2011-2015). He is
currently a Researcher on the African collection of the Museum of
Anthropology (MOA) at UBC, Canada and specialist researcher and for
the international heritage consultancy firm Barker-Langham, London
(2008-Present).

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="26">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="94">
                  <text>2017 Session 6: History and Current Trends of Underwater Archaeology around East Asia</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="95">
                  <text>East Asia is extremely rich in underwater cultural heritage, such as conventional shipwrecks under the sea, submerged settlement sites on the bottoms of inland lakes and rivers, or prehistoric shell mounds along coastal zones.  For instance, the medieval or post-medieval aged wrecks and their cargos have recently been discovered one after another in the waters, or the underwater cultural heritage or seascape of stone tidal weir is a common cultural trait to the Ryukyu archipelago, western Japan, southern Korea, mainland China, and Formosa, which surround the East China Sea or a northern part of the Asian Mediterranean. No East Asian nation has ratified the UNESCO 2001 Convention, partly because it does not exactly correspond with oriental philosophy, it does not properly resolve the controversial issues upon sovereign immunity of warship wrecks, and so forth.  Occasionally, the principle of preservation in situ in the convention has not been the first choice as Asian waters have poor water clarity generally.  &#13;
&#13;
Nevertheless, each country has already moved forward with its own underwater archaeological policies and projects both on governmental and grassroots levels.  Some activities are in close cooperation with foreign institutions or universities.  In East Asia, document-based historical study or terrestrial archaeology has a long tradition, which has had a noteworthy impact upon underwater archaeology and its methodology.  Even in this region as well as in other Pacific areas, contrariwise, the technological advancement in underwater survey has remarkably been made recently; using remote-sensing with satellites, robotics for ROVs or AUVs, or 3D photogrammetry by computer software mitigates or cancels the limitations regarding accessibility and working time caused by underwater environment.  The tie between such modern technologies and archaeology has minted new applications and perspectives of underwater cultural heritage study.  The multi-disciplinary or holistic approaches are increasingly more and more necessary among Asian researchers.  &#13;
</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="39">
              <name>Creator</name>
              <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="96">
                  <text>Akifumi Iwabuchi&#13;
Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, Japan    </text>
                </elementText>
                <elementText elementTextId="97">
                  <text>Kotaro Yamafune                                   &#13;
APPARATUS, LLC, Japan   </text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5617">
                <text>Who Were the Africans in Eastern Asia? : The Christian European Period 1500-1900 AD </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5618">
                <text>Seaways, especially monsoonal ones, allow movement on two directions. However Eurocentric approaches have tended to create hierarchies of cultures which have biased movements in particular directions to the historical exclusion of some narratives. This is a fresh look at a cultural connection from a perspective that has evaded investigation and seeks to balance the research on Chinese interactions with Africans in Africa. Africans have been trading with Asia for hundreds of years, yet their history and presence in East Asia has been barely suggested or investigated. The role of African crewmen is an important part of this narrative and one that brings a new dimension (if not challenges) to ethnographic studies of maritime cultural landscapes and seascapes. </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5619">
                <text>Clifford Pereira </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5620">
                <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5621">
                <text>11/24/2017</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5622">
                <text>Clifford Pereira </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="44">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 6 2017</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="97" public="1" featured="0">
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1092">
                <text>Breaking Barriers: Travel and the State in Early Modern Japan</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1093">
                <text>Constantine Nomikos Vaporis</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1094">
                <text>Harvard University Asia Center</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1095">
                <text>1995-03-01</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1096">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="8">
        <name>Zotero</name>
        <description/>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="122">
            <name>Author</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1097">
                <text>Constantine Nomikos Vaporis</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="149">
            <name>Item Type</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1098">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="152">
            <name>ISBN</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1099">
                <text>0674081072</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="178">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1100">
                <text>1995-03-01</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="205">
            <name>Library Catalog</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1101">
                <text>Amazon.com</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="226">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1102">
                <text>Harvard University Asia Center</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="241">
            <name>Short Title</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1103">
                <text>Breaking Barriers</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="246">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1104">
                <text>Breaking Barriers: Travel and the State in Early Modern Japan</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="16">
        <name>Japan</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="180" public="1" featured="0">
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2221">
                <text>The Christian Topography of Cosmas, An Egyptian Monk</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2222">
                <text>Cosmas Indicopleustes</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="2223">
                <text>J.W. McCrindle</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2224">
                <text>Hakluyt Society</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2225">
                <text>1897</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2226">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="8">
        <name>Zotero</name>
        <description/>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="122">
            <name>Author</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2227">
                <text>Cosmas Indicopleustes</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="147">
            <name>Translator</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2228">
                <text>J.W. McCrindle</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="149">
            <name>Item Type</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2229">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="178">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2230">
                <text>1897</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="217">
            <name>Place</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2231">
                <text>London</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="226">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2232">
                <text>Hakluyt Society</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="246">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2233">
                <text>The Christian Topography of Cosmas, An Egyptian Monk</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="28" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="28">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/590e307c15d1d6877b22c95c5da8b1b1.pdf</src>
        <authentication>91c01c2dd35f0d663626052d3c3f67ed</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="538">
                    <text>A Model Law to Implement the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater
Cultural Heritage and its Possible Application in Plural Legal Regimes in Pacific
Small Islands States: A Case study of Solomon Islands
Craig Forrest1 and Jennifer Corrin2
Centre for Public
International and Comparative Law
TC Beirne School of Law
University of Queensland
Brisbane
Australia 4072
Email: c.forrest@law.uq.edu.au1
Email: j.corrin@law.uq.edu.au2

Abstract
A strategy for promoting the adoption of the Convention on the Protection of the
Underwater Cultural Heritage, is the adoption of a Model Law; one that also promotes
uniformity, consistency and ease of use. This, however, is a challenge in the Pacific.
Solomon Islands, for example, like most Pacific island nations, has a plural legal
regime. That is, customary law operates in conjunction with the common law, a legacy
of Solomon Islands’ colonial past. Legal pluralism raises significant difficulties for the
protection and management of cultural heritage, and is especially challenging when the
maritime areas beyond the low water mark are involved. This paper considers the
barriers to protection of underwater cultural heritage raised by legal pluralism and the
further difficulties encountered when considering Solomon Island’s possible ratification
on the 2001 Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. It
considers whether a Model Law might be a useful tool in this endeavour.
Keywords: Underwater cultural heritage, Convention, 2001, Law, Legal, Framework,
Pacific, Solomon Islands,

The underwater cultural heritage of Solomon Islands
The very nature of Pacific Island peoples means that Solomon Islands has a rich
maritime heritage. Unfortunately, few underwater remains of pre-colonial vessels have
survived, though terrestrial examples exist (van Tilburg, 2011). Indeed, the largest water
craft in the British Museum is a war canoe from New Georgia (Hess et al., 2009).
Nevertheless, other heritage, such as underwater caves and sacrificial sites used for
shark or crocodile worship, are numerous, especially in the coastal waters of certain
1

�islands, such as Malaita (Lidimani, 2011). There are also submerged islands and
villages, inundated by the changing sea levels as well as in the construction of artificial
islands such as Langa Langa Lagoon and Lau Lagoon in Malaita Province and Roviana
Lagoon in the Western Province (Guérin et al., 2010). Perhaps the most famous historic
shipwreck in Solomon Islands is that of the Boussole, commanded by Jean-François de
Galaup, Comte de La Pérouse, lost in 1788 off the island of Vanikoro. The best known
wrecks in Solomon Islands, however, are those of the Second World War. So numerous
are they that the waters between Guadalcanal and Savo and Florida Islands are known
as Iron Bottom Sound. The Protection of Wrecks and War Relics Act 1980 restrict
access to (including diving) and interference with these vessels (and aircraft) and
associated objects, subject to obtaining a licence from the relevant Ministry (Corrin and
Forrest, 2013). Such a license is only to be granted to a person who can satisfy the
Minister that they are competent and properly equipped to carry out excavation or
salvage operations in a manner appropriate to the historical importance of the wreck.
Further, limited protection is provided by the Protected Areas Act 2010. This Act defines
areas which may be declared as protected to include an area which possesses
significant ‘cultural resources’ or ‘merits protection under the Convention Concerning
the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage’ [s 10(1)]. No other national
legislation protects the remaining body of underwater cultural heritage in Solomon
Islands, and beyond its territorial sea, a problem the 2001 Underwater Cultural Heritage
Convention is designed to address.
The Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage
The Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage came into force
in 2009, almost eight years after its adoption, and currently only has 45 States parties.
Moreover, of these 45 States, few have significant underwater cultural heritage (UCH)
within their waters, and even fewer are significant maritime powers that have lost
vessels in the oceans of the world. The reasons for the slow take up of the Convention
have been dealt with elsewhere (Dromgoole, 2013) but include debate concerning the
consistency between the Convention and the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention
(Cogliati-Bantz and Forrest, 2013); the lack of immunity offered to wrecked sovereign
vessels; and the non-application of salvage law. That said, recent ‘ratifications’ do
2

�include maritime States such as France and those with significant wrecks in their
waters, such as Belgium, who together with States such as Spain, have an important
impact on the manner in which the Convention will ultimately be implemented and
applied. It is hoped that more States will follow the lead of these recent ratifications, but
for the Convention to be effective, it requires much broader participation by States,
particularly in geographical regions such as the Asia-Pacific. The Convention provides
an agreed minimum standard for recovery of UCH and sets out the jurisdictional
structures and core principles upon which the regime is built, such as noncommercialisation of this heritage, supremacy of in situ preservation, and the
encouragement of non-intrusive and non-destructive public access. But above all, the
Convention is based on the principle of State co-operation. Without such co-operation,
protection beyond the territorial sea is difficult, if not impossible. Accordingly, the
Convention can only work if all the States with an interest in a particular wreck, for
example, are party to the Convention. This problem is exacerbated in the Asia-Pacific
region given the close proximity of many different island nations, and the ability to avoid
one jurisdiction and use another as a safe-haven when directing activities at UCH.
The Convention is somewhat unusual in its structure with an Annex as an integral part
of the Convention. Whereas the Annex addresses archaeological standards in some
detail, the Convention itself is designed to set out principles, rights and duties that
require implementation, and detail, from each ratifying State. The Convention is not a
self-executing convention in the sense that is does not provide rights and duties that
can easily be incorporated into a State’s national legal system without some form of
implementing legislation that provides a detailed protective regime. The Convention, in
seeking to harmonise principles, merely provides the skeleton or framework and each
State is required to add body to that structure. There is therefore a tension inherent in
the implementation of this Convention: the need for harmonisation across jurisdictions
given that the Convention is structured on the basis of State co-operation, whilst at the
same time giving States the freedom to implement the Convention in ways that make is
workable in that particular State. The great difficulty then is to identify the best
mechanism through which these international norms, binding on each State, may be
translated and transformed into a national protective regime that is effective as the basis
3

�for State co-operation. One possible mechanism is the use of a model law that can play
a transformative role, particularly within a particular geographical region.
The transformative function of a Model Law
A model law is a legislative text that is recommended to States for enactment as part of
their national law (Faria, not dated). Model laws are used to harmonise and unify law,
and have been used by a range of international organisations, including UNESCO, UN
Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the International Institute for
the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) (Siehr, 2012). Essentially the model law sits
somewhere on the spectrum between the generality of the norms of international
conventions and the specificity of the national legislation. It plays a mediating role in the
transformation process from international norms to national law. The extent of that
process is dependent on where in that spectrum the model law is to sit. And that is
dependent on a range of factors, including the States involved in the drafting of the
model law, the specificity of the international norms themselves and the differences in
the legal structures of various implementing States (particularly in the same
geographical area where this is important to the international context, as it is in this
case). The use of model laws in this transformative role has been championed for a
number of reasons. By having a more detailed agreed upon instrument, the
implementation of the intentional norms is more likely to be applied, interpreted and
enforced consistently between jurisdictions (Pistor, 2002). Moreover, the resulting
national legislation is also more likely to achieve quality measures of legislation such as
its enforceability, consistency, comprehensibility, transparency and accessibility
(Poloko, 2012; Muylle, 2003). It also saves time in that the national drafting process is
shortened through the collective drafting of the model law. It also allows for the pooling
of expertise, particularly where the subject matter of the international norms may be of a
technical nature; as is the case with the Annex of the Convention. This is perhaps
particularly pertinent in the Pacific, given the limited number of technical experts as well
as the limited number of experienced legislative drafters. This has led to a general
failure to introduce legislation in many Pacific Islands State to meet their obligations
under regional and international conventions. This shortage prompted the member
States of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, of which Solomon Islands is one, to
4

�establish a legal drafting unit within the Forum Secretariat in 2006. Its core mandates
include provision of legislative drafting assistance to Forum countries in relation to
national legislative agendas and in response to the Pacific Plan and any other relevant
initiatives. There is already a precedent for the drafting of model laws by the Unit, as in
2008 it completed a Regional Model Law on Customs. Prior to the establishment of the
Unit, the Forum Secretariat was a partner in the drafting of the Model Law for the
Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Culture in 2002. Solomon
Islands has not yet developed national law based on this model (Pacific Islands Forum
Secretariat; not dated).
The use of model laws in drafting national legislation does, however, have
shortcomings. Model laws that lie close to national legislation in terms of specificity may
lack a certain amount of democratic legitimacy. It is “a legislative process which may be
far removed from those which it affects and in a sense negates trends towards bringing
government closer to the people by way of regionalisation and devolution” (Poloko,
2012). The risk lies in implementing a model laws that achieves international uniformity
but lacks efficacy in the national legal system. As such, in drafting a model law,
consideration needs to be given to the difficulties that might arise in giving national (or
even local) effect to the resulting national legislation. Whilst a model law is not, in itself,
a legislative instrument, and therefore need not be duplicated in its entirety in the
implementing legislation, any divergence will undermine the very purpose of the model
law: uniformity and harmonization. Nevertheless, it has the advantage of flexibility and
the ability to accommodate national variation in its implementation (Faria, not dated).
The drafting of a Model law
The quality of the national legislation that implements the model law is naturally
dependant on the quality of the model law itself. In drafting the model law, consideration
must be given to the criteria used to ascertain the legislative quality: being its
enforceability, consistency, comprehensibility, transparency, plainness, accessibility and
clarity (Poloko, 2012; Muylle, 2003). This then will also impact on the generality or
specificity of the model law. These criteria would have to be applied in the drafting of a
model law implementing the Convention in the Pacific.
5

�1. Enforceability: the model law would need to take into account the practical consideration
needed to give effect to the Conventions’ articles.
2. Consistency and Comprehensibility: the model law would need to be drafted using
concepts, language and structures that give effect to the international morns but which
are also consistent with national legal structure and legislation and can be understood in
that national context. In geographical area such as the pacific, this might necessitate a
more abstract generalised model law that take into account the differences in national
legal structures.
3. Transparency and Accessibility: requires the involvement, or at least consultation,
between the drafters of the model law and those responsible for the national drafting and
administration of the implementing legislation.

These cautionary points are particularly pertinent in the Pacific, and particularly in
relation to States such as Solomon Islands. As a case study, Solomon Islands provide a
cautionary seascape within which to consider the use and application of a model law to
implement the UCH Convention.
Implementation in legally pluralistic States: Solomon Islands
Solomon Islands, like most other Pacific Island nations, has a plural legal regime. State
law co-exists with customary laws, which are largely unwritten. Customary laws have
been given formal recognition in the Constitution, but do not depend on the State for
their validity. For many Solomon Islanders they are the only laws they will ever
encounter. There is a stark distinction between State law and customary laws. In the
customary sphere, the distinctive features of the ‘legal’ and ‘social’ orders are
inextricably intertwined. The State system, on the other hand, is based on the common
law, which is a foreign model. Its laws and legal institutions are largely legal transplants.
There is a longstanding debate in transplant theory as to whether it is only rules that are
transplanted or whether it is law and its surrounding culture. It has been argued that the
success of a transplanted law depends on the type of law involved, with culturally
specific laws being the least likely to succeed (Kahn-Freund, 1974, 5-6). In the context
of Solomon Islands, the objection to transplants is well stated by Gatu:
A Solomon Islander is a unique Melanesian, and whatever laws or regulations
are passed should be made to suit the Melanesian lifestyle. ... Too often both
6

�expatriates and Melanesians (especially politicians) make the same mistakes
over and over again by trying to implant or impose foreign laws and concepts on
Melanesians and expect them to adhere to such changes with a wave of the
magic wand (1977: 98)
Model laws are subject to many of the same objections as legal transplants, in that they
are not drafted specifically for a country. However, unlike transplants, a model law is not
intended to be applied blindly, without modification or supplementation to accommodate
local circumstances. However, like transplants, model laws are particularly problematic
in plural legal regimes. It is not only the cultural setting of the law that may differ, but
also the legal setting. Each of the two legal systems may prescribe a different rule for
the same situation. Each may also differ in its approach to process and proof, the
appropriate relief and the penalties which may be imposed. Enforceability may also be
an issue, particularly given the logistics of Solomon Islands. In practice, particularly in
remote areas, traditional leaders may be the only effective authority.
Where legal systems overlap, care must be taken not to introduce laws which will
exacerbate tensions between the different systems. This is particularly the case where
State and customary norms are radically different, which may well be the case in
relation to cultural heritage. The complexities arising from legal pluralism in this area are
well illustrated by the disagreement of State and traditional authorities over ownership of
the land (or sea) on which tangible cultural heritage is situated or through which it may
be accessed. The State law is contained in the Land and Titles Act (Cap 133) and the
common law, constituted by decisions of Solomon Islands courts. The Act
acknowledges the supremacy of customary laws in relation to customary land (which
constitutes 87% of the total land area). It states that, ‘The manner of holding, occupying,
using, enjoying and disposing of customary land shall be in accordance with the current
customary usage applicable thereto, and all questions relating thereto shall be
determined accordingly’ [s 239(1)]. However the legislation does not expressly state
whether ‘customary land’ includes reefs or foreshore, and recourse must therefore be
had to the common law on this point.

7

�Unfortunately, the cases are conflicting. At one time, the High Court regarded the issue
as governed by the common law, and accordingly, areas below high watermark were
regarded as belonging to the Crown (Allardyce v Laore 1990). However, according to
the latest High Court decision (Combined Fera Group v Attorney General 1997) reefs
and foreshore may be under customary management if it can be proved that this was
the case prior to 1 January 1969. This means that if customary owners have undisputed
evidence that they owned an area on which cultural heritage is situated or accessed
before that date they may be able to establish a legal right to ownership. Customary
laws differ significantly from place to place in Solomon Islands, so it is not possible to
state categorically what these laws say about reef and foreshore. One fundamental
point of difference is that ‘ownership’ is not an adequate term to describe the rights and
obligations of members of customary society regarding their land, which are intimately
bound up in an intricate web of relationships. The customary concept of land-holding
recognises multi-layered rights of ownership and use. It may be more accurate to refer
to ‘rights to use’ than to ownership, but even this does not give the full picture (Corrin,
2008). What can be said is that customary land tenure includes tenure of the land below
high water mark. Such tenure carries with it the right to control the use of the marine
area and resources, including heritage resources. Solomon Islands Law Reform
Commission has considered this matter in some detail. The Commission’s 2012 report
recommends amending the definition of customary land in the Land and Titles Act to
include land below the low watermark up to the limit of Provincial boundaries ([1.26]). It
also recommends abolishing the need to prove ownership prior to 1 January 1969 and
relying on proof of current customary usage ([1.26]). To date, these recommendations
have not been implemented. If implemented they will have significant consequences for
the national government in attempting to implement the Convention in its territorial
waters below the high watermark. Another important aspect of legal (and cultural)
pluralism to be taken into account is the authority of traditional chiefs, who play a rule
not only in making, but also in administering and enforcing customary laws. The
Constitution of Solomon Islands puts an onus on Parliament to legislate for the inclusion
of traditional chiefs in provincial governance (s 114).

8

�Provincial governments
It is also important to bear in mind that legislative reform in Solomon Islands may be in
the form of national or provincial legislation. Provincial governments may make laws in
the form of ordinances on matters devolved to provinces or ‘incidental to or
consequential on’ such matters (s 31(1)). Devolved areas include ‘Historical remains’
(Provincial Government Act 1997, Sch 3, para 2). In the original Act, passed in 1981,
the Protection of Wrecks and War Relics Act 1980 was excluded from the devolved
powers. The extent of this exclusion is unclear, but this is now academic as it does not
appear in the 1997 Act. Provincial Ordinances only have effect within the province, and
provincial governments are specifically precluded from making laws affecting Solomon
Islands’ international obligations (s 31(4)). Nevertheless, given the political and practical
importance of provincial governments, it is important to bear their role in mind when
drafting model laws. It is also necessary to take into account the existing provincial
initiatives. Guadalcanal and Western Province both have policy frameworks on culture,
although these are fairly rudimentary (Guadalcanal Policy Statement on Culture 1987;
Western Province Policy on Culture 1989). However, five provinces have Ordinances
providing some degree of protection for cultural heritage. These are the Guadalcanal
Province Protection of Historic Places Ordinance 1985; the Malaita Province
Preservation of Culture Ordinance 1995; the Makira-Ulawa Council (Prevention of the
Sale of Traditional Artifacts) Bylaws 1977; the Temotu Province Preservation of Culture
Ordinance 1993; and the Western Province Preservation of Culture Ordinance 1989.
The Moli Ward Chiefs Council Ordinance 2010 provides a more recent and locally
specific example of a piece of sui generis legislation, drafted within Guadalcanal
Province to regulate the use of ‘traditional practices or heritage’. This is defined to
include, ‘song, chant, dance costume or clothing, ritual, ceremonial object or practice,
folklore, painting, carving, art, weapon, architecture, traditional knowledge and any other
authentic activity or object attributed to the customs and traditions of Moli Ward.’
Conclusion
While sui generis legal solutions are always the preferred option, the drafting of a Model
Law for the implementation of the Convention in the Pacific has much to offer. It is both
9

�resource and time efficient and its inherent flexibility in its transformative role is capable
of addressing individual State’s particular circumstances. That’s said, the drafting a
Model Law with sufficient flexibility to address the distinctive features of a State such as
Solomon Islands is not without significant challenges. Solomon Islands’ rich cultural
heritage, illustrated by its linguistic and tribal diversity (there are, for example, 65
different languages in Solomon Islands), and the peculiar nature of its legal and social
systems, requires input from Solomon Islanders as well as from technical experts on
maritime archaeology and the functioning of the Convention.
References
Allardyce v Laore [1990] SILR 174
Combined Fera Group v Attorney General (Unreported, High Court, Solomon Islands,
Palmer J, 19 November 1997)
Cogliati-Bantz, B., and Forrest, C., 2013. Consistent: The Convention on the Protection
of the Underwater Cultural Heritage and the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea. Cambridge International and Comparative law Journal, Vol. 2 (3): 1-26.
Corrin, J., 2008. Customary Land and the Language of the Common Law. Common
Law World Review, Vol. 37: 305 - 333.
Dromgoole, S., 2013. Reflections on the Position of the Major Maritime Powers with
Respect to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural
Heritage. Marine Policy, Vol. 38: 116-123.
Faria, J. A. E., Legal Harmonization through model laws: The experience of the United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), retrieved 28 December
2013, from
http://www.justice.gov.za/alraesa/conferences/2005sa/papers/s5_faria2.pdf.
Forrest, C., and Corrin, J., 2013. Legal Pluralism in the Pacific: Solomon Island’s World
War II Heritage. International Journal of Cultural Property, Vol. 20: 1-21.
Gatu, B., 1977. Dispute settlement in the Solomon Islands. In G. Powles, R. Crocombe,
and M. Pulea, (Ed.), Pacific Courts and Justice, Institute of Pacific Studies, Fiji: 98-100.
Guérin, U., Egger, B., and Penalva, V., 2010. Underwater Cultural Heritage in Oceania.
UNESCO, Paris.
Hess, M., Robson, S., Miller, F. S., Were, G., Hviding, E., and Berg, A. C., 2009.
Niabara - The Western Solomon Islands war canoe at the British Museum - 3D
documentation, virtual reconstruction and digital repatriation. Berg, Arne Cato 2009 15th
International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia: proceedings: VSMM 2009
Vienna
Austria,
retrieved
15
December
2013,
from
http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1305320/1/1305320.pdf.
10

�Kahn-Freund, O., 1974. Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law. Modern Law Review,
Vol. 37 MLR: 1 - 27.
Lidimani, D. B., 2011. Cultural Mapping Report: Solomon lslands. Secretariat of the
Pacific Community, Fiji.
Muylle, K. J., 2002. Improving the Effectiveness of Parliamentary legislative procedures.
Statute Law Review, Vol. 24 (3): 169-186.
Poloko, L., 2012. Drafting of legislation in compliance with model laws. LLM Thesis,
Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London.
Siehr, K., 2012. Model Laws for Implementing International Conventions - The
Implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property. Max Planck
Private Law Research Paper No. 12/25.
Solomon Islands Law Reform Commission., 2012. Review of the Law that Applies to
Land below High Water Mark and Low Water Mark (Solomon Islands Law Reform
Commission, 2012).
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat. Legislative Drafting, retrieved 8 January 2014, from
http://www.forumsec.org/pages.cfm/political-governance-security/legislative-drafting/.
Van Tilburg, H., 2011. Historic Period Ships in the Pacific Ocean. In A. Catsambis, B.
Ford and D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Maritime Archaeology, Oxford
University Press, Oxford
Watson, A., 1976. Legal Transplants and Law Reform. Law Quarterly Review,Vol.79- 84
Biography
Craig Forrest is a reader in law and Director of the Marine and Shipping Law Unitat the
University of Queensland. He was a member of the South African UNESCO delegation
that drafted and adopted the 2001 Convention and has participated in a number of
UNESCO workshops on the implementation of the Convention. In 2013 he assisted in
drafting a Model Law for the implementation of the Convention in the Caribbean. He is a
member of the International Law Association's Cultural Heritage Law Committee and is
editor of the Australian and New Zealand Maritime Law Journal.
Jennifer Corrin is Director of the Centre for Public, International and Comparative Law,
University of Queensland, and currently an Australian Research Council Future Fellow
undertaking research on law reform and development in plural legal regimes. Jennifer
has published in the areas of South Pacific law, customary law, human rights, court
systems, evidence, land law, constitutional law and contract. Current projects include
the status of French law in former colonies; carbon rights in Melanesia; and legal
pluralism and theories of law. Jennifer is on the Editorial Boards of the Journal of Legal
Pluralism, and the Journal of South Pacific Law.

11

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="18">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="64">
                  <text>Session 15: Legal Framework for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="49">
              <name>Subject</name>
              <description>The topic of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="65">
                  <text>Video interview with Session 15 chair Dr. Craig Forrest.</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="66">
                  <text>The legal framework for the protection of the underwater cultural heritage has gained momentum throughout the Asia-Pacific with a number of States turning their attention to this issue. For some this is due to concerns raised though specific incidents that have damaged or destroyed the underwater cultural heritage or the information that could be gleaned from its excavation, whilst for others, it follows from consideration being given to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.&#13;
This session considers the Legal Framework for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage in a number of Asia-Pacific states. The objectives of session are to explore the various national approaches and to seek aspects of commonality and uniformity that provide frameworks for other state that have not yet addressed the issue. </text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="39">
              <name>Creator</name>
              <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="67">
                  <text>Dr. Craig Forrest </text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="533">
                <text>A Model Law to Implement the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage and its Possible Application in Plural Legal Regimes in Pacific Small Islands States: A Case study of Solomon Islands</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="534">
                <text>A strategy for promoting the adoption of the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, is the adoption of a Model Law; one that also promotes uniformity, consistency and ease of use. This, however, is a challenge in the Pacific. Solomon Islands, for example, like most Pacific island nations, has a plural legal regime. That is, customary law operates in conjunction with the common law, a legacy of Solomon Islandsâ€™ colonial past. Legal pluralism raises significant difficulties for the protection and management of cultural heritage, and is especially challenging when the maritime areas beyond the low water mark are involved. This paper considers the barriers to protection of underwater cultural heritage raised by legal pluralism and the further difficulties encountered when considering Solomon Islandâ€™s possible ratification on the 2001 Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. It considers whether a Model Law might be a useful tool in this endeavour.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="535">
                <text>Craig Forrest</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="536">
                <text>Jennifer Corrin, in Van Tilburg, H., Tripati, S., Walker Vadillo, V., Fahy, B., and Kimura, J. (eds.)</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="537">
                <text>5/20/2014</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="7">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 15 2014</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="449" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="244">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/d1bf79948ef8c5ea4ab6bfbb0ab452b3.mp4</src>
        <authentication>a92049f3f62334ebc016ebec566e7107</authentication>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="18">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="64">
                  <text>Session 15: Legal Framework for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="49">
              <name>Subject</name>
              <description>The topic of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="65">
                  <text>Video interview with Session 15 chair Dr. Craig Forrest.</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="66">
                  <text>The legal framework for the protection of the underwater cultural heritage has gained momentum throughout the Asia-Pacific with a number of States turning their attention to this issue. For some this is due to concerns raised though specific incidents that have damaged or destroyed the underwater cultural heritage or the information that could be gleaned from its excavation, whilst for others, it follows from consideration being given to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.&#13;
This session considers the Legal Framework for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage in a number of Asia-Pacific states. The objectives of session are to explore the various national approaches and to seek aspects of commonality and uniformity that provide frameworks for other state that have not yet addressed the issue. </text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="39">
              <name>Creator</name>
              <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="67">
                  <text>Dr. Craig Forrest </text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="3">
      <name>Moving Image</name>
      <description>A series of visual representations that, when shown in succession, impart an impression of motion.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5315">
                <text>Video interview with Session 15 chair Craig Forrest.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5316">
                <text>The legal framework for the protection of the underwater cultural heritage has gained momentum throughout the Asia-Pacific with a number of States turning their attention to this issue. For some this is due to concerns raised though specific incidents that have damaged or destroyed the underwater cultural heritage or the information that could be gleaned from its excavation, whilst for others, it follows from consideration being given to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. &#13;
This session considers the Legal Framework for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage in a number of Asia-Pacific states. The objectives of session are to explore the various national approaches and to seek aspects of commonality and uniformity that provide frameworks for other state that have not yet addressed the issue. &#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5317">
                <text>Craig Forrest </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="5318">
                <text>6/12/2014</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="7">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 15 2014</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="542" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="333">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/ec28e12b41c45c37b9eb472c7d3cc427.pdf</src>
        <authentication>4b983e86c60a5911c3b8876bd21a7003</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="6070">
                    <text>Motivating and Enabling Pacific States to Ratify the 2001 UCH
Convention
Dennis Marita (Director of the Culture Division at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism,Solomon
Islands)
Ellen Lekka (UNESCO, Samoa)
Craig Forrest (University of Queensland)
ABSTRACT
Ratifications of the 2001 UCH Convention by Pacific States has been poor. Using Solomon Islands and the Marshall Islands
as case studies, this paper begins by considering the utility of the 2001 UCH Convention for these States before turning to the
difficulties and challenges in enabling ratification. These include not only capacity issues but also the extent to which
ratification requires amendment of existing laws and broader policy issues relating, for example, to tourism and international
relations.
KEYWORDS: Solomon Islands; Marshall Islands; UNESCO

INTRODUCTION
There are 15 States widely regarded as Pacific States - Federated States of Micronesia
(FSM), Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu,
Samoa, Tonga, Tuvalu, New Zealand, Cook Islands and Niue – and a number of territories
belonging to Australia, United States and France. Of these Pacific States only two have ratified
the 2001 UCH Convention: FSM and Nuie. With 72 States Party to the 2001 UCH Convention,
this is a significant under-representation. The more so when considering the extent of the
maritime zones (exclusive economic zones and continental shelf) of these States, which together
make up the largest maritime domain in the world’s largest ocean. This non-participation was
reflected in the negotiations that led to the 2001 UCH Convention at which only New Zealand,
Papua New Guinea and Samoa attended at least one of the four negotiation meeting; the remaining
States did not attend at all.
UNESCO has sought to educate, facilitate and encourage Pacific States to engage with and ultimately
ratify the 2001 UCH Convention. So far this has had limited immediate success. The resulting underrepresentation is not, however, confined to the 2001 UCH Convention, but across all the
UNESCO Cultural Heritage Conventions. None are party to the 1954 Convention for the Protection
of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict or the 1970 Convention on the Means of
Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.
Of the only three UN Member States not party to the World Heritage Convention, two are from the
Pacific – Nauru and Tuvalu. Moreover, other than New Zealand, no Pacific State has more than one
World heritage site, and some – Cook Islands, Niue, Samoa and Tonga – have none. And while all
are party to the 2003 Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention, engagement in that Convention is
also limited, with only four States having a single item each on the World List – FSM, Samoa,
Tonga and Vanuatu; the rest have none.
In this broader heritage contest, the lack of representation in the World Heritage and
Intangible Cultural Heritage lists is both a function of the increasingly complicated processes for
nomination, and the concern that Pacific States do not have the resources to effectively manage and
protect significant heritage that is subject to the relevant international Convention and the obligations
contained therein. It is clear that a lack of human and financial resources constrain the ability of
Pacific States to act. It is thus worth contextualising this by noting that the bottom seven positions of
the 207 listed States in the World Bank’s 2021 ranking by GDP were taken up by Pacific States:
Tonga, FSM, Marshall Islands, Palau, Kiribati, Nauru and in last place Tuvalu (World Bank 2012).
Not surprising many of the Pacific
1

�States are also the smallest in the World by pollution, with all but New Zealand and Papua New
Guinea having a pollution of less than 1 million, and in some cases considerably less. Palau has a
population of around 18,000; Tuvalu 12,000 and Nauru 11,000 (Worldometer 2023). As a region,
Oceania has the lowest pollution in the world with a total of less than 20 million, spread over the
largest maritime domain (UN World Pollution Prospects 2002).
Against the backdrop, there are a range of underlying reasons for a lack of interest in the 2001 UCH
Convention. In the context of current challenges faced by Pacific States, UCH is not a priority on the
political and national agenda and not surprisingly there is “a lack of visibility, public support and
understanding of the values attached to UCH, and the incompatibility with economic development
projects.” (Nikishiwa 2017, 20) There is also a basic lack of understanding of the convention and
uncertainty as to its relation with the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
This paper considers the difficulties Pacific States face in the process of considering ratification of the
2001 UCH Convention through a review of two case studies – Solomon Islands and Marshall Islands.
ADVANTAGES OF RATIFICATION
The Pacific States were born by seafarers undertaking significant feats of seamanship and navigation
over hundreds of years beginning as far back as 3,500 years ago. Little has been found of the physical
remains of these endeavours, but better technology and a greater emphasis on Pacific indigenous
heritage bods well for the future. Much more recently, the western age of exploration, colonialisation
and a world war have left UCH across the Pacific. Not only is this historically and archaeologically
important heritage but is of great tourism potential and requires sustainable management.
The 2001 UCH Convention provides the bedrock upon which this UCH can be managed. It contains
an internationally agreed legal framework supported by international best practice in maritime
archaeology. Perhaps more importantly, the 2001 UCH Convention is essentially a framework for
State cooperation, including in the sharing of information, training and in the use and transfer of
relevant technology. Only through ratification and ‘membership’ as States Parties, can a State engage
in deliberations about UCH in an international context; participate in the UNESCO organs of the 2001
UCH Convention, particularly in the Scientific and Technical Advisory Body and have access to the
UCH Fund that supports various activities, including training, workshops, public awareness
raising and technical missions.
There is little cost to ratification, with representation the only direct cost, and that, in any event, is a
matter for each State to decide as to the level of participation. The only indirect cost is the law reform
required to ensure a State gives effect to its international obligations arising out of the 2001 UCH
Convention.
Despite these obvious advantages, Pacific States have not ratified the 2001 UCH Convention. The case
of Solomon Islands and Marshall Island may highlight some of the reasons for this.
SOLOMON ISLANDS
The UCH resources of the Solomon Islands includes caves and sacrificial sites used for shark or
crocodile worship, submerged villages and artificial islands, historic shipwrecks including the
remains from La Perouse expedition of 1788, and famously, hundreds of planes and shipwrecks
2

�resulting from the fierce battles of the WWII. Indeed, Iron Bottom Sound, between Guadalcanal and
Savo Islands, is so named because of the number of WWII wrecks lying there. It is a particularly
popular dive tourism site.
UNESCO’s bid to encourage ratification of the 2001 UCH Convention in the Pacific began shortly
after it came into force in 2009. UNESCO organised an inter-governmental meeting in Honiara,
Solomon Islands, attended by representatives of Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Palau, Papua New
Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu (Takahashi 2011, 6). It was designed to
stimulate interest and assist States in ratifying the 2001 UCH Convention; reinforce existing cooperation in the Asia Pacific Region and set up new linkages for the protection and management of
UCH.
While useful in that it introduced the 2001 UCH Convention to Pacific States, little came of this
meeting. UNESCO did publish Underwater Cultural Heritage in Oceania in 2010 to raise awareness
within the region, and a Feasibility Study on a Pacific UCH Capacity Building programme did follow,
but nothing appears to have come of that (Mckinnon and Kimura 2012). Pacific States did not show
any real interest in pursuing ratification.
In 2021 UNESCO (author Ellen Lekka) and contracted consultants (author Craig Forrest, together
with Matthew Carter and Ole Varmer) organised a consultation workshop on the 2001 UCH
Convention in the Solomon Islands over two days: 23–24 June, bringing together key stakeholders
representing government, industry, development partners and international experts to discuss possible
ratification of the 2001 UCH Convention. A draft Gap Analysis was prepared to compare Solomon
Islands’ legislation to the requirements of the 2001 UCH Convention, as well as a National Interest
Analysis detailing the benefits and obligations should Solomon Islands ratify. At that meeting, the
Director of the Culture Division at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (author Dennis Marita), spoke
about the importance of the ocean to Solomon Islanders’ identity, he declared that “Solomon Islands is
a maritime country, and a great part of its heritage and history is based on the ocean”. The Director
also expressed the desire of the Solomon Islands Government to ratify the 2001 UCH Convention.
This has yet to happen, and a number of reasons might explain why.
While the 2001 UCH Convention does not impose significant obligations on States Parties, each State
does need to ensure that its legislation is capable of giving effect to these obligations. The extent to
which each State can respond to this obligation is both a function of the complexity and modernity of
its existing legislation and its capacity to amend that legislation or introduce new legislation. The
Solomon Islands Gap Analysis revealed that the existing law applicable to wrecks, salvage and
maritime jurisdiction (Shipping Act 1998; Protection of Wrecks and War Relics Act 1980) required
some amendment, as did aspects of related legislation such as the Environment Act 1998 and
Protected Areas Act 2010; though these do provide a sound footing for the implementation of the 2001
UCH Convention – subject to minor amendments. In many respects, while the needs for amendments
were modest, the task of coordinating these across multiple legislative instruments (and relevant
departments) is time consuming and requires dedicated human resources. Indeed, the age of some of
the legislation that required amendment (eg. Protection of Wrecks and War Relics Act 1980) attests to
the difficulty in generally keeping legislation contemporary and up to date. The main recommendation
from the Gap Analysis was the adoption of a new stand-alone legislative instrument to give effect to
the 2001 UCH Convention. Given that the 2001 UCH Convention provides the framework this should
not be a particularly difficult legislative instrument to draft but it does require time and resources and a
certain level of subject matter expertise.
3

�Time and resources that are not easily directed to heritage, especially heritage like UCH, which is out
of sight and not immediately relevant to much of the population, whose cultural traditions often favour
intangible heritage (Jeffrey et al 2021, 137). This is hardly surprising when considering issues such as
climate change and other threats that challenge a State’s very existence. As such, attempts to address
issues related to heritage are often tagged on to broader issues such as sustainable development. And
these all compete for limited resources.
The nature of UCH in Solomon Islands may also play a role, in that the most obvious examples of
UCH are not indigenous Solomon Islander heritage, but rather that from World War II (Forrest and
Corrin 2013). It is often perceived in tourism terms and as a financial commodity, rather than genuine
heritage. At the very least the idea of it being heritage does exist because of the emphasis placed on it
by the two belligerent States: Japan and Untied States. That this heritage will not in fact fall within the
scope of the 2001 UCH Convention until the early 2040s is not always appreciated and therefore
coloured the view they have of the 2001 UCH Convention as to its role in Solomon Islands.
Solomon Islands has also not fared well in terms of its engagement with other international cultural
heritage regimes. In 1998, East Rennell was inscribed on the World Heritage List. At the time, the
World Heritage Committee noted that adequate long-term legislative, regulatory or institutional
protection was not in place. Nevertheless, the property was inscribed on the list with a number of
recommendations made to address these issues, but Solomon Islands failed to address them and, in
2003, the property formally entered the non-compliance response system, and in 2013, placed on the
List of World Heritage in Danger where it remains (Hamman and Hølleland 2023, 98-99). This
illustrates the significant capacity challenges faced in all areas of cultural heritage management and
does not bode well for UCH without external assistance.

MARSHALL ISLANDS
Having been discovered by around 2000 years ago, the Marshallese archipelago, with 1225 islands
and islets, is vast. The settlement of this archipelago required extraordinary navigational skills and
seaworthy craft. While little physical remains of this early seafaring have been discovered, other
traditional sites demonstrate the intimacy Marshallese have with the ocean, including coral reef heads
featured in traditional oral history and ancient fish traps, some of which are still in use today. The
UCH resources of the Marshall Islands also extend to the Japanese and United States wreckage of
WWII; and the material evidence of nuclear testing at Bikini Atoll (Naone 2011, 1).
The notion of cultural heritage in Marshall Islands appears to be coloured by its association with the
United States. After achieving self-governance in 1979, the Marshall Islands entered into a Compact
of Free Association with the United States which allowed, amongst many things, for the Historic
Preservation Office to continue its roles as provided for in the 1966 U.S. National Historic
Preservation Act. Indeed, four sites are listed on the US National Register of Historic Places: Kwajalein
Island Battlefield, Roi-Namur Battlefield, Debrum House and Marshall Islands War Memorial Park
(Forrest and Jeffrey 2018). In 1991, the Historic Preservation Act was adopted by the Nitijela as a
response to the perceived legal vacuum in relation to indigenous Marshallese historic preservation.
This included submerged cultural heritage and was followed by the adoption of Regulations
Governing Access to Prehistoric and Historic Submerged Resources. These provide for a reasonable

4

�protective regime, though difficult to enforce given the vast distances involved and the limit
enforcement capability (Naone 2011, 1 and 5).
Whilst there was therefore some recognition of the importance of UCH, the Marshall Islands was not
engaged in the negotiations that lead to the 2001 UCH Convention. Importantly though, it was
engaged with the World Heritage Convention and in 2010 the Bikini Atoll Nuclear Test Site was
inscribed on the World Heritage List; including the ships that were sunk during the 67 nuclear tests
that took place there. These form an integral part of the World Heritage site and are the only UCH
specifically protected in Marshall Islands. However, these wrecks are not only cultural resources but
also an environmental threat. Other than the affect that atomic tests have had, and continue to have, on
these wrecks, a number still have potentially polluting bunker fuel on board, and some still have
unexpended ordinance, requiring intervention (Forrest and Jeffrey 2018, 61-64).
As part of its commitment to educate, facilitate and encourage States to ratify the 2001 UCH
Convention, UNESCO commissioned desk-based reports on the State of the legislative framework and
UCH related programme in the five States of Micronesia – including Marshall Islands (Forrest and
Jeffrey 2018). The key recommendation was that Marshall Islands become a party and adopt a new
Act to give effect to the Convention, at the same time making consequential amendments to the
Historic Preservation Act, Regulation and Control of Shipping Act and Wrecks and Salvage Act, and
others as appropriate. In 2021, this was followed by a more detailed consideration of this legislative
framework together with a draft National Interest Analysis and a two-day workshop (7-8 December
2021) together with educational material, based on the model used for the work undertaken the
previous year for Solomon Islands.
The recommendations arising out of that work were substantially similar to those for Solomon Islands:
ratification of the 2001 UCH Convention with consequential, but limited, amendments to a range of
legislation and the adoption of a new stand-alone legislative instrument to give effect to the 2001 UCH
Convention. As yet, no action appears to have been taken following this work and recommendations.
Trite, but again the underlying cause is a lack of resources.
SUSTAINED INSTITUTIONAL AND STATES PARTIES ASSISTANCE
Both Solomon Islands and Marshall Islands would benefit from ratification of the 2001 UCH
Convention and both States appear eager to do so. The inevitable effect of consultants working
remotely with no ongoing relationship with those in the States responsible for progressing the path to
ratification has begun to toll on the momentum generated by the work undertaken in the past two
years. Given these States’ significant financial and capacity constraints, and where cultural heritage
issues are a low priority given the geo-political and environmental challenges being addressed, it is
difficult to criticise lack of progress. It thus falls to those assisting these States to persist in ongoing
dialogue, and perhaps just a little bit of pressure, to ensure that momentum does not falter and fade
entirely. There is thus a role to play for organisations such as UNESCO Pacific Office, Pacific Islands
Museum Association, International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) - both ICOMOS
Pacifika and ICOMOS International Committee on Underwater Cultural Heritage), and the Pacific
Heritage Hub at University of the South Pacific. All have an interest in assisting these States, but there
appears to be little coordination and sharing of the load, in part because these organisations too face
resourcing constraints. Perhaps what is needed is a more coordinated approach with one organisation
that takes the lead and coordinates the efforts of all other organisations with an interest in the
protection and management of the Pacific UCH.
5

�The 2001 UCH Convention (article 2(2)) is, above all, a cooperative regime and States Parties are
bound to cooperate as a fundamental principle of this regime. Australia is edging close to ratification.
In 2018, the federal government adopted the Underwater Cultural Heritage Act that is consistent with
the 2001 UCH Convention and will allow for Australia to fulfil its obligations following ratification.
In March 2003 the Federal government’s Joint Standing Committee on Treaties concluded its hearing
and report on the 2001 UCH Convention by recommending ratification. If, as is now highly likely,
ratification will take place, Australia will owe obligations to other States Parties, and if those were
Pacific States, the benefits of having a relatively well resourced and highly skilled neighbour would be
of significant benefit. Pacific States would do well to follow an Australian ratification.

Bibliography
Forrest, Craig and Corrin, Jennifer. “Legal Pluralism in the Pacific: Solomon Island’s World War II Heritage” International
Journal of Cultural Property 20 (2013): 1-21.
Forrest, Craig and Jeffrey, Bill. UNESCO Report: Underwater Cultural Heritage (UCH)-related legislation and
programme review in the five countries in Micronesia United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization,
2018.
Guerin, Ulrike, Egger, Barbara and Penalva, Vindha. Underwater Cultural Heritage in Oceania. Paris: UNESCO, 2010.
Hamman, Evan and Hølleland, Herdis. Implementing the World Heritage Convention. Cheltham (UK): Edward Elgar Press,
2023.
Jeffrey, Bill, McKinnon Jennifer F. and Van Tilburg, Hans. “Underwater cultural Heritage in the Pacific: Themes and Future
Directions.” International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies 17, no. 2 (2021): 135-168.
Mckinnon, Jennifer F. and Kimura, Jun. Feasibility Study on a Pacific Underwater Cultural Heritage Capacity Building
Programme. Paris: UNESCO, 2012.
Naone, Mary Jane. The Underwater Cultural Heritage of the Marshall Islands; A Discussion of the Resources, the
Legislation, the Community, Protection and Preservation. The MUA Collection, 2011
http://www.themua.org/collections/items/show/1185
Nishikawa, Chihiro. “Underwater Cultural Heritage in Asia Pacific and UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the
Underwater Cultural Heritage.” International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies 17, no. 2 (2021): 15-38.
Takahashi, Akatsuki. “UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage and the Pacific Small
Island Developing States (SIDS).” The MUA Collection, 2011 http://www.themua.org/collections/items/show/1575
World Bank Gross Domestic Product 2021 https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/GDP.pdf
Worldometer 2023
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/
UN World Pollution Prospects 2002: Summary of Results
https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf

6

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="53">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="283">
                  <text>2023 Session 17: The 2001 Convention: from ‘constructive ambiguities’ to ‘destructive misunderstandings’</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="49">
              <name>Subject</name>
              <description>The topic of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="284">
                  <text>Session 17 papers</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="285">
                  <text>Papers presented at Session 17 of the 2023 Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage&#13;
</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="39">
              <name>Creator</name>
              <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="286">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="45">
              <name>Publisher</name>
              <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="287">
                  <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="40">
              <name>Date</name>
              <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="288">
                  <text>November 2023</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="47">
              <name>Rights</name>
              <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="289">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="44">
              <name>Language</name>
              <description>A language of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="290">
                  <text>English</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="91">
              <name>Rights Holder</name>
              <description>A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="291">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6061">
                <text>Motivating and Enabling Pacific States to Ratify the 2001 UCH&#13;
Convention</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6062">
                <text>Ratifications of the 2001 UCH Convention by Pacific States has been poor. Using Solomon Islands and the Marshall Islands&#13;
as case studies, this paper begins by considering the utility of the 2001 UCH Convention for these States before turning to the&#13;
difficulties and challenges in enabling ratification. These include not only capacity issues but also the extent to which&#13;
ratification requires amendment of existing laws and broader policy issues relating, for example, to tourism and international&#13;
relations.&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6063">
                <text>Dennis Marita</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="6064">
                <text>Ellen Lekka</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="6065">
                <text>Craig Forrest</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6066">
                <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6067">
                <text>2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6068">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="80">
            <name>Bibliographic Citation</name>
            <description>A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible.</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6069">
                <text>Marita, Dennis, Ellen Lekka, and Craig Forrest. 2023.  “Motivating and enabling Pacific States to ratify the 2001 Convention.” Edited by Jennifer Craig, Jay Mok, T. Kurt Knoerl, and Mariano Azna. In Proceedings of Fifth Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage: Gwangju, The Republic of Korea, November 13-18 2023. The Museum of Underwater Archaeology. URL: https://apconf.omeka.net/exhibits/show/apconfproceedings/item/1911 </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="57">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 17 2023</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="544" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="335">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/88a6a949dfd7178bd3445fe4eb22138a.pdf</src>
        <authentication>16dcbcccbbb8647d5df1433c10710ac7</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="6086">
                    <text>THE SOCIAL HISTORY OF ARTEFACTS AND THE LAW IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
Professor Craig Forrest (University of Queensland, Director, Marine and Shipping Law Unit)
ABSTRACT
The loading of objects on a vessel, their loss, then physical discovery, recovery and subsequent movement, all
take place in a legal context. That context is not static and cannot be viewed entirely in hindsight from the now.
In unravelling the legal rights and interest to recovered objects the inter-temporal nature of the law requires
consideration and possible application. Moreover, irrespective of what law applies at any given time, this
intertemporal legal context reflects evolving values and is part of the object’s social history. This paper examines
this intertemporal nature of salvage law and other related laws as they might apply to objects recovered in
Southeast Asia over the past 40 years.

THE COLLECTION
The Abbott Collection comprises approximately 2300 ceramics purchased by a private collector from
antique markets in Indonesia and Singapore between 1966 and 2016. The collection has never been
catalogued but is believed to include ceramics from a wide range of South-East Asian States, including
Thailand, China, Indonesia and Viet Nam, with some dating from at least the 9th century
(Polkinghorne 2022, 11-12).
As collectables, these ceramics have little or no provenience or provenance other than, in some cases,
the identity of the seller in Indonesia or Singapore. Marine encrustations and glaze condition, together
with information provided by the antique sellers in some cases, suggests that most were recovered
from shipwrecks in Indonesian waters. Otherwise, little is known about these ceramics. They could,
however, reveal much about the Maritime Silk Route and the entities involved. In investigating these
ceramics, the project seeks to establish the ceramics “original cultural and historical contexts and to
re-establish links to their communities of origin” (Polkinghorne 2022, 12). This entails undertaking
provenience and provenance research and linking the collection with communities with verifiable links
to each ceramic. That link could be the place of manufacture, the place of loading on board the ship,
the nationality of the ship and or its owners, or the place of its sinking. That link could also include
those who recovered the ceramics from the shipwrecks, facilitated its movement to market, and
ultimately the seller and purchaser.

THE LEGAL CONTEXT
The collector purchased the ceramics and shipped them from Indonesia or Singapore to Australia in
good faith and in the belief that all actions were in accordance with the laws as understood at the time.
Nevertheless, the lack of any provenience or provenance at the time of purchase means that the legal
context would have been largely unknown. As this project reveals the provenience of each ceramic so
the provenance and wider legal context will require investigation and application. With 2300 ceramics
acquired over a 50-year period, such an undertaking is onerous. This is made more complex as the
manufacture of a particular ceramic, its loading on board a vessel, loss, then physical discovery,
recovery and subsequent movement, all take place in a legal context that changes over time and place.
That context is not static and cannot be viewed entirely in hindsight from the now. This paper
considers this inter-temporal nature of the applicable law, as well as its determination across place –
jurisdictions.
This consideration of the legal context is not, however, purely for the purpose of determining its
current status. The applicable law – in time and place – also reflects the social history of the ceramic.

1

�Each ceramic in this collection was a trade good; manufactured as a commodity. Who owned it, how it
was traded, and how it was shipped would have been governed by the law at that point in time.
Moreover, that law might differ depending on where the ceramic was at that point in time. As such, if
for example, it was manufactured in what is now China, the law of that place might apply to
ownership when manufactured, but the law of some other place, such as what is now Singapore, might
have applied to the sale of the ceramic while the law of the nationality of the ship or its owner might
apply to its transportation. Moreover, what these laws were in the 15th century will be quite different to
that applied in the 18th century.
Having been lost at sea, the ceramics in this collection were likely salvaged sometime in the last 100
years, and more likely only in the last 50 years, given the state of diving and salvage technology. Most,
but perhaps not all, of the ceramics in this collection are thought to have been recovered in waters over
which Indonesia today exercises some form of jurisdiction, and if in the territorial waters – which is
most likely - absolute sovereignty. But it may not have been salvaged by an Indonesian national or
from an Indonesian vessel, and at the time of salvage, the location of the shipwreck might not have
been in Indonesian waters given the changes in jurisdiction over the last 100 years.
Even within Indonesian territorial waters, the law of Indonesia has also changed considerably,
especially in the last 30 years.

INDONESIAN LAW
The earliest applicable Indonesian law that will have applied is ‘Barang Muatan Kapal Tenggelam
(BMKT)’ which translates to ‘valuable items recovered from shipwreck’, contained in Chapter VII of
the Indonesian Commercial Code since 1938 and based on traditional Dutch salvage law. That is not to
say that it was actually applied and there are likely to have been many cases where local communities
simply recovered ceramics and sold them to dealers without recourse to any legal mechanisms; and
without any original owner to pursue the ceramics, no legal issues would have arisen.
Indonesian law also provided some protection over cultural heritage that was also based on early
Dutch colonial law. In 1931, the colonial government enacted the Monumenten Ordonnantie Number
19 of 1931 (Stbld. 1931 no. 238) which imposed an obligation to register cultural property and banned
their export. This Law was subsequently amended by Monumenten Ordonnantie Number 21 in 1934
(Stbld. 1934 no. 515). It is not likely these laws applied to underwater cultural heritage.
Following the salvage and sale of ceramics from the Geldermalsen, Indonesia introduced legislation,
Presidential Decree Number 43 of 1989, that regulated the salvage of historic wrecks and asserted
ownership of all wrecks within Indonesian territorial waters (Pearson 2019, 709). This legislation also
established the National Committee for the Recovery and Utilisation of Valuable Items from
Shipwrecks. This Presidential Decree was subsequently replaced with Presidential Decree Number 25
of 1992 together with Law No. 5 year 1992 concerning Cultural Heritage, which was enacted
following the Belitung looting in the early 1990s. At the same time, the salvage law regime was also
changed when Chapter VII was taken out of the Commercial Code and replaced with Law Number 21
of 1992 concerning Navigation (which was later replaced by Law No. 17 of 2008 concerning
Navigation) (Nayati 1998, 144).
Further legislative changes occurred in the 2000s. In 2009, a Minister of Finance Regulation No. 184
of 2009 addressed Procedures for Determining the Status of Use and Sale of Valuable Objects from the
Ship's Shipwreck, followed, in 2010, by amendments to the law protecting cultural property in Law
No. 11 of 2010 that imposed a temporary moratorium on commercial salvage. This was made
permanent in 2016 in Presidential Decree No. 44 of 2016 which included historic wrecks in one of the
Negative List of Investment, effectively imposed a moratorium on salvage operations (Pearson 2019,
709). Other relevant regulations include an export ban under Ministry of Trade Regulation No.
44/M-DAG/PER/7/2012 and optimisation of Indonesian cultural heritage under Law No. 5 of 2017
2

�concerning Cultural Advancement. Most recently, Presidential Decree No. 1 of 2022 concerning
Registration of Cultural Property was introduced. These amendments were largely intended to ensure
that Indonesia kept significant and scarce artefacts stored in museums. But legislative definitions of
‘cultural heritage value’ and ‘national identity’ are so ambiguous as to have little or no legislative
significance.
Most importantly, Presidential Decree Number 8 of 2023 reinstituted the government-controlled
salvage regime, which reverted to the shared model of public/private sharing of the salvage of
underwater cultural heritage (UCH).

AUSTRALIAN LAW
While the Indonesian law is pertinent to the provenance of the ceramics, the collection is in Australia
and subject to Australian – South Australian and Federal – law. It is thus principally Australian law
that governs the ceramics. In light of the socio-legal history of a ceramic, how then is Australian law
to address them? While this short paper cannot address this complex issue in detail, three important
underlying principles are considered: the nature of inter-temporal law, non-retrospectivity and the
choice of law in conflict of laws.
Inter-temporal law
The doctrine of intertemporal law, in the words of Judge Huber of the International Permanent Court
of Arbitration, means that “a juridical fact must be appreciated in the light of the law contemporary
with it, and not of the law in force at the time when a dispute in regard to it arises or falls to be settled”
(Island of Palmas 1932, 845; Elias 1980, 286).
As such, whether the recovery of a particular ceramic in, say, 1967, was legal, recourse must be had to
the law that existed in 1967 at the place where the salvage occurred, or, if then in international waters,
at the place where the ceramic was landed. It is the law as then in existence that will determine rights
and duties of the relevant actors, including the salvor, the original owner and the relevant State. The
collection is therefore going to be divided into categories dependant on the governing law at the time
and place of their recovery; each category giving rise to possibly different rights and obligations. The
greater the incremental change in the law in a particular place and the more places involved, the more
categories are likely to emerge.
Judge Huber went on to clarify the doctrine by declaring that “as regards the question which of
different legal systems prevailing at successive periods is to be applied in a particular case (the
so-called intertemporal law), a distinction must be made between the creation of rights and the
existence of rights” (Island of Palmas, 1932 845; Elias 1980, 286).
What this means is that while the right might be acquired in accordance with the law at that time, its
continued validity is also dependant on the law at any point in time thereafter when the right is
relevant to a dispute. This clarification on the doctrine is, at least in an international law context, is
subject to some debate but as a general proposition it is appropriate for the case in question (Elias
1980, 292). It means that, for example, the salvor might acquire salvage rights over the wreck, but
over time, should the law as to the rights of the salvor over the wreck site change, then the changed
law might apply. That new law would not address the acquisition of the right to the wreck, but only the
continuation of that right. The debate concerning this clarification of the doctrine lies in the risk that
the application of a new law might, in effect, amount to a retrospective law that negates the original
acquisition of the right. This is a particular risk where the new law arises from a statutory instrument
or an international agreement domestically implemented, such as the 2001 UNESCO Convention on
the Protection of UCH (2001 Convention).

3

�The emergence of Australia’s Historic Shipwreck Act 1976 might illustrate this point. The Act was
adopted in part to address the discovery of a number of old Dutch shipwrecks and the recovery of
objects from these sites. For current purposes, the recovery was legal in accordance with the law at the
time, and as such, the new Act could not apply retrospectively such that it negated the acquisition of
the salvage rights of the salvors. The Act did, however, impose a new obligation on the salvors: a
requirement that they register all objects that had been recovered from those sites. Since his new law
did not impact the right acquired at the time of recovery, but imposed a new statutory obligation, it
applied only from 1976 onwards.
Inter-temporal law then is not only a consideration of the rights acquired at the relevant point in time,
but also the impact that changing laws then have on those rights over time (and place), provided that
the new law did not apply retrospectively.
Non-retrospectivity
The prohibition of the application of any law retrospectively is often, but not universally, regarded as a
fundamental principle of law, especially with respect to criminal law (Kryvoi and Matos 2021, 46). It
is generally applied to international conventions such as the 2001 Convention. As codified in article 28
of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which declares that “[u]nless a different intention
appears from the treaty or is otherwise established, its provisions do not bind a party in relation to any
act or fact which took place or any situation which ceased to exist before the date of the entry into
force of the treaty with respect to that party”.
As article 28 evinces, this is not an absolute prohibition. Indeed, States may give a treaty, or some of
its provisions, retroactive effect (von der Decken 2018, 510). Many States, for example, argued the
1970 UNESCO Convention that addresses the illicit trafficking of cultural heritage, should have
applied retrospectively in order to address the loss of their heritage during the colonial era. Whilst not
accepted, this nevertheless illustrates the circumstance in which States may regard retroactivity as
legitimate. It may thus be open to a State such as Indonesia to address the issue of salvage and export
of UCH through retrospective legislation, though this may come at a cost in terms of claims for lost
rights from individuals. Such legislation would have to be unequivocal in its scope of application. It
remains to be seen whether this research project will reveal any instances of retrospective legislative
application and its effect on the applicable law.
Choice of law in conflict of laws
Since the Abbott Collection ceramics are found in Australia, only Australia has the judicial capacity to
determine and enforce rights to them. It is thus Australian law that applies. That does not, however
necessarily mean that Australian domestic rules will apply given Australian choice of law rules that
are applied when there is a conflict between the laws of different jurisdictions relevant to the dispute in
question; and in this case between the laws of Australia and Indonesia (though other jurisdiction may
also be pertinent, such as China, Viet Nam etc, depending on the ceramic in question). As a general
proposition, the Australian common law choice of law rule for rights to property is the law of the place
where a property was situated at the time the property right is said to be acquired - the lex rei sitae
(Davies et.al 2019, 795). A salvor’s property right to ceramics salvaged in Indonesian territorial sea
will therefore be determined in accordance with Indonesian law at that time, even if that dispute were
to be adjudicated in Australia. Where the location is not in Indonesian waters, the determination of the
applicable law may be rather more complex and require detailed consideration of the conflict of law
rules in an intertemporal context: not always an easy undertaking.

4

�A SOCIO-LEGAL HISTORY OF THINGS
The ceramics in this collection, ranging from as early as the 9th century and recovered in different
locations over a period of 50 years, means the applicable law at any given point in time is not a
straightforward task. If identifying a particular right, or the legality of a particular act needs to be
determined, then this is a necessary task. But for each ceramic the continually changing legal context
is also part of its social history. The applicable law would have played a role in shaping the initial
commodification of the ceramic, its transformation across space and time as its exchange value and
use by different social groups have altered to a point where it is elevated beyond commodification and
transformed into a public good This project therefore not only seeks to identify and apply the relevant
law to each ceramic, but to place its socio-legal history as a fundamental component of the ceramic as
we understand and utilise it today.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Davies, Martin; Bell, Andrew, Brereton, Pau and Douglas, Michael. Nygh’s Conflict of Laws in Australia, 10th
ed LexisNexis, 2019.
Elias, T.O. “The Doctrine of Intertemporal Law” The American Journal of International Law n. 74 (1980) 285.
Hatcher, Michael and Thorncraft, Anthony The Nanking Cargo Hamish Hamilton 1987
Island of Palmas case (Netherlands, United States) 2 R. Int’l Arb. Awards 831
Polkinghorne, Martin. Reuniting cargoes: Underwater Cultural Heritage of the Maritime Silk Route, Australian
Research Council Linkage Grant, 2022 (on file with author)
Kryvoi, Yarik and Matos, Shaun. “Non-Retroactivity as a General Principle of Law” Utrecht Law Review no.
17(1) (2021) 46–58.
Nayati, Pudak. “Ownership Rights Over Archaeological/ Historical Objects Found in Indonesian Waters:
Republic of Indonesia Act No 5 Of 1992 on Cultural Heritage Objects and its Related Regulation” Singapore
Journal of International and Comparative Law, no. 2 (1998): 142 – 174.
Pearson, Natali. “Protecting and Preserving UCH in SE Asia.” in The Palgrave Handbook on Art Crime. Edited
by Hufnagel, Saskia and Chappell, Duncan, 685-730. Palgrave MacMillan, 2019
von der Decken, Kersten. ‘Article 28’ in Oliver Dőrr and Kirsten Schmalenbach (eds) Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties: A Commentary Springer Palgrave, 2018 510.

5

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="60">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="346">
                  <text>2023 Session 24: Recovering dispersed and salvaged legacy collections of UCH in Southeast Asia</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="49">
              <name>Subject</name>
              <description>The topic of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="347">
                  <text>Session 24 papers</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="348">
                  <text>Papers presented at Session 24 of the 2023 Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="39">
              <name>Creator</name>
              <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="349">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="45">
              <name>Publisher</name>
              <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="350">
                  <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="40">
              <name>Date</name>
              <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="351">
                  <text>November 2023</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="47">
              <name>Rights</name>
              <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="352">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="44">
              <name>Language</name>
              <description>A language of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="353">
                  <text>English</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="91">
              <name>Rights Holder</name>
              <description>A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="354">
                  <text>Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6079">
                <text>The Social History of Artefacts and the Law in Southeast Asia  </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6080">
                <text>The loading of objects on a vessel, their loss, then physical discovery, recovery and subsequent movement, all&#13;
take place in a legal context. That context is not static and cannot be viewed entirely in hindsight from the now.&#13;
In unravelling the legal rights and interest to recovered objects the inter-temporal nature of the law requires&#13;
consideration and possible application. Moreover, irrespective of what law applies at any given time, this&#13;
intertemporal legal context reflects evolving values and is part of the object’s social history. This paper examines&#13;
this intertemporal nature of salvage law and other related laws as they might apply to objects recovered in&#13;
Southeast Asia over the past 40 years.&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6081">
                <text>Craig Forrest</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6082">
                <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6083">
                <text>2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6084">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="80">
            <name>Bibliographic Citation</name>
            <description>A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible.</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6085">
                <text>Forrest, Craig. 2023. “The social history of artefacts and the law in Southeast Asia.” Edited by Jennifer Craig, Jay Mok, and T. Kurt Knoerl. Proceedings of Fifth Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage: Gwangju, The Republic of Korea, November 13-18 2023. The Museum of Underwater Archaeology. URL: https://apconf.omeka.net/exhibits/show/apconfproceedings/item/1913 </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="58">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 24 2023</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="211" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="91">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/e85517c892d580a7223b27c2d464598d.pdf</src>
        <authentication>fae990492aaddcfcbc7eedd230a7d9f2</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="2570">
                    <text>The Subcritical Mass-Treatment of a Range of Iron
Artifacts from Varying Contexts
Nasanen, L. M. E.; González-Pereyra, N. G.; Cretté, S.A.

Abstract
The use of subcritical fluids for the treatment of archaeological and marine archaeological iron
artifacts has been under experimentation at the Clemson University’s Warren Lasch Conservation
Center (WLCC) since 2003 and has shown promise of providing solutions to some of the issues
related to the more traditional desalination treatments: Treatment times are but a fraction of those
required by the soaking methods; chloride readings are brought to near-negligible levels;
desalination can be carried out with or without prior deconcretion; solutions are maintained in
sealed containers for the duration of the treatments; and positive results have been seen so far
with tests for long-term stability of treated artifacts. Particularly remarkable has been the effect
the process appears to have had on corrosion matrices containing the chloride-hosting iron
oxyhydroxide, Akagenéite (β-FeOOH) on artifacts that have been allowed to dry out. Results
have shown a significant reduction in the quantities of this phase – often linked to the continuation
of active corrosion processes within iron artifacts – through transformation into more stable
corrosion products such as magnetite and hematite. Experiments carried out to date have not
only involved single samples and artifacts, but testing has progressed to a stage where numerous
artifacts have been successfully stabilized simultaneously in the same batch. The work presented
describes three of such desalination treatments. The first run included a single wrought iron
ballast block from the H.L. Hunley, a confederate Civil War submarine lost in battle in 1864. This
was followed by the first batch run on five similar ballast blocks and a second with nine iron
artifacts of varying composition, context and condition, selected from the National Park Service
(NPS - USA) curatorial collection.

Introduction
After extensive studies and testing for 9 years at the WLCC, the subcritical
treatment has proven to be an effective alternative for the stabilization of iron and
iron corrosion products of materials recovered from marine and terrestrial
contexts.
In order to stabilize the iron matrix, the presence of chloride ion (Cl-), often
linked to active corrosion processes must be eliminated or rendered inactive
(deViviés, et al. 2007: 26-30; Drews, et al. 2004: 247-260; González, et al. 2007:
32-37).
The desalination treatments used in the conservation field are based on the
exchange of Cl- with hydroxide ions (OH-). Therefore, the solution carrying the
OH- must reach the sites where the Cl- are located, which often means
penetrating through pores and interstices following paths with high degrees of
tortuosity through corrosion layers and concretion (Selwyn 2004:294-306;
Selwyn, et al. 2001:109-120; Selwyn, et al. 1999:217-232). Once the chloride
sites are reached, an excess of hydroxide is necessary in order to facilitate the

�exchange. Then, the newly released Cl- must diffuse out through the material
towards the bulk of the treatment solution. In the atmospheric region these
processes are slow and their end point is often difficult to determine. Traditional
desalination techniques rely on diffusion, which is based on concentration
gradients that are significantly affected by the presence of any type of material
that may act as a membrane such as corrosion layers and concretion.
The most appealing reason to consider working in the subcritical region is that
the properties of water are tunable by simply adjusting the temperature and
pressure of the system. Changes in temperature and pressure can provide new
thermodynamic and kinetic options, or chemical paths, not viable at lower
temperatures.
The subcritical metal treatment developed at the WLCC utilizes alkaline
solutions at temperatures and pressure above 100°C and 30bar, respectively
(Drews, et al. 2011). To date more than 130 experiments have been performed
to evaluate the effects of subcritical treatment on a variety of archaeological
wrought and cast-iron samples from both terrestrial and marine sites (deViviés, et
al. 2007: 26-30; Drews, et al. 2004:247-260; Drews, et al. 2011; Drews, et al.
2005:77; González-Pereyra, et al. 2010:39-49; Mardikian, et al. 2006:82-88).
Based on the results, the subcritical treatment has demonstrated to be effective,
safe and exceptionally fast in removing chloride (deViviés, et al. 2007:26-30;
Drews, et al. 2004:247-260; González-Pereyra, et al. 2010:39-49).
This paper discusses three recent treatments using subcritical fluids, with
specific emphasis on the benefits this technology may offer to the mass
treatments of collections of metallic cultural heritage. Amount of Cl- released
during treatment as well as corrosion products and elemental compositions of the
various artifacts were monitored using ion chromatography, X-ray Fluorescence,
micro-Raman, and SEM-EDS.

Subcritical Technique
Throughout this paper, the region where water remains in the liquid phase and
extends from its normal boiling point (100ºC, 1bar) to its critical point (Tc =
373.9ºC, Pc = 220bar) will be referred to as subcritical region, while the region
under 100ºC, at normal pressure, as atmospheric region, as illustrated in Figure
1a. In the sub-critical region there is a significant departure of thermodynamic,
transport and chemical properties of water from those at normal conditions,
redefining water as a reaction medium. Viscosity, surface tension and density all
decrease for pure water or a dilute water solution including the 0.5w% sodium
hydroxide (NaOH). Density, probably the most defining thermodynamic property,
is affected by temperature. At high temperatures liquid water expands

�considerably decreasing its density. Many properties of water are affected by this
change, in particular the behavior of water as a solvent (Fernández-Prini, et al.
2004). Viscosity and surface tension are also affected. They decrease as the
temperature increases, resulting in enhanced wetting properties and higher
ability to penetrate pores or interstices. An increase in the diffusion constants for
Cl- and OH- of about 9% will also occur, relative to the diffusion constants at 25oC
and 1bar when the temperature and pressure are increased to approximately
180oC and 50bar, respectively (Bird, et al. 1992).
The subcritical region also allows the use of NaOH at concentrations that are
lower than what is common with traditional treatments, thus easing the burden
imposed by its disposal. Additionally, evidence suggests this process also results
in the transformation of certain iron corrosion products into more stable phases
(akaganéite and lepidocrocite transform into hematite) (deViviés, et al. 2007:2630; González-Pereyra, et al. 2010:39-49).
An additional promising characteristic of this alternative treatment is the short
treatment times required compared to traditional techniques (chemical,
electrochemical or gaseous). Average treatment periods typically fall within
fifteen days. Moreover, this technique provides the potential ability to permeate
thick concreted and corroded layers which in theory means that iron artifacts may
be pre-treated or even stabilized with subcritical fluids, prior to deconcretion or
cleaning (González-Pereyra, et al. 2010:39-49). This attribute is of particular
interest in the case of terrestrial artifacts that are often too fragile to be cleaned
prior to desalination. As such, they often require the addition of a stabilizing
consolidant; however this material is likely to interfere with the extraction of the
salts. Therefore, subcritical treatment offers the ability to effectively stabilize the
residual metal core while the object is still embedded in its concretion.

�Subcritical Protocol
The schematic diagram depicted in Figure 1b provides the basic elements of the
system. It consists essentially of a feed solution reservoir, a high-pressure pump,
a treatment cell, a back-pressure regulator to control the system pressure and an
eluent collection vessel. Artifacts are placed in the cell and the fluid flow path
primed to flush any air out of the system. Next, the system is closed, brought
under pressure, the flow is stabilized and the temperature is increased to the set
point. Pressure, temperature and flow of the system are monitored using a
computer system. Once the system is running, the eluent is sampled periodically
and the Cl- concentration is measure at the exit of the cell and in the collection
vessel by ion chromatography. When it reaches the level of the feed solution,
considered the baseline in Cl- content for ion chromatography, the temperature is
turned off and the high-pressure cell is cooled down; the flow of eluent is allowed
to continue throughout the cooling process. Once the cell reaches room
temperature, the high-pressure pump is turned off and the cell opened to retrieve
the desalinated specimen. This latter is then rinsed thoroughly with deionized
water and dried quickly to prevent any potential flash corrosion.

The Artifacts
The Ballast Block “Pioneer”
The very first treated artifact utilizing the 40L chamber was a wrought iron ballast
block – one of 97 excavated from the H.L. Hunley. Apart from a select few of
such blocks, having undergone other means of desalination, the majority of these
blocks remain stored together in a very large tank of NaOH 1.0w%. The selected
block to undergo subcritical treatment was stored separately for several weeks
immersed in a pre-treatment solution of NaOH 0.5w%. Thorough documentation
and analysis pre- and post-subcritical treatment were performed, as shown in
Figure 2. The artifact record showed that partial deconcretion had been carried
out prior to immersion in the storage solution to enhance desalination. However
the pre-treatment assessment clearly showed some considerable remains of
corrosion products, sediment and marine fauna on the surface, particularly within
the fine detail. Some mechanical damage to the original surface of the artifact
was also noted, where areas of several centimeters were missing, leaving the
wrought iron core exposed. It is important to also note the ballast blocks
discussed here had never been allowed to dry out and hence no akagenéite was
found prior to treatment.

�The Five to Follow
Following successful completion of the single ballast block treatment a similar
outcome was attempted with multiple artifacts similar in nature. Five further
ballast blocks were selected for simultaneous treatment within the 40L chamber.
Whilst the artifacts are primarily of the same composition each held very distinct
individual characteristics. All had undergone partial deconcretion in the wet state
prior to immersion in the above mentioned storage solution, and thus some
damage to the original surface had occurred in varying degrees from one block to
another.

The National Nine
The following batch of artifacts consisted of nine iron artifacts from the NPS
collection. These were of both, wrought and cast iron, consisting of various parts
in some examples and from a range of contexts. One common factor for the
selection was concern over the stability of the items. All artifacts had been
allowed to dry, had been stored in largely uncontrolled environments and thus
displaying clear signs of active corrosion in the form of bright orange powdery
corrosion products - commonly within pits - as well as blistering, spalling and
cracking in some areas of the original surface. Figure 3 illustrates the condition of
four of the artifacts prior to subcritical treatment. These artifacts will act as
primary examples throughout the paper, as this particular selection received a
so-called ‘full conservation treatment’, and were selected as such due to a more
prominent surface detail or complex multiple-part features. Out of the selected
four, the ring-peg and hinge showed the most structural complexity with moving
components and the presence of threaded bolt and nut assemblies. Complex
artifacts such as these have commonly posed additional conservation challenges
with regards to desalination due to limited permeability of the wash solution into
the joins and crevices of such areas, as well as differential corrosion cells at

�peripheral regions with varying exposure to the environment. It should also be
stated that some of the artifacts appeared to have been treated with a
penetrating oil-type substance, but no conclusions as to the composition of the
product were found in previous treatment records, or through analytical means.
The artifacts had also been labeled with catalog numbers applied in black ink
over a white label painted directly on to the surface of the artifact.

Documentation and Analysis
All artifacts were systematically assessed through documentation and digital
images to identify signs of corrosion. A set of non-destructive characterization
equipment was utilized to determine the Cl- concentration, as well as to identify
corrosion products. A FujiFilm NDE DynamIX™ IV digital radiography system was
used to determine the overall integrity of the object. Corrosion products present
on the artifact surfaces were analyzed with a Bruker Optics SENTERRA microRaman spectrometer. Raman data collection and processing was performed
using Opus Version 6.5 software.
The Cl- concentrations released during desalination was measured by two
methods. Chloride Quan Tab® test strips, manufactured by Hach® (Loveland,
CO), were used to quickly determine quantitative amounts of Cl- present. Ion
chromatography was performed using an ICS-90 ion chromatography system
with a IonPac® AS9-HC analytical column, both manufactured by Dionex
(Sunnyvale, CA). The data was collected and analyzed using the Dionex
Chromeleon™ software.
Quantitative and qualitative elemental compositions were determined by an
Oxford INCAx-act analytical silicon drift energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS)
fitted onto a Hitachi S-3700N Ultra Large VP-SEM variable pressure scanning
electron microscope. Data collected was analyzed with the INCAEnergy software
interface. Qualitative and semi-quantitative elemental analysis was also attained
with a Bruker handheld Tracer III-SD X-Ray Fluorescence spectrometer.
All results were averaged from at least three data collections.

Results and Discussion
Alongside the evident advantages regarding stability and length of treatment,
post-stabilization deconcretion stands out crucially in the eyes of the conservator.
The effectiveness of the process allows for drying to take place prior to any
mechanical cleaning due to the inherent post-treatment stability of the artifact
and its corrosion matrix. This further allows for better and easier visual
identification of the corrosion layers and original surface and thus more control

�over any removal. Full documentation can be carried out after drying with no
time limitations due to the threat of flash corrosion or stresses caused by
recrystallization.

�Ballast Blocks
With regards to the overall appearance of the artifacts, there was very little
change with any of the ballast blocks on initial inspection. The first ballast block
was stabilized in 16 days. Approximately 90% of the total Cl- released occurred
within the first 5 days, with a maximum peak reached on the first day.
Furthermore, after the fifth day the concentration of Cl- remained under 1ppm. At
the end of the run the total amount of Cl- extracted from the artifact was
0.031w%.
To put these results into perspective, they can be compared with similar
ballast blocks soaked in NaOH 1.0w% with and without electrolysis (Figure 4a).
These treatments required on average 150 days to reach 90% of the total Clreleased, and over one year for total stabilization.

�The low amount of total Cl- released during mass treatment of the five blocks
group was an expected outcome. Considering that these blocks had been
soaking in NaOH 1.0w% for over four years, it was anticipated that most of the
Cl- had been removed. Simple soaking in NaOH can be very effective for Clremoval providing the artifacts were never allowed to dry out and akaganéite was
not present.
Localized color change from orange to black was noted, corresponding
generally to lepidocrocite and magnetite respectively. Although superficial
deposits had persevered, a change in the physical state of these features was
soon noted. Even in the wet state, some of these deposits would readily brush
off demonstrating a loss in adherence. This phenomenon has been recognized
in previous work, and it has been suggested that increased porosity is due to
changes in crystal lattice structure of the corrosion product matrix, and possible
leaching out of substitutional and interstitial elements, such as sodium, calcium,
chlorine and phosphorous respectively (González-Pereyra, et al. 2010: 39-49).
Instead of utilizing hammers and chisels, cleaning could be performed using
mostly a scalpel. The original surface, easily identified, had a compact nearmetallic sheen throughout, and appeared somewhat consolidated. Where the
benefits of carrying out cleaning procedures after stabilization and in the dry state
were particularly accentuated was at the discovery of tool marks and foundry
stamps on the ballast blocks, as shown in Figure 2.
Where considered necessary, a consolidative treatment by immersion in
Owatrol™ oil – an alkyd-based drying oil with an inbuilt corrosion inhibitor was
employed.

NPS artifacts
With these artifacts, a slightly different approach was employed. As seen in the
images, the artifacts had very little corrosion layers present to add to the overall
volume of the artifact.
The challenge with already dry terrestrial artifacts with regards to stabilization
treatments under immersion in varying solutions is the inherent physical stresses
caused by not only the permeation of the solution into the crevices of the
corroded artifact, but also the continued ionic exchange at the active corrosion
sites. This is particularly accentuated at pit and blister sites, where the original
surface is often forced away from the artifact causing separation and loss of
surface detail. Thus chemical stabilization and desalination of dry and terrestrial
iron artifacts has been viewed as a considerably difficult and an unresolved issue
in conservation (Drews, et al. 2004:247-260; Mardikian, et al. 2006:113-118;
North, et al. 1978:174-186; Selwyn, et al. 1999:217-232; Watkinson 2010:33073340). To prevent any further stresses occurring within the artifacts during
subcritical treatment the artifacts were soaked in the treatment solution for 72

�hours prior to the run. It was completed in 8 days and the results can be seen in
Figure 4d. The plot displays a typical behavior showing a Cl- peak within the first
day followed by a significant drop. Similarly to what was observed in the case of
the first ballast block, approximately 95% of the total Cl- released took place
during the first four days. Post-treatment, SEM-EDS elemental analysis showed
a level of chloride under the instrument detection limit of 0.1w%, while pre- and
post treatment XRF analysis (Figure 4f) clearly illustrates elimination of chloride
from the artifacts. Finally, SEM-EDS confirmed that subcritical conditions did not
affect elements such as lead or copper.
The corrosion products of all the NPS artifacts were analyzed using microRaman spectroscopy in different areas of the artifact’s surface. Analyzed areas
were selected for their diversity in color and texture. Active corrosion was
evident, occurring below the original surface, largely in pits with bright orange
powdery corrosion products identified as akagenéite (Figure 4c). Lepidocrocite
and goethite were found only in a few areas. A striking absence of akaganéite
was observed after subcritical treatment, as illustrated in Figure 4e. The
akagenéite had been converted to hematite with magnetite and goethite in
localized areas.
From visual inspection and weight measurements, it was clear that no
significant material loss had occurred during treatment, the oil-based consolidant
and the number labels applied in a previous conservation campaign had
effectively been removed. After analysis and in order to improve the general
appearance of the artifacts, micro-air-abrasion was performed on the selected
four artifacts. Although consolidation was not considered necessary with regards
to the physical integrity of the artifacts, due to an agreement with the NPS, they
received a consolidant in the form of Owatrol™ in two applications, with the last
application slightly pigmented with natural magnetite powder. This treatment was
performed to purely improve the appearance of the artifacts and to allow for
assessment of a contrast between a stabilized and a fully conserved artifact.

Conclusion
Recent experiments using subcritical fluids have shown great promise of
resolving many of the issues relating to the stabilization of archaeological iron –
marine and terrestrial. The results of this work have encouraged further research
and experimentation to improve the methodology and its applicability across the
field. Recent focus on such development has revolved around the possibility of
modifying the reactor capabilities in order to be able to carry out rinsing and
drying within the treatment chamber. Further yet, considerations have been
made towards an unfathomable advancement, where subcritical and supercritical

�technologies would be combined to allow for the inclusion of the application of
tailored corrosion inhibitors and consolidants during a single step in the
treatment. In addition small-scale laboratory testing has been initiated to study
the effect this fluid technology may have on non-ferrous metals. In short,
extensive continued research is necessary in order to implement an integral
treatment for metallic cultural heritage, that is effective, fast, reversible,
sustainable, safe, and in accordance with conservation ethics.

Bibliography
Bird, R. B., Stewart,
W.E.,
Vasquez,
F.M.,
1992
deViviés, P., Cook,
D.,
Drews,
M.,
González,
N.,
Mardikian,
P.,
Memet, J.-B.,
2007
Drews,
M.,
deViviés,
P.,
González,
N.,
Mardikian, P.
2004
Drews,
M.,
deViviés,
P.,
González,
N.,
Mardikian, P.,
2011
Drews,
M.
J.,
deViviés,
P.,
González,
N.,
Mardikian,
P.,
Grogan, K.,
2005
Fernández-Prini,
R., Harvey, A.H.,
Palmer, D.A.,
2004

“Fenómenos de Transporte : un Estudio Sistemático de los
Fundamentos del Transporte de Materia, Energía y
Cantidad de Movimiento”. Mexico: Reverte.
“Transformation of Akagenéite in Archaeological Iron
Artefacts Using Subcritical Treatment” in Proceedings of
Metal 07: ICOM-CC International Conference on Metals
Conservation. Amsterdam.pp. 26-30.

“A study of the Analysis and Removal of Chloride in
Samples from the Hunley” in Proceedings of Metal 04:
International Conference on Metal Conservation. Canberra,
Australia: National Museum of Australia. pp. 247-260.
“The Application of Sub-Critical Solutions for the
Stabilization of Archaeological Iron”, (Manuscript in
preparation).

“Evaluation of New Technologies for the Stabilization of
Archaeological Iron” in Proceedings of XIV International
Materials Research Congress, and IV NACE International
Section. Cancun, Mexico: Academia Mexican de Cienca de
Materiales, A.C. pp. 77.

“Aqueous Systems at Elevated Temperatures and
Pressures: Physical Chemistry in Water, Steam, and
Hydrothermal Solutions” ed. R. Fernández-Prini, A. H.
Harvey and D. A. Palmer. Boston: Elsevier Academic
Press.
González,
N., “The Effects of Cathodic Polarization, Soaking in Alkaline
Cook, D., deViviés, Solutions and Subcritical Water on Cast Iron Corrosion

�P.,
Drews,
M.,
Mardikian, P.,
2007
González-Pereyra,
N. G., Brocard, T.,
Cretté,
S.A.,
deViviés,
P.,
Drews, M.,
2010
Mardikian,
P.,
Drews,
M.,
González,
N.,
deViviés,
P.,
Hunter, J.W.,
2006
Mardikian,
P.,
González,
N.,
Drews,
M.,
deViviés, P.,
2006
North,
N.
Pearson, C.,
1978
Selwyn, L. S.,
2004

Products” in Proceedings of Metal 07: ICOM-CC
International Conference on Metals Conservation.
Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp. 32-37.
“The Use of Sub-Critical Fluids for the Stabilization of
Concreted Iron Artifacts” in Proceedings of Metal 2010:
ICOM-CC
International
Conference
on
Metals
Conservation. Charleston, SC - USA: Clemson University.
pp. 39-49.

“Searching for a Diamond in the Rust: A Review of LargeScale Archaeological Iron Conservation Projects, 19802006” in Proceedings of Iron, Steel &amp; Steamship
Archaeology - 2nd Australian Seminar. Perth, Melbourne
and Sydney, Australia: Australian National Center of
Excellence for Maritime Archaeology. pp. 82-88.
“New Perspectives Regarding the Stabilization of Terrestrial
and Marine Archaeological Iron” in Proceedings of Iron,
Steel &amp; Steamship Archaeology - 2nd Australian Seminar.
Perth, Melbourne and Sydney, Australia: Australian
National Center of Excellence for Maritime Archaeology. pp.
113-118.
A., “Washing Methods for Chloride Removal from Marine Iron
Artifacts” in Studies in Conservation. 23, 4, pp. 174-186.

“Overview of Archaeological Iron: the Corrosion Problem,
Key Factors Affecting Treatment, and Gaps in Current
Knowledge” in Proceedings of Metal 04: International
Conference on Metal Conservation. Canberra, Australia:
National Museum of Australia. pp. 294-306.
Selwyn,
L.
S., “Models For Chloride Ion Diffusion In Archaeological Iron” in
McKinnon,
W.R., Studies in Conservation. 46: pp. 109-120.
Argyropoulos, V.,
2001
Selwyn,
L.
S., "The Corrosion of Excavated Archaeological Iron with
Sirois,
P.J., Details on Weeping and Akaganéite" in Studies in
Argyropoulos, V.,
Conservation, 44, pp. 217-232.
1999
Watkinson, D.,
2010

"Part VI: Corrosion Management - Preservation of Metallic
Cultural Heritage" in (ed.) T. J. A. Richardson, Shreir's
Corrosion, Elsevier, Amsterdam, London, pp. 3307-3340.

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2563">
                <text>The Subcritical Mass-Treatment of a Range of Iron Artifacts from Varying Contexts</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2564">
                <text>Session 7&#13;
Preservation and conservation of wet archaeological materials and site management</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2565">
                <text>The use of subcritical fluids for the treatment of archaeological and marine archaeological iron artifacts has been under experimentation at the Clemson Universityâ€™s Warren Lasch Conservation Center (WLCC) since 2003 and has shown promise of providing solutions to some of the issues related to the more traditional desalination treatments: Treatment times are but a fraction of those required by the soaking methods; chloride readings are brought to near-negligible levels; desalination can be carried out with or without prior deconcretion; solutions are maintained in sealed containers for the duration of the treatments; and positive results have been seen so far with tests for long-term stability of treated artifacts.  Particularly remarkable has been the effect the process appears to have had on corrosion matrices containing the chloride-hosting iron oxyhydroxide, AkagenÃ©ite (Î²-FeOOH) on artifacts that have been allowed to dry out. Results have shown a significant reduction in the quantities of this phase â€“ often linked to the continuation of active corrosion processes within iron artifacts â€“ through transformation into more stable corrosion products such as magnetite and hematite.  Experiments carried out to date have not only involved single samples and artifacts, but testing has progressed to a stage where numerous artifacts have been successfully stabilized simultaneously in the same batch. The work presented describes three of such desalination treatments. The first run included a single wrought iron ballast block from the H.L. Hunley, a confederate Civil War submarine lost in battle in 1864.  This was followed by the first batch run on five similar ballast blocks and a second with nine iron artifacts of varying composition, context and condition, selected from the National Park Service (NPS - USA) curatorial collection.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2566">
                <text>Nasanen, L. M. E.</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="2567">
                <text>GonzÃ¡lez-Pereyra, N. G.</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="2568">
                <text>CrettÃ©, S.A.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2569">
                <text>November 2011</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="2">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 7</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="358" public="1" featured="0">
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4300">
                <text>Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4301">
                <text>Crone, Patricia</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4302">
                <text>Princeton University Press</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4303">
                <text>1987</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4304">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="8">
        <name>Zotero</name>
        <description/>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="122">
            <name>Author</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4305">
                <text>Crone, Patricia</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="149">
            <name>Item Type</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4306">
                <text>Book</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="178">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4307">
                <text>1987</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="217">
            <name>Place</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4308">
                <text>Princeton, N.J</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="226">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4309">
                <text>Princeton University Press</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="246">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4310">
                <text>Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="640" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="431">
        <src>https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/d2b1eb07309e48775bfe94f4080ea761.pdf</src>
        <authentication>98a7bba5c02588eeab63501b71740fec</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="92">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="6944">
                    <text>How atob came to be - the evolution of stone tidal weir in the Philippines
Cynthia Neri Zayas, Ph.D.
Professorial Lecturer, Center for International Studies, University of the Philippines
ABSTRACT
Stone tidal weirs suggest evolutionary stages of how the human-natural world interacts. From it, “commons” is
reflected in the social and cultural milieus among indigenous/local communities.  In the Philippines, an atob is a
stone tidal weir built on a gradually sloping reef by piling up stones as a barrier to sift sea creatures carried by
the receding tide. This presentation is based on three data sets that will explain how atob came to be. The first
set consists of the atob itself. The second set is composed of four related versions of the atob: (a) a simpler weir
namely atob-atob 1, a fish aggregating device (FAD) of stones where fish are caught by hand, (b) panihod
which is like atob-atob 1, except that fish is caught thru a basket, (c) atob-atob 2 which is not exactly a trap, but
an enclosure like a pool to stock live fish for later use, and (d) the mirakolhol (miracle hole), a dug-up hole like
a basin. The third set is the panapok (&lt; pang- ‘instrumental affix’ + tapok ‘to pile up’) or pangatob, (&lt; pang- +
atob ‘to trap’) built in shallow waters that combines FAD with an encircling net dropped from the
boat.  Panapok or pangatob is the missing link to the evolution of the atob. Two methods of analysis are
utilized, i.e., a comparative study of material culture, and a semantic analysis of the terms used in naming and
describing the weirs.
In archaeology, the simplest artifact is often identified as the oldest. Could these weirs with the same
features - stone structure, reliance on the tide, and an enclosure - be one and the same, differing only in the
stages of their development as trappers reckon their natural world?  My data came from field research between
1990 and 2010, historical materials, and ethnography.  
List of Figures
Figure 1 Metemorphosis
Figure 2 Etyomology and Stone
Figure 3 Imitating Nature

INTRODUCTION
Traps such as atob are intended to lure fish like an aggregating device. The means of gathering the
fish vary in many ways. Three data sets are presented here to connect them as an associated method of
fishing, thus answering the possible transformation from a simple to a complex atob. The first set of
data describes how the atob, in principle, can trap fish. An example of an atob with a catchment or
mouth is presented. The second set includes atob-atob 1, panihod, atob-atob 2, and mirakolhol. For
fish to take shelter and become stuck when the tide recedes, the atob-atob 1 waits for the tide to come
in. A similar method, the panihod involves breaking up or scattering the stone pile in order to direct
the fish toward a basket of the same name. Atob-atob 2, on the other hand, is a man-made pool
surrounded by stone walls used to store live fish. In a similar manner, a mirakolhol is a man-made
hole filled with tree branches and some coconut leaves to entice fish into seeking safety and thus, get
trapped. The third set is composed of panapok or pangatob, piled-up the stones that are two fathoms
below the water. Left alone for weeks, fishers return in a boat with a net after some time. A net is
dropped around the pile of stones, then divers scatter the stones for the fish to swim toward the net.
1.0 Atob, stone tidal weir
On progressively sloping reef tides, long stone walls known as atog or atob are constructed in the
form of a horseshoe. The stone walls are breached by seawater during high tide, confining the nearby
marine life as the tide recedes (Zayas 2023). The "mouth" or taun, a crucial catchment element, is
located at the lowest ebb. These fish weirs were constructed along the coastline of a few islands in the
Central Philippines. Designed to catch fish swimming above the pools as the tide comes in and release

1

�them as it goes out, imitating the ability of even the most primitive people to catch fish with their
hands in natural pools, Nishimura described the weir as:
a man‐made [sic] replica of the natural hollow found in rock or coral reef, which the
ebbing tide fills with water. Copying the principle of the natural pool, in which even the
most primitive [sic] people are able to catch fish by hand, piled‐up stones are used to
form artificial basins and are so positioned that fish swimming above the pool at tide are
caught in the weir as the tide recedes. The more complicated construction of the stone
fish trap, which also relies on the ebb and flow of the tide, includes a stone wing that
forces the fish to enter the catching base (Nishimura 1968, 23).
There are four features of a stone tidal weir: it is dependent on the ebbing tide; it has a natural hollow
or constructed basin on the reef; it has piled-up stones; and it has a wing (leader) that directs fish into
the catchment (mouth). These features that can be gleaned in some of the fish traps in the following
sections.

Figure 1 Metemorphosis

1.1 Origins of the term atob
Atol is a cognate term of atob. Atol is mentioned in 1711 CE a river fish trap in Mateo Sanchez's
Vocabulario de la lengua bisaya. Francisco Alcina (2004) used a similar word, atub, to describe a
large animal deadfall trap or snare roughly 60 years before Sanchez. Alcina described it as a device
that forms a narrow passage with stakes and sets a trap between the stakes, adding some large stones
on top for greater weight. The trap is suspended and falls by walking over or touching a smaller stick,
which they refer to as gisui, catching the crocodile below and crushing it with the smaller stick.

Figure 2 Etyomology and Stone

2

�1.2 Etymology of the term
Atol is cognate word for atob or atog in Eastern and Western Visayan languages. The English word
atoll, defined as a ring of coral rock arranged around a lagoon, is a word that has been borrowed from
the Austronesian languages where Philippine languages belong. Atob, atog, antol, and its variations
are characterized as a coral stone wall built along tidal flats for the purpose of collecting fish during
ebb tide. The two Hispanic sources mentioned above offer an intriguing perspective on the true
purpose of the trap. The atol of the sea and the atub of the marshland alludes to specific concepts
about trapping technology that may provide a hint to the theory of the genesis of hunting implements
among pre-Hispanic peoples. Or, possibly, they allude to anything regarding a cultural tradition of the
lithic age and the connection between land-based and marine traps. This is inferred from a belief that
Megalithic culture originated in Southeast Asian mountains during the Mesolithic Period.
Linguistically speaking, the nautical equivalent of the megalithic civilization on land is a stone tidal
weir (Zayas, 2004:560).
1.3 Atob from proto-Philippine *batúʔ ‘stone’
It has been established that the word atob comes from the proto-Philippine *batúʔ ‘stone’ which is
bato in many Philippine languages (Paz 1988). It undergoes metathesis, resulting in the initial
consonant b ending up in final position, i.e., bato &gt; atob. 1
Three fundamental components of a tidal trap are revealed by analysis of names given to variants of
atob, such as hubas and sada, which are also close to the definition of the atoll. These components are
a stone wall, an enclosure, and an ebbing tide. This suggests, based on linguistic data, that an atob can
only be made of stone and that it may be one of the earliest types of fishing equipment in the
Philippines, if not the oldest (Zayas 2004, 56-57). It is noted that atob construction is very versatile.
As it is small-scale, it can be modified using other materials such as nets, bamboos and/or wood. I
shall describe these later.

Figure 3 Imitating Nature

1.4 Atob of stone, reliance on tides, and an enclosure
An atob structure is made of stone. It is also a barricade of stones, a mound of stones, and a fish corral
of bamboo matting reinforced with piles of stones. Its reliance on the tide can be gleaned from the
Bikol languages that refer to ebb tide, i.e., hubas ‘ebb tide’, hubasan ‘place of ebb tide’, and unasan
1

In my conversation with the linguist Yamada Yukihiro, he surmised that the metathesized form atob from
bato, mentioning the word stone might have some taboo element.
3

�‘ebb tide’. Finally, as an enclosure, the terms panada, sada, sara and serada are Bikol loan words
from the Spanish word cerrar ‘to close’. These terms are defined as stone barricade built on reefs
near the shore for catching rockfish during the receding tide. Literally, the term means the act of
fishing with the sada or reef barricade (Umali 1950, 130, 147, 151, 152).
2. Atob-atob 1, Panihod with Atob-atob 2 and Mirakolhol
Along the tidal flats of Dumaguete City's renowned coastal promenade, Nisi Banay-banay's atob-atob
1 is piled high. When the tide is low, he visits these piles to collect any fish or other aquatic life that
sought refuge. He scatters the stone to drive the fish out of the pile. He would later reconstruct his
atob-atob after switching from one pile of stone to another. Nearby is an atob-atob owned by Antonia
Teves. I learned that her catch in one pile consisted of a variety of coral fishes, native abalone, sea
urchins, and a few shells.
Akin to Banay-banay’s pile of stones, there is a mention of a similar method of fishing, except that a
basket of the same name, panihod, is used as reported by my colleague Ms. Mary Jane
Calderon-Hayhow (1994, 431, 458) on the same coast. Atob-atob and panihod are similar, but
panihod harvesting requires knee-deep water and a basket. Pan-+ ihod/sahod is a Bisayan expression
that means ‘to catch through the flow of anything with a container’. To guide the fish toward the
container, the basket is placed between the fisherman's knees.
Despite sharing the same name as atob-atob 1, atob-atob 2 is designed to store fish for later
consumption or to raise undersized catch for future use. It is built of stone piles, much like an atob
(Zayas 1964, 91-92). Meanwhile, mirakolhol (&lt; miracle hole) is a term given by those who
introduced the weir from a government agency. It is a hole that has been dug, lined with stones, and
filled with coconut leaves and tree branches. Its purpose is to draw captive fish into the pit, where they
can find protection even if the rising tide forces them to leave.
Because they are not constructed on sloping tidal flats, atob-atob in Gigantes and Dumaguete are
stone fish traps rather than stone tidal weirs. In addition, there are no stone walls with a horse-shoe
shape there. The mirakolhol has elements of FAD incorporated in the shape of old tires and tree
branches while physically resembling an atob. It also serves as a pond for stocks of live fish (Zayas
20004, 64).
3. Atob and taun, the commons, and other inhabitants
A non-return valve hidden in the deepest part of the stone walls is the taun, a bamboo trap owned by
Tranquilino Chavez. Chavez's atob at Tinigbas, Antique was shaped like a crescent moon and
measured roughly 109 meters long and 59 meters wide. Children, mothers, and some elderly folks
gathered here during low tide for their supper's side dish. Not against the law for these gleaners to
enter the atob, they picked up shells, little octopuses, prawns, and seaweed with their hands or some
basic tools. However, they are forbidden from touching Mr. Chavez's taun. When the catch is good,
he does share these with his family and neighbors. The atob is not privately owned, but the taun is
(Zayas 2011, 72-73).
An atob, per se, cannot be owned by anyone. The village owns the reefs and intertidal flats as
common property. The stone tidal weir's “accidental” presence does not imply ownership of the area.
However, the builder can claim the catchments, known as taun, and the stones used to construct the
weir as his, giving him the appearance of ownership because he can harvest from his taun and sell the
stones if he so chooses. Sometimes, stones are just picked up and used again to construct a new atog.
(Zayas 2009, 126).
Until recently (about 2006), family members and neighbors shared the fish, shells, and other items
trapped in the weir after the owner had his fill. While adults collected shells clinging to the stacked
stones, children would play inside the weir. Essentially, weir construction is community-based on
4

�large or small scales. Communities’ social formation often revolves around the atob’s construction,
repair, production, and distribution of catch. Ownership is not about the relationships among members
of the community and the weir per se, but about customary relations among people that evolved as a
result of constructing the weir and using it for their own benefit (Zayas 2011, 72-73).
Sharing the goods without having access to that area suggests that nobody truly controls the sea.
Users never act as owners, just as stewards. The concept of the commons for weir owners partly
involves sharing fish during ritual activities with other people, as well as with sea spirits. Fishermen
think spirits or other beings who are not like us also inhabit the sea. Extensive festivities are held to
usher in the fishing season. In a place with humans, spirits live alongside them.
CONCLUSION
A stone tidal weir called an atob is used in the Philippines to screen marine creatures brought ashore
by the receding tide. It is built on a reef that slopes. Simpler traps, such as a mound of stones broken
up to drive out fish and catch them by hand, or a similar pile of stones but with the disaggregation
aimed at a waiting basket, a pile of stones can also show how an atob works. Specifically, it has a
mouth where a taun basket, where the water emerges from the barricade's lowest point, is situated. As
the name suggests, atob is shown here as the stone fish tidal weir. Looking at this trap's evolution
from simple to complicated reveals how local expertise has enriched its more complex form across a
range of situations. It isn't implied that this is how the atob evolved; rather, it merely describes some
of the ways it might have progressed as the environment required. At first, there was a heap of stones
at the coast, waiting for the ebbing tide to trap aquatic life. The identical pile of stones is then spread
in a different manner when the tide is knee-deep. Organisms in the trap are steered toward a basket
that is positioned between the trapper's legs. The same-named trap's panihod basket serves as a
description of what it is. Two examples of innovations or adaptations to the environment are: (1)
dispersing stones when the water is below the knees in place of dry tidal flats; and (2) using a
panihod, a basket, to catch fleeing species. In deeper water of two fathoms, panapok or pangatob, the
same stone pile is repeated. However, the divers' practice of spreading the stone while enclosing the
pile in a double net is novel. Eventually, a traditional stone tidal weir resembling an atob or atog is
created. This trap has the same features as the earlier ones. reliance on the tide, use of a stone
barricade in place of a pile to scatter fish, removal of stones from the pile to replace the panihod
basket, the replacement of the surrounding net with a stone barricade intended to trap fish, and finally,
the return to the fundamentals of bato becoming atob, show how trappers have imitated nature.
This paper used the association of parts and functions of the weirs to show how similar fishing
techniques can shed light on an ancient fish weir's origin and potential evolution. The Philippine
counterparts are smaller in scale than the enormous ones found in the Penghu archipelago. It is also an
individual or household-type managed fishing method, not clan- or community-based. Due to its
portability, it may be modified according to the islands’ weather, wind, and vegetation. In retrospect,
the Philippine islands have this type of weir, which is characterized by small-scale stone tidal weirs.
Due to their size, they can easily be recycled after usage or transformed into a different type of weir
using various materials. Think about how little stones (in comparison to those in Taiwan) can be
combined with bamboo and a net. By adding additional power in this way, it becomes stronger. The
redesigned weir can also be relocated from one spot to another based on wind or current movement.
The presence or absence of mangroves has an impact on where the fish trap is placed as well. The
latter is crucial since over the past few decades, mangrove habitats have been transformed into
fishponds because of demands from overseas. In particular, shrimp are in high demand. When
mangroves are eliminated, fish stop reproducing because they no longer have a place to hide and food
to eat. In the Philippines, stone tidal weirs function as fish aggregation devices and draw varied
marine creatures, encouraging biodiversity both within and beyond their boundaries.

5

�This communal fish weir embodies the notion of the "commons." To be clear, an atob per se cannot be
owned by anybody; the reefs and intertidal flats belong to the village as common property. The
“accidental” presence of the stone tidal weir does not suggest ownership of the territory. But since he
can harvest from his taun and sell the stones if he so chooses, the builder can claim ownership of the
catchments, or taun, and the stones used to build the weir give him the illusion of ownership. To build
a new atob, stones are occasionally just taken up and put back together (Zayas 2009, 126).
Acknowledgments
Field research in Panay was undertaken with the assistance of Lilian dela Peña in 1992 and 2006.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agustin Umali, Guide to the classification of fishing gear in the Philippines. Washington, D.C.: Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Series. Research report (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service); (1950) 17.
Alcina, Ignacio Francisco. History of the Bisayan People in the Philippine Islands 2 (Translated, edited, and annotated by C.
J. Kobak and L. Gutierrez. Manila: UST Publishing House (Originally published in 1868 as Historia de las Islas e Indios de
Bisayas). 2004.
Nishimura, Asahitaro. Living fossil of oldest fishing gear in Japan. In: VIIIth International Congress of Anthropological and
Ethnological Sciences, Tokyo and Kyoto. 1968.
Paz, Consuelo J.  Appendix: A dictionary of proto‐Philippine morpheme, in A Reconstruction of proto‐Philippine Phonemes
and Morphemes, The ARCHIVE. Diliman: Department of Linguistics University of the Philippines.1988.
Zayas, C. N. Importance of Stone-weir Heritage in the Arch of Instability- Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Paper
presented during the workshop on the project, Indigenous People, Traditional Ecological Knowledge, and Climate Change:
The Iconic Underwater Cultural Heritage of Stone Tidal Weirs, June 11-17, 2023, sponsored by the National Central
University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, and the Bureau of Cultural Heritage (BOCH), Government of Taiwan.2023.
Zayas, C. N. Stone tidal weirs rising from the ruins: cultural scenes from the seascapes of the Pacific Islands. In Journal of
Ocean &amp; Culture 2 (2019):88-109. With minor corrections and an addendum, this present text is an updated version of the
book edited by Rila Mukherjee in 2017 entitled, living with Water - People, lives, and livelihood in Asia and Beyond. Delhi:
Primus Books.
Zayas, C. N. Describing stewardship of the common sea among atob fishers of the Pacific Rim Islands – cases from Japan,
Taiwan, and the Philippines. South Pacific Studies 31, no. 2 (2011): 71-80.
Zayas, C. N. &amp; C. Selerio “Innovation of Stationary Fishing Gear in Guimaras Island, Central Philippines". Philippine
Quarterly of Culture &amp; Society 37 (2009):19-34.
Zayas, C. N. 海の畑　―　ヴィサヤ諸島・澎湖 (プンフー) 諸島・流球諸島の石干見　(Umi no hatake – stone tidal weirs in
the Visayas (Philippines), Pescadroes (Taiwan), and the Ryukyus (Japan)― 2009. In 海の回廊と文化の出会い。橋本　政治
(ed) 。Osaka: Kansai Univ. Press, (2009): 247-281.
Zayas, C. N. Bato nga tinumpok”- Stone tidal weirs as representations of “kabilin”, knowledge heritage, and cultural
landscapes. Aghamtao 18 (2009):24-33.
Zayas, C. N. “Atob and bato– two sides of Philippine lithic tradition.” Studies in Philippine stone tidal weir. Pilipinas 43
(2004): 55-70.
Zayas, C. N. Pangayaw and Tumandok in the Maritime World of the Visayas Islands, In The Fishers of the Visayas. The
Fishers of the Visayas [Visayas Maritime Anthropological Studies I, 1991-93]. Edited by Iwao Ushijima and C. N. Zayas.
Diliman: CSSP Publications Office and the U.P. Press.1994.
Zayas, C. N. et. al. Maritime Anthropological Survey in Panay. Report Submitted to the Institute of Fisheries Policy and
Development Studies, College of Fisheries, University of the Philippines, Miag-ao, Iloilo. Manuscript. 1993.

6

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <itemType itemTypeId="18">
      <name>Document</name>
      <description>A resource containing textual data.  Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6937">
                <text>How atob came to be - the evolution of stone tidal weir in the Philippines</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6938">
                <text>Stone tidal weirs suggest evolutionary stages of how the human-natural world interacts. From it, “commons” is&#13;
reflected in the social and cultural milieus among indigenous/local communities. In the Philippines, an atob is a&#13;
stone tidal weir built on a gradually sloping reef by piling up stones as a barrier to sift sea creatures carried by&#13;
the receding tide. This presentation is based on three data sets that will explain how atob came to be. The first&#13;
set consists of the atob itself. The second set is composed of four related versions of the atob: (a) a simpler weir&#13;
namely atob-atob 1, a fish aggregating device (FAD) of stones where fish are caught by hand, (b) panihod&#13;
which is like atob-atob 1, except that fish is caught thru a basket, (c) atob-atob 2 which is not exactly a trap, but&#13;
an enclosure like a pool to stock live fish for later use, and (d) the mirakolhol (miracle hole), a dug-up hole like&#13;
a basin. The third set is the panapok (&lt; pang- ‘instrumental affix’ + tapok ‘to pile up’) or pangatob, (&lt; pang- +&#13;
atob ‘to trap’) built in shallow waters that combines FAD with an encircling net dropped from the&#13;
boat. Panapok or pangatob is the missing link to the evolution of the atob. Two methods of analysis are&#13;
utilized, i.e., a comparative study of material culture, and a semantic analysis of the terms used in naming and&#13;
describing the weirs.&#13;
In archaeology, the simplest artifact is often identified as the oldest. Could these weirs with the same&#13;
features - stone structure, reliance on the tide, and an enclosure - be one and the same, differing only in the&#13;
stages of their development as trappers reckon their natural world? My data came from field research between&#13;
1990 and 2010, historical materials, and ethnography.&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6939">
                <text>Cynthia Neri Zayas</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6940">
                <text>The Museum of Underwater Archaeology</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6941">
                <text>2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6942">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="80">
            <name>Bibliographic Citation</name>
            <description>A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible.</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="6943">
                <text>Zayas, Cynthia Neri . 2023. “How atob came to be - the evolution of stone tidal weirs in the Philippines.” Edited by Jennifer Craig, Jay Mok, T. Kurt Knoerl, Paul Montgomery, and Bill Jeffrey. In Proceedings of Fifth Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage: Gwangju, The Republic of Korea, November 13-18 2023. The Museum of Underwater Archaeology. URL: https://apconf.omeka.net/exhibits/show/apconfproceedings/item/2012 </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="77">
        <name>Asia-Pac Session 11 2023</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
</itemContainer>
