Hull Types Associated with Austronesian Rigs

The dugout canoes of Austronesia fall into four general configurations: the simple, single-hull dugout (about which little has been written), the single-outrigger canoe, the double-outrigger canoe (i.e., dugout canoe, with light outriggers on both sides), and the double canoe (i.e., two true approximately equal dugout hulls held a few feet apart by crosswise struts). 

A recent post discussed the general categories of rig types indigenous to Austronesia, and with further help from Wangka: Austronesian Canoe Origins, by Edwin Doran, Jr., we'll now see how the rig types and the hull types relate to one another. (All images here are from that source.)

The double spritsail, which some believe to have been the original Austronesian rig, was documented only in scattered locations in Indonesia (specifically, in Celebes and Sumatra), Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Madagascar, and on the Bab el Mandeb, the strait separating the Arabian Peninsula from Africa.

Doran writes:

"I have come to believe that the presumed simplicity and primitiveness [of the double spritsail]are deceptive and that the sail represents an early but sophisticated attempt to devise a rig which will permit shunting. Without shifting the spars, the clew of the sail (after corner) becomes the tack (forward corner) on the other shunt, and a simple way of moving the center of effort of the sail has been developed. Micronesian crane sprit technique is more efficient once the sail is shifted, but requires a more cumbersome rig to achieve the same end."

Doran neglects to identify the hull type associated with the double sprit rig, but he does so for the remainder of the rig types.

The Oceanic sprit is associated with double canoes and tacking single outriggers, and appears in limited locations in Indonesia and the Philippines, and in New Zealand and parts of Polynesia, including Hawaii.

The crane sprit is used for most shunting single outriggers, mostly in Melanesia and Micronesia, but also in parts of Polynesia:

The boom-lug rig is used almost exclusively with double-outrigger canoes, whose domain is primarily Indonesia and Malaysia, with extensions into Melanesia and a couple of outliers in the Philippines and the Persian Gulf:

Doran uses these distribution maps to attempt to deduce the relative ages of the various rig types, their places of origin, and their role in the evolution of the other types -- i.e., which rig type and hull type came first, and how and where they evolved into the other types. I don't find his arguments strongly convincing, however, so I will refrain from describing them. 

Bark Canoes of Australia

A few weeks back I wrote about the bark canoes of Australia's Arafura Swamp, noting that the design was unique to that area. Bark canoes of other styles were used elsewhere in Australia, as shown below in this image from Edwin Doran, Jr.'s Wangka: Austronesian Canoe Origins, which I cited a recent post. As always, the image may be clicked to enlarge.

To quote Doran's complete description (items in [square brackets] are mine):

Among the simplest, and presumably most ancient, types of watercraft in Austronesia are boats made of bark. The simplest of all are formed of bark sheets plugged at the ends with clay [top image], whereas others are tied at the ends [center] and more complex ones have sewed ends [bottom]. The principle location [i.e., within Austronesia] of bark canoes is Australia, but a few relicts are found in Indonesia, probably indicating a much wider distribution.

The very simple bark rafts of the Tasmanians allowed some mobility on the water but became waterlogged in about six hours and were never used for distances offshore greater than about eight miles.

The sewn canoe shown differs from those of Arafura not only in the shape of the end but, significantly, in its having gunwale members lashed to the sheerline. The Arafura boats were entirely without added structural members.

Although Doran says that bark canoes were "Among the simplest, and presumably most ancient types of watercraft" (emphasis added), he is not implying that they are the simplest or most ancient. That distinction he applies to log rafts, noting that true rafts rely on the inherent buoyancy of their material of construction, rather than on a designed, built structure that displaces water. Also in support of his argument: it is a simpler matter to tie one floating log to another, thus creating a raft without any tools at all, whereas even the simplest bark canoe requires tools of some sort to strip the bark from the tree.

Doran shows the distribution of the various types of bark canoes in the following map, along with the distribution of dugout-based outrigger canoes with constituted the focus of his study.

Austronesian Rigs Simplified

Dozens of rig types have been identified in Austronesian maritime cultures (see this post for an illustration showing a large selection) -- so many, in fact, that it led to confusion and dispute about which types were related to, or ancestral to, others. And since anthropologists often view the diffusion of technology as a means of analyzing cultural origins, that confusion served as both cause and effect for disputes about how the Pacific came to be populated.

In Wangka: Austronesian Canoe Origins, Edwin Dorran, Jr., took a stab at grouping the principal Austronesian sail types into nine categories. As shown below, these nine actually group into two classes: sprit rigs (A-F) and lug rigs (G, H, I). The following brief descriptions are derived from Dorran's text, using Dorran's names for each. (Dorran assigned names as a matter of convenience in the discussion; he acknowledged that many of them were known by a variety of other names.)

A. Double spritsail. Confined to a few locations in the Indian Ocean at the time of publication (1981). Both spars are sprits -- there is no mast on this rig (and arguably, none on any of the sprit rigs described). As shown in the photo below, both sprits hold up only a corner of the rectangular sail. Possibly the grandfather type of all Austronesian sprit rigs.

B. Common spritsail: rig appears with and without the boom. Essentially identical to the European sprit rig.

C., D., E.: Oceanic spritsail: D and E differ only in the angle of the after sprit, which, if horizontal enough, can be termed a boom, as in E. Type D, pictured below, was by far the most common at the time of writing.

Dorran considers Type C (pictured below) to be "an extreme form of the basic Oceanic spritsail," because it meets his definition of a spritsail, viz: "Spritsails are supported on two spars with are close together or touching at the lower end and divergent to two sail corners aloft." To me, this is putting the horse before the cart. Even if the rig shown meets the definition (debatable), I would argue that the definition is fairly meaningless if it encompasses a sail so manifestly different in shape, type, and most likely, origin. (As Dorran notes, David Lewis called this an "inverted, triangular sail" and classed it among a category of "claw" sails with "a deeply incurved free edge".)

F. Crane spritsail: The word "crane" is being used like the hoisting machine, not the bird. Dorran argues persuasively that this is not a variant of the lateen sail. Where all the other rigs shown here are "tacking" rigs, this one is the famous Pacific "shunting" rig. The additional spar pivots fore-and-aft at the base, so that the entire rig can switch ends in the boat, allowing the canoe to switch directions relative to the wind while always keeping its (single) outrigger float to windward. In the photo below, there is a platform on the boat's lee side, on which crew (in this case) or cargo can be placed as a counterweight against the outrigger.

G. Rectangular boom lugsail.
H. Square boom lugsail
I Trapezial boom lugsail

Dorran believes these three are closely related, and that the different sail shapes represent a fairly minor distinction. He includes the term "boom" in the name to distinguish them from lugs without booms and from those with sail battens (i.e., Chinese junk-style sails).

All illustrations in this post are from Dorran, except of the double sprit rig photo, provided by boat designer Michael Schacht, editor of the blog Proafile, about all things proa. Many thanks Michael!