h. pohl, from the kattumaram to the fibre-teppa – change in boat-building traditions at...

The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology

(2007)doi 101111j1095-9270200600134x

copy 2007 The Author Journal Compilation copy 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd 9600 Garsington Road Oxford OX4 2DQ UK and 350 Main Street Malden MA 02148 USA

Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Changes in Boatbuilding Traditions on Indiarsquos East CoastH Pohl

From the

Kattumaram

to the

Fibre-Teppa

mdashChanges in Boatbuilding Traditions on Indiarsquos East Coast

Henrik Pohl

Archaeomare institute for marine and maritime research Alter Hafen Suumld 3 18069 Rostock Germany

A small wooden raftmdashthe

kattumarammdash

is still very prominent among fishing communities on the east coast of India Thegoal of this study is to describe this traditional fishing raft focusing on the description of constructional changes The essentialsof terminology conditions of production propulsion techniques and crewing as well as equipment and the spread and usageare described Moreover one other more modern raft-type and a fibre-boat are presented here because they are closely relatedto the

kattumaram

copy 2007 The Author

Key words

boatbuilding watercraft ethnography India change

kattumaram

teppa

U

p to the present day the major part of Indiarsquoseast coast fishery is carried out usingtraditional fishing craft and among them

the

kattumaram

is very widely used mainly betweenPuri (Orissa) and Cap Comorin (Tamil Nadu)and further north-west as far as Cochin (Kerala)It is estimated that of around 60000 vessels in this

c

2000 km-long coast there are 40000

kattumaram

sThe goal of this study is to describe the

kattumaram

focusing on the description of constructionalchanges In addition one other more modernraft-type and a fibre-boat will be presented becausethey are closely related to the

kattumaram

McGrail

et al

rsquos recently-published

Boats of SouthAsia

provided a welcome basis for ethnographicresearch describing thoroughly a multitude oftraditional boats from Bangladesh to Sri LankaThe emphasis lay on plank-boats and thus excludedthe

kattumaram

as a trunk-raft A description ofthis type was expressly desired in the final chapterof this monograph (2003 281) The expedition torecord these boats took place in the weeks justbefore the

tsunami

of 26 December 2004 Henceit represents a unique inventory just before thepartial destruction of the fishing-fleet of Indiarsquoseast coast The starting point was Calcutta whereI was introduced to the great diversity of western-Bengal watercraft by the maritime ethnologistSwarup Bhattacharyya He showed me differentboatbuilding traditions in the Ganges delta and

made valuable suggestions as to the future route ofthe expedition Further stopovers were from northto south Tarsali Puri Gopalpur VizakhapatnamMachilipatnam Chennai and Mamallapuram(Fig 1) This expedition came to an abrupt end

Figure 1 Map of the area of study (H Pohl)

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

2 copy 2007 The Author Journal Compilation copy 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

in Chennai on 26 December 2004 I stood at 800am with fishermen on the beach and was just aboutto make a trial sailing when the

tsunami

arrivedAlthough the effect in the bay of Chennai wasnot as dramatic as in other parts of the countryit nevertheless made a deep impact in the fisher-menrsquos lives resulting in loss of life and also loss ofmuch of the fishing equipment which was washedaway from the beaches In Mamallapuram boatsand rafts were either destroyed or washed inlandUnder these circumstances a continuing assessmentof

kattumaram

s further south was not possibleThe following text will attempt to describe three

different types of fishing craft Two are definableas rafts due to the inherently buoyant nature oftheir hull-components The third is a modern fibre-boat which is closely related to the

kattumaram

Type Amdashthe

kattumarammdash

represents the oldesttype of wooden raft used along the Indian eastcoast a traditionally-built vessel which mainlyconsists of 3ndash7 tree-trunks lashed together Type Bthe

wooden-teppa

is a raft-construction composedof a boat-shaped hull shaped by side planks andfilled with polystyrene blocks Type C the

fibre-teppa

is a modern fibre-boat (the skin and deckmade of fibre-reinforced plastic (FRP) and thecavities filled with expanded polystyrene) whichhas some elements of a

kattumaram

The underlying question of the assessment was

how far has traditional boatbuilding along Indiarsquoseast coast changed in the last 25 years The researchpapers of the Bay of Bengal Program (BOBP)published in the early 1980s served as reference-points A detailed study of the

kattumaram

wasprovided by Menon (1980) but did new materialsencourage the development of new boat-typesor were proven types preferred Are there localtypes and if so did they change independentlyof each other The principal research methodwas documentation of the present state throughsketching and digital photography Archetypesof diverse boats and rafts were identified andmeasured Trials with selected watercraft yieldedimportant observations on their use A furthersignificant aspect was the interviewing of fisher-men and boatbuilders There was no lack ofeloquent indigenous assistants who renderedvaluable support

Type Amdash

Kattumaram

The generic term for the vessels evaluated here hasbeen established as beach-landing craft in scholarlyliterature (Gulbrandsen

et al

1980 1) This

applies to all vessels which could be landed onand launched from a beach Apart from thishistorical boat-names will be left aside Insteadthe vessels encountered are divided into Types AB and C and described accordingly (cf Weski 1999)The most important languages in this area areHindi the common language of many Indiansparticularly in the north Oriya widespread inthe state of Orissa Telegu in Andhra Pradeshand Tamil in Tamil Nadu It is noticeable that thenames of vessels are from minor or local languagesHindi is only used for generic terms All typeswill be ordered and the names of the watercraftpresented according to the route of the expedi-tion from north to south

In Puri in the state of Orissa the languagesHindi Oriya and Telegu are encountered Thegeneric term for lsquoboatrsquo is

donga

in both Oriya andHindi and

teppa

in Telegu Due to the fact thatPuri which is the largest fishing village in Orissais primarily inhabited by migrants from AndhraPradesh who speak Telegu the boats are called

teppa

here In Gopalpur which is also in Orissaone encounters the same terminology In Vizak-apatnam in the state of Andhra Pradesh thefishermen used for the first time two differentterms

teppa

and

kattumaram

Strangely enoughthe fishermen of Machilipatnam also in AndhraPradesh only used the term

teppa

despite thisplace being nearer the area in which the Tamilword

kattumaram

originated The term

kattumaram

was unknown to the local fishermen with theexception of a teacher at the Fishery TrainingInstitute

In Chennai Bay Tamil Nadu

kattumaram

wasexclusively used for Type A The meaning of theword in Tamil the principal language in southernIndia is lsquolashed woodrsquo composed of

kattu

=lsquoto lash lashedrsquo and

maram

= lsquowoodrsquo Hence theterm is quite specific and descriptive as the craftwas indeed built of trunks lashed together TheEnglish term lsquocatamaranrsquo is derived from the Tamilword but while we would nowadays use it todescribe a double-hulled vessel its original meaningwas a raft made of several tree-trunks

Kattumaram

is the most adequate term It is not only the genericterm for lsquoboatrsquo as

teppa

in Telegu or

donga

in Hindibut designates both a type and its constructionTherefore this paper will refer to Type A as

kattumaram

not least in order to avoid anypossibility of confusion with the similar-soundingbut entirely differently-used term lsquocatamaranrsquo Thereare further specific raft-names They concernparticularly additive or descriptive names which

H POHL CHANGES IN BOATBUILDING TRADITIONS ON INDIArsquoS EAST COAST

copy 2007 The Author Journal Compilation copy 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 3

elucidate the way the vessel was used for fishingSmaller rafts of Type A are called in Tamil

periamaram

while larger vessels are known as

chinnamaram

(Menon 1980 6)

Construction

Rafts may be distinguished from boats by thesource of their buoyancy A raft uses the flotationcharacteristics of individual elements (McGrail1987 5) Due to the inherent flotation charac-teristics of the individual lashed trunks the

kattumaram

can be defined as a log-raft The assess-ment of

kattumaram

s along Indiarsquos east coastyielded various local types in Andhra Pradeshand Orissa the boat-shaped

kattumaram

is mostcurrent in the north-eastern part of Tamil Naduraft-shaped

kattumaram

s in the south-easterncoastal area of Tamil Nadu is a variant of the boat-shaped

kattumaram

with a distinctive U-shapedcross-section

All types have one basic construction in commonBetween three and seven shaped tree-trunks arelashed together with string The lashings are notintended to be permanent but are untied wheneverthe vessel is beached in order to carry the separateparts on to the beach to dry For the boat-shaped

kattumaram

of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa woodennails were also used to fix the side parts of thevessel Light woods with low water-absorptionare preferred for building

kattumaram

s althoughthere are some difficulties in obtaining reasonably-priced quality woods nowadays Preferred woodsare

Melia dubia

albizzia stipulata

and

bombaxmalabaricum

with a density of 368ndash415 kgm

3

(Menon1980 2 6) or

erythryna indica

and

brithryna

sp

(locally known as

padhua

) (Mohapatra 1986 12)The

kattumaram

has low side planks which giveit a boat shape For propulsion paddles sculling-oars engines andor sails are used Daggerboardsadd to the vesselrsquos lateral plan and alleviate itsrolling motion

Local

kattumaram

-types

Some

kattumaram

-types were examined in the townsof Puri Gopalpur Vizakhapatnam MachilipatnamChennai and Mamallapuram Here the fundamentaldifference between the boat-shaped

kattumaram

sof Andhra Pradesh and the raft-

kattumaram

s ofTamil Nadu was noted Normally

kattumaram

s inPuri are made of four trunks (Fig 2) This resultsin two adequate raft-halves There is no centraltrunk as in other areas A striking feature is theattached beak-shaped prow (Fig 6) On each sideof the raft low planks are fastened lashed to the

hull and additionally supported by woodenstruts at bow and stern (Fig 5) The planksprovide protection from waves by increasing thefreeboard At the stern is a board with a semi-circular recess for a sculling oar Each individualwooden component was fastened by eitherlashings or treenails The tree-trunks are lashedtogether particularly at the bow and stern The

kattumaram

s of Puri have daggerboards asternbut no central ones as in other places

This

kattumaram

looks boat-shaped (Fig 2)It features a sharp up-bending bow and a flatstern The greatest breadth is amidships It has aflat deck on which fishing equipment is kept No

Figure 2 Kattumaram Puri (H Pohl)



Figure 3 A large kattumaram Vizakhapatnam (H Pohl)

Figure 4 Fish-well in a kattumaram Vizakhapatnam (H Pohl)



boxes or similar devices are used for storage Thereare also no thwarts and the fishermen sit on thebare trunks The submerged portion is hydrody-namic being well-rounded and smooth withoutany projections The raftrsquos sheer is minimal Atypical

kattumaram

from Puri has a breadth of095 m a height of 032 m amidships a height withside plank of 038 m and a total length of 530 mNevertheless it should be kept in mind that thereare no standard measurements but considerablevariation in size and combination of the individualtrunks It would hardly be possible to find twoidentical

kattumaram

s along Indiarsquos east coastAstonishingly only one working

kattumaram

wassighted in Gopalpur In terms of constructionit is similar to the rafts documented in Puri Twoother scrapped remains of

kattumaram

s were foundbut most vessels in Gopalpur are

wooden-teppas

In the large international port of Vizakhapatnamis a sheltered bay which is designated for tradi-tional fishing-boats and

kattumaram

s The raftswe saw are very similar to those from Puri Theywere built of two identical halves and have no

central trunk like rafts further south for examplein Machilipatnam Constructional differences toPuri are mainly that in Puri the sterns were flatin Vizakhapatnam the middle trunks are prolongedastern and form a block for sculling or a basefor an outboard engine Sometimes there is noadditional prow but instead the trunks form avery flat but solid bow The measured sizes ofthe raft vary in length between 3 and 11 m Thelargest of all measured

kattumaram

s with onlyfour trunks had a total length of 112 m and amaximum breadth of 23 m (Fig 3) A localpeculiarity of Vizakhapatnam are oblong woodenboxes on top of the deck which measure

c

04

times

015 m and are normally on starboard (Fig 4)These are too small to hold the catch but are forsmall live fish which are used as bait

At the extensive beach of Machilipatnamparticularly are found smaller traditional rafts andboats Large ships and small

navas

are furtherupstream in a harbour The

kattumaram

s of Mach-ilipatnam are built of three large components(Fig 5) Two side parts are arranged around a central

Figure 5 Dismantled kattumaram Machilipatnam (H Pohl)



trunk which has two slots for daggerboards oneamidships and the other further aft At the bowa kind of prow is fastened to the middle trunk bymeans of a hook-scarf (Fig 6) Abaft all trunksend in line to form a chock as stern (Fig 5) Itsupports a sculling oar sometimes an outboardengine and gives the vessel additional buoyancyWhile the middle part is usually a single large trunkthe sides are built of several individual piecesDepending on the quality of the wood it couldconsist of two trunks but also of many more joinedto each other with hardwood dowels The sheerstrake curves out It tapers sharply at the bowwhereas the stern is not planked (Fig 7) Thisvery low bulwark was shored up by cross-pieces andfixed with small wooden dowels It is additionallyfasted with plastic strings to the raft

The fastenings of the

kattumaram

of Machili-patnam are very flexible and could be quicklydismantled The lashings were done with plasticstrings and cordage and secured with hardwooddowels If large trunks are used the side parts ofthe raft being fastened with hardwood dowels aremore rigidly connected But apart from that theentire construction is only held together by tworopes at bow and stern At this spot two pieces ofwood were loosely inserted like cross-beams tocounteract the strain exerted by the rope fasteningIn this way a three-part raft is built which couldbe dismantled within a minute and then carriedby two men onto the beach (Fig 5) A typical

kattumaram

in Machilipatnam has a length of75 m and a breadth of 16 m

Several fishing villages are situated in the longbay of Chennai For the first time a

kattumaram

type appears which could be described as a raft-

kattumaram

The construction of this raft-type isclearly different from those used further northIn Chennai five or six trunks of various lengthsare used arranged symmetrically (Fig 8) Theymake a trough-shaped construction that is tosay the flanking trunks are higher than those inthe middle The different lengths of the trunksis a distinctive feature The middle trunk is thelongest (Fig 9) and the individual trunks becomegradually shorter towards the sides At the endsof all trunks is an appendage of 01 m wide and015 m long It is located centrally on the middletrunk and on the outer side on all other trunksThere are no side-planks so this is a raft in thepure sense This applies also for the fastenings Thefive or six tree-trunks are fastened without any dowelsbut with ropes at bow and stern The prow is alsolashed with ropes to the hull This beak-shapedprow component is larger more curved and lessintegrated than the prows of Machilipatnam

The lateral plan is exclusively determined by asmall daggerboard at the stern The vessel is steeredwith a long board which is also used as a paddlewhen the boat is beached or launched At theoutermost side trunks in the vesselrsquos first third aresmall rounded recesses which serve as mast-feet

Figure 6 Scale drawing of a kattumaram Machilipatnam (H Pohl and D Hinz)



It was observed that sculling-oars were not usedbut instead a pulling-oar A thwart lies across thetrunks at the front part of the raft as well as arowlock on the port side held by a spar which isfixed by a wooden block as base and a tautenedstring The pulling-oar could be fastened to the sparwith strings (Fig 10) and combined with the steeringboard used as a simple paddle represent the manualpropulsion of this vessel In Mamallapuram 60 kmsouth of Chennai only a few rafts were sightedinland damaged and swept from their mooringsby the

tsunami

The construction of the

kattumaram

sencountered was identical to those of Chennai In

view of the exceptional situation the expeditionfinished here

The southern part of Tamil Nadu has a furthertype of

kattumaram

Between three to five trunksare lashed together with coco-fibres Additionallythe relative positions of the logs are maintainedwith two massive cross-timbers at bow and stern(Fig 11) The outer trunks are positioned muchhigher than the inner ones giving this raft a U-shaped cross-section These kinds of vessels some-times have a slightly pointed shape being widerat the stern than the bow Another difference isthat all trunks have the same length and are not

Figure 7 Kattumaram Machilipatnam (H Pohl)



staggered as in Chennai (Menon 1980 8ndash9)Unfortunately the tsunami prevented a detailedstudy A 3-log kattumaram of this type can be seenin the Deutsches Museum (Munich Germany) andhas a length of 757 m and a breadth of 105 mIt was fitted with split-bamboo sticks for paddlingand a sail but no opening for a centreboardPossibly this kind of craft was sailed in pairs twokattumarams are joined together at the bow andthe larger one set a sail to reach the fishing area(Menon 1980 1 fig 4 Rajamanickam 2004)

Thus centres of locally-distinctive raft-buildingtraditions begin to emerge in Andhra Pradeshand Orissa are boat-shaped kattumarams in thenorth-eastern part of Tamil Nadu are raft-shapedkattumarams in the south-eastern coastal stripof Tamil Nadu is a variant of the boat-shapedkattumaram with a distinctive U-shaped cross-section

The building of a kattumaramAt the beach of Machilipatnam it was possibleto observe and document the construction of akattumaram A boatbuilder and his assistant wereoccupied for several days hewing the side parts ofthe raft and fitting them together The building-site was on a beach between finished rafts andnot marked in any way The trunks lay on twotimbers Future archaeologists would have no reasonto identify this place as a boatbuilding site apartperhaps from the wood-shavings (Fig 12) The

Figure 8 Scale drawing of a kattumaram Chennai (H Pohl and D Hinz)

Figure 9 Overall view of a kattumaram Chennai (H Pohl)



Figure 10 Pulling-oar device of a kattumaram Chennai (H Pohl)

Figure 11 Boat-shaped kattumaram from Tamil Nadu Deutsches Museum Munich Germany (H Pohl)



following tools were used long-shafted adze smalladze with hammerhead hand-saw two-man sawplane and gimlet Other items were a pot withochre paint and a cloth

At first the middle trunk was worked In thiscase an existing middle trunk was re-used Twoadjoining side-parts were produced Probably dueto financial constrains these were made of severalsmaller pieces which were roughly shaped witha long adze Then holes for dowels were madewith a hand-drill wherever necessary to fix thesmaller parts together An ochre-coloured liquidwas applied to the woods to control the fitting(Fig 13) A timber to be fitted was painted andpressed into its intended position The colourimprint on the opposite timber indicated wherematerial needed to be planed off These timberswere joined with dowels (Fig 14) made of a veryhard and inflexible wood After having finished theside parts the final hull-shape was worked outwith a long-shafted and a small adze Initially thecombined trunks make an angular shape Onlyby removing large quantities of material was theintended hydrodynamic shape of the submerged

portion of the hull achieved In contrast to the evendeck the underside of the vessel features a boldcurvature The prow parts are adequately manu-factured and fastened to the trunks with hook-scarfs Unfortunately the making and fasteningof the side planks was not observed This and thelashing of the wooden parts are the final steps tofinish the hull

Protective coating for the woods seems not tobe common This and the use of inferior woodslike cotton-tree and mango add to the relativelyshort life-span of kattumarams of 3ndash5 yearsThe builder of the vessel was not exclusively aboatbuilder but a fisherman who occasionallymdashdepending on ordersmdashbuilt kattumarams Theassistant was the client and future owner of the raftHence the type of production could be classifiedas rural-handicraft It was interesting to notehow the boatbuilder was supplied by the assistantwith a kind of rice-beer each day which enabledhim to carry out the heaviest manual work evenin mid-day heat The building of this kattumaramtook 5ndash7 days According to the client a trunkcost 600 Rupees and the cost of a finished

Figure 12 Raft-building area Machilipatnam (H Pohl)



but unequipped raft amounted to 5000 Rupees(equivalent in 2004 to c$100)

This price is relatively high when one considersthat the middle trunk was re-used and the side parts

were made of small and cheap wooden pieces Theworkmanship cost 800 to 1000 Rupees A newkattumaram costs 8ndash15000 Rupees with a motor20ndash25000 Rupees (Babu 2005 24) The trend

Figure 13 The fitting of components by means of paint imprints raft-building area Machilipatnam (H Pohl)

Figure 14 Dowelling raft-building area Machilipatnam (H Pohl)



indicates an increase in the price for raft-woodso that alternative materials are increasingly beingused (Anon 1980 2 3 15 16 Menon 1980 3Mohapatra 1986 12ndash13 McGrail et al 2003 146)In contrast the pay was very low In the 1980s thewages for the building of a kattumaram amountedto 500 Rupees (25 Rupees per hour) (Anon 198012) Taking the inflation rate of the Indian Rupeeduring the last 25 years into account it can beestablished that the wages for the building of akattumaram have not increased

Means of propulsionThe simplicity of the hull-construction of akattumaram contrasts with the numerous propulsion-methods ranging from simple paddles pulling-and sculling-oars and poles up to sails and smallengines These differences reflect the financialmeans of the fishermen but also adaptation todiverse tasks All these fishing-craft usually crossthe surf with paddles and oars and reach the fishing-grounds by sail or motor Smaller kattumaramsare exclusively moved by one or two paddlesmade of a rounded bamboo or wooden shaftwith no handle at the top The overall length isc1ndash15 m The wooden blade is an uneven oval(Fig 15) The pointed end is joined to the shaftwith strings or ropes the wider end is immersedIt was observed that the helmsman sculls with

his paddle On larger kattumarams paddles wereprimarily used when a vessel crossed the surf InChennai only the helmsman paddles while theman at the bow uses a pulling-oar The aftermostpaddle is only a board and is later used for steering(cf Fig 9)

Oars are deployed in two different ways Largerrafts could be propelled with a stern sculling-oar In Chennai however a construction with apulling-oar was observed (cf Fig 10) It consistsof a thwart across all tree-trunks at the foremostpart of the raft and a rowlock at the port sidesupported by a diagonally-tautened spar whichrests upon a wooden block This spar can befastened with strings to the pulling-oars whichare made of shafts c15 m long to which anangular rudder-blade is fastened From othersources it is known that poles are sometimes usedfor the propulsion of kattumarams (Wiebeck 198761) mainly for crossing surf but this author hasnot observed this

The use of sails was mainly observed on medium-sized and large kattumarams a single mast witha trapezoidal lug-sail or settee-sail (Doran 198139ff ) These sails offer a good compromise betweenpropulsion and manoeuvrability on one hand andsimplicity on the other In terms of sail-handlingone needs to consider that the very small deckof kattumarams does not offer much space forstowing the rig during fishing Moreover thisconstruction has the advantage that a relativelylarge sail area could be hoisted on a little-supported mast This fore-and-aft sail has goodsailing qualities on a steady course and rafts andboats which are fitted with it have a particularlygood upwind performance as seen in sailing trialsLike large surf-boards kattumarams can sail veryfast on a close reach The great disadvantage ofthis rig is the complicated tacking manoeuvresWhenever the vessel goes about the mast needs tobe lowered and stepped again on the windward sideYet this is not critical as the permanent winds nearlyalways allow a comfortable beam-reach courseso the raft needs to be tacked very seldom Thebasic layout of sails used on kattumarams couldbe divided into two types

Type 1 (Fig 16) is a trapezoidal lug-sail on a shortmast made from a stout wooden pole sittingin a very shallow central mast-foot in a steeply-inclined position pointing forwards and to wind-ward In the bay of Chennai mast-foots are smallrounded recesses which are not central but on theouter sides of the vessel The mast is supportedby three shrouds so only the windward shrouds areFigure 15 Kattumaram paddle Puri (H Pohl)



Figure 16 Sail Type 1 lug-sail trapezoidal on a short mast Puri (H Pohl)

Figure 17 Drawing of sail Type 1 (H Pohl and D Hinz)



under tension Shrouds are fixed on the starboardand port sides and the third shroud slightly abaftof the others and on the windward side Thehalyard for hoisting the upper spar runs througha sheave-hole on the top of the mast Both sparsare fixed to downhauls at the fore part of the peakThe upper spar is much longer than the mastand steeply inclined so that it partly fulfils thefunction of the mast (Fig 17) A guy is attachedat the last third of the upper spar while the lowerspar is handled with a sheet at the clew Thewooden mast has an average length of 2 m and adiameter of 01 m The spars are made of bamboowith a diameter of 006ndash008 m and are sometimesextended

Thirty years ago sails were still made of impre-gnated cotton (Menon 1980 8) The appearanceof cheap synthetic packaging material induceda change so nowadays sails I have seen are oftensewn together from woven polyester sacks Thismakes the sail very inexpensive although it hasto be constantly repaired and is partially permeablefor the wind so much of the impulse drive getslost In this respect non-permeable polyethylenefoils which are also quite inexpensive and couldbe cut out as required would be better but theyare even more susceptible to tearing A sail inGopalpur had the following measurements 47 times065 times 495 times 465 m The average sail area was10ndash12 m2 Nevertheless there are certain differencesin the sail area The sailrsquos foot could be longer byup to 1 m

Type 2 is a lateen-sail on a spar (Fig 18) observedin Machilipatnam (Fig 19) loose-footed and handledby a sheet The sail could be boomed out with a2ndash3 m long boom when the vessel runs downwindThe mast-shoe is merely a small board with a recessin the middle which is held simply by ropesThe spar is very long and often a composite oftwo pieces Its tack is fastened directly to thebow with a downhaul This type of sail has thelsquoclassicrsquo triangular shape of a lateen sail but itshould be noted that the spar could not be freelyrotated but rather like a mast is pivoted at the bowonly (Fig 19) This represents a specialty whoseorigin is not well understood and is worthy offurther study Various explanations are possibleincluding independent invention Arab dhowswith lateen sails Vietnamese boom lug sails orPolynesian influences (Doran 1981 39ff)

The installation of an engine is in principlepossible in all medium-sized and large kattumaramsYet this modern method of propulsion was onlyobserved on some rafts in the bay of Chennai where

long-shaft outboard engines called lsquolongtail enginesrsquowere commonly used (Fig 20) These give thekattumarams a much greater radius of actionThe main disadvantages are the high acquisitionmaintenance and operating costs the reductionof the limited deadweight capacity as well assusceptibility to faults when the vessel capsizes inthe surf Moreover there were reports of accidentsas a result of uncontrollable shafts and propellers(pers comm Lokanath Anka Puri Orissa)

Crew and propulsion techniquesA kattumaramrsquos crew consists of between one andthree persons though most commonly two Onthe very large kattumarams of Vizakhapatnamthere could be more When the surf is crossed theraft is always propelled with paddles Either bothfishermen paddle or the helmsman sculls withhis paddle This part of the journey is the moststrenuous The heavy wooden rafts have to beaccelerated quickly in order to avoid the waveswashing the vessel back on to the beach Afterhaving crossed the surf the daggerboard is loweredirrespective of whether the vessel is under sail asit alleviates the vesselrsquos rolling motion Afterwardsthe vessel is propelled in a standing or sitting postureto the fishing grounds while other vessels with rigshoist their sails It was reported that occasionallytrawlers and kattumarams join together to forma fishery-community (Anon 1984 9) Rafts arepulled by a trawler to the fishing-grounds wherethe trawler serves as a mother-ship during fishingWhile it is fishing in the common way with drift-gillnet or a long line the kattumaram is left drifting

In order to get back to the home beach the surfneeds to be crossed It is important to wait for anadvantageous moment and then to paddle withconcerted effort in an interval of smaller breakersthe remaining 50ndash100 m to the beach The helms-man uses his paddle for steering and sculling whilecrossing the surf The capsizing of rafts is oftenobserved and was witnessed by the author onceThe consequences are not as dramatic as theyappear though the fishermen can swim (whichwas uncommon for their European colleaguesin the past) the vessel cannot sinkmdashit is raisedand floats again the equipment had been tied upproperly before crossing the surf and hence shouldnormally not get lost Several men are needed tocarry the trunks and other dismantled pieces ofthe raft and equipment up the beach using yokeson their shoulders

Propulsion is different in the bay of Chennaifrom the rest of Andhra Pradesh One fisherman



Figure 18 Sail Type 2 lateen sail loose-footed Machilipatnam (H Pohl)




sits on a thwart at the bow with a pulling-oar whilethe second man kneels at the stern and paddleswith the steering-board (Figs 9 and 10) On the openwater either a small engine or a sail is used Thevarious tasks on a journey were only documentedon Types B and C and will be discussed below

EquipmentApart from the basic wooden raft the following partsbelong to a kattumaram On boat-kattumarams inAndhra Pradesh two different-sized daggerboardsare used to reduce lateral movement The maindaggerboard c1 m long and 03ndash04 m widewith hydrodynamically-rounded edges is loweredcentrally in its slot (Fig 6) with wooden battensnailed onto the upper end on each side to stop itslipping through The stern-daggerboard is muchsmaller 040 times 015 m and its slot is not workedinto the trunk but is simply a recess between twotrunks In the bay of Chennai the raft-kattumaramsof Tamil Nadu have no central daggerboards butonly daggerboard-slots astern Due to the tsunamiit was not possible to document how these vesselswere used Yet it could be assumed that the steering-board fulfilled also the function of a daggerboardwhen the craft was sailed Otherwise the necessarylateral plan would have been absent

Another difference between the boat-kattumaramsfrom Andhra Pradesh and those from Tamil Nadu

is their anchors The typical anchor for boat-kattumarams is a wooden hook weighted by astone (Fig 21) which is usually fastened tothe back-end of the anchor shank Sometimes arather small stone is affixed to the point of thewooden hook A different anchor type wasdocumented in Chennai a stone anchor A largec03 times 03 m rectangular flat stone is woven intoa rope Sometimes an eye was spliced into the ropethrough which the actual anchor cable is run

The crews of smaller kattumarams who putto sea for day-fishing seem to manage withoutany food and only a bottle of water Larger raftswere loaded with nets containing water and foodboxes As the rafts are held together by ropes it isof great advantage to have spare ropes on boardThe fishing equipment consists of long line drift-gillnets with ballast stones and floater in a net baitstaff-buoy beacon-buoy gaff and a basket or netfor the caught fish In addition they carried thepaddles oars sails and engines described aboveBailers are not carried as rafts can not take on water

UseThe kattumaram is an all-round vessel for coastalwork Its action radius could range from 1 to 15 kmoff the coast Fishing is primarily carried outwith small drift-gillnets Other methods are line-fishing gillnets and boatpurse seines (Anon 1984 1)

Figure 20 Type C fibre-teppa Puri (H Pohl)



The nets and fishing-lines consist primarily ofsynthetic materials It could be roughly said thatnet-fishing is carried out on large kattumaramsand line-fishing on small rafts This kind of fisheryis mostly carried out during daylight becauseof the limited carrying capacity The duration offishing is dependent on many factors such asdistance to the fishing-grounds wind currentsand the kind of fishery

Generally the boat-shaped kattumarams of TamilNadu operate in pairs and fish with a long line(Anon 1984 1) Some kattumarams in Tamil Nadualso put to sea for several days in order to catchflying-fish The fishing season covers the whole yearexcept during periods of bad weather The fishermanhas to rely on daily income There are mostly nosavings so he is forced to put to sea even when thesurf is high At the beach of Machilipatnam severaltemporary fishing-huts were erected According tothe statements of the indigenous population thesehuts are loaded on the vessels after 3 months andbrought to the next fishing grounds where a newtemporary fishing-village emerges

SpreadUp to the present day the major part of Indiarsquoseast coast fishery is carried out with traditionalfishing-craft the most common of which is thekattumaram Exact figures are very difficult toobtain (cf McGrail et al 2003 130) A census in

1981 for Andhra Pradesh listed 22198 kattumaramsout of a total of 36013 traditional fishing-craft(Anon 1980 Anon 1983 27) A more recent censusin 2003 in Tamil Nadu listed 33038 kattumaramsout of a total of 68036 boats along this 1000-km coastline (Anon 2005 36) One can thereforeassume (before the tsunami) a total number ofc45000 kattumarams along Indiarsquos east coastas opposed to c19000 other traditionally-builtvessels (Gulbrandsen et al 1980 1) Around120000 fishermen earn their daily living on these45000 kattumarams supporting c500000 familymembers (Menon 1980 1)

The area of spread is generally assumed to bebetween Puri (Orissa) and Cap Comorin (TamilNadu) and continuing north-west until Cochin(Kerala) along a coastline of c2500 km Adistribution-map from 1965 indicates the samedistribution-pattern for several traditionalvessel-types (Deloche 1994 fig 37) The spreadof Type-A rafts could be very different An exactand topical distribution map would be a desirablefuture task to be carried out by an indigenousethnologist Here on the spot it was only possibleto make a rough estimate which however rendersa good overall view and allows the following con-clusions (Table 1) Type A is represented inquantitative order from north to south as followsin Puri it is the third most common watercraftwhereas in Gopalpur only one kattumaram was

Figure 21 The anchor of a kattumaram Puri (H Pohl)



sighted In Vizakhapatnam and at the beach ofMachilipatnam the kattumaram is the mostcommon watercraft in the town of Chennai thesecond most common and in the rural outskirtsof Chennai the most frequent fishing-vessel Togo into more detail the following data was collectedin the respective places

Puri is considered to be the largest fishing villageof Orissa yet it is a very young fishing communityIt was only c30 years ago that a steady migrationof fishermen from Andhra Pradesh began Beforethat there were only around ten boats in Puri (perscomm Lokanath Anka Puri) In the last c20years small modern watercraft appear for fisherywith the introduction of the fibre-teppa and thewooden-teppa Vizakhapatnam is a special case asthe building of the international port has favouredthe displacement of the traditional line-fishingby net-fishing so that it only retains a minor roleOnly a side bay within the harbour is designatedfor smaller fishing craft In Machilipatnam it isnotable that all boats along this beach are ownedby one person However these small fishing-craftwere documented directly on the beach the majorityof larger fishing-craft including hundreds of trawlersas well as some river-fishing navas are mooredin a harbour further upstream At the beach ofChennai were hundreds of Type A rafts and justas many Type C boats Outside the urban bay thenumber of kattumarams was greater At Mamalla-puram it was not possible to make any statementson the quantitative ratio of traditional fishing craftin this place as the tsunami had destroyed manyvessels while others were washed inland

There are several centres of different local stylesin raft-building in Andhra Pradesh and Orissa theboat-shaped kattumaram is represented particularlyin the north-eastern part of Tamil Nadu the raft-shaped kattumaram is built in the south-easterncoastal region of Tamil Nadu one encounters a variantof the boat-shaped kattumaram with a U-shapedcross-section This type is particularly well repre-sented in the area of Palk Bay (Menon 1980 2)

The boundary of the area of distribution ofkattumarams is relatively definite The northern-most edge is Puri Further north the Gangesdelta of Bengal begins where one encounters anmuch greater diversity of boat-types though nokattumarams In Myanmar on the other side ofthe Gulf of Bengal kattumarams are not knownbut a logboat-building tradition is still vibrantCap Comorin is the southern tip of India butnot the boundary of the spread of kattumaramsThe fishermen of the Malabar coast further north-west as far as Cochin use the kattumaram as well asother types of watercraft There are also kattumaramsin Sri Lanka (httpwwwstreaminitiativeorgpdf050203Srilankapdf Support to Regional AquaticResources Management 2) As they appear onlyin areas which were settled by Tamils is seemscertain that they brought the tradition with themand it was not developed locally Hence it is notastonishing that this type corresponds to theTamil raft-kattumarams (httpwwwitdgorgdocsregion_south_asiarebuilding-fisheries-livelihoods-(draft)pdf ITDG 7) Due to many years of civilwar in the north of Sri Lanka no modern water-craft have been introduced in contrast with otherparts of the country

Type Bmdashwooden-teppaThe occurrence of Type B is limited to the statesof Andhra Pradesh and Orissa All boats are calledteppa there Type B is specified by the descriptionlsquowooden-tepparsquo meaning a raft construction whichconsists of a boat-shaped hull formed with woodenplanks and filled with polystyrene blocks Althoughit has the shape of a boat it is clearly a raft as ithas actually no cavity and no watertight outersurface (McGrail 1987 5) the source of itsbuoyancy being the flotation characteristics of itsindividual wooden and polystyrene elements Asa raft it has some similarities with the kattumaram(Fig 22) Wooden-teppas were particularly docu-mented in the areas of Puri and Gopalpur and

Table 1 Numbers of Types A B and C observed along the east coast of India

Place Total Type A (kattumaran) Type B (wooden teppa) Type C (fibre-teppa) Other

Puri c2000 50 100 1750Gopalpur c300 1 200 50 20 (masula drais)Vizakhaparnam c280 200 0 30 50 (masula)Machilipatnam c250 230 1 20 1 (nava)Chennai 100s 100s



consist mainly of a hull-skin made of sewn non-watertight planks filled with polystyrene blocksand then decked (Figs 23 and 24) In contrast to thekattumaram the wooden-teppa could not be dismantledto dry or to transport its individual componentsTherefore more men are needed to transport itThe advantage of this vessel is its increased sea-going capabilities compared to a kattumaram itsgreater deadweight capacity and its safety

The building of a wooden-teppaIn Orissarsquos largest fishing village Puri it was possiblepartially to document the building of a wooden-teppaIt appears like a mixture of a kattumaram anda boat having a deck with a moderate sheer Thesubmerged hull is starkly curved and it has atypical kattumaram stern (Fig 25) high sideplanks increase the freeboard preventing wavesfrom washing over the deck Measurement yielded

Figure 22 Type Bmdashwooden-teppa Puri (H Pohl)

Figure 23 Scale drawing of Type Bmdashwooden-teppa Puri (H Pohl and D Hinz)



Figure 24 Raft-building area Type B Puri (H Pohl)

Figure 25 Stern view Type B Puri (H Pohl)



a breadth of 215 m a height at midships of 08 mwith deck 085 m at the bow 145 m Length 1 is73 m and length 2 is 79 m (cf Fig 23) Todaymango-wood is mostly used as building materialjoined with strong plastic string and iron nailsThe tools used were bow-drill spoon-bit a largetwo-handed hand-saw a small hand-saw an adzea marking-string and a plane

The hull is begun with the laying down of abottom plank which tapers towards the ends Theturn of the bilge runs very sharply fore-and-aft Thehull sides consist of two broad strakes and the foresection an additional strake (cf Fig 23) Astern thebottom planks protrude from under the actual sternand thereby form an extension solidified by ablock for the outboard engine which is fastenedwith bolts The side planks end before this Thestern extension has a recess for a sculling oar

The hull is divided into segments by means ofboards fitted crosswise They look like bulkheadsyet they are not watertight but provide transversestability and keep in place the polystyrene blockswhich fill the hull and represent the actual buoyantbody of the wooden-teppa Prefabricated being cutby knives in external workshops or by fishermenin their leisure time they are fitted by hand intothe hull shape When this is finished the deckplanks are sewn to each other and reinforced withwooden battens The vessel has a moderate sheerthat is to say the deck amidships is lower than atthe bow and stern Then the upper side planks arefitted and sewn with strong plastic string Judgingby appearance the vessel has between three to fourstrakes yet the uppermost is only a side plank

Then struts simply wooden battens are nailedon to the deck and side planks Those at the bowand stern are relatively wide Besides reinforcingthe side planks it serves simultaneously as a thwartThis is the only decorated element of this workingcraft (Fig 25) The middle stanchion has a trapezoidalshape which consists of an under and upper blockThe thole board is a side plank onto which a battenwas nailed as reinforcement on the out- and insiderespectively (cf Fig 25) Amidships and asternare slots for daggerboards simply sawn throughthe deck planking the polystyrene blocks andthe bottom planking without any sealing A thinboard was nailed onto the deck planking infront of the midships daggerboard slot It has atriangular shape is very flat and has a roundedrecess for receiving the mast-foot which sits in itloosely Wooden battens reinforce the deck andside planks and are fastened with steel nails Thedrill-holes are not caulked as the hull is a raft and

any incoming water flows out through the drill-holes like through scuppers The use of colour orcoating was not observed on any wooden-teppa inPuri and Gopalpur The connections of a wooden-teppa are typically strong plastic string used totighten the planks The emerging pattern of theseams is reflected in the drawing and the photo(Figs 23 and 24) It varies from raft to raft

In Puri (Orissa) a boatbuilder was observed forseveral days building a wooden-teppa at a placebetween the outskirts of the village and a sand-dune at the beach A timber and two supportsserved as base for the keel plank An awningserved as shelter against the sun (cf Fig 24)The following tools were used small adze withhammerhead hammer hand-saw two-man sawbow-drill plane spoon-bit marking-string andgimlet The boatbuilder worked with two assistantsAlthough he is a fisherman he carried on thebuilding of wooden-teppas as his main trade Inthis fishing-village there were several master-boatbuilders The construction time was c10 days

Means of propulsionThe use of paddles or punting-poles was notobserved for this type but the use of pulling- andsculling-oars was documented These oars are madeof wood and have an oblong oval-shaped bladeThe pulling-oars are handled by between two andfour crew members and are especially used whensurf is crossed or when becalmed The helmsmanuses a long sculling-oar across the stern block andcan propel the raft efficiently When the vessel isunder sail this oar is used for steering (Fig 26) Themain method of propulsion is the sail particularlythe trapezoidal lug sail of Type 1 (above) whichwas adopted from the original kattumaram Thevariations in sail area are also within the typicalrange for kattumarams Mostly PE-foils were usedfor sail material In Machilipatnam the wooden-teppaalso bore the lateen sail as described above withone spar loose-footed and held by a sheet at theclew An engine could but does not necessarily haveto be part of Type B The outboard long-shaft(lsquolongtailrsquo) engine is used although larger modelsthan on kattumarams

A typical crew of a wooden-teppa is betweentwo and five persons A hierarchy is perceptiblewith the helmsman at the top The rest of thefishermen take all the remaining duties on boardlike hoisting the sail rowing during a calm layingout nets or lines and preparing food As on TypeA the journey encompasses the crossing of thesurf sailing to the fishing grounds fishing and



coming back Again the crossing of the surf is acritical moment but Type B is more manageablein breakers than the kattumaram The reasons liein its construction The higher bow the greaterbuoyancy and a relatively lower weight allowsType B to cross the surf more safely Besides theengine could be started at a shallow depth so thevessel can gather speed quickly and take advantageof an interval between waves After having crossedthe surf the central and stern daggerboards arelowered

The most economical means of propulsion iscertainly the sail Both types of sails offer very goodsailing qualities on steady courses wooden-teppaswhich are rigged in this way are especially goodat close reach as seen in my own sailing trialsThe sailing characteristics are similar to those ofthe kattumaram (see above) They can sail fast ona close reach Tacking is complicated but rarelynecessary The manoeuvres under sail could be

described as follows While the sail is hoisted thehelmsman maintains the course At first the mastis put loosely into the mast-step by the crew thenerected and tautened by the two shrouds whereasthe third shroud further aft is belayed on thewindward side The mast is inclined forwardsand to windward (Figs 16ndash19) The main halyardruns through a sheave and is connected to theupper spar After the sail is hoisted the fore peaksare kept down by downhauls which are fastenedto the bow and which render the spar a steepgradient With one or two braces the yard canbe rotated While fishing the sail could be eitherfurled in or trimmed very flat in order to gain aminimum velocity for drift-gillnet fishing (Fig 27)Whenever the vessel is tacked the sail needs to befurled in and the mast put up on the windwardside By means of sculling- and pulling-oarsthe bow is turned through the wind and when thevessel is on a new course the sail is hoisted If

Figure 26 Stern view Type C Puri (H Pohl)



becalmed and without a working engine it is theduty of all to row the vessel to its destination

On average 12 men are required to pull a wooden-teppa up a beach (Fig 28) Two yokes are positionedrespectively on bow and stern and considerablymore persons are required than for the kattumaramwhere just two suffice to dismantle and to man itIn fact the number of helpers required at the beachsurpasses the crew-size so co-operation with other

fishermen ashore has to take place Apart fromthe obligatory food-containers no differences inthe equipment and its use was attested on boardof a wooden-teppa in comparison to Type A

Spread and useNumerically the Type B raft the wooden-teppa isthe most frequent of the three types in the stateof Orissa It even seems to be limited to the areas

Figure 27 Drifting wooden-teppa with half-set sail Puri (H Pohl)

Figure 28 The transport of a wooden-teppa Puri (H Pohl)



around Puri and Gopalpur In Puri in December2004 there were c100 vessels of this type makingit the second most common type of watercraft andin Gopalpur with c200 vessels the most frequenttype Further south its occurrence is negligibleIn Vizakhapatnam no wooden-teppa was sightedin Machilipatnam only one and none in Tamil Nadu(Table 1) Hence this seems to be a regionally-limited variant of raft Where it occurs howeverthis type is very successful The reasons are not clearand need to be studied The use of the wooden-teppais very similar to that of kattumarams thoughits greater load-bearing capacity facilitates longerjourneys Also in this case fishing is carried outwith a slightly larger drift-gillnet and long line

Type Cmdashfibre-teppaThis type is generally known in Andhra Pradesh andOrissa as teppa and donga This name is moreclosely defined by the additive lsquofibrersquo indicatingthe building material This name however pre-sented itself during questioning at Puri beachin a different light Local fishermen reported thatthe name of the fibre-raft was paivor-teppa (theexact spelling they specified) Yet this name is aderivation from fibre-teppa Anyone who is familiarwith Indian phonetic transcription will easilyunderstand the derivation of this word I learnedthe connection in an interview some days later Isthis a common way for names of new boat-typesto become established The term fibre-teppa alwaysdenotes a fibreglass boat with some elements ofa kattumaram A teacher at the Fishery TrainingInstitute in Machilipatnam used the descriptionlsquoFRPrsquo (Fibre-Reinforced Plastic) and lsquobeachlandingcraftrsquo In Chennai in Tamil Nadu the term lsquofibre-boatrsquo is used a local and not very specific termfor this variant of plastic boats The largest of allobserved lsquobeachlanding craftrsquo was clearly a boatwith an inboard engine The term drais was usedto describe it

ConstructionType C (Fig 20) is no product of traditionalboatbuilding Its shell has been manufactured for atleast 20 years in small boatyards by modern methodsNevertheless the fibre-teppa will be described hereas it represents a systematic new development ofa fishing vessel inspired and still with some elementsof the kattumaram and more particularly of thewooden-teppa The following similarities are apparentboth Types B and C are denoted as teppa theshape is very similar the rigging is the same the

equipment and the daggerboards are identicalThe fibre-teppa is distinguished from Types A andB by its source of buoyancymdashit has a watertightouter surface and is therefore a boat and not araft Inside however the hull is filled withpolystyrene like a raft (cut chunks or sack netsfilled with polystyrene leftovers) The differenttypes have between one and three watertight cavitiesThe variation ranges from a small stowage at thestern an engine compartment and a hatch amid-ships up to three cavities separated by bulkheadsThe rig is of wood and bamboo the sail cut ofpolyethylene foils or old PE-sacks The long thindaggerboards are of wood

Sails and engine are the primary means of pro-pulsion A steering oar abaft could be also usedfor sculling (Fig 26) A specimen of Type C in Puriyielded the following measurements (Fig 29)overall length 96 m maximum breadth 25 mheight amidships 09 m stern height 1 m bowheight 15 m Apart from the fibre-teppa shape othervariations of this FRP-boat exist There are manysmall boatyards with their own hull-moulds so thatthere is great range of different designs There isa tendency to more and larger cavities so that itis moving further and further from its origins asa raft

DiscussionThe underlying question of this paper concernedthe changes in traditional boatbuilding in the last25 years along the Indian east coast Research inthe 1980s in the Bay of Bengal Programs servedas reference point By coincidence this expeditiontook place just before the tsunami of 26 December2004 and thus represents a unique inventorybefore the partial destruction of the fishingfleet An attempt has been made to elucidate theconstruction of kattumarams including several localtypes as well as Types B (wooden-teppa) andC ( fibre-teppa) This rather technical aspect wasgiven priority in the documentation Furthermorethe essentials of terminology conditions of pro-duction propulsion and crew techniques as wellas equipment and the spread and usage of the typeshave been described Further research should becarried out by indigenous ethnologists

The question as to whether traditional boat-building in this area has changed can be explicitlyanswered lsquoyesrsquo The kattumaram is a conservativewatercraft It was probably first mentioned inPeriplus Maris Erythraei (60 206ndash9) and couldbe traced back to the 1st century AD (McGrail et al



2003 16 Casson 1989 89 lsquovery big dugout canoesheld together by a yokersquo arguably denotes the Tamilversion of a trunk raft with yoke constructionMonoxylon could be translated as logboat in thiscase though not hollowed out but as bare trunkswhich are held together with a yoke (cf Menon1980 9 Tamil kattumaram) Sangra is probablythe word for the Tamil variant of the trunk-raftwith a yoke construction The local name sangarabecame in Portuguese jangada (English lsquoraftrsquo)(Casson 1989 229) and denotes a very similarsailed fishing-raft The kattumaram is still a veryprominent vessel among traditional fisheries onthe east coast of India In the last 25 years a coupleof reasons have led to minor modifications Itcan be established that the following innovationsin the traditional kattumarams occurred inthe 1980s and 1990s motorization with smalloutboard engines use of other especially cheaperwoods sewing with plastic string sails madefrom large plastic sacks and foils But apartfrom that this type has retained its centuries-oldconstruction and is even marked by its quantitativespread

The observed changes concern mainly the develop-ment of new types of watercraft with raft elementsNew materials became used (wooden planks FRPand Polystyrol) while traditional forms weremaintained In Orissa a new type of fishing-raftwas developed Type B (wooden-teppa) distingui-shed by its planked boat-shaped hull filled withpolystyrene blocks This boat-shaped raft has

decisive practical advantages such as cheapnessmaking it attractive for fishermen In the wholeof India FRP boats are built some with lsquomodernrsquoforms some retaining traditional forms It is nowonder that on the east coast a new FRP boatthe fibre teppa was developed with some elementsof a kattumaram

At the beginning of the 1980s specific experimentswere carried out by the Bay of Bengal Programs(BOBP) to test the new material FRP (Gulbrandsen1980 1ff) The goal was a systematic developmentof new fishing-craft in order to make fishing morelucrative and to facilitate safer working conditionsThe fibre-teppa is the answer to the changed con-ditions of fishery and boatbuilding In 1986 thefirst fibre-teppa was constructed in the state ofAndhra Pradesh (pers comm teacher FisheryTraining Institute Machilipatnam cf Gulbrandsen1980 Anon 1984 9) Type C the fibre-teppa isdistinguished from Types A and B by the sourceof buoyancy the fibre-teppa has a watertight outersurface and is therefore a boat and not a raft Onthe other hand the hull of Type C is filled withpolystyrene like a raft Why are the boatbuildersdoing that It seems they do not trust the water-tightness of their own construction However fillingwith polystyrene is an element deriving fromthe kattumaram and wooden-teppa which surelyprovided the inspiration for the developmentof the fibre-teppa This process allows us to seea modern transition from raft to boat One gainsthe impression that the most modern Type C the

Figure 29 Scale drawing of Type C fibre-teppa Puri (H Pohl and D Hinz)



fibre teppa is the best-represented vessel in largefishing-ports like Puri and Chennai Converselythe kattumaram is the primary vessel in most ofthe smaller fishing villages

The reasons for these changes are complex Themain reason is the increase in the price of woodand the over-fishing of coastal waters by trawlersThe wood Melia dubia albizzia stipulata andbombax malabaricum commonly used for the con-struction of kattumarams has become enormouslyexpensive in recent years Due to the material-intensive construction of kattumarams it ischallenged by types like the wooden-teppa whoseconstruction requires less wood The traditionaloperational field of kattumarams is day-fishingin coastal waters Fishing vessels with a greaterradius of action especially trawlers have causedover-fishing The average catch per kattumaramhas decreased (McGrail et al 2003 129) so thatalternatives had to be sought Another reason isthe increasing poverty of Indian fishermen whoare forced to employ the cheapest fishing-vesselsThe reasons for the retention of kattumaramsare low acquisition and maintenance costs Theadvantages of Types B and C are manifest in thefollowing areas their sea-keeping qualities arebetter in the surf they are more durable and cantravel further The disadvantages are their higheracquisition and maintenance costs and thereforea poor depreciation rate The modest catch has tobe shared between a relatively large number offishermen The vesselrsquos owner who is normallynot a fisherman gets the largest share

How should these changes be judged Is therea line of development from Type A to Types B andC or have these types developed independentlyDid the use of new materials lead to new vessel-types or were proven types continued Apparentlythere was no change to proven and inexpensivetypes like the masula but adaptations of the typeitself to new conditions and materials In 1985

Kentley considered that masulas might spreadfurther north and displace the kattumarams (1985315) This however is until now not the case Puriwhere only two masulas were documented is thenorthern boundary for thir spread yet there werehundreds of rafts of Types A and B and boats ofType C

Looked at typologically Type A is the primarytype from which Type B (fairly local) and Type C(along Indiarsquos entire east coast) have developedYet one should not imagine a constant line ofdevelopment A chronological order from Type A(kattumaram) via Type B (wooden-teppa) to TypeC ( fibre-teppa) and its transitional types wouldbe too simplistic A parallel more or less localdevelopment of new types is more feasible Bythe systematic development of new types sincethe 1980s through BOBP and the South IndianFederation of Fishermen Societies (SIFFS) thedisadvantages of kattumarams were hoped to beovercome In 1983 SIFFS started with of introduc-tion of ply-vallums (stitch-and-glue plywood openboats) on the south-west coast of India (httpwwwsiffsorgIndexaspxPage=BoatGrowthaspx)One of their main activities today is conductingresearch and development on designs of boat-models and materials for boatbuilding In 1996the first fibre-boats were developed These twoorganizations (BOBP and SIFFS) represent thesystematic research and introduction of new fishingvessels in India

The necessity of adaptation and the possibilitiesopened up by new materials have led to the develop-ment of new types of fishing-vessels It is ques-tionable how the consequences of the tsunamihave impacted on this interesting process Theheavily-damaged and destroyed fishing-fleetson Indiarsquos east coast are being rebuilt Only timewill tell which types of fishing-craft survive thisradical change and subsequently become subjectto gradual change as before

AcknowledgementsThe author would like to thank Dr W Steusloff (University of Rostock) and Swarup Bhattacharyya (Kolkata) for theirhelpful comments and advice Julia Frank for best company and assistance and Daniel Zwick (DEGUWA) for thistranslation

References

Anon 1980 Boatbuilding materials for small-scale fisheries in India in Bay of Bengal Programme BOBPWP09Anon 1983 Marine Small-Scale Fisheries of Andhra Pradesh a General Description in Bay of Bengal Programme BOBP

Inf4



Anon 1984 Report of Investigations to improve the Kattumarams of Indiarsquos east coast in Bay of Bengal Programme BOBPRep17

Anon 2005 ICSF Information Dossier Tamil Nadu Fisheries Statistics ChennaiBabu S 2005 Artisanal fishing units in Kanyakumari in Post-Tsunami Rehabilitation of Fisheries Livelihoods ICSF

Information Dossier ChennaiCasson L 1989 The Periplus Maris Erythraei Princeton NJDeloche J 1994 Transport and Communication in India Prior to Steam Locomotion vol 2 Water Transport OxfordDoran E 1981 Wangka Austronesian Canoe Origins College Station TexasGillet P 1985 Small is Difficult The pangs and success of small boat technology transfer in South India RugbyGulbrandsen O Gowing G P and Ravikumar R 1980 Technical Trials of Beachcraft Prototypes in India in Bay of

Bengal Programme BOBPWP07Kentley E 1985 Some aspects of the Masula surf boat in S McGrail and E Kentley (eds) Sewn Plank Boats 303ndash18 BAR

Int Ser 276 OxfordMcGrail S 1987 Ancient Boats in NW Europe LondonMcGrail S Blue L Kentley E and Palmer C 2003 Boats of South Asia LondonMenon T R 1980 Inventory of Kattumarams and their fishing gear in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in Bay of Bengal

Programme BOBPWP2Mohapatra P 1986 Traditional marine fishing craft and gear of Orissa in Bay of Bengal Programme BOBPWP24Parkin D and Barnes R (eds) 2002 Ships and the development of maritime technology in the Indian Ocean LondonRajamanickan G V 2004 Traditional Indian Shipbuilding DelhiWeski T 1999 Fiktion oder Realitaumlt Anmerkungen zum archaumlologischen Nachweis spaumltmittelalterlicher Schiffsbezeichnungen

Skyllis 22 96ndash106Wiebeck E 1987 Indische Boote und Schiffe Rostock



in Chennai on 26 December 2004 I stood at 800am with fishermen on the beach and was just aboutto make a trial sailing when the

tsunami

arrivedAlthough the effect in the bay of Chennai wasnot as dramatic as in other parts of the countryit nevertheless made a deep impact in the fisher-menrsquos lives resulting in loss of life and also loss ofmuch of the fishing equipment which was washedaway from the beaches In Mamallapuram boatsand rafts were either destroyed or washed inlandUnder these circumstances a continuing assessmentof

kattumaram

s further south was not possibleThe following text will attempt to describe three

different types of fishing craft Two are definableas rafts due to the inherently buoyant nature oftheir hull-components The third is a modern fibre-boat which is closely related to the

kattumaram

Type Amdashthe

kattumarammdash

represents the oldesttype of wooden raft used along the Indian eastcoast a traditionally-built vessel which mainlyconsists of 3ndash7 tree-trunks lashed together Type Bthe

wooden-teppa

is a raft-construction composedof a boat-shaped hull shaped by side planks andfilled with polystyrene blocks Type C the

fibre-teppa

is a modern fibre-boat (the skin and deckmade of fibre-reinforced plastic (FRP) and thecavities filled with expanded polystyrene) whichhas some elements of a

kattumaram

The underlying question of the assessment was

how far has traditional boatbuilding along Indiarsquoseast coast changed in the last 25 years The researchpapers of the Bay of Bengal Program (BOBP)published in the early 1980s served as reference-points A detailed study of the

kattumaram

wasprovided by Menon (1980) but did new materialsencourage the development of new boat-typesor were proven types preferred Are there localtypes and if so did they change independentlyof each other The principal research methodwas documentation of the present state throughsketching and digital photography Archetypesof diverse boats and rafts were identified andmeasured Trials with selected watercraft yieldedimportant observations on their use A furthersignificant aspect was the interviewing of fisher-men and boatbuilders There was no lack ofeloquent indigenous assistants who renderedvaluable support

Type Amdash

Kattumaram

The generic term for the vessels evaluated here hasbeen established as beach-landing craft in scholarlyliterature (Gulbrandsen

et al

1980 1) This

applies to all vessels which could be landed onand launched from a beach Apart from thishistorical boat-names will be left aside Insteadthe vessels encountered are divided into Types AB and C and described accordingly (cf Weski 1999)The most important languages in this area areHindi the common language of many Indiansparticularly in the north Oriya widespread inthe state of Orissa Telegu in Andhra Pradeshand Tamil in Tamil Nadu It is noticeable that thenames of vessels are from minor or local languagesHindi is only used for generic terms All typeswill be ordered and the names of the watercraftpresented according to the route of the expedi-tion from north to south

In Puri in the state of Orissa the languagesHindi Oriya and Telegu are encountered Thegeneric term for lsquoboatrsquo is

donga

in both Oriya andHindi and

teppa

in Telegu Due to the fact thatPuri which is the largest fishing village in Orissais primarily inhabited by migrants from AndhraPradesh who speak Telegu the boats are called

teppa

here In Gopalpur which is also in Orissaone encounters the same terminology In Vizak-apatnam in the state of Andhra Pradesh thefishermen used for the first time two differentterms

teppa

and

kattumaram

Strangely enoughthe fishermen of Machilipatnam also in AndhraPradesh only used the term

teppa

despite thisplace being nearer the area in which the Tamilword

kattumaram

originated The term

kattumaram

was unknown to the local fishermen with theexception of a teacher at the Fishery TrainingInstitute

In Chennai Bay Tamil Nadu

kattumaram

wasexclusively used for Type A The meaning of theword in Tamil the principal language in southernIndia is lsquolashed woodrsquo composed of

kattu

=lsquoto lash lashedrsquo and

maram

= lsquowoodrsquo Hence theterm is quite specific and descriptive as the craftwas indeed built of trunks lashed together TheEnglish term lsquocatamaranrsquo is derived from the Tamilword but while we would nowadays use it todescribe a double-hulled vessel its original meaningwas a raft made of several tree-trunks

Kattumaram

is the most adequate term It is not only the genericterm for lsquoboatrsquo as

teppa

in Telegu or

donga

in Hindibut designates both a type and its constructionTherefore this paper will refer to Type A as

kattumaram

not least in order to avoid anypossibility of confusion with the similar-soundingbut entirely differently-used term lsquocatamaranrsquo Thereare further specific raft-names They concernparticularly additive or descriptive names which




periamaram


chinnamaram

(Menon 1980 6)

Construction


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram


Melia dubia

albizzia stipulata

and

bombaxmalabaricum


3

(Menon1980 2 6) or

erythryna indica

and

brithryna

sp

(locally known as

padhua


kattumaram


Local

kattumaram

-types

Some

kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


This

kattumaram










kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


wooden-teppas


kattumaram



kattumaram


c

04

times



navas


kattumaram







kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram







tsunami


kattumaram




kattumaram












































































































































References


Inf4













periamaram


chinnamaram

(Menon 1980 6)

Construction


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram


Melia dubia

albizzia stipulata

and

bombaxmalabaricum


3

(Menon1980 2 6) or

erythryna indica

and

brithryna

sp

(locally known as

padhua


kattumaram


Local

kattumaram

-types

Some

kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


This

kattumaram










kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


wooden-teppas


kattumaram



kattumaram


c

04

times



navas


kattumaram







kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram







tsunami


kattumaram




kattumaram












































































































































References


Inf4

















kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


kattumaram


wooden-teppas


kattumaram



kattumaram


c

04

times



navas


kattumaram







kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram







tsunami


kattumaram




kattumaram












































































































































References


Inf4














kattumaram


kattumaram



kattumaram


kattumaram







tsunami


kattumaram




kattumaram












































































































































References


Inf4













tsunami


kattumaram




kattumaram












































































































































References


Inf4



















































































































































References


Inf4










h. pohl, from the kattumaram to the fibre-teppa – change in boat-building traditions at...

Documents