No. 237 Maritime Archaeology in the People's Republic of China ...

Chapter 3. Archaeological evidence Southeast Asian vessels
Figure 54.
Plan of the Pattaya site showing cross-section and plan of the site.
Pattaya
The Pattaya wreck site was investigated in 1982 (Green &
Harper 1983, Green & Intakosi, 1983) (FIGS). This was one
of the first sites in the Gulf of Thailand to be excavated where
substantial hull structure was uncovered. Only the bow-half
of the site was excavated.
The ship had triple planking, the inner layer 70 mm and the
outer two 40 mm thick. At least one strake had a trapezoidal
cross-section, it may well have been the garboard, the sharp
angles resulting from the hollow deadrise adjacent to the keel
(FIG). There were at least six bulkheads between the mast
step and the forward part of the vessel. Bulkheads varied
in separation, ranging from 1.40 to 1.60 m. The bulkheads
were supported by frames on the side facing the centre of the
vessel. Both the bulkheads and the bulkhead frames had two
large limbers cut into their base. There was luting covering
the joints and face between the bulkhead and bulkhead frame.
This was a hard resinous putty. The modern Thai fishing
vessels use material almost identical in consistancy and smell,
called cham.
The keel had a block sitting on top of it 3.6 m long 200
mm wide by 150 mm thick running from bulkhead 1 through
to bulkhead 4 where it was rebated into the bulkhead and
bulkhead frame. It is thought that this was a type of clamp
covering and supporting the scarf joint in the keel.
One of the aspects of this excavation not appreciated at
the time was evidence as to how the cargo was arranged on
the ship. Between bulkheads 3 and 5 on the starboard side of
the vessel was a very large concretion which was confined
to a line 300 mm off the centre line of the vessel. There
was also evidence of bamboo dunnage protruding from
the concretion. It is likely therefore that the concretion was
confined by a partition to the starboard side of the vessel and
that because the iron cargo remained largely confined by this
after the vessel sank, it reflects the internal arrangement that
otherwise would not be seen. This may explain the problem
concerning the function of the watertight bulkheads and the
limbers. It is unclear why one would go to such lengths to seal
the bulkheads while having large limbers on the bilge. Marco
Polo’s statement that the compartments were watertight has
been taken in the past to mean that the compartments were
sealed. However, every vessel with bulkheads has been found
25