Contarina I

Country: Italy

Place: Near Contarina, Po river valley, Adriatic coast

Type: Double-ended, lateen-rigged riverine/lagoon vessel

Identified: Not identified by name

Dated: Originally dated to ca. 1300 by Bonino (1978); Beltrame's 2009 reassessment suggests it was likely lost only a few years before Contarina II, i.e., also in the fifteenth or early sixteenth century

Number of Masts: At least two mast steps were identified over the keelson

History of the shipwreck

Flooding of the Po river valley on Italy's Adriatic coast in 1882 emphasized the inadequacies of the canal network meant to channel overflow away from cultivated areas. As a result, a consortium was formed for new reclamation works in the Polesano territory and to build new canals as part of this project, with a main canal planned between the Fossa Polesella, the Canalbianco, and the Po di Levante. The consortium hired the Trezza Company to carry out the canal excavations (Occioni-Bonaffons 1901, 12-13).

During construction of the canal in 1898, laborers working near Contarina, Italy, uncovered the remains of two ships. Contarina I consisted of the hull below the waterline and was in surprisingly good condition; the companion wreck, Contarina II, consisted of a section from the side of the vessel and part of a deck. The significance of the finds prompted officials to document the wrecks as part of the maritime history of the area (Occioni-Bonaffons 1901, 14).

Both ships were photographed in situ, disassembled, and transported to Venice for further study. It is unclear what happened to the original timbers, but accurate scale models of the hull structures were made and are now housed at the Naval Museum of Venice (Occioni-Bonaffons 1901, 20-2).

Marco Bonino reviewed this information in 1978, suggesting the coastline had undergone significant silting of the Po river delta over the centuries. Based on the few finds associated with the two wrecks, as well as their construction features, he proposed Contarina I was lost around 1300. This date was accepted in nautical archaeological circles for several decades, owing to the dearth of comparative archaeological material (Bonino 1978, 8, 13).

In 2009, Carlo Beltrame (with advice from Mauro Bondioli) revisited the same data reviewed by Bonino, agreeing that the siltation of the Po river delta was extensive but concluding it did not accumulate as quickly as Bonino had claimed. Because Contarina I was found further inland than Contarina II, without associated artifacts, Beltrame suggests it was probably lost only a few years before its companion wreck, likely also in the fifteenth or early sixteenth century, rather than around 1300 as Bonino had proposed (Beltrame 2009, 415).

Description of the site

Contarina I was found during canal construction near Contarina, in the Po river valley. It lies further inland than its companion wreck, Contarina II, which was found 290 m away, closer to the Adriatic coast (Beltrame 2009, 415).

Hull Remains

Contarina I has a rectangular, shallow keel. Neither the keel nor the endposts include rabbets, and all axial timbers simply butt against each other without scarfs. The ship is double-ended, with a rounded stem and sternpost, both including a thicker section at the junction between the flat floor and the upward turn (Occioni-Bonaffons 1901, 24-6).

Framing consists of floor timbers that overlap the futtocks without a scarf. A single master frame with dual futtocks was placed amidships. All framing elements are square, with roughly the same spacing between frame stations. Floor timbers are fastened to the futtocks with three round nails; there is no mention of bolts securing the floor timbers, though bolts driven through the keelson are clinched on the outside face of the keel (Bonino 1978, 13-15). The keelson was rebated only over the central section of the hull, a feature that disappeared toward the extremities (Occioni-Bonaffons 1901, 27). Two mast steps were built over the keelson, one near the bow and another further aft; floor timbers associated with the two mast steps were molded with additional thickness, creating a tooth-like profile, or built-in buttresses that supported lateral mast-step partners and chocks resting over the keel to form the mortise (Beltrame 2009, 413).

The overlap between floor timbers and futtocks was reinforced by a single bilge stringer, and fragments visible in the original photographs indicate longitudinal ceiling. The presence of bilge keels suggests this vessel operated in shallow-water environments requiring offloading near shore. Planking thickness reflects the vessel's medium size, and each frame station included four iron nails without any use of treenails. Overall, the ship had a flat floor with a round bilge (Bonino 1978, 13, fig. 3).

Size and scantlings

Floor timbers square and evenly spaced, fastened to futtocks with three round nails; planking fastened with four iron nails per frame station.

References

Occioni-Bonaffons, G., 1901.

Bonino, M., 1978. "Lateen-rigged medieval ships"

Beltrame, C., 2009.