Book Review: Robert Kurson's Pirate Hunters

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

CT-Rich

Contributor
Messages
6,259
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Hamden, Connecticut
I just finished Robert Kurson's second installment of the Dirk Pitt, I mean John Chatterton series. Actually, snarky comments aside, Pirate Hunters, Treasure, Obsession and the Search for a Legendary Pirate Ship was a very interesting book. Kurson is an excellent writer and he present his multi-layer tale in an engaging format. The story follows real-life NUMA agent, I mean wreck diving legend, John Chatterton and his partner John Mattera on a quest to locate and identify the rarest and most mythic of all wrecks, a golden age pirate ship.


With only one other confirmed pirate wreck known (the Cape Cod wreck of the Whydah), Chatterton is looking for what might be a capstone accomplishment for one of the most spectacular wreck diving careers of all time. Chatterton and his Partner, Mattera, a ex-security specialist, with a passing association with the Gambino crime family are planning on locating there own Spanish treasure galleon off the coast of the Dominican Republic. Their plan is derailed with an offer from Tracy Bowden to a newer and more lucrative quest: Finding the wreck of The Golden Fleece, the ship Captained by the pirate Joseph Bannister.



The theme of the book is Chatterton's and Mattera's investigation in to the history of Bannister, the golden age of piracy and the modern business of treasure hunting. Although one can never really see into the mind of a man three hundred years removed from today, Chatterton and Mattera make some very interesting suppositions about what drove Bannister, a successful and well respected sea captain, to suddenly take up piracy and giving up his otherwise respectable and safe existence. One of the disappointments of the book was that it mentioned the UNESCO treaty that will grant ownership of shipwrecks, but it never did any significant analysis of the issues.



While I can understand that treasure hunters would seek out a ga-zillion dollar gold hoard and because of the risk of theft and poacher's might not be the most thoroughly observant archaeologists (although several of them have taken considerable pains to treat the sights in a archaeologically appropriate manner), the focus of this story is identifying and recovering artifacts from a unique site. A 17th century wreck that has lain undisturbed for more than 300 years. And unlike most treasure ships that were ripped open on coral reef in the midst of epic hurricanes, this wreck was a casualty of combat and sank in a protected area. The book has Bowden and his team excavating the site by hand and simply removing artifacts from the site, destroying any historical context there might have been. This may not be a fair depiction because Mr Kurson may have been adjusting the narrative to make the story work better. But it also cuts to the heart of one of the most important complaints against treasure hunters doing archaeology for profit. If a historically valuable wreck is excavated for profit, some of the most valuable treasures may be overlooked in the grab for gold. Certainly there is a cash value in a pirate beads, bowels and muskets, but if it is removed from its context we lose the chance to fill in the story of how these men lived, fought and died.



Over all it is a great book, filled with interesting histories of all the characters, historic and modern. This book is much lighter on the diving aspects, since there is little drama in diving to thirty feet in the Caribbean. Even so, there is still plenty of action on the high seas and in the streets of the Dominican Republic. I think the book would have been better served if it had taken a more critical look at treasure hunting versus maintaining archaeological integrity. There are valid arguments to be made on both sides of the debate especially since not all treasures are created equal.
 
The ending of the book was disappointing. It fizzled out like a damp firework. A pity because the story was interesting. I suspect that it was more so because of Kurson's good storytelling techniques - I have a feeling that the reality was quite different and quite boring except for Mattera's close encounters with real day pirates.
 
The ending of the book was disappointing. It fizzled out like a damp firework. A pity because the story was interesting. I suspect that it was more so because of Kurson's good storytelling techniques - I have a feeling that the reality was quite different and quite boring except for Mattera's close encounters with real day pirates.

There was a lot of good stuff in there and Kurson played the three levels of the story well (Chatterton, Treasure hunting and the historical record), but I think he stepped around the big elephant in the room by not taking direct look at the ethics of treasure hunting.

If they simply pulled up every identifiable relic without careful documentation of location, Bowden and Chatterton were destroying the context and much of the historical value beyond saying this was a pirate gun, this is a pirate ring. Those items might do well at auction, but it tells us nothing about the pirates. On the flip side, these ships won't be found or they will be secretly pillaged and gold melted down and all the non-gold treasures destroyed. The Treasure hunters risk life limb and their own fortunes to find these wrecks. What is fair compensation for them? The book was around 250 pages, which is not particularly long. I think there was certainly enough room to frame the issues and argue a point. Shadow divers had plenty to say about modern war dead and the ethics of wreck diving. I think Kurson side stepped a major ethical debate by pretty much ignoring it, which was a missed opportunity.
 
The integrity of the Golden Fleece was not disturbed. There was an archeologist from the Department of Cultura on the vessel for the actual salvage
and every artifact was surrendered to Cultura for conservation and classification. The hull of the GF was an amazing find and it remains intact in situ.
There is much debate between commercial archeology and the tenured academics. It is unfortunate that neither side has an answer for the problem, so the fight will continue.
 
Hi CT-Rich

I read your comments, and wanted to address what you feel may have been an important part of the book?

1) The body of the wreck was buried by more than 5 feet of sediment and mud. It's not like this shipwreck was just sitting on the bottom, and anyone would have found it. The truth here is that it wouldn't have been found, and just about everyone else who was looking for it was looking in the wrong place.
2) With that said, there is no historical context that has been disturbed. We only pulled up artifacts that were around the perimeter of the hull, and didn't penetrate into the ship itself to leave it intact.
3) To preserve the wood, the hull has been re-buried
4) As John5555 said. All of our work was both in partnership with and under the direct observation and supervision of the Dominican Republic's "Cultura" department. They have all of the artifacts in preservation, and the cut received by the "Pirate Hunters" is completely fair salvor's share.

I don't think that in this case there would be a major ethical debate, and Rob didn't avoid it by any means... it wasn't even a consideration. Bannister's ship isn't property of any sovereign nation, he was a pirate. The wreck lay completely in the waters of the country of the Dominican Republic, and as I said... Nobody would have stumbled upon this wreck unless they set out to find it (and everyone else who was looking was looking in the wrong place by more than 5 miles).
 
Hi CT-Rich

I read your comments, and wanted to address what you feel may have been an important part of the book?

1) The body of the wreck was buried by more than 5 feet of sediment and mud. It's not like this shipwreck was just sitting on the bottom, and anyone would have found it. The truth here is that it wouldn't have been found, and just about everyone else who was looking for it was looking in the wrong place.
2) With that said, there is no historical context that has been disturbed. We only pulled up artifacts that were around the perimeter of the hull, and didn't penetrate into the ship itself to leave it intact.
3) To preserve the wood, the hull has been re-buried
4) As John5555 said. All of our work was both in partnership with and under the direct observation and supervision of the Dominican Republic's "Cultura" department. They have all of the artifacts in preservation, and the cut received by the "Pirate Hunters" is completely fair salvor's share.

I don't think that in this case there would be a major ethical debate, and Rob didn't avoid it by any means... it wasn't even a consideration. Bannister's ship isn't property of any sovereign nation, he was a pirate. The wreck lay completely in the waters of the country of the Dominican Republic, and as I said... Nobody would have stumbled upon this wreck unless they set out to find it (and everyone else who was looking was looking in the wrong place by more than 5 miles).
Thanks for your comments Howard. I appreciate the extra details. I wasn't trying to implicate that anyone involved was doing anything illegal or even unethical, but I thought the topic of treasure hunting controversy was worthy of space in an already excellent read. I've already received some clarification from John Materra that the wreck was excavated in a responsible manner. But I appreciate the additional details.
Rich
 
Really enjoyed the book. Kurson is a great writer and both Chatterton and Mattera are interesting and serious guys. I've recommended the book to several people and without exception they've all enjoyed it.

Book exceeded my expectations.

IMHO any inclusion of the debate (which I thought was adequately discussed in the book) between commercial archaeology and tenured academics would have detracted from the story. However, I agree with OP that its a issue worth discussing, just in another book or venue.
 
read it and enjoyed it. I even got Kurson to sign it for me. It was not a thrilling wild adventure (mostly) like shadow divers but it was riveting in it's own way
 
I enjoyed the book, but not as much as I enjoyed Shadow Divers. Brilliant tale though, and I find all the characters involved fascinating, both the present day and historic.Just didnt flow quite as well as the previous book in my opinion. Both worth a read though.
 

Back
Top Bottom