Content uploaded by Maria Ximena Senatore
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Maria Ximena Senatore on Nov 16, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
.
Senatore, M.X. 2018. Antarctic Historical Sealing Industry and Material Culture. In Headland, R. (Ed) Antarctic Sealing
Industry.
Scott Polar Research Institute, Occasional Publication
, pp. 61-71. Cambridge University, Cambridge
ANTARCTIC HISTORICAL SEALING INDUSTRY AND MATERIAL CULTURE
Maria Ximena Senatore
1
1. Introduction
Archaeological research on the nineteenth century sealer and whaler occupation of the South Shetland
Islands has developed over the past three decades, and the conservation and management of
archaeological sites have become matters of concern for the scientific teams involved. To date, more
than 30 of these sites have been found and marked along the coasts of the islands by archaeologist
and non archaeologist (e.g. Fontes and Fernandez 2016; Lewis Smith and Simpson 1987; Lucero and
Stehberg 1996; Oliva and others 2016; Pearson and Stehberg 2006; Pearson and others 2008; Senatore
and Zarankin 1999; Senatore and others 2008; Stehberg 2003; Stehberg and Cabeza 1987; Stehberg
and Lucero 1996; Stehberg and others 2008; Zarankin and Senatore 2005, 2007, Zarankin and others
2011, among others). Some of these have been excavated and studied in more detail, providing
information about both sealer’s everyday experiences on land and the relationships of sealing and
whaling to the global expansion of capitalism.
Sealing activities were present in the South Shetland Islands since their discovery and during
the entire nineteenth century. These activities contributed to the incorporation of uncharted Antarctic
areas, and the experiences of the groups of sealers left onshore to perform their duties were the first
of their kind in Antarctica. The significance of those expeditions has a low representation in Antarctic
narratives. The nineteenth century material remains of these sealers represent a unique source of
evidence for the study of the early stages of the human exploration and occupation of Antarctica. Site
conservation has not yet been undertaken in the context of the Antarctic Treaty System.
One of the main goals of this paper is to show the analytical power that material culture
studies have for understanding the sealers’ presence in the history of Antarctica. This paper poses the
following general question: What has the study of material remains meant to our knowledge of the
historical sealing industry in Antarctica? As a starting point, sealers presence in Antarctica is
understood in the particular historical context of the expansion of the modern capitalist world. The
sealers presence in the islands represents the process of exploration and of the incorporation of an
unknown and remote place. From this perspective, I am interested in learning about the particularities
of this process by posing specific questions that help characterize the strategies used by sealers in the
South Shetland Islands during the nineteenth century.
This paper presents a summary and meta-analysis of the data produced during three decades
of archaeological research on the topic, addressing specific questions regarding the decisions involved
!
1
CONICET-INAPL, Universidad de Buenos Aires and Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia
Austral
mxsenatore@conicet.gov.ar
in the uses of space, the selection of the economic activities developed, the organization of onshore
activities and possible temporal changes in these choices. More specifically, this paper examines
whether the sealer strategies were expansive or focalized in terms of their use of space, were
opportunistic or specialized in terms of the resources exploited and were flexible or rigid in terms of
their organization as well as to what degree they changed through time during the nineteenth century.
The data to answer these questions were gathered through a deep review of all the currently published
information about sealers sites in the South Shetland Islands, including publications from our own
team as well as other groups.
2. Master narratives and sealers stories
Sealers as well as whalers have a low representation in Antarctic narratives, which are mainly focused
on the era of Antarctic exploration and its well-known explorers, specific dates and events at the end
of nineteenth century and the beginning of the 20th century (Senatore 2011, 2014). In this context,
master narratives show recurrences in the way they present sealers in Antarctic history. The narratives
tend to give over-simplified descriptions of the sealer presence in Antarctica. In general, they focus
on the event of the discovery of the islands and the associated names of captains or ships. In terms of
chronology, they constrain the sealer presence to the early seasons of the beginning of the nineteenth
century and as linked to the availability of fur seals. Additionally, they focus on the life on board
ships and leave aside the lives of sealers onshore. Written evidence is the main source of information,
while the information arising from material culture studies is generally not considered.
The description of sealers in Antarctic narratives presents the notion that sealers hunted fur
seals almost exclusively and that, after the overexploitation of these resources, their scarcity forced
ships to abandon the South Shetland Islands for 50 years
2
. In 1840, after the financial failures of
sealing expeditions due to the lack of seals “Commercial interest in Antarctica –the prime motive for
past exploration- disappeared for the next fifty years” (Landis 2001: 61). “Sealers returned to the
South Shetlands when news spread that the fur seals had repopulated the islands”, ca. 1880. (Landis
2001: 284). “After the 1840s, Antarctica was seldom visited until the beginning of the Heroic Era in
the 1890s” (Rosove 2002: 55). Antarctic narratives focus on the names of captains and ships as well
as the written testimonies of the captains of their perspectives describing the landings of gangs along
the rockeries, which lack detail about everyday life onshore. Generalizations are common in the few
instances where this topic is addressed. For example, “Conditions in the South Shetland Islands were
harsh for the sealers … They lived under overturned boats, ate whatever they could kill, shivered by
fires fuelled with penguin skins, and sometimes starved to death on the dangerous shores” (Landis
2001, p. 283). It is interesting to note that only recently, as a remarkably exception, have the material
remains of sealers begun to feed historical narratives. “Gangs of sealers lived ashore in shelters built
against a cliff-face, with whale-rib roves covered by sailcloth and walls of boulders caulked with
sealskin. At one sealers’ cave on Livingston Island, whale vertebrae had served as seats, and
moccasins of canvas and sealskin remained to be recorded in 1959” (Griffiths 2007: 56).
Historical literature has placed a special focus on the discovery of the South Shetland Islands,
their early exploration, and the initial sealing seasons in ca. 1825 (e.g., Balch 1902; Baughman 1993;
Bertrand 1971; Campbell 2000; Gould 1940; Martin 1940; Miers 1920; Pyne 2000; Stackpole 1955).
However, other perspectives have offered valuable contributions for understanding the sealer
!
2
The sealers interest in other resources as elephant seal oil was present since the early records of the activity (e.g. Allyn
1879, Clarke 1887, Fanning 1834, Smith 1844, Starbuck 1878). Databases on sealing and whaling expeditions to South
Shetland Islands shows their presence along the nineteenth century (e.g. Headland 1989, 2009; Senatore 2011; Steward
1990).
presence in a broader context. They presented the fluctuation of the industry on a global scale using
chronological approaches (e.g., Berguño 1993a; 1993b, Headland 1989) economic studies (e.g.,
Basberg and Headland 2008; Jones 1981a, 1981b, Richards 2003) and social approaches (e.g.
Madisson 2014). From this perspective, the widespread Antarctic narratives do not comprehensively
or accurately represent what is known from historical studies about sealers, and they often neglect the
relation between the sealer presence in the South Shetland Islands and the process of capitalist
expansion on a global scale.
3. Archaeology and material culture studies
This section of the paper presents a meta-analysis of the archaeological research on the sealer
presence in the South Shetland Islands. The main focus is understanding the decisions involved with
the use of space, the selection of the economic activities developed, the organizations of the activities
onshore, and the potential changes of these choices over time. The specific questions driving this
research are as follows: A) were sealer’s strategies expansive or focalized in terms of use of space?
B) Could sealer’s strategies be characterized as opportunistic or specialized in terms of the resources
exploited? C) Does the organization of the landings, in terms of size of the group, length of stay and
supplies carried, correspond to a flexible or rigid model? And finally, D) to what degree did any of
these strategies change during the nineteenth century?
3.1 Data and Methods
Data from South Shetland Islands concerning sealers was derived from published papers and books,
dating from the 1980s to the present, which were mostly written in Spanish. Archaeological research
has offered a great body of information about sealer camps, huts and objects (Pearson and Senatore
2014, Pearson and Stehberg 2006, Pearson and others 2008, Senatore and others 2008, Stehberg 2003,
Stehberg and Cabeza 1984, Zarankin and Senatore 2005, 2007). To date, more than 30 sites have
been found via fieldwork observations and archaeological surveys along the coasts of the Islands
(Figure 3). Of these sites, 19 have been excavated; these 19 sites are the focus of this paper. Sites are
typically found either in isolation or forming groups with heterogeneous structures, dimensions, and
functions. They were often built to take advantage of the local orography, structured inside caves or
protected by natural shelters, such as the rock faces of cliffs or sea-stack, and only rarely appeared on
open beaches. The structures share some building techniques, such as the raw materials used,
morphologies, or sizes. Additionally, these structures are often simple huts enclosed with low walls
made of stones without mortar that were roofed with seal skins and other fabrics, such as sail-coats,
held together by whale ribs or jaws, wood, or timber, which were used as beams. The raw materials
used are primarily those available locally on the beach.
3.1.1 Data collection and map elaboration
The published bibliographical information of the 19 excavated archaeological sites was studied to
derive detailed data for each case. Even though all the published papers and books about the
archaeological research in the South Shetland Islands were read and scrutinized, the references cited
include only those works that offered raw data or information relevant to the aims of this paper. The
spatial analysis was based on assessing the distributions of the sites along the islands. The
archaeological sites were positioned on a local map based on their geographical position taken from
the published information. The South Shetland Islands maritime contours were obtained from the
Trinity Peninsula area and the South Shetland Islands map from “Coastal-change and glaciological
map of the Trinity Peninsula area and South Shetland Islands, Antarctica: 1843–200” (Ferrigno and
others 2006). The geographic coordinates of the sites were projected on the map using a grid of 1°
latitude by 3° longitude as a reference and using a stereographic polar projection transformation.
The procedure for data collection in each case was based on three basic categories of the
archaeological record: structures, objects and resources. Each of these categories informed multiple
aspects of each site. In particular, we focused on the following variables: chronology, frequency of
occupation, resources exploited, size of the group, length of the stay, and supplies (Figure 1). The
following sections describe in more detail how each of these site descriptors was obtained from the
archaeological records.
Archaeological record categories
Structures
Objects
Resources
Site descriptors
Chronology
-
Absolute methods
History of Technology (e.g.
bottle, ammunition, sledge)
-
Frequency of
occupation
Stratigraphy
Reclamation (reutilization of part of the
structures raw material)
History of Technology (e.g.
bottle, ammunition, sledge)
Taphonomy
Resources
exploited
Specific use (e.g. open fire-places)
Functionality (e.g. storage buildings)
Specific use (e.g. pegs, barrels)
Fuel (amount)
Bones: processing- marcs pattern
Size of the group
Number
Size
Functionality
Density
Diversity
Density
Diversity
Length of the
stay
Quality of buildings and time investment
(e.g. roof, rock selection)
Organization and maintenance of huts
(e.g. garbage disposal)
Consuming time activities (e.g.
games, scrimshaw)
Manufacturing of objects (e.g.
pegs, moccasins)
Density
Diversity of consumed resources
Supplies
Non local raw material (e.g. wood, fabric)
Cooking artefacts (e.g. marmite,
teapot)
Fuel (e.g. mineral charcoal)
Food (e.g. non-local species)
Figure 1. Organization of the data collection. Synthesis of the categories of the archaeological record and the
variables considered.
3.1.2 Structures
The interpretation of each site’s stratigraphy is the starting point for understanding the time sequences
at each site. Information about the processes of the formations of the deposits over time and the
formation histories of the sites was used for the determination of the frequencies of occupation of
the huts, i.e., whether they had one-time occupations or multiple occupations. The uses of the
structures were also key information required in order to determine the types of resources exploited.
Structures for specific uses linked to fur seals and elephant oil exploitation were identified among the
sites, specifically including structures used for boiling oil or the storage of seals furs. Examples of
this sort of structure identification include the large size of the open fire place used for placing the
pot for producing oil from seal elephant blubber observed at PS1 (Senatore and Zarankin 1999) as
well as the structures used as storage places for furs identified using chemical analysis of soil residues
in CS3-4 (Villagran and others 2011). The interpretation of the occupation organization informed us
about the size of the group. The numbers, sizes and functionalities of the structures were valuable
data in this sense. For an assessment of the length of the stay ashore, crucial information came from
the qualities of the buildings and associated time investments, including, for example, the presence
of a roof or the selection of rocks observed at PE1-4 and PS1. Other sources of information are the
organization and the maintenance of the living spaces inside the huts, including, for example, the
location of the garbage disposal outside the main hut in PS1 (Senatore and others 2008) and in the
cave LL1-2 (Zarankin and Senatore 2007). Last, the identification of non-local raw materials in the
buildings informs us about the inclusion of supplies at the shelter. For example, the amount of wood
in the huts of PMa or the sailcoat, fabric, and wood observed at CN1.
3.1.3 Objects
Artefacts are valuable sources of information about the chronologies of modern archaeological
contexts (Lawrence 2006). Absolute and relative methods were applied to estimate the dates of the
archaeological deposits and sites. Thermoluminescence was used to determine the absolute dates
associated with the ceramic samples of LL1
3
. The calculation of the mean beginning and end dates
for the formation of a deposit is based on the presence of certain types of artefacts used during a
specific period of time and diagnostic elements linked to limited manufacturing period of each
category of artefacts. The typological classification of historical materials was also another procedure
used to establish the estimated chronology of a site. There are some types of artefacts considered to
be diagnostics due to their uses being limited to a certain period of time. For example, round lead
ammunitions (as found in CN4, CS3-4) were used until the middle of the nineteenth century, until
muskets began to be replaced by rifles
4
. Similarly, the sledge found in PD2 was dated via its typology
(Stehberg and others 2009, Stehberg and others 2008). In addition, there are specific elements in some
categories of artefacts that are considered diagnostic because they are influenced by changes in their
manufacturing procedures occurring at specific dates, such as the bases and finishes of glass
containers or the stem/bowl junction and the mouthpieces of clay tobacco pipes. Diagnostics elements
in bottles were useful to establish a mean date for PS1 and PV (Moreno 2000).
Artefacts with specific uses were also identified and linked to the resources exploited. For
example, these include such artefacts as the wooden pegs used for drying the extended seals skins
along the shore before transporting them to the ships. A considerable number of wooden pegs were
found at PS1 and CS3-4. The size of the group landed could be related to the numbers and types of
discarded objects, the combination of measures showing high and low densities, and the diversities
of artefacts. For example, in EI, a relatively large number of a single category of objects (shoes) were
interpreted as being left by a large group (20 shoes in a hut). The length of the stay was determined
though the identification of objects that indicate time-consuming activities. Objects linked to spare
time were examples of this sort, such as the presence of a wooden board game (PS1), checkers (PS1,
CN1), and a scrimshaw (RI1). Other examples were the remains that indicated the manufacturing of
artefacts, such as the debris of the manufacturing of pegs at PS1, of moccasins at LL1, and of game
checkers at PS1.
!
3
Stehberg and others 2008: 7
Sample ID
Reference
P (Gy)
D (Gy/año)
Age
Calendan date
UCTL 1863
LL1- G3 Surface
0,92 ± 0,09
5,22*10-3
175 ± 15 BP
1830 AD
UCTL 1864
LL1 E8 Level -70-
75
1,14 ± 0,11
5,70*10-3
200 ± 20 BP
1805 AD
4
The use of rifles by sealers is mentioned in the Logbook of the Schooner Thomas Hunt commanded by Captain H.
Appleman that sailed from Stonington, Connecticut, towards the New South Shetlands from July 22, 1873 to May 9, 1874.
In the October 17 entry, the first mate describes a landing at Cape St. John, Staten Island, South Atlantic Ocean “… a boat
landed again … found sea lions. Shot a few for practice with the rifle @11 am the boat returned …” (p. 43). Logbook,
New Bedford Whaling Museum, MNBdf Hi. 840 MR 722 / 412-493.
The identifications of objects used for the everyday life activities of the groups, like cooking,
informed about their inclusion as part of the supplies. Examples include the iron marmite found at
CN2 and the teapot at RI1.
3.1.4 Resources
Taphonomy studies contributed to the determination of the frequencies of occupation of the sites,
offering key and detailed information about the histories of formation of the assemblages of faunal
remains. These studies were limited to PYa2 (Cartajena and Labarca 2007), LL1-2 (Muñoz 2000) and
CN1-4 (Cruz 2011). In addition, archaeozoological and archaeobotanical analyses produced valuable
information about resources exploited, consumed, and supplied for several sites (Cartajena and
Labarca 2007, Cruz 2011, Muñoz 2000). The identification of non-local animal, vegetal, and mineral
species as parts of the resources consumed were useful to establish the types and amounts of supplies.
For example, seeds of barley, oat, and wheat were identified at PMa; bones of pigs were identified at
LL1-2; bones of cows were identified at PYa2, LL1 and CN1; and bones of sheep were identified at
CN2-3
5
. In terms of the resources exploited, the amount of fuel associated with open fireplaces was
a diagnostic element for determining those activities that required large and long duration fires, such
as the boiling of blubber used in oil production. The identification of specific patterns of marks in fur
seal bones indicate that activities associated with the extraction of the skins of fur seals occurred at
PMa. Last, the size of the group and the length of the stay ashore were also aided by measures of
the densities and diversities of the resources consumed in the huts.
4. Results
This section presents the results of the analyses and a discussion of the patterns identified. The
interpretations of the cases are summarized in Figure 2, including references to the bibliographical
sources. The analysis was limited to published information, while cases where information was
inconclusive or unavailable were coded as n/a (not available).
The chronologies estimated for the sites were primarily earlier in the nineteenth century.
From the 19 excavated sites, 17 were interpreted as occupations during the early nineteenth century,
and two were interpreted as occupations during the late nineteenth century. The later occupation sites
were RI2 on Rugged Island and PD2, located on the western coast of Byers Peninsula of Livingston
Island (see Figure 3). The site RI2 was matched to historical information about one particular
expedition and was interpreted as the remains belonging to a group of men marooned in 1876, which
was left by the ship Florence (Pearson and Stehberg 2006). The site PD2 was interpreted as a hut built
for the storage of a wooden sledge (Pearson and others 2010). Typological information of the sledge
was used to estimate the site’s date of use. These sites could be interpreted as particular situations
and are not representative of the middle or late nineteenth century in the South Shetland Islands
(Stehberg and others 2008, Stehberg and others 2009).
!
5
In addition, dog remains were found at CN3. The identification of 3 fragments of bones of Canidae –canis familiaris in
the CN3 sample was done by the archaeozoologist Dr. Mariana De Nigris in 2011. These bones showed no evidence of
having been processed.
Sites
Chronology
Frequency of
occupation
Resources
exploited
Size of
the group
Length of the
stay
Supplies
Bibliographic
sources
1
EP
Early nineteenth
century
n/a
Eo
Big
Longer
Fu
Oliva and others 2016
2
PS1
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Ss-
Eo
Small
Longer
Fu,
Fo(v)
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 109-
116, 163-170; Senatore and others
2008: 265-268; Moreno 2000
3
CN1-4
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Ss
Big
Longer
Fu,
Fo(a),
Sh, Ob,
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 116-
124, 170-173; Senatore and others.
2008; Cruz MS 2011
4
CN4
Early nineteenth
century
2nd
n/a
Small
Shorter
Senatore and others 2008: 268-272;
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 173
5
CS3-4
Early nineteenth
century
1st
SS-
Eo
Big
n/a
Fu
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 75-80,
160 Zarankin and others 2011: 20-25;
Moreno 2000; Villagran and Schaefer
2011
6
Pe3
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Eo
n/a
n/a
Fu
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 89, 161,
Zarankin et al. 2011: 29-33
7
Pe1
Early nineteenth
century
1st
n/a
Small
Shorter
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 87
Zarankin and others 2011: 27-29
8
PV
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Ss
Small
Longer
Fu, Sh
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 85-86,
161; Zarankin and others. 2011: 25-
26, Moreno 2000
9
LL1-2
Early nineteenth
century
n/a
n/a
n/a
Longer
Fu,
Fo(a)
Zarankin and Senatore 2007: 90-91,
124-129, 174-175; Muñoz 2000
10
PYa2
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Ss
Small
Shorter
Fo(a)
Stehberg and Lucero 1996: 59-82
Stehberg 2003: 85-96; Cartajena and
Labarca 2007
11
PMa
Early nineteenth
century
1st ý
Ss
Big
Longer
Fu,
Fo(v)
Stehberg 2003: 96-100
12
EI
Early nineteenth
century
1st ý
Ss
Big
Longer
Fu, Sh
Stehberg 2003: 102-106
13
CoD
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Eo
Big
Longer
Fu, Ob
Stehberg 2003: 109-129
14
CP
Early nineteenth
century
1st
Ss-
Eo
Big
Shorter
Fu, Ob
Stehberg and Cabeza 1987: 83-111;
Stehberg 2003: 75-84
15
RR
Early nineteenth
century
1st
n/a
Small
n/a
Fu
Stehberg 2003: 135-136, 140-144
16
VK
Early nineteenth
century
1st
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Stehberg 2003: 137-138, 144-147
17
RI1
Early nineteenth
century
1st ý
ý
Ss
n/a
Longer
Fu
Pearson and Stehberg 2006
18
RI2
Late nineteenth
century, c.a. 1870
1st
Ss
Small
Longer
Fu, Ob
Pearson and Stehberg 2006
19
PD2
Late nineteenth
century (c.a 1890)
1st
n/a
n/a
Shorter
Ob
Pearson and others 2008; Stehberg
and others 2008; Stheberg and others
2009; Zarankin and Senatore 2007:
84-85, 129-130.
Figure 2. Information from the excavated sites (n=19) in the South Shetland Islands
Regarding the frequency of occupation, 18 of the 19 sites were used only once and were not
reoccupied. The site CN1-4 located on the Byers Peninsula of Livingston Island was the exception as
it was partially reused for living or as a shelter. In one of the four structures at this site (CN4), two
levels of occupation were identified. Both occupations were dated as occurring in the earlier
nineteenth century.
Figure 3. Map of sealer sites in the South Shetland Islands
Regarding the resources exploited during the occupations of the early nineteenth century
sites, activities linked to the extraction of seal skins were observed at 9 sites and those linked to oil
production from sea elephant blubber were observed at 6 sites (see Figure 4). Among these, 3 sites
showed evidence of the exploitation of both types of resources. The results also indicate diversities
in the lengths of the stay. Short occupations were observed at 4 sites, and long stays were observed
for 9 cases. The sizes of the groups also show diversity, ranging from small groups at 7 sites to bigger
ones in 6 cases. The relations between the types of resources exploited and the lengths of the stays
were not found. Additionally, any association between the resources and the sizes of the group were
missing (2 cross-tabulations, p>.05). This lack of associations may be due to the limited sample size
(only between 9 and 10 sites were included in these analyses).
Figure 4. Length of stay, size of the groups, and resources exploited at the early nineteenth century sites.
Cross-tabulation analyses showed no indication of associations between the types of resources exploited and
the size of the group or the length of the stay throughout the early nineteenth century sites.
Supplies
Sites
Fuel
Food
(animal)
Food
(vegetal)
Objects
Shelter
1
EP
2
PS1
3
CN1-4
4
CN4
5
CS3-4
6
Pe3
7
Pe1
8
PV
9
LL1-2
10
PYa2
11
PMa
12
EI
13
CoD
14
CP
15
RR
16
VK
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
17
RI1
Figure 5. Type of supplies found at early nineteenth century sites. Dark cells indicate the presences
of each specific supply type within each site.
The supplies found at the early nineteenth century sites are observed to include diverse types
and combinations. These supplies include raw materials for shelters, animal and vegetal species for
food and objects for the development of the everyday life activities of the group, such as cooking
(Figure 5). The most frequent supply was the fuel (i.e., mineral charcoal, found at 13 sites) associated
with economic activities as well as with cooking and the heating of the huts. Other types of supplies
(food, objects, or shelter) were found at 9 sites, with no associations between the different types of
supplies identified across the sites. Supplies of non-local foods were found at 5 sites (3 containing
vegetal supplies, e.g., seeds, and 2 containing animal food supplies), objects used for the everyday
life activities of the groups were found at 3 sites, and supplies used for shelter were found at 3 sites.
5. Discussion
Archaeological research offered a useful perspective for answering the questions posed in this paper.
The widespread locations of the sites, their chronologies and their lack of reutilization are consistent
with a fast expansive strategy for the incorporation of new unknown places (question A). The results
also suggested that the sealers’ uses of the spaces of the South Shetland Islands changed with time
(question D). These changes can be described with respect to the changes in visibility of the early and
late nineteenth century occupations, with the early occupations having highly visible impacts onshore
and the later occupations having low visibility material impacts onshore. These changes are consistent
with either changes in the strategy or frequency of the sealer occupations. For the early sites, the
economic activities were linked to the exploitation of elephant seals, fur seals, and a combination of
both. This could indicate an opportunistic strategy rather than a specialized strategy focused on a
specific resource (question B). Last, the lack of observed regularities of the organizational aspects of
the occupations, such as groups sizes, the lengths of stays, and the supplies involved, point towards a
flexible rather than rigid strategy for the early nineteenth century occupations (question C).
5.1 Limitations of the analyses and future research
There are limitations of the analyses presented in this paper that suggest potential lines of future
research and improvements. First, the low number of cases used (19 excavated sites) limits the power
of the analyses as well as the generalizability of their results. Second, the lack of availability of raw
data for some sites in the published record further limits our ability to perform sensitive inferences
for some of the posed research questions. Last, the diversity of the criteria for recording, organizing,
and publishing the existing information from the excavations across the different studies as well as
the diversity of studies and analyses performed on the archaeological assemblages gathered during
the field works also limit our abilities to meaningfully compare and extrapolate between the individual
archaeological contexts. Considering these limitations, efforts to normalize and share the information
gathered across multiple studies and sites could considerably improve our ability to generalize beyond
individual cases.
There are interesting observations and remaining questions about the uses of space and the
temporal changes that suggest further areas for research. One is the predominance of the early
nineteenth century sites and the potentially missing (either absent or not yet identified) sites from the
middle and late nineteenth century. To address this issue, future research could focus on specific
analyses involving currently excavated sites as well as unexcavated or other as yet undiscovered sites.
First, extending laboratory analyses could help to more accurately determine chronologies of the
assemblages gathered at the currently excavated sites. Second, analysing the information about the
sites that have not yet been excavated could help confirm that these sites did derived from sealer
occupations. Additional analyses of these sites could also help evaluate the potential patterns that may
be related to the presence of late nineteenth century sites or to the temporal changes in the organization
of the camps onshore. Third, developing historical research of expedition logbooks from the middle
and late nineteenth century that mention the South Shetland Islands could help identify geographical
places mentioned as landing points, thus driving future archaeological surveys in currently
unexplored areas.
6. Conclusions
This study indicates that the strategies used by sealers were flexible in their practices and
opportunistic in their exploitation of resources. The strategy for the incorporation of new unknown
places was likely fast and expansive, as evidenced by the chronologies and the scarce reoccupations
of the studied sites. Our analyses do not seem to imply the implementation of a pre-existing rigid
plan, like those common during the heroic era. This was likely a high-risk strategy, as it confronted
unknown places and circumstances with no clear predefined plan as well as with a heavy reliance on
local resources.
Despite the abundance of archaeological studies over the past 30 years, much remains to be
done. Future of archaeological research depends heavily on the preservation of these sites. Sealer
histories and sites have traditionally had low visibilities in Antarctic narratives as well as in policy-
making decisions linked to Antarctic heritage. Increasing the visibility of sealers’ histories in the
current Antarctic narratives as well as helping draft future proposals for the conservation of sealer
sites needs to be driven by scientific research.
The possibility of achieving the conservation of the sealer sites depends on understanding
how the process of heritage making occurs in Antarctica and the role that science could play in it
(Avango 2016, Leane and others 2016, Roura 2017, Senatore 2016). Currently, this heritage is mainly
conceptualized from an essentialist perspective (i.e., as a thing that has intrinsic values) and is
supported by either national interests or unchallenged master narratives. This conceptualization has
marginalized sealer legacies and sealer sites as these are interpreted as having no intrinsic value and
as not being linked to any particular national interests or identities. Distancing ourselves from these
influences, social scientists could argue that sealer sites need to be protected in order to preserve
evidence for future research and knowledge as well as to play a more active role in the process of
heritage making in Antarctica.
Support
This work has been supported by funds from the Universidad de Buenos Aires UBACyT
20020130100787B (2014-2017) and the Universidad de la Patagonia Austral, Argentina PI-UNPA
D29/072 (2016-2018).
References cited
Avango, D. 2016. Acting Artifacts: On the Meanings of Material Culture in Antarctica. In Eds
Roberts, P., van der Watt, L-M. and A. Howkins, Antarctica and the Humanities, pp.159-179 DOI:
10.1057/978-1-137-54575-6_7 ·
Allyn, G. L. 1879. The Old Sailor’s Story or a short account of the Life, Adventures and Voyages of
Capt. Gurdon Allyn, Including three trips around the world, written by himself in the seventy-eighth
years of his age. Norwich, Connecticut: Gordon Wilcox.
Balch, E. 1902. Antarctica. Philadelphia: Press of Allen, Lane and Scott.
Basberg, B. L. 2008. Antarctic Tourism and the Maritime Heritage Discussion Paper SAM 20: 1-24.
Berben: NHH.
Basberg, B. J. and R. K. Headland. 2008. The nineteenth Century Antarctic Sealing Industry: Source,
Data and Economic Significance. Bergen: Institutt for Samfunnøkonomi.
Baughman, T.H. 1993. Before the Heroes Came: Antarctica in the 1890s University of Nebraska
Press: Lincoln and London.
Berguño, J. 1993a. Las Shetland del Sur: el ciclo lobero. Primera parte. Boletín Antártico Chileno
abril, pp. 5-13.
Berguño, J. 1993b. Las Shetland del Sur: el ciclo lobero. Segunda parte. Boletín Antártico Chileno
octubre, pp. 2-9.
Bertrand, K. 1971. Americans in the Antarctica 1775-1948. American Geographical Society Special
Publication, 39.
Campbell, R.J. 2000. The Discovery of the South Shetlands Islands 1819-1820 as recorded in
contemporary documents and the Journal of Midshipman C.W. Poynter. The Hakluyt Society Series
III, Volume 4.
Cartajena, I. and R. E. Labarca. 2007. Patrones históricos de cuereo en lobos marinos: la evidencia
de los abrigos 1 y 2 de playa Yámana (Isla Livingston, Antártica chilena). Magallania 35 (1): 95-105.
Clarke, A. H. 1887. The Antarctic Fur Seal and Sea Elephant industries. In: Goode, G. B. The
fisheries and fishing industries of the United States. Washington: Government Printer.
Cruz, M. J. 2011. Aproximaciones a las prácticas alimenticias de los grupos foqueros (Islas Shetland
del Sur-siglo XIX). Tesis de Licenciatura Departamento de Ciencias Antropológicas, orientación
Arqueología, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Undergraduate Thesis, MS.
Fanning, E. 1834. Voyages round the world. London: O. Rich, Red Lion Square.
Ferrigno, J. G., A.J. Cook, K.M. Foley, R. S. Williams Jr., Ch. Swithinbank, A. J. Fox, J. W. Thomson
and J. Sievers.!2006. Coastal-change and glaciological map of the Trinity Peninsula area and South
Shetland Islands, Antarctica: 1843–2001: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series
Map I–2600–A, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000, with 32-p. pamphlet. Available online at
http://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/2600/A
Griffiths, T. 2007. Slicing the silence. Voyaging to Antarctica. Harvard University Press: Cambridge,
MA and London.
Gould, R. 1941. The Charting of the South Shetland Islands. Mariner’s Mirror 27 (3): 206-242.
Headland, R. K. 1989. Chronological List of Antarctic Expeditions and Related Historical Events.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Headland, R. K. 2009. A Chronology of Antarctic Exploration. A Synopsis of Events and Activities
from the Earliest Times until the International Polar Years, 2007-09 London: Bernard Quaritch.
Jones, A.G.1981. The British Southern Whale and Seal Fisheries Part I. The Great Circle 3 (1): 20-
29
Jones, A.G.1981. The British Southern Whale and Seal Fisheries Part I. The Great Circle 3 (2): 90-
102
Landis, M. 2001. Antarctica. Exploring the extremes, 400 years of adventure. Chicago: Chicago
Review Press.
Lawrence, S. 2006. Artefacts of the Moden World. In J. Balme and A. Paterson, Eds, Archeology in
Practice pp.362-388. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Leane, E., Winter, T. and J.F. Salazar. 2016. Caught between nationalism and internationalism:
replicating histories of Antarctica in Hobart, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(3): 214-
227, DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2015.1114010
Lewis , R.I. and H.W. Simpson. 1987 Early nineteenth century sealers’ refuges on Livingston Island,
South Shetland Islands. British Antarctic Survey Bulletin No 74, pp. 49-72
Lucero, V. and R. Stehberg. 1996. Arqueología Histórica Antártica: relevamiento y excavación de
sitios de cazadores de lobos del siglo pasado. Islas Shetland del Sur. Historical Archaeology in Latin
America 14: 99-106
Maddison, B. 2014. Class and Colonialism in Antarctic Exploration, 1750-1920. United Kingdom:
Pickering and Chatto Publishers.
Martin, L. 1940. Antarctica Discovered by a Connecticut Yankeee, Captain Nathaniel Brown Palmer.
The Geographical Review XXX (4): 529-562.
Miers, J. 1920. Account of the Discovery of New South Shetland, with Observations on its
Importance in Geographical, Commercial and Political Point of View: With Two Plates. Edinburgh
Philosophical Review III: 367-380.
Moreno, P. 2000. Botellas de la peninsula Byers, I. Livingston, Shetland del Sur. Actas del Congreso
Argentino de Americanistas, pp. 207-228. Buenos Aires: Liga Naval.
Muñoz, A.S. 2000. Arqueofaunas de la isla Livingston, Shetland del Sur. Un estudio exploratorio de
los restos de mamíferos recuperados en la península Byers. Archaeofauna 9: 39-57.
Oliva, M., J. Ruiz-Fernández, A. Zarankin A. Casanova-Katny and J. Nofre. 2016. Geoecology and
Historical Heritage in the Ice-Free Area of Elephant Point (Antarctica). Proposal for Future
Environmental Protection. Geoheritage DOI 10.1007/s12371-016-0184-1
Pearson, M. and M.X. Senatore. 2014. Historical Archaeology in Antarctica. Encyclopedia Global
Archaeology. New York: Springer.
Pearson, M. and R. Stehberg. 2006. Nineteenth century sealing sites on Rugged Island, South
Shetland Islands. Polar Record 42: 1-13.
Pearson, M., R. Stehberg, A. Zarankin, M.X. Senatore and C. Gatica. 2008. ‘Sealer’s sledge
excavated on Livingston Island, South Shetland Islands’. Polar Record 44: 362-4.
Pearson, M., R. Stehberg, A. Zarankin, M.X. Senatore and C. Gatica. 2010. Conserving the oldest
historic sites in the Antarctic: the challenges in managing the sealing sites in the South Shetland
Islands”. Polar Record 46: 57-64.
Pyne, S. 1986. The Ice: A Journey to Antarctica. Iowa: University of Iowa Press.
Richards, R. 2003. New market evidence on the depletion of southern fur seals: 1788-1833. New
Zealand Journal of Zoology 30: 1-9.
Rosove, M. 2002. Let Heroes Speak. Antarctic Explorers 1772-1922. New York: The Berkeley
Publisher Group.
Roura, R. 2017 Antarctic cultural heritage: geopolitics and management. In K. Dodds, A. D.
Hemmings and P. Roberts, Eds., Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica. 468-484. Edward Elgar
Publishing Ltd Elgaronline.
Senatore, M.X. 2011a. Antártida como narrativa. Vestigios, Revista Latinoamericana de Arqueologia
Histórica 5 (2): 159-184.
Senatore, M.X. 2011b. Sounds and Silences in Antarctica. A Historic database on sealing and whaling
expeditions to South Shetland Island from 1840 to 1890. Paper presented at SCAR History Group
Workshop, July 26-29, Stellenbosch.
Senatore, M.X. 2014. Archaeology and the master narratives of the Antarctic History. Poster
presented at XXXIII SCAR-OSCM, August 2014, Auckland.
Senatore, M.X. 2016. Encounters: people-object interaction in the process of heritage-making in
Antarctica. Proceedings of the Polar Museum Network Conference. Oslo: Fram Museum.
Senatore, M.X. and A. Zarankin. 1999. Arqueologıa histórica y expansión capitalista. Prácticas
cotidianas y grupos operarios en Peninsula Byers, Isla Livingston de Islas Shetland del Sur. In A.
Zarankin and F. Acuto Eds., Sed Non Satiata. Teoría Social en la Arqueología Latinoamericana
Contemporánea, pp. 171-88. Buenos Aires: Ediciones del Tridente.
Senatore, M.X., A. Zarankin, M. Salerno, I.V. Valladares, and M.J, Cruz. 2008. Historias bajo cero.
Arqueología de las primeras ocupaciones humanas en Antártida. In , L. Borrero and N. Franco (Eds),
Arqueología del Extremo Sur de Sudaméricapp. 117-130. Buenos Aires: DIPA-IMHICIHU-
CONICET.
Smith, T. W. 1844. A Narrative of the Life, Travels and Sufferings of Thomas W. Smith. Boston:
Wm. C. Hill.
Stackpole, E.A. 1955. The voyage of the Huron and the Huntress; the American sealers and the
discovery of the continent of Antarctica. Mystic, Connecticut
Starbuck, A. 1878. History of the American whale fishery from its earliest inception to the year 1876.
Part IV of the Report of the U.S. Commission on Fish and Fisheries, Washington.
Stehberg, R.L. 2003. Arqueología histórica antártica: Aborıgenes sudamericanos en los mares
subantárticos en el siglo XIX. Chile: Centro de Investigaciones Diego Barros Arana.
Stehberg, R.L. 2004. Archaeologists document historical heritage in the South Shetlands. Cultural
Heritage in the Arctic and Antarctic Regions. Monuments and Sites VIII, pp. 69-73. Lorenskog:
IPHC- ICOMOS.
Stehberg, R. and A. Cabeza. 1987. Comienzos de la Arqueología Histórica Antártica en el Sitio
Cuatro Pircas. Revista Chilena de Antropología 6: 83-111
Stehberg, R. and V. Lucero 1996. Excavaciones arqueológicas en Playa Yámana, Cabo Shirreff, Isla
Livingston, Antártica. Serie Científica Instituto Antártico Chileno 46:59-81.
Stehberg, R., M. Pearson, R. Blanchette, and J.A. Jurgens. 2009. A further note on a sealer's sledge,
discovered on Livingston Island, South Shetland Islands. Polar Record 45 (3): 275.
Stehberg, R., M. Pearson, A. Zarankin, M.X. Senatore and C. Gatica. 2008. Protection and
Preservation of the oldest sites of the Antarctic: the case of Fildes Peninsula and Byers Peninsula in
the South Shetlands Islands. In S. Bär and P. Chaplin, Eds., Historical Polar Bases Preservation and
Management, Monuments and Sites XIV Special Issue, pp. 80-94. Lorenskog: IPHC- ICOMOS.
Stehberg, R., A. Zarankin, M. Pearson, C. Gatica and. M.X. Senatore. 2008. Nuevos antecedents
arqueológicos sobre la caza de lobos y focas en Penísnula Byers. Boletín Antártico Chileno, 7-8.
Steward, J. 1990. Antarctica. An Encyclopedia. Jefferson, North Carolina and London: McFarland
& Company, Inc. Publishers.
Villagran, X.S. and Carlos E.G. R. Schaefer. 2011. Geoarqueologia das primeiras ocupaçones na
Antártida. Vestigios, Revista Latinoamericana de Arqueologia Histórica 5 (2): 115-136
Zarankin, A. and M.X. Senatore. 2005. Archaeology in Antarctica: nineteenth-century capitalism
expansion strategies. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9: 43-56.
Zarankin, A. and M.X. Senatore. 2007. Historias de un pasado en blanco: Arqueología Histórica
Antártica. Belo Horizonte: Argumentum.
Zarankin, A., S. Hissa, M. Salerno, Y. Froner, G. Radicchi, L.G. Resende de Assis and A. Batista.
2011. Paisagens em branco: Arquologia e Antropologia Antárticas Avanços e desafios. Vestigios,
Revista Latinoamericana de Arqueologia Histórica 5 (2): 11-51
