Visit https://ebookluna.

com to download the full version and

explore more ebooks

Structure in the Sea: The Science, Technology and

Effects of Purpose-Built Reefs and Related Surfaces
1st edition - eBook PDF

_____ Click the link below to download _____

https://ebookluna.com/download/structure-in-the-sea-
the-science-technology-and-effects-of-purpose-built-
reefs-and-related-surfaces-ebook-pdf/

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookluna.com

Here are some recommended products that might interest you.
You can download now and explore!

Electronic Structure and Surfaces of Sulfide Minerals:

Density Functional Theory and Applications 1st edition-
eBook PDF
https://ebookluna.com/download/electronic-structure-and-surfaces-of-
sulfide-minerals-density-functional-theory-and-applications-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

Antioxidants Effects in Health: The Bright and the Dark

Side 1st Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebookluna.com/download/antioxidants-effects-in-health-the-
bright-and-the-dark-side-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) The International Law of the Sea

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-the-international-law-of-the-
sea/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) The Science of Animal Growth and Meat

Technology 2nd Edition

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-the-science-of-animal-growth-
and-meat-technology-2nd-edition/

ebookluna.com
The Xiaomi Way Customer Engagement Strategies That Built
One of the Largest Smartphone Companies in the World 1st
edition - eBook PDF
https://ebookluna.com/download/the-xiaomi-way-customer-engagement-
strategies-that-built-one-of-the-largest-smartphone-companies-in-the-
world-ebook-pdf/
ebookluna.com

Fate and Impact of Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems.

From the Coastline to the Open Sea 1st Edition Edition
Juan Baztan - eBook PDF
https://ebookluna.com/download/fate-and-impact-of-microplastics-in-
marine-ecosystems-from-the-coastline-to-the-open-sea-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

Science and Technology of Liquid Metal Coolants in Nuclear

Engineering 1st Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebookluna.com/download/science-and-technology-of-liquid-metal-
coolants-in-nuclear-engineering-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

Oceanography of the Mediterranean Sea: An Introductory

Guide 1st Edition- eBook PDF

https://ebookluna.com/download/oceanography-of-the-mediterranean-sea-
an-introductory-guide-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Principles of the Carriage of Goods by Sea

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-principles-of-the-carriage-of-
goods-by-sea/

ebookluna.com
STRUCTURE IN THE SEA
This page intentionally left blank
STRUCTURE IN
THE SEA
THE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND
EFFECTS OF PURPOSE-BUILT REEFS
AND RELATED SURFACES

WILLIAM SEAMAN
Elsevier
Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the
Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance
Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher
(other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden
our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become
necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and
using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information
or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom
they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any
liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or
otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the
material herein.

ISBN: 978-0-12-823425-9

For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at

https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Candice Janco

Acquisitions Editor: Maria Elekidou
Editorial Project Manager: Sara Valentino
Production Project Manager: Bharatwaj Varatharajan
Cover Designer: Victoria Pearson

Typeset by TNQ Technologies

 To four who profoundly influenced the
foundations of this book:
Carter Gilbert, Giulio Relini, David Whit-
marsh, and Patrice Francour.
Four scholars, four friends.

v
This page intentionally left blank
 Contents

Foreword ix 2.4 Importance of long-term datasets 65

Preface and Acknowledgments xi 2.5 Citizen science as a component of research on
human-made habitats 68
2.6 Building blocks 69
1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of
References 70
natural and human-made habitats Further reading 74

1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse,

hidden 5 3. Purposes and planning of human-made
1.2 Human-made sea floor habitat structure: the reef structure
many definitions of artificial reef 14
1.3 Building knowledge for the technology of 3.1 Perspectives on human-made reef structures in
primary structured reefs 20 the context of ecosystem services and
1.4 Scales, centers, and periods of activity connectivity 81
concerning human-made seafloor structures 25 3.2 Purposes of human-made seafloor structure:
1.5 Results at-a-glance: successes and shortcomings annotated accounts 84
in deployment of purpose-built structure 28 3.3 Planning to optimize intentional seafloor
1.6 Suspended fish attracting devices, “FADs”: structure 122
a separate story, a cautionary tale? 31 3.4 Building blocks 133
1.7 Secondary structure and substrate: unintended References 133
reef effects 32 Further reading 143
1.8 Building blocks 34
References 34 4. Design, siting, engineering, construction,
Further reading 40
and evaluation of human-made reefs
2. Scientific foundations for artificial reefs 4.1 Natural and human-made seascapes in context:
and related human-made sea floor scales, connections, and effects 150
structures 4.2 The case for design of human-made ocean
structures 151
2.1 Sciences of natural hard-bottom benthic 4.3 Siting and location of seafloor human-made
environments and reef ecosystems 44 structure, from units to complexes 153
2.2 Context and scope of research disciplines, 4.4 Appropriate and effective materials and
milestones, and evolving priorities for the fabrication of reef units 159
science and technology of human-made aquatic 4.5 Design criteria and practices: form and function
habitats 52 of purpose-built seafloor structure 172
2.3 Questions asked, hypotheses and going beyond 4.6 From shore to sea: on-land and on-site
attraction-production debate 61 construction and placement practices 186

vii
viii CONTENTS

4.7 Postconstruction monitoring and evaluation/ References 267

assessment: compliance, efficacy, Further reading 271
environment 190
4.8 Building blocks 195 7. Secondary reefs: infrastructure as
References 197 a growing component of ocean ecosystems
Further reading 203
7.1 The worldwide expansion of marine
5. Life at and around purpose-built reef infrastructure 274
and related undersea structures 7.2 Representative secondary structures and their
reef effects 277
5.1 Introduction 206 7.3 Trends for marine infrastructure design and
5.2 Human-made seafloor structure in an ecological management in ocean ecosystems 286
context 207 7.4 Building blocks 294
5.3 Abiotic and biotic factors influence reef habitats References 294
and communities/assemblages 208 Further reading 298
5.4 Life-sustaining resources, patterns, processes, and
community phenomena at structure 216 8. Human-made structure and seafloor
5.5 Biomimicry and maturity at purpose-built reefs: habitat in a changing ocean
two sides of the same coin? 234
5.6 Reef effects in the surrounding 8.1 A changing planet 300
environment 238 8.2 The changing ocean, past, present, and future:
5.7 Building blocks 240 effects on seafloor ecosystems 304
References 241 8.3 Stakeholders, managers, and scientists respond
Further reading 246 to changing oceans: concerns and emerging
solutions 310
6. Integration and roles of human-made 8.4 From concepts to tools and application: a role
structure in ocean resources management for human-made structure in changing oceans?
313
6.1 Context: scope, issues, rationales, and 8.5 Building Blocks 321
approaches in ocean management 249 References 323
6.2 Marine resources, management, and the role Further reading 326
and performance of human-made reefs 253
6.3 Building blocks 267 Index 327
 Foreword

Dear Readers of Structure in the Sea, scoured them from cover to cover, learning
As I descended through the cold green about artificial reefs and related structures.
water, the shadow of the intentionally sunk In 2022, research on submerged structures
ship now resting upright on the seafloor has grown into its own branch of modern
became more defined. A diversity of fish ocean science. Understanding artificial reefs
swarmed around me, as large predatory and other human-made habitats has,
jacks corralled glittering bait-balls and perhaps, never been more pressing, as
cryptic fish poked their heads out of the increased human use of the coastal ocean is
ship’s nooks and crannies. While I had heard often accompanied by the introduction of
of “artificial reefs,” I had not seen one until novel structures ranging from artificial reefs
this recreational dive. I was instantly fasci- and offshore energy infrastructure to artifi-
nated by how these purposely sunk struc- cial islands and shoreline armoring struc-
tures create habitat for marine life and tures. Global estimates suggest that the
wanted to learn more about them, including amount of artificial structures in the ocean
basics of what they are, why they are covered at least 32,000 km2 in 2018 and will
deployed, when they have been deployed, increase to 39,400 km2 by 2028 (Bugnot et al.
who deploys them, and how they function 2021, Nature Sustainability). Despite the
underwater. The year was 2008, and I was an projected increase in artificial structures
undergraduate student. dotting the coastal ocean, key knowledge
In 2008, purpose-built reefs were gaps remain in our understanding of how
deployed globally to achieve a variety of these structures function ecologically. Recent
goals, ranging from enhancing and restoring findings suggest that purpose-built struc-
habitat to mitigating environmental impacts. tures can support large predators and facili-
Foundational artificial reef research during tate species at their range edges, but other
the 1970s and 1980s largely focusing on ecological roles remain more elusive. For
ecological succession and colonization had example, do species receive the same ener-
burgeoned by 2008 into a pronounced area getic benefit from artificial structures as
of research. Dr. William Seaman had pub- natural equivalents? Which spatial arrange-
lished seminal volumes on artificial struc- ments of artificial structures are optimal for
tures 17 years (Artificial Habitats for Marine enhancing density or biomass of particular
and Freshwater Fisheries, 1991) and 8 years species? Do artificial structures ever truly
(Artificial Reef Evaluation: with Application to mimic natural habitat? Answering these
Natural Marine Habitats, 2000) prior. As part sorts of longstanding questions can help
of my doctoral research several years later, determine how to design and site artificial
Seaman’s books would become the most structures to maximize ecological benefits
well-used or dog-eared in my collection, as I while also achieving human needs. With

ix
 Visit https://ebookluna.com
now to explore a diverse
collection of ebooks available
in formats like PDF, EPUB, and
MOBI, compatible with all
devices. Don’t miss the chance
to enjoy exciting offers and
quickly download high-quality
materials in just a few simple
steps!
x FOREWORD

increasing impacts from climate change and accessible. He comes from the school of
other environmental stressors, I anticipate metaphorical writers who not only take joy
that a major challenge over the next decade in sculpting words into sentences but who
will be effectively scaling up ecological also strike a balance of scientific writing and
research on the benefits and impacts of prose. Gems are sprinkled throughout his
human-made structures from local scales to newest book, including probing questions
broader regional and global scales. like “When do artificial reefs stop being
Seaman’s latest book, Structure in the Sea, artificial?” and “How might purpose-built
will become the international guide for arti- reefs provide ecosystem services?” that
ficial reef science for researchers, managers, warrant reflection. Forays into the etymol-
conservation practitioners, and stakeholders. ogy of words like “biomimicry” that are
Seaman synthesizes global artificial or effortlessly supplemented by quotations
purpose-built reef research, spanning from from William Shakespeare and Hippocrates
the history of the structures to how they add extra spice to the volume. Seaman’s
become reefs. He interweaves information latest contribution, Structure in the Sea, will
on diverse topics, including design, ecology, undoubtedly become a cornerstone of your
and technology, in his volume and places, library, as it will in mine.
this information within a broader applied Sincerely,
context that Seaman can envision, given his
decades of firsthand experience on artificial
reef research and management. Ultimately,
this volume serves as a guide that will pave
the way toward answering longstanding Avery B. Paxton, PhD.
ecological questions about the roles of Avery B. Paxton is a Marine Ecologist with
purpose-built structures. It moves the field CSS, Inc. in support of the National Oceanic and
forward by exploring how ecological roles Atmospheric Administration’s National Centers
provided by artificial structures can be for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), USA
scaled up and harnessed for future applica-
tions, especially those related to marine Reference
spatial planning and ecosystem-based
management. Bugnot, A.B., Mayer-Pinto, M., Airoldi, L., et al., 2021.
Current and projected global extent of marine built
Lastly, one of the reasons that Seaman’s structures. Nat Sustain 4 (2021), 33e41. https://doi.
previous books were the most dog-eared in org/10.1038/s41893-020-00595-1.
my library is because his writing style is
 Preface and Acknowledgments

Yonder is the sea, great and wide, which recreation and eco-tourism, and underwater
teems with things innumerable, living things arts and education. Similarly, a diverse and
both small and great.
expanding scientific effort worldwide has
Psalm 104:25.
rigorously documented many of the func-
Standing at water’s edge, children seem tions and ecosystem services, and to a lesser
naturally inclined to pick up and then throw, degree performance, of introduced seafloor
drop, or place stones into the stream, lake, or structure. This book tells something of the
ocean before them. Some adults can be synergy between these two realms.
observed to do this also. Or wish that they Indeed, the science, technology, and ap-
could! What is it about putting things into plications of so-called “artificial reefs” and
water that attracts people? The genesis of allied structures on the floor of the world’s
this book stems from another kind of oceans have sufficiently matured so that a
attraction, based on a simple biological synthesis of their successes and shortcom-
observation that has been put into practice ings is made possible. Thus, this volume
since ancient times. Namely, that objects examines these structures, increasingly
placed into a body of water commonly will referred to as human-made, purpose-built,
host a variety of living things, some in or by a specific descriptor such as fishing or
passing, some as residents, some small, some diving reef, submerged breakwater, or un-
great. Over the centuries, people worldwide derwater art installation, for example, and
have taken advantage of this phenomenon, recognizes the host of scholars and public
mainly to improve harvest of ocean fishes, and private entities that have contributed to
plants, and other aquatic organisms growing rigorous, multidisciplinary, and productive
on, or in, or drawn to piles of rocks, bundles international research efforts in the natural
of brush, or even sunken boats lying on the and social sciences. (Aspects of structure of
bottom. Items suspended in the water col- the sea are treated more selectively, in
umn may have some of these effects. conjunction with human-made objects.)
In roughly the last half-century new ma- Findings outlined in the book’s eight chap-
terials, innovative designs, larger scales of ters seek to make a timely contribution to
size and space, numerous purposes other continued advancement and application of
than fishing, establishment of reef-related innovative ecological, socio-economic, and
businesses, and refinement of research tech- engineering research. Of great importance
niques are among the trends accompanying are the plentiful opportunities for student
and enabling a proliferation of purposely training.
submerged ocean structures. The variety of Preparation of this book began with an
stakeholders and practitioners has increased initial focus on the traditional 20-plus pur-
in over 60 nations to encompass newer aims poses of intentional deployment of seafloor
such as habitat restoration and conservation, structure, for which a rich literature exists,

xi
xii PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

and which are reviewed extensively in this of individuals and organizations concerned
volume. It soon became apparent that the with stewardship of ecological and human
book would be incomplete without attention resources, and issues of oceans research and
to the emerging grand challenge of global governance. For example, at a global level,
ocean change. That change includes the the United Nations has proclaimed 2021
widespread development and impacts of e2030 as a “Decade of Ocean Science for
marine infrastructure, such as shoreline Sustainable Development” to address twin
protection reefs and offshore energy pro- aspects of ocean science and ocean health
duction platforms, and especially for this and sustainability; “Sustainable Develop-
book the “reef effects” (unintentional) that in ment Goals” are among the tangible sup-
quantity and impact may well outstrip those porting efforts.
of historical, intentional structures. Likewise, In the spirit of international collegiality I
the roles of all human-made structure dedicate this volume to four pillars of the
installed on the seafloor must be evaluated in aquatic sciences academy: Dr. Carter Gilbert
the context of the warming, acidification, (deceased), University of Florida, United
deoxygenation and rising levels of the sea States, a valued mentor with prodigious
worldwide, and biogeographic change and knowledge of fish taxonomy, biogeography,
ecosystem connectivity therein. Urgency is and ecology, a meticulous author, and
documented at length in a joint statement of source of boundless professional and per-
111 professional aquatic science and fishery sonal generosity; Dr. David Whitmarsh
organizations from all continents, dated (deceased), University of Portsmouth,
2021. England, an economist who brought
Practices of this field of environmental overdue attention to socio-economic aspects
science, concerned with structure in the sea, of seafloor structure and worked across
are consistent with other technical subjects, disciplinary lines to create bioeconomic
including, for example, automotive engi- models concerning reef fisheries, conducted
neering (test tracks) and commercial food seminal research in fisheries economics, and
products development (test kitchens). Agri- captivated students at home and interna-
culture has seen productive cooperation tionally; Dr. Patrice Francour (deceased),
among farmers, academia, and industry in Université Côte d’Azur, France, whose
development of numerous types of equip- breadth of expertise and interests in marine
ment, seeds, and breeds. Here the ocean ecology not only contributed extensive
serves as a testing ground, an “experiment research breakthroughs and advanced the
station” for scientists and practitioners scholarship of students but also informed the
(including citizen scientists) concerned with conservation of species, habitats, and pro-
human-made marine habitat to ask good tected areas, and afforded citizens opportu-
questions, rigorously develop and analyze nities for research; and Dr. Giulio Relini,
databases, and give and receive feedback to Università di Genova, Italy, one of the deans
achieve mutually compatible goals, particu- of European marine biology and a prolific
larly as they are couched in terms of sus- publisher concerning purpose-built seafloor
tainability and follow the maxim, “do no structures, who with colleagues developed
harm.” one of the longest research programs con-
Beyond the immediate purposes of this cerning multipurpose reefs and thus has
book, hopefully it reflects or leads to provided important sets of data to the larger
awareness of the dedication and imagination community. The good humor of each of
 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii
these individuals has made working with background for writing this book has been
them a joy. Their integrity and scientific strengthened by connections and collabora-
expertise has made it a privilege to work tions with individuals and organizations
with them in publications. concerned with ocean science and seafloor
My own inspirations for this book may structure. I have been fortunate to have had
well have originated as a child during deep- early associations with various expert re-
sea, recreational angling trips in the Atlantic searchers, educators, and administrators
Ocean off Long Island, New York, United including those affiliated with the European
States, when my father took me on board a Artificial Reef Research Network (Drs. Ant-
pay-for-passage party boat once or twice ony Jensen, Ken Collins, and Gianna Fabi),
each summer. Looking back, I wonder, did the University of Hawaii Institute of Marine
our captain sometimes take his clients to Biology (Dr. Richard Brock), and many years
secret, uncharted “personal reefs” that he of collaboration with colleagues at the Musée
had built, guided only by popular sports océanographique de Monaco (Drs. François
magazine articles, in the absence of research Simard and Denis Allemand), the United
findings? (We always caught fish!) As a States National Marine Fisheries Service
neophyte ichthyologist in college, my scien- (Richard Stone, Drs. James Bohnsack and
tific curiosities were fed by observations of Margaret Miller), and the Florida Fish and
freshwater fishes building nests of stones in Wildlife Conservation Commission (Keith
rocky streams. Among the numerous edu- Mille). Dr. William Lindberg, University of
cators who helped my early understanding Florida, was particularly gracious in
and own lifelong efforts in this field, I including me in formative research expedi-
acknowledge the mentorship of Dr. Edward tions, and Dr. Thomas Frazer, University of
C. Raney at Cornell University and the South Florida, was a significant companion
aforementioned Dr. Carter R. Gilbert at the at sea.
University of Florida in my training in Measurable assistance and guidance over
ichthyology and aquatic sciences generally. the course of assembling this book came
As a beginning college faculty member (fac- from colleagues in three ways. First, I
ing the vagaries of an all too real publish-or- gratefully thank the collegial staff at Elsevier
perish environment) unforeseen events publishing, starting with Louisa Munro who
fortuitously steered me into the earliest as senior acquisitions editor initiated a con-
stages of the transition of artificial reef versation with me about submitting a book
development from an art to a science. Thus, proposal and then secured three anonymous
in concert with the administrative aspects of reviews that were helpful in launching the
my career with the Florida Sea Grant College project. The informative, patient advice of
Program, I was fortunate to develop aca- senior editorial project manager Sara Valen-
demic involvement with purpose-built reefs tino, as well as Robin Sulit and colleagues at
as enabled by Donald Y. Aska, and then the helpdesk for online manuscript prepa-
measurably sustained by Dr. James C. Cato. ration, and then the skilled, thoughtful
From that time and decades later into guidance of production project manager
retirement, I have been witness to the crea- Bharatwaj Varatharajan, were invaluable,
tivity of research programs and networks in particularly as I was among a group of au-
various areas of the world devoted to un- thors in a beta test of the electronic platform
derstanding and explaining human-made for publication. Secondly, general comments
seafloor structure functions. The scientific ranging from the style of writing to sources
xiv PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

of particular points of information were strengthen its scientific content. All of these
provided by Dr. Sanford Berg, University of individuals freely shared of their knowledge.
Florida, Dr. Joseph Serafy, University of Inasmuch as writing this book was a self-
Miami, and Dr. Daniel Pondella, Occidental funded project, I express great thanks to
College. Toward completion of the manu- my wife, Anne, for volunteering over many
script, an extended online meeting with a unpaid hours to apply her software and
nonprofit reef development group in Tamil electronic data management skills to
Nadu state, India (Punit Dhandhania and bringing order out of chaos in arranging and
colleagues) provided the unexpected oppor- enhancing images, securing permissions,
tunity to review the utility of contents, and getting the manuscript (and me) across
chapter by chapter, for the underlying sci- the finish line.
entific foundations and practical approaches It is customary and appropriate for an
intended for all readers. I am grateful to author to declare responsibility for errors
Zachary Romano, Springer publishers, for an that make their way into a manuscript, and I
introduction to international efforts for sus- ask the reader’s patience if the document
taining development of ocean resources and falls short of expectations. As sole author I
assistance with obtaining important have tried to cast a wide net over subjects of
publications. differing familiarity. Thus, I acknowledge
Finally, Dr. Giulio Relini, Professor, Uni- that some coverage may be uneven or
versità di Genova and the Italian Society of incomplete, but hopefully all of it is accurate
Marine Biology, and Dr. Avery Paxton, Ma- and factual. No endorsements of commercial
rine Ecologist, NOAA National Centers for interests are intended. With an eye to the
Coastal Ocean Science, served as irreplace- breadth of topics associated with purpose-
able readers and sounding boards with built seafloor structure, I have planted a
overall comments on the style and technical few seeds in the text to suggest opportunities
content of drafts of the manuscript. Expert, for future book-length treatments of certain
detailed technical review of portions of the subjects, especially by an “up-and-coming”
manuscript came from Dr. Jacob Allgeier, generation of scholars.
Assistant Professor, University of Michigan,
and Dr. Mark Hixon, Professor, University of William Seaman
Hawaii, whose generous investment of time University of Florida, and
and deep subject matter knowledge pro- Montreat, North Carolina,
vided comments that importantly helped to United States of America
streamline the manuscript text and
 C H A P T E R

1
Structure in the sea: a diversity of
natural and human-made habitats

O U T L I N E

1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, 1.5 Results at-a-glance: successes and
diverse, hidden 5 shortcomings in deployment of
1.1.1 Maritime footprints 6 purpose-built structure 28
1.1.2 Seafloor mapping and monitoring 9
1.6 Suspended fish attracting devices,
1.1.3 Hard seafloor ecosystems 12
“FADs”: a separate story, a
1.2 Human-made sea floor habitat cautionary tale? 31
structure: the many definitions of
1.7 Secondary structure and substrate:
artificial reef 14
unintended reef effects 32
1.3 Building knowledge for the
1.8 Building blocks 34
technology of primary structured
reefs 20 References 34
1.4 Scales, centers, and periods of Further reading 40
activity concerning human-made
seafloor structures 25

Structure on the floor of the world’s oceans would be a common sight if only shoreside
observers could readily look beneath the surface of the sea. There, they would see a sub-
merged landscape that includes significant topographies of varied vertical profile, color,
texture, stability, and biodiversity: Consider that for eons, natural geologic and biophysical
forces have created features such as sea mounts, rocky outcrops, and coral reefs. Over
millennia, humans have lost countless ships accidently; other debris from the land have
washed into the ocean and settled on the bottom. And in more recent centuries, meanwhile,

Structure in the Sea

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823425-9.00005-9 1 © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
2 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

people have been intentional in introducing natural and human-made objects onto the sea-
floor to exploit, manage, or create an aspect, product or service of the ocean’s natural pro-
cesses and resources.
Taken together but at varying degrees all these structuresdancient and recent, natural and
manufactured, and purposeful and accidentaldsupport a panoply of marine communities,
habitats, and assemblages (Fig. 1.1). In turn, they contribute to a range of numerous essential
ecosystem services represented in human endeavors including fishing, recreation, and coastal
protection and restoration. They also offer humanity a window into the fascinating world on
the bottom of the ocean.
The particular role of introduced structure in modifying environmental processes so as to
cause or achievedwhether purposefully or unintentionallydmanifold biological, engineer-
ing, and socio-economic objectives is the subject of this book. At its core, its content derives
from centuries-old placement of human-made objects on the ocean floor, to sustain fishing
enhancement practices. Recent years have seen these practices extensively diversified and
transformed in at least 60 countries, with associated experiences and studies forming the sub-
stantial body of knowledge (and wisdom) that this volume addresses.
The broad range of global interests concerned with the specific topic of purpose-built
habitat structure, most universally recognized as “artificial reefs,” in the sea includes a large
multidisciplinary research and development sector, both basic and applied, as well as a seem-
ingly larger array, perhaps by an order of magnitude (or even more), of highly diverse stake-
holders and practitioners. These two sectors have been realizing a synergy, which is a theme
of this volume. On the one hand, investigators from biology, chemistry, economics, engineer-
ing, law, oceanography, policy, sociology, and other fields are building a growing and

FIGURE 1.1A Structure on the sea floor, shown in images of similar scales, includes (A) natural features such as
scleractinian coral reefs in the Pacific Ocean, American Samoa, and (B) rocky reef, Cordell Bank, California, United
States, and (C) manufactured objects such as computer-printed 3-D composite structure in Monaco. Also deployed
are often larger objects, (D), originally intended for commercial or environmental objectives and now repurposed as
secondary reefs, such as ships in Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, United States. Images courtesy of: A, United
States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), K. Lino; B, NOAA Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary, D. Roberts; C, Association Monegasque Pour la Protection de la Nature, Stéphane Jamme; D, NOAA Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries, https://floridakeys.noaa.gov/artificialreefs/more.html.
1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats 3

FIGURE 1.1B

FIGURE 1.1C

FIGURE 1.1D
4 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

reliable body of technical knowledge. Meanwhile, user interests depend on structure-based

influences and processes that support artisanal and commercial wild seafood harvest and
aquaculture, recreational fishing and diving, tourism, ecosystem conservation, habitat resto-
ration, shoreline protection, energy and mineral extraction, education, art, spirituality and
formulation of management policy (Table 1.1). Effective collaborations are resulting in
more effective reef system design, formal and informal education, and expansion of knowl-
edge through citizen science.
Besides the many thousands of seafloor objects intended to yield principally benefits of an
environmental nature, as identified here, and commonly referred to as “primary reefs,”
another class of objects dedicated as infrastructure for ocean-dependent industrial, commer-
cial, and engineering works, nonetheless also can yield, as “secondary reefs,” unintentional
yet significant habitat-related outcomes comparable to those achieved with primary reefs,
such as production of biomass. Likewise, they can have negative impacts. Due to the large
collective footprint of such structures on the floor of the ocean, including shipwrecks, break-
waters, and energy production platforms and pipelines that serve as de facto reefs, the book

TABLE 1.1 Reef purposes.

Submerged breakwaters for coastal defense: Beach protection and erosion control
Surfing reefs for recreation
Protect benthic habitat and fish populations with antitrawling structures
Biofiltration reefs to remove nutrients and improve water quality

Divert recreational diver pressure from natural reefs

Create or enhance suitable areas for recreational diving
Restore depleted habitats: Off-site mitigation for habitat destruction
Restore depleted habitats: On-site restoration of disturbed habitats
Mitigate or enhance reef effects of marine infrastructure

Mitigate ocean global climate change effects

Enhance artisanal fisheries
Enhance commercial fisheries
Enhance recreational fisheries
Marine ranching and aquaculture for food production
Produce biomass for on-site aquaculture harvest

Provide structure as release sites for hatchery-produced fishes

Ornamental aquarium species production
Conservation of individual species or defined taxa
Conservation using human-made reef structure in protected areas
Underwater cultural, spiritual, and artistic enhancement
Formal and informal education

Sites for experimentation and observational research

Multipurpose reef systems
 1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden 5
offers detailed coverage of them in their unintended but significantdand apparently
expandingdbiological role.
“Structure in the Sea” reviews both scholarly and more applied aspects of the history,
development, status, and emerging trends in research, technology, and intended outcomes
of human-made reef habitats and allied sea floor structures in the world’s oceans. It aims
to serve and inform those seeking to understand, utilize, and add to the research undergird-
ing modern reef deployment efforts and to guide and equip stakeholders requiring technical
foundations and best practices to participate sustainably in the context of marine spatial plan-
ning and ecosystem management. As relevant, important information and experiences
derived from both traditional ecological knowledge and also the study and management
of natural structure such as coral reefs and “hard bottom” habitats are presented. Supple-
mental online resources include videography of laboratory, topside, and underwater subjects.
The “human element” is an essential part of this book. It includes a look at the perceptions
of experts and the general public alike toward this field and considers how they are or might
be folded into natural resources policy, planning, and outreach. It explores some of the diffi-
cult and debated aspects of developing best practices, while heeding the advice of medical
practitioners to “Do No Harm.” Caution is expressed in the widely cited, and arguably land-
mark paper by Bohnsack and Sutherland (1985), and applies decades later: “Unfortunately, a
naïve (and usually unstated) attitude exists among some managers: they know artificial reefs work;
they do not need to know how they work. In fact, knowing how artificial reefs function is crucial
for devising appropriate management strategies.” This book seeks to inform the “knowing
how” for all interested and affected parties.
This chapter, then, offers a primer to readers of varying awareness, understanding, and
engagement with the topic of human-made seafloor structure. As such it provides entry
points to the more detailed treatments of worldwide scientific foundations and applications
of the technology (Chapters 2, 3, 5); planning, materials, designs and construction methods
used across the globe by those who build reefs (Chapter 4); the biota of these structures
including key aspects of life history of flora and fauna associated with reefs (Chapter 5);
the current and potential role of underwater structure in management of ocean resources
such as in marine protected areas, sustainable fisheries and marine ranching, and community
economic development (Chapter 6); the role of secondary reefs including planned urban
infrastructure in marine ecosystems and possible ways to enhance their ecological services
(Chapter 7); and emerging issues and opportunities for this field, including its role in a chang-
ing ocean climate (Chapter 8). Evaluation of biological, engineering, social and economic per-
formance and services of purpose-built reefs and related structures is a theme running
through the book.

1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden

For millennia, humans have transformed the surface of Earth. On a clear day, persons
surveying a broad landscape from the top of a distant mountain, or perhaps looking out
an airplane window from several kilometers up in the sky, can view a footprint of human
beings and societies upon the continents of Earth. One person might see extensive flat or
terraced farm lands with crops in neat rows, and another the hardened urban surfaces of
tall buildings and roadways of seemingly endless dimensions. Such is not the case for ob-
servers wishing to peer as easily to the bottom of the sea.
A review of land transformation by humans includes an estimate that over 80% of ice-free
land is likely directly influenced by humans (Hooke et al., 2012). About 37% of the over 13
 Visit https://ebookluna.com
now to explore a diverse
collection of ebooks available
in formats like PDF, EPUB, and
MOBI, compatible with all
devices. Don’t miss the chance
to enjoy exciting offers and
quickly download high-quality
materials in just a few simple
steps!
6 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

billion hectares of dry land is devoted to agriculture, for example, which includes 1.5 billion
ha of arable land for crops with the rest devoted to pasture (ESA European Space Agency,
2021). Meanwhile, estimates of urban land cover range between 1% and 3%, according to
Liu et al. (2014), while Elvidge et al. (2007) estimate impervious surface on the world’s
land area at 0.43%.
The techniques used to quantify land-use include the obvious, common, and well-
established practices of surveying on the ground as well as from airplanes and in recent
decades satellites and drones (e.g., Brinker and Minnick, 1995; AAAS, 2021; Shin et al.,
2014). Advanced computer software allows enhanced analysis of remotely sensed data,
complemented by artistic re-creation of historic landscapes. In addition, a host of geophys-
ical, chemical, and biological monitoring and sensing practices have defined the influence of
terrestrial and aquatic human activities on global ecosystems (e.g., Millennium Assessment,
2005). Such efforts can offer information on historic conditions and what constitute a “base-
line” against which contemporary attempts to restore or enhance can be measured.
If we could just as readily see and survey below the surface of the world’s oceans and
coastal seas, what sort of human-made and natural infrastructures might we observe on
the bottom?
This section offers context for the extent and kinds of certain benthic structure in the ma-
rine environment, both estuarine and oceanic, and some of the research methods and findings
that describe their composition, distribution and effects, and thereby inform the scientific ba-
sis for their use and management. Of special interest are the “live bottoms” whose functions
are a basis for biomimicry by human-made structure.

1.1.1 Maritime footprints

Humanity’s maritime history includes unintentional and wartime sinking of numerous
ships at sea; placement of various hardened coastal structures for protection of harbors
and beaches from wave impact; and more recently, extensive precise deep-sea placement
of engineered infrastructure ranging from submarine cables that conduct electronic commu-
nications signals to pipelines for transmission of fossil fuels (Fig. 1.2). Among the more

FIGURE 1.2A Common large underwater objects and infrastructure, positioned on or attached to the seafloor,
and with attributes offering potential to drive “reef effects” as secondary, de facto reefs, include A, breakwaters, B,
pipelines, C, platforms and their supporting “legs,” with encrusting organisms, and D, shipwrecks, shown at varying
scales. Sources: A, Oh, Y.I., Shin, E.C., 2006. Using submerged geotextile tubes in the protection of the E. Korean shore. Coastal
Engineering 53 (11), 879e895, Fig. 22; B, Smith, P.E., 2016. Types of marine concrete structures.
In: Alexander, M.D. (Ed.), Marine Concrete Structures: Design, Durability and Performance. Elsevier, pp. 17e64. https://
www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780081009055/marine-concrete-structures, Fig. 2.60; C, Blue Latitudes, Courtesy of Emily
Hazlewood; D, US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/news/living-shipwrecks-
3d-virtually-explore-north-carolinas-shipwrecks-and-marine-life/.
1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden 7

FIGURE 1.2B

FIGURE 1.2C

FIGURE 1.2D
8 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

extreme spatial distributions in terms of the extent of such structure, it is estimated that three
million shipwrecks are distributed around the world (Gemini, 2018). Estimates concerning
intentional structures by Bugnot et al. (2021) include more than 1.36
105 km of pipelines
installed as of 2018 and by van Elden et al. (2019) include over 12,000 oil and gas production
installations on the continental shelves of over 50 nations.
Although the human footprint on the sea floor is neither as large nor as well documented
as on land, nonetheless “marine urbanization” is said by Dafforn et al. (2015) to be a global
issue that is occurring at an increasing pace and over a larger area. (“Footprint” in the ocean
has been defined as “the spatial extent of a pressure arising from a human activity” [Kenny et al.,
2018].) Yet science often lacks understanding of its regional ecological consequences, such as
in associated loss of habitat and changes in connectivity (e.g., Dafforn et al., 2015) or enhance-
ment of biological diversity and productivity (e.g., Momota and Hosokawa, 2021). Mapping
by Halpern et al. (2008) of global human impacts (“pressures”) on the marine environment
estimated that “anthropogenic benthic structures in coastal regions affect an area of 300,000 square
kilometers . approximately the size of Italy.” From analysis of 17 drivers of ecological change
(e.g., fishing, pollution, shipping) for 20 ecosystems (e.g., seagrasses, hard shelf, pelagic),
these authors determined that anthropogenic impacts affected 41% of the world’s ocean at
medium to very high levels. Ecosystems of particular interest for this book and which
have some of the highest predicted “cumulative impact scores,” according to Halpern
et al. (2008), include rocky reefs and coral reefs. Bugnot et al. (2021) concluded that as of
2018, actual on-site construction “has claimed a minimum of 32,000 km2 of seafloor,” while esti-
mating that the total area of seascapes modified around ports, wind farms, breakwaters, tun-
nels, and bridges is in the range of 1.0e3.4 million km2 (See Chapter 7).
At a much smaller geographic scale, Benn et al. (2010) determined that an area of
27,932 km2 of the total European OSPAR area (11,032,175 km2) of the North Sea was
impacted by human activities. These authors note that while the area of impact is relatively
small, they use the analogy of the size of the Amazon rainforest, and its deforestationdas a
fraction of the entire land area of South Americadto call attention to the high importance
ecologically of the area impacted. Another regional study (Kenny et al., 2018) quantified
seafloor “pressure layers” for the North Sea, English Channel, Irish Sea, and parts of the
Celtic Sea by assessing surface sediment abrasion from bottom fishing activities, sediment
removal by aggregate dredging, smothering caused by sediment disposal activities, and
deployment of concrete and steel structures by renewable energy and oil and gas activities,
finding spatial footprints that varied from a fraction of 1% to as much as 50% (Fig. 1.3).
Localized measures of seabed disruption include the determination that 24% of tidal chan-
nel surface in the lagoon of Venice, Italy, was modified by human activity, especially by
dredging (Madricardo et al., 2019), while Wilson et al. (2010) estimated that 8600 km2 of
the United Kingdom seabed would be affected by wind farm developments by the
year 2020.
 1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden 9

FIGURE 1.3 Map of cumulative impact upon the seafloor around the United Kingdom for sediment abrasion,
sediment removal, sediment smothering, and deposit of hard structure. Source: Kenny, A.J., Jenkins, C., Wood, D.,
Bolam, S.G., Mitchell, P., Scougal, C., Judd, A., 2018. Assessing cumulative human activities, pressures, and impacts on North
Sea benthic habitats using a biological traits approach. ICES Journal of Marine Science 75 (3), 1080e1092. doi:10.1093/icesjms/
fsx205., Figure 6.

1.1.2 Seafloor mapping and monitoring

Quantifying “hardscape” on the floor of the ocean historically has been difficult and
expensive, especially in larger areas and deeper waters beyond the normal range of localized,
more shallow surveys by scuba divers. Estimates of detailed global seafloor mapping range
from about 5% Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) to 6%e9% and “at a scale
needed to understand ocean processes, protect or exploit seafloor resources, or support engineering op-
erations” (Mayer 2018). Mayer (2018) further concludes, “At a 1
1 km scale, approximately
82% of the seafloor has never had a direct measurement of depth,” and speaks to the issue of fund-
ing at least some of this expensive work through “crowd-sourcing” of data acquisition and
lengthy deployment of autonomous vessels.
“Conventional sea floor mapping is a tedious process” begins an overview by Smith and
Sandwell (1997) in a summary of the progression of earlier techniques to measure depth
10 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

from ships using single-beam echo sounders since the 1950s, followed by more accurate
multibeam swath-mapping systems in the 1980s. These authors cite some of the limitations
of these procedures, even the traditional hand-drawing of depth contours, while presenting
a high-resolution grid of global, ice-free sea floor topography based on combining quality-
controlled ship depth soundings with interpolation guided by satellite-derived gravity
data.
Mayer (2018) cites satellite altimetry to predict seafloor bathymetry and advanced multi-
beam sonar technology as two keys to high-resolution sea floor mapping, and notes their
transition from classified military applications to more widespread use in the academic
and commercial communities. Further, “In shallow water, when water clarity permits, bathymetric
LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and satellite-derived bathymetry . have provided efficient
ways to produce estimates of bathymetry in regions where multibeam sonar mapping is much less effi-
cient” Mayer (2018).
Representative of rapid advancement in this field is an open source software package for
the processing and display of bathymetry and backscatter imagery data derived from multi-
beam, interferometry, and sidescan sonars, whereby objects as small as 1 centimeter on the
seafloor can be mapped. It is notable that an international effort to facilitate the complete
mapping of the world ocean by 2030 is underway, under the auspices of Nippon Foundation
GEBCO Seabed 2030 Project (Mayer et al., 2018). This will provide significant data for the
General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans of the International Hydrographic Organization
and numerous other users.
In addition to needing to quantify extent and nature of biophysical features on the sea floor,
preparatory to possible installation of structure, scientists and policy experts seek information
on living resources of benthic systems. Among the tools employed by marine biologists to
describe organisms associated with hard structure, in shallow waters monitoring by scuba
divers (Fig. 1.4) is often the method of choice (e.g., Foster et al., 2013; Bortone et al., 2000).

FIGURE 1.4 Typical research practices by scuba divers at seafloor structure include photography. (Note: Pictured
here is Patrice Francour [1960e2019], marine ecologist and pioneer in research, education and coastal policy con-
cerning natural and human-made reefs, diving on the wreck Donator at Porquerolles, France, July 2018). Source:
Guidetti, P., Harmelin-Vivien, M., Raybaud, V., Piasecki, W., 2020. Memoriam, professor Patrice Francour (13 April 1960 13
october 2019). Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 50 (2), 237e245. https://doi.org/10.3750/aiep/02977. Figure 3, © Jerome Espla,
http://www.aiep.pl/volumes/2020/1_2/txt/txt_15.phpCreative, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
 1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden 11
(It is noteworthy that scientific diving has rigorous standards for training, with certifications of
increasing rigor concomitant with deeper dives, e.g., AAUS, 2016.) In deeper water remotely
operated vehicles (ROV) are commonplace and reported by Sward et al. (2019), for example,
who summarized global ROV activity as reported in 119 publications to assess fish assem-
blages, while also reviewing types of ROV instruments and scientific observations made
(Fig. 1.5).
As well as having enhanced capabilities for in situ study of benthic habitat, flora, and
fauna, scientists also are developing various sorts of models. For example, a graphical repre-
sentation of local and regional impacts through the three lifecycle stages of an offshore petro-
leum production structure by Dafforn et al. (2015) certainly has application generally to
primary human-made reefs also (Fig. 1.6). Meanwhile, an empirical, mesoscale, data-driven
model to predict areas of hard-bottom habitat by including several possible components of
rugosity as predictor variables within a logistic regression framework has been proposed
by Dunn and Halpin (2009). These authors suggest that a high correlation between hard-
bottom habitat and high biodiversity provides a basis for natural resource managers to use
such maps as proxies for marine biodiversity in planning. In an effort to combine geophysical
and biological data, Wieczorek et al. (2014) used remotely derived bathymetry in modeling
fish biomass.
With this albeit brief survey of some trends for “marine urbanization” and some principal
sensing and mapping practices as background, we turn to the types of natural reefs whose
structure, function, and ecosystem services importantly may, and increasingly do, inspire hu-
man design to emulate them to secure optimal outcomes. In doing so, we seek to determine

FIGURE 1.5 Study locations globally for ROV surveys to visually assess fish assemblages identified by Sward
et al. (2019) in a survey of reports from 1965 through 2018. Source: Sward, D., Monk, J., Barrett, N., 2019. A Systematic
Review of Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys for Visually Assessing Fish Assemblages. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:134. 10.3389/fmars.
2019.00134, Figure 5.
12 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

FIGURE 1.6 Conceptual model of some potential physical/chemical effects (blue boxes) and consequent ecological
impacts (purple boxes) on marine habitat from four aspects (orange boxes) of offshore petroleum production infra-
structure during its life cycle from construction through operation to decommissioning, which offers considerations
for ecological impacts from installation of human-made structure generally. Source: Dafforn, K.A., Glasby, T.M., Airoldi,
L., Rivero, N.K., Mayer-Pinto, M., Johnston, E.L., 2015. Marine urbanization: an ecological framework for designing multi-
functional artificial structures. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 13(2), 82e90, Figure 2.

the geographical extent and ecological importance of reefs, including as part of the broader
seascape.

1.1.3 Hard seafloor ecosystems

In the broadest sense, “hard bottom” refers to “live coral, rock/coral rubble, exposed low-profile
carbonate and phosphorite substrates, thinly covered hard substrate with emergent growth, or artificial
structures” (Dunn and Halpin, 2009). Development of biological assemblages occurs on three
types of hard substratum, namely “mineral (natural rock or surfaces of organic origin: e.g. valves of
dead clams), artificial surfaces of anthropogenic origin, and biogenic (living) surfaces” (Davis, 2009).
Hard bottom ecosystems “Feature some of the most spectacular and diverse biological communities
on this planet . contain a rich treasure of genetic, taxonomic and functional information . deliver
 1.1 Structure in the sea: extensive, diverse, hidden 13
irreplaceable ecosystem services . highly vulnerable and increasingly threatened by anthropogenic
pressures” (Wahl, 2009). Determining the extent of naturally occurring structure with a verti-
cal profile such as rock ledges and outcrops and so-called “live bottom” and “hard bottom,”
especially in deeper waters, has been on a localized basis consistent with limitations of survey
methods. Representative live bottoms are illustrated in Fig. 1.7.

FIGURE 1.7A Some of the most wide-

spread natural reefs in the world’s oceans
include, A, coral reefs, and B, rocky
reefs, which occupy relatively limited spatial
areas yet are recognized as having dispro-
portionately large ecological roles in biodi-
versity. Sources: A, United States National
Science Foundation, Credit: Amy Apprill; B,
Nakamura, Y., Feary, D.A., Kanda, M., Yamaoka,
K., Tsikliras, A.C. (2013). Tropical Fishes Domi-
nate Temperate Reef Fish Communities within
Western Japan. PLoS ONE, 8(12), e81107.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081107,
Figure 3.

FIGURE 1.7B
14 1. Structure in the sea: a diversity of natural and human-made habitats

Coral reefs are among the most biologically productive ecosystems on Earth, often
compared to rain forests for their biodiversity. Although limited in area to just 0.2% of the
ocean’s floor, they are thought to contain about 1,000,000 species of fishes, invertebrates,
and algae worldwide (NASA, 2001). To humans coral reefs historically have provided protein
for sustenance. The socio-economic importance of healthy coral reefs is indicated by esti-
mated annual net economic benefits of about USD 30 billion derived from them, including
the contribution of reef fisheries at about USD 5.7 billion and which feed hundreds of millions
of people (Teh et al., 2013). The largest coral reef system in the world, the Great Barrier Reef of
Australia, covers an area of approximately 133,000 mi.2, extends over 1400 miles, is made up
of almost 3000 individual reefs, and is visible from space (NOAA, 2021).
In addition, other live-bottom systems, smaller in size but widely distributed and of
important ecologically, include rocky reef reefs that support kelp forests and soft sediments
that support sponge beds (e.g., Maldonado et al. (2016, Wahl, 2009). Fishery and ecosystem
managers may designate them as “essential fish habitat” necessary for feeding, growth, and
reproduction and also as “habitat areas of particular concern” because of their important
ecological function or sensitivity to environmental disruption (Salgado et al., 2018).
Into the milieu of natural and anthropogenic ocean structure, and typically onto relatively
flat “plains-like” open areas of seafloordwith their own ecologically important ambient mi-
crobes, flora and faunadhuman-made reefs and allied purpose-built objects are being intro-
duced worldwide. The most extensive situation historically has been in Japan, where, as of
2004, 12% of the continental shelf held structure intended to promote fishery and aquacul-
tural harvest (de La Casinière, 2021).

1.2 Human-made sea floor habitat structure: the many definitions of artificial
reef

How are the underwater structures deployed by humans and intended to affect environ-
mental processes, and thereby effect ecosystem services, to be defined? Use of human-made
structures has proliferated in ocean waters. It is important to understand the meaning of
certain terms, including any limitations. Jackson (1999), for example, addresses one aspect
of terminology: “Artificial reefs and other structures are used in many countries and regions across
the world for coastal management purposes, including the enhancement or concentration of living ma-
rine resources, compensation for habitat loss, and coastal protection. However, different countriesd
and regionsdhave different definitions thereof and, as a result, have differing opinions as to what
structures are considered as artificial reefs.”
Understanding how seafloor structures are defined offers stakeholders a foundation and
common basis for effectively communicating and determining their appropriate usage in
the ocean environment. This section addresses the seemingly simple question of which
term(s) may best represents the issue, materials, and functions of purpose-built structure
on the floor of the sea and offers the reader a context for the complexities involved in
resolving it. It is not unusual to ask questions about environmental terminology, with even
the widely recognized term “biodiversity,” for example, having been addressed (Seigneur
and Mazouni, 2010).
 1.2 Human-made sea floor habitat structure: the many definitions of artificial reef 15
While the term “artificial reef” is most commonly used to describe the purposes, compo-
sition and location of a class of objects installed on the ocean bottom, other termsdperhaps
more indicativedalso are used in technical and lay publications and electronic media. “Arti-
ficial reef” apparently first appeared in the scientific literature in 1968 (and likely earlier in
popular recreational fishing magazines) and was most used (in 76% of the references) in a
search of articles by Florisson et al. (2018), who reviewed Scopus and Web of Science re-
sources, with over 3500 citations. Synonymous terms in scientific articles found by these au-
thors in their review included “human-made reefs” (HMR), “habitat enhancement structure,”
“man-made reefs,” and one of the earliest words, “gyosh o,” from pioneering reports in Japan.
A review by Becker et al. (2018) used the terms “artificial reef*,” “artificial habitat,*” and
“man-made reef*”in a structured search of databases (477 articles) that included Web of Sci-
ence and Google Scholar.
The question and evolution of meaningful terminology was addressed by Grove and Wilson
(1994) in the context of wording the title, “Fifth International Conference on Aquatic Habitat
Enhancement,” in 1991, thus replacing the terms “Artificial Habitats” (1987) and “Artificial
Reef” (1985) from previous meetings: “We debated over what constitutes an ‘artificial reef,’ and
whether its purpose was solely for fisheries.. This name change reflects the explosion of mitigation
projects and global efforts toward habitat restoration.” One reflection of the expanding purposes
is seen in use of the term “Reef Enhancement Units” by Ng et al. (2017) in reference to
structures they made for restoration of coral reefs.
One of the earlier authors to address terminology was Chou (1997), who used the term
“artificial” yet proposed that “The concept of artificial has to be properly understood to effectively
achieve desired goals. The term “artificial” reef gives many people the misconceived idea of artificial
structures on the seafloor richly covered with the organisms of a regular reef. What is often pictured
is a rich coral community developing spontaneously over a once-barren area with artificial structures
serving as a catalyst.” Tickell et al. (2019) offer an extended discussion of this subject in
addressing the origins of the term “reef,” reference to still more synonyms including “anthro-
pogenic reefs,” “underwater structures,” and “anthropogenic structures at sea,” and state,
“Because the use of the word artificial could imply that HMRs are an inferior substitute for natural
reefs,” as part of their decision to use the term human-made reef. Deliberate use of the term
“human-made” as a replacement for “artificial” also was proposed by Pitcher and Seaman
(2000) with the justification that the “term “artificial” has negative connotations (in the sense of
ersatz) that do not help us to see clearly the potential benefits and the dangers of these reef systems.”
As the purposes of artificial reefs have grown significantly (see Chapter 3) since the term
appeared in early literature in reference to fishing enhancement objectives, additional terms
specific to new functions have emerged. For example, “submerged breakwater” for coastal
shoreline stabilization, “surfing reefs” for ocean recreationists, “antitrawling reefs” for habitat
protection, and “memorial reefs” are purpose-specific references. In addition, proprietary
trademarks are used by businesses to brand their structures, without use of the word “arti-
ficial.” As an alternative to referring to reefs as artificial, the term “purpose-built” has
appeared occasionally since about 2000 (e.g., Revenga et al., 2000) and increasingly is used
in most recent publications (e.g., Burt et al., 2012; Keller et al., 2017; Degraer et al., 2020), be-
ing used in some titles (e.g., Folpp, 2012; Becker et al., 2017).
Individual definitions in the (overwhelmingly English language) literature vary in reflect-
ing purposes, materials and design, stakeholders, and expected outcomes (Table 1.2).
 Visit https://ebookluna.com
now to explore a diverse
collection of ebooks available
in formats like PDF, EPUB, and
MOBI, compatible with all
devices. Don’t miss the chance
to enjoy exciting offers and
quickly download high-quality
materials in just a few simple
steps!
Other documents randomly have
different content
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Nicaraguan
Antiquities
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Nicaraguan Antiquities

Author: Carl Bovallius

Release date: March 5, 2021 [eBook #64707]

Language: English

Credits: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at

https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NICARAGUAN

ANTIQUITIES ***
SWEDISH SOCIETY OF
ANTHROPOLOGY
AND GEOGRAPHY
NICARAGUAN ANTIQUITIES

BY

CARL BOVALLIUS

STOCKHOLM, 1886
KONGL. BOKTRYCKERIET
P. A. NORSTEDT & SÖNER

TO
THE ROYAL ANTIQUARY OF SWEDEN

Dr. HANS HILDEBRAND

THIS WORK,
THE PUBLICATION OF WHICH HAS BEEN POSSIBLE
ONLY BY HIS KIND EXERTIONS,
IS GRATEFULLY DEDICATED
BY THE AUTHOR.
 icaragua is a very rich field for research to the student of
American Archæology, and so I found it during my two
years stay in Central America. I had there the good
fortune several times to meet with localities more or less
rich in remains from the prehistoric or rather pre-
spanish period. Not very much being known about
Central American antiquities, and the literature on this subject being
very poor, especially with regard to the Nicaraguan ones, I purpose
here to describe briefly and to figure the more important statues,
rock-carvings, ceramic objects etc., found by me in Nicaragua and
partly delineated or photographed on the spot, partly brought home
to Sweden. Unfortunately I wanted the means of carrying home any
of the statues; but my Nicaraguan collections contain a number of
more easily transportable relics, mostly examples of pottery. These
are now deposited in the ethnographic collection of the R. Swedish
State Museum. The accompanying plates are all executed after my
original sketches or photographs taken on the spot. Most of the
statues have never before been figured or described; some of them
are mentioned and figured by E. G. Squier[1] in his splendid work on
Nicaragua. As it turned out, however, on comparisons being made by
me on the spot, that some of Squier’s figures do not quite agree
with the originals, I have thought fit to publish also my own
drawings of these previously figured statues, 6 in number.
Although this sketch is certainly not the place for an account of
the history of Central America or Nicaragua, yet I may be permitted
to give a brief statement of those few and disconnected notices that
we possess with regard to the nations inhabiting Nicaragua at that
period, when the antiquities here spoken of were probably executed.
The sources of our knowledge of these people and their culture are,
besides the above quoted work of Squier, the old Spanish
chroniclers, Oviedo, Torquemada, Herrera, and Guarros, the memoirs of
Las Casas and Peter Martyr, the relation of Thomas Gage, and scattered
notices in the works of Gomara, Ixtlilxochitl, Dampier a. o.

At the time of the Spanish invasion under the command of D o n

G i l G o n z a l e s d e A v i l a in the years 1521 and 1522, the
region now occupied by the republic of Nicaragua and the north-
eastern part of the republic of Costa Rica, was inhabited by Indian
nations of four different stocks, which very probably may be
considered as being of different origin and having immigrated into
the country at widely separated periods.
The Atlantic coast with its luxuriant vegetation but damp climate
and the adjacent mountainous country with its vast primeval forests
were the home of more or less n o m a d i c t r i b e s, remaining at a
low stage of civilization. It may be inferred, however, from certain
indications in the account of the third voyage of Columbus, and from
the scanty notices of several of the so-called buccaneers or
filibusters, that those Indians were more advanced in culture and
manner of life than the hordes, that may be regarded as their
descendants at the present day: the M o s c o s, the R a m a s, the
S i m o o s or S m o o s a. o.[2]
Between this strip of country on the eastern shore and the two
great lakes, X o l o t l a n (Managua) and C o c i b o l c a (the lake of
Nicaragua), the intermediate highland, which shelves gradually
towards the lakes, was inhabited by los C h o n t a l e s, as they are
denominated by Oviedo. The name is still preserved in
«Departemento de C h o n t a l e s». They lived in large villages and
towns and were agriculturists. Possibly they were of the same stock
as, or closely related to, the large M a y a-family which extended over
the eastern parts of Honduras and Guatemala and furnished the
population of Yucatan. This guess acquires a certain probability by
the fact of several words in their language being similar to the
corresponding ones in some Maya-dialects. The P o a s, To a c a s,
L a c a n d o n e s, and G u a t u s o s may possibly be their
descendants. These also are living at a decidedly lower stage of
civilization than their supposed ancestors.
If the eastern part of Nicaragua, on account of its almost
impenetrable forests and damp climate, is less fit to be the dwelling-
place of a highly cultivated people, the western portion, on the
contrary, is much more happily endowed in this respect and seems
to be marked out by nature itself to become one of the centres of
mankind’s civilization. By its smiling valleys, fertile plains, and
thinner, but shadowy forests, by its splendid lakes, gently flowing
rivers, and verdant mountains the country appears well able to
tempt even the most exacting people to settle in it. Indeed the
country, on the arrival of the Spaniards, was found to be very
densely populated, and divided amongst a great number of small
sovereignities, which could however be referred to two separate
stocks, differing in language and character. One of these, the third
one of those stocks from which has sprung the population of
Nicaragua, was los C h o r o t e g a n o s or M a n g u e s. They occupied
the territory between the two large lakes and all the fertile level
country west and north of Lake Managua down to the Pacific and
Bahia de Fonseca. Oviedo asserts that they were the aborigines and
ancient masters of the country, without being able however to state
any proofs in support of his opinion. Of los C h o r o t e g a n o s four
groups are usually distinguished: 1:0) Los Cholutecas on the shores
of Bahia de Fonseca; their principal town was the present
C h o l u t e c a. 2:0) Los Nagrandanos between Lake Managua and
the Pacific; their capital was S u b t i a b a, near the present Leon.
3:0) Los Dirianos between the lakes Managua and Nicaragua and
down to the coast of the Pacific. Their largest town was S a l t e b a
near the present Granada and 4:0) Los Orotinas far separated from
their relations, inhabiting the peninsula of Nicoya and the territory of
Guanacaste, which comprises the north-eastern part of the republic
of Costa Rica. Opinions vary, however, with regard to these groups,
several authors being inclined to regard los Cholutecas as a
detached branch of los Pipiles in El Salvador; they would then be of
Toltecan origin. Certainly there is a number of local names within
their district which seem to corroborate this opinion. Other writers
are disposed to ascribe a Mexican origin to the Orotinas and lastly
Dr. Berendt[3] suggests that the whole Chorotegan stock may be
considered as a Toltecan offspring, the name Choroteganos being
only a corruption of Cholutecas.
The last or fourth of the tribes inhabiting Nicaragua was los
N i q u i r a n o s. The territory occupied by this people was the
smallest of all, viz.; the narrow isthmus between Lake Nicaragua and
the Pacific, together with the large islands, Ometepec and Zapatera,
in Lake Nicaragua. But although comparatively small in extent this
territory was perhaps the most richly blessed of all in this country,
the darling one of nature. According to the concurrent testimonies of
the old chroniclers the Niquirans were a Mexican people settled in
the country at a comparatively late period. It is not clear whether
they were Toltecs or Aztecs, and this question cannot probably be
decided until the ancient remains, surely very numerous, that they
have left behind them, shall have been accurately studied and
compared with the better known Mexican antiquities. For my own
part I incline to the opinion that they were Aztecs, and had
immigrated into the country rather late, perhaps little more than a
hundred years before the Spanish invasion. They lived in a state of
permanent hostility with the Chorotegans and had probably, on their
irruption, expelled the Orotinas, who were thus cut off from the
main stock of the Chorotegans. The intelligent and well built Indians
on the island of Ometepec are doubtless the descendants of the
Niquirans; this is corroborated by their language, which the
successful investigations of Squier have shown to be of Mexican
origin and presenting a very close similarity to the pure Aztec
tongue. They are now a laborious and peaceful race, somewhat shy
of strangers; in general they speak Spanish, but may be heard
occasionally to talk Indian dialect with one another; with regard to
this dialect they are, however, extremely unwilling to afford any
explanations, generally answering «es muy antiguo» «no sé nada».
The Indians of Belen and the surrounding region remind one of the
Ometepec Indians, but are evidently intermixed with foreign
elements.
According to Oviedo, Torquemada, and Cerezeda, the last one of
whom accompanied Gil Gonzales de Avila in his expedition 1522, and
thus is able to speak, like Oviedo, from his own personal
observations, the Niquirans had reached a higher degree of
civilization than their neighbours. However, the Chorotegans were
also pretty far advanced in culture.
Indeed, reading the scanty descriptions of the last days of these
nations, one feels tempted to assert that in harmonic development
of the mental faculties they were superior to that nation, which, by
its crowds of rapacious and sanguinary adventurers, honoured in
history with the name of «los Conquistadores», has fixed upon itself
the heavy responsibility for the annihilation of this civilization. For
indeed so swift and radical was this annihilation, through the
fanatical vandalism of «christian» priests and the bloody crimes of a
greedy soldatesca, that history knows of no similar example. Thus
the investigator of the comparatively modern culture of Central
America is obliged to travel by more toilsome and doubtful roads
than the student of the ancient forms of civilization of Egypt and
India, although these were dead several thousands of years ago.
So much, however, has come to the knowledge of our time, as
suffices to prove that the nations of Central America were very far
advanced in political and social development as well as in science
and art. But no other way is left to us of gaining an insight in this
culture, than to search the country perseveringly for the purpose of
disclosing the monuments, hidden in the ground or enviously
concealed by the primeval vegetation, that now reigns alone in many
of those places, which were formerly occupied by populous and
flourishing cities, and artistically ornamented temples.
By comparing these monuments with those of Mexican culture,
somewhat better known in certain respects, we may hope finally to
arrive at the solution of some of the intricate problems concerning
the ancient nations of Central America and their history.
 The antiquities figured by me were found for the greatest part in
the island of Z a p a t e r a, the rock-carvings in the islet of C e i b a
close to Zapatera, only some few ceramic objects are from the island
of O m e t e p e c. All these localities are contained within the territory
occupied by the Niquirans, and on this account may probably be
considered as specimens of A z t e c art, or of an art very closely
related to this. Those few statues that I have seen in the
neighbourhood of G r a n a d a and in L a s I s l e t a s immediately off
Granada, as well as the statues and high-reliefs in the little volcanic
island of M o m o t o m b i t o in Lake Managua, the former belonging
probably to los D i r i a n o s, the latter to los N a g r a n d a n o s,
appear to me to be much more rudely executed, without any
attempt to copy the human body; whereas many of the statues of
Z a p a t e r a testify to a pretty accurate study of the human body,
often presenting faithfully elaborated muscle portions etc., so as to
make it probable that the Niquiran artists used models. There
certainly are found rather fantastic figures even among these
statues, but in general their originators prove to be artists of a more
realistic conception, and at the same time of more developed
technics than the Chorotegan artists. From the monuments etc.
found farther northwards at C o p a n, Q u i r i g u á, U x m a l,
P a l e n q u e, and other places in Central America, the works here
described differ most considerably, indeed so much that it is not
easy to point out more than a few common artistic features.
With the exception of the meagre notices, communicated by
Oviedo and Cerezeda and their compilers, the source of our knowledge
of N i c a r a g u a n antiquities is E. G. Squier’s interesting work
«Nicaragua: its people, scenery, monuments and the proposed
interoceanic canal». After Squier some other American investigators
have followed in the road opened by him; Dr. Earl Flint of Rivas has
during many years searched for and collected antiquities, partly in
the Department of Rivas, partly in the island of Ometepec. I am
obliged to Dr. Flint for much valuable information on the present
subject, kindly communicated to me, when I had the pleasure of
meeting with him at Rivas in January 1883. He has sent the
collections gradually brought together by himself, to the
Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n. In «A r c h æ o l o g i c a l
r e s e a r c h e s i n N i c a r a g u a»[4] Dr. J. F. Bransford gives a
highly interesting description of his researches in Ometepec, where
he made a large collection of grave-urns, other vessels of pottery,
and smaller relics of stone and metal. He occupied himself principally
in investigating burying-places on the west side of the island and he
has thrown a new light on this part of Niquiran archæology. His very
large collection, of 788 numeros, is deposited in the collections of
the Smithsonian Institution in Washington. He has also figured
several rock-carvings from Ometepec; these seem to be a little ruder
and less complicated than those delineated by me from the island of
Ceiba. Dr. Bransford also describes several ancient relics from
Ta l m a c, S a n J u a n d e l S u r in the department of Rivas, and
some localities in Nicoya, in the republic of Costa Rica. From a
linguistic point of view Dr. Berendt[5] has given very valuable
contributions to our knowledge of the ancient civilisation of
Nicaragua by his sharp-sighted and successful investigations into the
Indian idioms of that country and into those of Mexico and of the
northern parts of Central America.

In the night of the New-Year’s-eve 1882-1883 I arrived at

O m e t e p e c from Granada, and took up my head-quarters at the
little borough of M u y o g a l p a, in the north-west corner of the
island. From this point excursions were made in different directions,
and, although my time was pretty severely taxed by zoological
researches, I found however some opportunities of undertaking
archæological diggings.
Hardly one kilometer to the west of the burying-place examined
by Dr. Bransford, a symmetrical mound, rising one meter and a half
above the ground, was dug through (Station 1). It contained a little
bowl, pieces of a larger urn of an unusual thickness, feet and
fragments of a tripod vase, and a little bronze figure of a saint, the
last one evidently a foreign guest among the other objects. At L o s
A n g e l e s (Stat. 2) two statues, both very badly frayed, were
measured and sketched; some insignificant fragments of pottery
were digged out. At a bay (Stat. 3) on the north side, between
M u y o g a l p a and A l t a G r a c i a, in a place said by the Indians to
have formerly been a town, fragments of divers small pottery, two
stone chisels, one «molidor», and perforated and polished shells of a
species of Oliva and a species of Voluta, from the neighboring coast
of the Pacific, were dug out. In a valley, or rather ravine (Stat. 4),
near A l t a G r a c i a, where a heap of pretty large, partly cut stones
seemed to indicate the site of a large building, several fragments of
pottery were found together with a cup of earthen ware, and a well
preserved little sitting image of painted terra cotta, pretty similar to
that figured by Bransford, l. c., p. 59. At a height of nearly 350 m.
above the level of the lake on the west side of the majestically
beautiful volcanic cone (Stat. 5), while digging in a rather extensive
stone-mound, a very pretty, vaulted earthen urn with lid, painted in
three colours, was found, and, besides, a great many fragments of
pottery. I made excavations also at six other places in Ometepec, for
inst. in the isthmus between Ometepec and Madera, but without any
results worthy of record.
I stayed in this charming double-island for more than a month,
roving through it on horse-back and on foot in all directions,
ascending the volcano, rowing and sailing over the delightful lagoons
and bays, that border its shores, and amongst which I shall late
forget that very paradise for the hunter, L a g u n a d e S a n t a
R o s a and C h a r c o V e r d e. Having left Ometepec about the
beginning of February, my next visit was to «t i e r r a f i r m e»,
where I made some easily executed, but not very successful
excavations, immediately to the north of S a n J o r g e. From
D e p a r t e m e n t o d e R i v a s’ I sailed to L a s I s l e t a s, also
called L o s C o r a l e s, an extremely beautiful little archipelago, just
southwards of G r a n a d a. The whole group owes its existence to
the volcano M o m b a c h o, which towers high above it, the islands
consisting exclusively of the remains of one or more eruptions of
M o m b a c h o. But the vegetation here is so powerful and luxuriant,
that it has changed those piles of black stones into smiling islands,
which the traveller is never tired of admiring. Only on the outside of
the archipelago, where the often angry lake of Nicaragua has
checked the development of the verdant cover, the black, gloomy
basalt is still open to the view, lashed by white-foaming waves. In
several of the islets statues were measured and delineated, but
unfortunately the photographic apparatus could not be used on this
occasion. After a stay of some days among L a s I s l e t a s and a
short visit to G r a n a d a for the purpose of completing my
photographic outfit, I set sail for Z a p a t e r a. On my arrival I
encamped for a long time on the playa of B a h i a d e C h i q u e r o.
Along the playa of the semi-circular bay there are now five houses,
the homes of as many families, being the only inhabitants at the
present time of this large and fertile island, which was, no doubt,
formerly populated by many thousands of Niquirans, possessing rich
towns and splendid temples. The islet of C e i b a is situated off Bahia
de Chiquero (see map 2). According to my opinion, Z a p a t e r a is
certainly a volcanic island, but in this manner, that its north-western
part is the summit of a sunken volcanic cone, Bahia de Chiquero
being the crater itself, the narrow, elevated mountain ridge which
surrounds the bay, forming the edge of the crater and the islet of
Ceiba the continuation of this edge, L a g u n a d e A p o y o,
situated scarcely one kilometer from the shore, may then be
regarded as a side-crater.
Z a p a t e r a exhibits an abundant variety of beautiful scenery,
delightful valleys, watered by streams and rivulets, fertile elevated
plains, magnificent mountain-cones, clothed in verdure to the very
summits, and bays and lagoons offering excellent harbours.
Unfortunately I had not an opportunity of examining, in an
archæologic point of view, more than a part of the north side of the
island and the islet of Ceiba. My kind hosts of the settlement in the
island, Don José Lobo, Donna Julia Solorzano, S:rita Virginia Mora,
Don Jacinto Mora and others, zealously assisted me in my zoological
as well as archæological investigations. Through their warm-hearted
benevolence my stay in Zapatera became the most pleasant
remembrance of my long journey.
The results of my antiquarian researches in Z a p a t e r a may be
referred to three stations: 1:0. The first station is Punta del Sapote;
the extreme north-western point of the island, where statues,
potteries, and stone relics were found. This station is beyond all
comparison the most important one, because it has never, as far as I
know, been examined, nor even mentioned. It possesses so much
greater importance, as several statues were found in their original
position, thus affording an insight into the manner how they were
used. 2:0. The second station is Punta de las Figuras. It forms part
of the edge of the crater, sloping softly towards the lake, between
Laguna de Apoyo and Bahia de Chiquero. It has been previously
visited by Squier, who has given figures of several of the statues.
Besides those mentioned by him, many of which I did not find, I
lighted upon some that had escaped his attention. In this locality
only insignificant remains of pottery were met with. 3:0. The third
station is the little island of Ceiba, which, instead of statues, that are
wanting, offers some very well preserved rock-carvings of evidently
very ancient date, and, besides, valuable relics of earthen-ware and
stone. Although my visit to Zapatera was posterior in time to my stay
in Ometepec, I shall begin the detailed description of the antiquities
with those of the first station in Zapatera.
 I
STATUES IN
PUNTA DEL SAPOTE.

unta del Sapote forms a broad, rounded peninsula, the

greatest length of which is in N.E. and S.W. Its middle
part is a large plateau, about 150 m. high, sloping
rapidly both towards the lake and the neck of the
peninsula, and thus forming an isolated height of
somewhat more than one kilometer in length by scarcely one
kilometer in breadth. The central portion of this plateau is perfectly
level and, judging by the numerous statues met with here, and the
regular form of the stone-mounds, round which they were placed,
appears to have been a sacred place during the Niquiran period. On
the very isthmus between the peninsula and the island of
Z a p a t e r a rose a conical stone-structure, 30-40 m. high; it
consisted of enormous, unhewn blocks, placed upon one another in
pretty regular layers. Its diameter at the base might be estimated at
about 40 m. The top of the cone was truncated, and appeared to
form a plane of 6-8 m. in diameter. The steep sides were so densely
covered by spinous bushes and lians, that I was soon obliged to
desist from my attempts to mount the summit. The whole structure
resembled a kind of beacon, and has possibly been a place of
sacrifice, although its dimensions were so large, that it cannot well
be regarded as such a «sacrificial pillar» as is mentioned by Peter
Martyr under the name of «Te z a r i t». Maybe a little «casita» has
stood on the platform above. Something of the same kind is known
from U x m a l.
 Due north of this cone, on the top of the above mentioned
plateau, were six stone-mounds of oval form, but of very different
size. The largest (Pl. 41: 1) measured about fifty m. in length by
thirty m. in breadth, the smallest (Pl. 41: 6) about fifteen m. in
length by somewhat less than half in breadth. The greatest diameter
of each mound was in N. and S. The stones of these mounds varied
of course in size, but for the most part they were large, more or less
cubical, from half a meter to one meter long and about half a meter
broad. Their often regular shape and pretty plane sides, particularly
in the mound 1, might lead one to infer that some of them have
been hewn, and have formed the foundations and possibly also the
walls of buildings, the ground plans of which are indicated by the
form of the mounds and the situation of the statues, of which we
are soon going to speak.

STONE-MOUND 1.
At the mound 1 (Pl. 41), the largest of all, and the one situated
farthest to the north and west, several statues were found remaining
in the same position, that they originally must have occupied,
because the mound was still surrounded by six figures, standing in
its circumference; and larger or smaller fragments of the pedestals
of three others were found in the ground, although the statues
themselves were thrown down beside them, and more or less
broken. Judging by the regular distances between these statues, it is
probable, that there have been twelve figures standing in the
periphery of this building or temple. The fact that those remaining in
the ground fronted outwards, and that their backs, which were
turned towards the building, were not smooth, but only plane-cut,
strengthens my hypothesis that the figures have formed part of a
stone- or logwall enclosing the building. All those statues of the
mound 1, of which the upper parts remained, with the exception of
D, and another not delineated one, carried on their heads a more or
less long and broad projection in the form of a tenon, and on this
account I venture to propose the hypothesis, that they have served
to support the wall-plate of a more or less circular building. All the
statues were monoliths, cut from blocks of blackish basalt of a pretty
considerable hardness. The roof itself has probably been covered
with palm leaves, a supposition confirmed by certain indications in
Cerezeda and Oviedo. That the temples should have been open, as
Squier seems to think, I venture to doubt, on account of the above
described form of the statues; this appears to show that they must
have been united with one another by a wall, probably of cut stones.

A
Pl. 1.
Male, standing figure, in an easy posture, with the arms hanging
straight down. It stood quite upright, but was buried in the earth to
the elbows; by digging round it, it was laid bare to just below the
knees. It was the finest and most nobly sculptured of all the
Nicaraguan statues that I have had an opportunity of seeing. The
face, neck, and chest were carefully elaborated, the mouth closed
with full lips, the Adam’s apple marked out at the throat, the muscles
of the chest, as well as of the arms, correctly rendered; the hands
on the contrary were somewhat stiff, with the thumbs in the same
plane with the other fingers. The shoulders, elbows, and hips were
well formed (the arms were, however, not detached from the body),
but passed gradually backwards into the plane-cut back of the stone.
The head was covered with a large, rounded hood or cap, projecting
above, and drawn out in rounded flaps at the sides of the neck.
Upwards and backwards this hood passed into a kind of capital,
ornamented at the sides with a semi-circular depression, bordered
by a rounded rim, with globularly enlarged ends. The tenon-shaped
projection above the head was unusually large, tapering upwards,
surrounded in front by a double frame, at the sides by a simple,
broad, sharply cut one. The statue was perfectly equilateral. It did
not seem to have been exposed to any injury whatever, and was on
the whole the best preserved of all in this locality. The whole length
of the statue from the upper edge of the tenon to the knee was 225
cm., the breadth across the shoulders 58 cm., the length of the
tenon 65 cm.

B
Pl. 2 and 3.
Female, standing figure, its head slightly bent forwards, and its
arms hanging straight down. It was found erect, but imbedded in
the earth to the navel; the head was broken off, but was found close
to the statue. The statue was very well sculptured, but not so
carefully finished as the preceding one. The forehead was adorned
with a low turban or round band, upon which was placed the heavy
capital, with carvings in relief on the sides. The capital was
surmounted by the square-shaped tenon, the lower part of which
was surrounded by twenty staves with rounded tips. These
ornaments seem to indicate, that in this statue, as well as in the
former one, which was adorned with a double frame, the lower part
of the tenon has been visible, and only its uppermost portion
inserted into the plate of the building. The face and chest were well
preserved, although not so accurately rendered as in A. The mouth
was half-open, the eyes were well marked, deep cut, the ears hidden
by large, square, flat, and grooved pieces. The breasts were held up
by a double, round band. The breadth across the shoulders was
extraordinarily great. The shoulders were high and thin, the arms
very short and feeble in proportion to the body, not entirely
detached, but much more so than in A. The length of the statue
from the upper edge of the tenon to the knee was 226 cm., the
breadth across the shoulders 66 cm.; the length of the tenon 34 cm.

C
Pl. 4.
Male, half-sitting figure, with straight hanging arms; of
considerably less size than A and B, and very badly damaged. The
head and neck were broken off, and crushed into small fragments,
impossible to reconstruct. The pedestal was round, column-shaped,
without any ornaments. The figure had powerful arms, detached
from the sides of the body. The legs were unusually thick and
strong, the feet clumsy, with thick, short toes. In the middle of the
chest there was a carved oval, with a little circle in its centre. The
length of the statue from the shoulder to the sole of the foot was
110 cm., the breadth across the shoulders 56 cm.

C1
Not figured.
Male, sitting figure, with its hands crossed on its knees. The
pedestal was square, remaining erect in the ground. The statue itself
was broken in six pieces, its face entirely crushed. It carried on its
head a round, column-shaped head-dress, similar to that delineated
in figure F, ornamented with transverse furrows and ending upwards
in a tenon. The ears were hidden by square, flat pieces 21 cm. in
length, resembling those of figure B. The head itself was 39 cm. long
from the base of the head-dress to the chin; 31 cm. broad across
the forehead. The breadth across the shoulders was 60 cm.

D
Pl. 5.
Male, standing figure. Head, chest with arms, and upper part of
legs broken off, and lying in four pieces on the ground. The pedestal
was square, with the upper part ornamented with angular wreaths;
it remained fixed in the ground in its original place, and carried still
the feet and the legs (to the knees) of the figure. The face was of
quite a different type from those of A and B, with very prominent
cheek-bones, large lips, and strongly protruding under-jaw; it was
adorned with a crown-shaped head-gear. The ears were also here
hidden by flat pieces, thickening upwards, with the lower corners
rounded. The back of this statue, as well as its position in the
periphery of the stone-mound, points to its having formed part of
the wall of the building; but it seems not, however, to have served
the purpose of supporting the roof, because the upper part of the
crown was finely chiselled, and exhibited no trace of a tenon. It
differed in this point from all the other statues in the circumference
of the mound 1, with the exception of E 1, that was situated almost
opposite to D at the western longside. The height of the head from
the upper rim of the crown to the lower edge of the chin was 45 cm.
The length of the trunk from the shoulders to the thighs was 60 cm.
The breadth across the shoulders was 54 cm.

D1
Not figured.
At a distance of 5 m. from D, in the periphery of the mound,
there rose obliquely from the ground a male, half-sitting statue with
its arms crossed. The head and the uppermost part of the chest with
the exception of the right shoulder were wanting, and could not be
identified among the existing fragments. It wore a beard reaching to
the crossed arms, being in this respect as well as in posture and
workmanship very like F. It measured 102 cm. from the shoulder to
the thighs. The breadth across the shoulders seemed to have been
less than 50 cm.

D2
Not figured.
Near the place that ought to have been occupied by the next
statue, there were lying fragments of an unusually narrow, square
pedestal or pillar. It was narrower than the following E, but in other
respects it resembled this more than it did any of the others found
here.
 E
Pl. 5.
Contrary to the other images of this mound, indeed, of this whole
locality, it did not represent a human figure, but formed a square
pillar, provided with carvings on its front side. It carried a narrower
superstructure (tenon), bordered in front by a sharp-cut frame, 6
cm. broad, 3 cm. deep. The carvings on the front side of the pillar
itself consisted of wreaths somewhat more than 2 cm. deep with a
breadth varying from 3 to 5 cm. They appeared to represent the
head of an animal with an eye surrounded by two concentric circles.
The sides of the pillar were narrower, smooth, without any traces of
wreaths, but bordered by a square-cut frame, 6 cm. broad and 3 cm.
deep. The back of the pillar, which was turned towards the building,
was rough, without any frame. The front side was provided with a
frame only above, and along the eastern side. The front side of the
pillar was 50 cm. broad, the lateral sides 37 cm. broad. The tenon
was 40 cm. in height by 38 cm. in breadth. The pillar was so deeply
imbedded in the ground, that in spite of our digging strenuously, I
did not succeed to lay bare more than about 125 cm. of its length,
reckoned from the upper edge of the tenon.

E1
Not figured.
Male, standing, much damaged. The human figure supported on
his head the head of a massive animal of the feline genus, by its
form most reminding one of the African or Persian lion(!). The statue
was thrown down and broken in several pieces; only the head of the
animal was so far preserved as to enable one to discern something
of the original sculpture. Upon this head was part of a square tenon.
The length of the statue from the upper edge of the forehead to the
thighs was 84 cm., the breadth across the shoulders 39 cm., the
length of the face 24 cm. The head of the animal was 54 cm. high
and 52 cm broad.

E2
Not figured.
Fragments of a female, sitting statue were shattered in the
vicinity of the place, that should have been occupied by the tenth
statue. The head was adorned with a turban-shaped head-dress,
without any trace of a tenon. It is, however, very uncertain whether
this statue has formed part of the series.
Between the last-mentioned statue and F there was not the least
vestige to be found of that statue which ought to have been the
eleventh in number, when reckoned from A.

F
Pl. 6, 7, and 8.
Male, half-sitting figure, with its right arm hanging straight down,
and its left one bent, and resting on the chest. According to my
impression, received on regarding the statue and sketching it, it
represented a chieftain or warrior with a mask before his face and a
helmet on his head. I have arrived at this conclusion from the
reasons, viz. that the face was here incomparably much stiffer than
in the other images, without the slightest attempt of indicating the
muscles, the cheeks, or the mouth; further that the eyes were
marked by two concentric circles with a little (peeping-)hole in the
centre, and that the whole face and the covering of the head were
so much broader proportionally to the breadth of the body than in
the other statues. (A somewhat similar head was found on the
heavily injured statue at the mound 5.) The head-cover may be
considered to exhibit the form of a helmet; this reached to the
shoulders at both sides, hiding the ears completely; but nearly at the
place of the ears there was on each side a shallow circular
depression with a small excavation, probably representing a hole, in
the centre. From the lower part of the helmet a thick elevation,
grooved length-wise in front, came down over the chest. It may be
regarded as representing a breast-armour, or possibly a beard. From
the face itself, below the nose, a piece of the same shape as the just
described elevation was seen to descend, but it was of much smaller
dimensions. The left shoulder with the bent arm was somewhat
more raised than the right. Both shoulders were uncommonly large
and broad, so that the artist almost seems to have intended to
indicate the blade-bone. The arms were pressed close to the body,
disproportionately narrow when viewed from the front, but more
than sufficiently broad when viewed from the side. On its left bent
fore-arm the statue held a little round shield, at the anterior margin
of which the hand projected, showing, unusually enough, the thumb
of the same length with the index. The chest and abdomen were
sculptured with some signs of muscles. The legs were short and
thick, the feet clumsy, with no traces of toes. The image stood on a
pedestal, the upper part of which showed a deep cavetto. The
pedestal was deeply immersed into the ground. Immediately above
the helmet was the square tenon. The length of the statue from the
upper edge of the tenon to the upper edge of the pedestal was 207
cm. The breadth across the shoulders was 57 cm., that of the head
36 cm. The statue was on the whole well preserved, and stood, no
doubt, in its original situation.
As it seems to be beyond a doubt that the above described
statues, which were found standing more or less erect, and at
almost equal distances, nearly five meters from one another,
remained in the situations where they had been originally placed, it
cannot be considered too bold, to suppose that we have here before
us an ancient temple exhibiting an example of how such a building
might be arranged with the Niquirans. It is evident that the ground-
plan of the edifice has been a broad oval, and it is highly probable,
on account of the back of the statues not being elaborated, but only
roughly cut, that it has not been open, but enclosed by walls, the
statues serving as pilasters. However, it must be admitted that this
latter circumstance is far from being proved. The figures A and B,
being larger than the others in the periphery, and more deeply fixed
in the ground, may possibly have stood at each side of the entrance
or perhaps of a flight of steps, leading up into the temple. The roof
was probably supported by a plate of stone or wood, carrying light
rafters, covered with palm leaves or such like materials.

STONE-MOUND 2.
This mound, also oval, was much smaller than mound 1; its
longer diameter was eighteen meters, the shorter twelve. It was
situated due E. of 1, separated from it by a depression in the
ground, ten to twelve meters in breadth, and was made up of more
or less irregular stones. It is impossible to decide whether this
mound has also been surrounded by a series of statues, and in such
a case, by which, because even those statues which were found in
the neighborhood of it, did not remain in situ, but were overthrown,
and more or less broken. The same was also the case with the four
remaining stone-mounds. Thus I shall only briefly indicate their
situations, and then return to the description of the statues in the
order that they were measured and delineated.

STONE-MOUND 3.
It was situated due S. of mound 2, and held rather the same
dimensions, but it was less symmetrical in form. Near it only R and R
1, two large stone-slabs, lids, or parts of a wall, ornamented with
human figures in high-relief, were found.

STONE-MOUND 4.
Due S. of mound 1. Respectively twelve and ten meters in
diameter. Near it the statues M, P and Q were found, none of which
can, however, be with certainty alleged to have been roof-supporter.
P has surely stood quite free.

STONE-MOUND 5.
Situated furthest southwards, of the same dimensions as mound
2, but containing a much less quantity of stones. Only one statue, F
1, was found there.

STONE-MOUND 6.
The smallest of all, situated furthest to the east, of a more
irregular form. In its vicinity three statues were found, of which only
one, O, was delineated. The others were crushed into small
fragments.
The smaller objects found by excavations made in, and beside
these mounds, will be spoken of in connection with the other
ceramic relics, discovered in Ometepec and Zapatera.
I now return to the description of the several statues.

G
Pl. 9 and 10.
This statue, a double figure, was dug up out of the ground
between the mounds 1 and 2. It has probably stood free, because
considerable portions of its back were well elaborated. It is quite
evident, that it has not served to support a roof, as the upper part of
the head of the upper figure wanted every trace of a tenon, and was
carefully finished. It represented a male figure, somewhat stooping,
with bent arms, the hands leaning on the hips. Upon this human
figure that of an animal was seated, embracing with its fore-paws
the head of the male figure. The animal was probably intended to
represent a monkey. The male figure had an ugly face, with a long
straight nose; the eyes were formed by quite circular cavities, the
mouth was widely open, and the chin very short. The ears were
covered by thick, square, flat pieces, as in the image B. The neck
was long, the shoulders were much raised, large and powerful; the
arms were bent, pressed close to the sides of the body, very narrow
when seen from the front, broad and flat when seen side-ways. The
chest and stomach were pretty roughly worked; the muscles
however were sharply marked. The legs were short, without any
trace of muscles or even of knees. The feet were completely
wanting, the legs being abruptly cut off. The second figure, the
monkey, rested its lower jaw upon the head of the principal figure,
clasping the hind part of it with its long fingers. The head was large,
with prominent muzzle and jaws, low, curved forehead, and broad
nose, with round nostrils. The hanging ears were long and broad,
rounded backwards. The mouth was open, showing strong, sharp
teeth. The fore-legs or arms were very long, the fore-arm was bent
at a right angle to the upper arm, the shoulder-blades were very
broad and powerful. The back was strongly curved inwards, the tail
long, longer than the animal itself, hanging straight down. The hind
legs were short, strongly bent, drawn up towards the abdomen, and
abruptly cut off above the feet, as in the principal figure. The length
of the statue from the top of the animal’s head to the upper edge of
the pedestal was 175 cm. The breadth of the human figure across
the shoulders was 31 cm.; the breadth of the monkey across the
shoulders was 21 cm.

G1
Not figured.
It was of the same kind as G, i. e. representing a human figure,
on whose shoulders and head an animal was seated. It was much
damaged, and almost impossible to delineate. The anterior portion
of the animal’s head was crushed, as were also the legs and arms of
the human image, whose face seemed designed to represent a skull
with a long neck. The face of the principal figure was 21 cm. long.
The length of the animal from the crown of the head to the root of
the tail was 50 cm. The legs and claws of this animal were larger
than those of the monkey in G.

G2
Not figured.
Male torso, impossible to complete. It was lying near G, and
seemed to have belonged to the mound 2. It measured 57 cm. from
the shoulder to the thighs. The breadth across the shoulders was 48
cm.

H
Pl. 11.
Male, sitting image. This is the first representative of a kind of
idol, of which, as far as I know, not more than a single one from
Central America previously has been figured.[6] Squier has also given
an illustration of a statue from P e n s a c o l a (Las Isletas), in which a
head of an animal is placed upon the head of a human figure, but
there the animal’s head evidently serves only as a helmet; this
seems also to be the case with the above-mentioned image E 1,
from the western side of the stone-mound 1. With regard to the
present image, on the contrary, I believe that the head of the animal
is the more important figure, representing a deity, the human figure
being nothing but the bearer of the god, viz. a kind of caryatid. I
formed this opinion on account of the very strongly marked
supporting postures exhibited by the three human figures, bearing
heads of animals, which follow next in my description. Of the image
H only the upper portion remained; this showed, that the human
figure had been sitting, or half-sitting, but not in what manner the
arms had been used as supports. The head of the animal was a
splendid head of a jaguar, very finely elaborated, and pretty well
preserved. The mouth was somewhat open, showing distinctly
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookluna.com