Siljan Historielag






Stokkebåt med lavt fribord:
5,7 m lengde.
Datering: Folkevandringstid = siste del av eldre jernalder
Funnsted: Siljanvassdraget.

Denne - antatte -  elvebåten har ligget på lager i 80 år.
Når vil den bli tilgjengelig for publikum?

Historielaget har besøkt stokkebåten i Skien.

Helt nye kontrolldateringer viser at eika ble felt på 400-tallet e.kr.
Dette betyr at båten hadde sin bruksperiode i folkevandringstid.
Et  spørsmål stilles etter nye vurderinger av skrog og mulig funksjonalitet:
Har farkosten alternativt vært transportslede til vinterbruk?

Lenger ned følger en kronologi over hendelser rundt forvaltning av funnet fra 1935 fram til dags dato

 

 

Lørdag 30.september 2017 besøker vi stokkebåten i Brekkeparken /Telemark museum, med omvisning av Kari Bjercke. 

Dette blir en sjelden anledning til å se Siljans stokkebåt, datert til eldre jernalder. Båten ligger ennå på lager i museets vognskjul. Der har den ligget siden 1937.
To av de besøkende har sett båten før den ble tatt opp av vannet i 1935: Otto Austad og Albert Kiste. De brukte båten som plattform til lystring av gjedde og bading.
Albert var nede og så på båten i 1937. Da lå den i nylaget stativ. Dette stativet har bidratt til å bevare båtens form.
Etter en uoffisiell måling på stedet måler båten nå 5,65 m i lengde og 87 cm på det bredeste. Den har altså krympet noe i lengde, men ikke noe i bredde.
Oppsprekking er likevel mer markert. Begge de to håndtakene er løsnet siden 2001. Det ene er i hovedsak i behold.







 


Kari forteller at båtens skjebne er avhengig av et nybygg på museets eiendom. Dette nybygget har klarsignal om del-finansiering fra både Skien kommune og Telemark fylke.
Tegninger ligger klare.
Det siste avgjørende bidrag gjenstår:
Sluttfinansiering må vedtas i det forestående statsbudsjettet før iverksetting. Etter søknad som har ligget inne i flere runder: Dette er nå avklart.(des. 2018)

- Her åpnes døra inn til vognskjulet.











Her står Albert Kiste ved båten som var "fast land" under gjeddefiske tidlig på 1930tallet.
En observasjon: Skroget er oppsiktvekkende fast i treverket, tatt i betraktning alder og manglende konservering.
Det bør nevnes at Osebergskipet i Vikingeskipsmuseet med konservering har dårligere forfatning idag enn denne båten.












To staute karer fra Siljan: Otto Austad og Albert Kiste foran stokkebåten fra Lauv i sør-Siljan. Begge to var med på å oppdage båten. Den stakk da med den ene enden opp av vannet.
Farkosten er seinere datert til Norges nest eldste.














En stolt gjeng får tilgang til museets største klenodie.
Det er å håpe at alle besøkende vil få samme anledning i overskuelig framtid.
Da utstilt i tilpasset monter, og i eget besøkssenter.

Tvi tvi..











2 håndtak som er uthogd av samme emne som båten utgjør noe av båtens særpreg. Konstruksjonen synes tilpasset også forsering av land-strekninger, med last ombord.
Vi kan gjerne kalle den en elvebåt.
Det anerkjennes at i romertid hadde nordboene en viss handel med ytterkanten av romerriket gjennom ulike nettverk. Skinn, gevir og pels fra innlandet kan ha vært fylt i denne båten.







 

 

Fagskisse med snitt, laget av Knut Paasche og Arne Emil Christensen





 

En mer presis datering av eike-båten er nå gjort til 400-tallet e.kr. -  dette vil si tidlig folkevandringstid.
Dette er fra ei tid med klaner, skiftende allianser med gave/bytte-nettverk, særlig langs transportlinjer som sjø og vassdrag.
Dette er en av Norges eldste båter- eller mulig slede for varetransport. Den hører til et felles, nordisk stammesamfunn.
Vann og elver er viktige for ferdsel, byttehandel, kontroll og impulser.

 

Kronologiske hendelser:

 

1927? 

 Under en større flom løsner en torv på vestsida av det lille vannet Lauv, rett syd for Gorningen. Deler av en stokkebåt blir dermed synlig: Den ene enden stikker noe opp av vannet ved lav vannstand.

Funnstedet er ei lita bakevje i Siljanvassdraget, som tidvis har stor vassføring. Høyde over havet er ca 61m. Rett nedenfor er strykene øvre og nedre Kistefoss, rett ovenfor er Austadfossen.

Vassdraget strekker seg fra Skrimfjella i Buskerud gjennom hele Siljan i Telemark og ut gjennom Farris i Vestfold ut til kysten. Store mengder tømmer fløtes ned til Larvik - fram til 1969.

 

Iflg både Albert Kiste (f.1925) og Otto Austad (f. 1926) blir båten observert og delvis brukt til lek ved vannet noen tid før opphenting - ”tidlig på 30tallet ” nevnes.  

Merknad: Storflommen i 1927 kan være er en årsak.

 

1935

    10.september

Meieribestyrer Alf Rød meddeler ved brev til konservator Berge/Telemark fylkesmuseum et funn av ” en gammel båt i Laug mellom Gorningen og Laksjø”.

Oppdagelsen opplyses gjort av John Hansen. Båten er nylig dratt opp på land ved hjelp av Hansen og Rød.

 

  1. september

Datert merknad/svar på dette brevet: ”Ikke av interesse”.

 

     Oktober

En svensk amatør-arkeolog - og fornem gjest på jaktslottet - vurderer båten til å være opptil 2000 år gammel.

 

  1. oktober

 Godseier Treschow meddeler til universitetets oldsaksamling et funn i Lauv av ”en kano, som efter alt å dømme er meget gammel”.

  1. oktober

Oldsakssamlingen svarer på henvendelsen bl.a. at kanoen neppe har før-historisk verdi, og en tar seg ikke råd til å reise på en befaring. Det anbefales kontakt med fylkesmuseet.

 

Fylkesmuseet kontaktes.

Forpakter Pedersen på Kiste plasserer båten ved jaktslottet til godseier Treschow. Den er da helt fast i treverket. Båten er kommet i kontakt med luft, og uttørking er påbegynt.

 

1937

 
   juli

Båten innleveres til fylkesmuseet, der den registreres som gave fra Treschow.

   september

Funn nr 26 registreres og beskrives slik av konservator Berge:

- Eikje (kano), heilhola, truleg av eik.

- Mykje skadd, sidune avbrotne

- Utsida paa stavnane maksla i baatkjølform, utholinga paa innsida som eit flaatt trog. Breid og flat i botnen.

- Men ein kann ikkje no avgjera breiddi heilt, i den eine stavnen tykkjest den fulle breidd av holingi hava vori ikr. 86 cm, men paa midten hev ho vel vori større.

- Lengd no 5,75 m.”

- Innanbords i kvar stavn er eikja uthola soleis at der stend att eit handtak.

 

Båten legges i eget stativ, som spesial-lages ved museet.

(Båten ligger fortsatt i dette stativet.)

 

1999

Funnsted for stokkebåten i Lauv registreres ved et lokalt felles-prosjekt om kulturminner, initiert av fylkesmannen i Telemark.

 

2001

      Juli

Egne forskningsdager arrangeres lokalt i Siljan, ved historielaget, biblioteket og ungdomsskolen. Årets tema er ”Siljanvassdraget i 10.000 år”.
Historielaget velger å jobbe med en datering av stokkebåten fra Lauv. Denne er svært lite kjent, også i Siljan.

Båtens tilstand er, etter historielagets befaring:

Båten ligger på lager, innerst inne i museets vognskjul. Den er delvis skjult under andre gjenstander. Det er ingen særskilt informasjon ved båten.Båten har to håndtak, det ene fast,
det andre er løsnet fra festet - men mulig å sette på plass. Båten er tørr og noe oppsprukket. Skroget er krympet endel. Litt pulverisert treverk ligger løsnet fra skroget. Formen er lesbar:
Stokken er båt-formet, ikke bare utholet. Formen er helt uvanlig i forhold til andre stokkebåter. Den har avsmalnede og forsterkede stevner og et smekkert, utbretta skrog, med lavt fribord.
Både form og håndtverk synes spesialtilpasset for last i elve-manøvrering, endog over landterreng.Utførelse og form gir inntrykk av presist håndtverk.
Datering av en tre-prøve framstår som avgjørende for båtens videre skjebne.

62 gram treverk – som tydelig framstår som løsnet fra båten - sendes til Beta Analytic Inc/USA.

  1. september

Laboratoriets datering tolkes feil av formidler til 240 e.kr (+/-70 år). Dette viser seg seinere å være for snever tolkning av beta-rapporten.
Uansett: Farkosten dateres til eldre jernalder.

Ved vitenskapelig bevis rykker Siljanbåten opp til å bli Norges nest eldste båt. Den er bare slått av en stokkebåt med tradisjonell stokkeform, funnet i Bingen/Glommavassdraget.
Båten fra Farrisvassdraget er dermed den eldste båten med formet stavn.

  1. september

Datering meddeles i brev til Sjøfartsmuseet, Universitetets kulturhistoriske museum og Telemark Museum.

 

  1. september

Forskningsdagene lokalt avsluttes på Siljan bibliotek/Øverbøstua. I samarbeid med professor Gunnar Wasberg offentliggjøres nå den ferske datering av båten. Wasberg betegner den nye oppdagelsen som et tidsskille mht. forståelsen av Farrisvassdragets betydning for handel. Dette temaet har han for øvrig arbeidet med i en årrekke.

 

    22.september

Førstesideoppslag i Varden og TA viser stokkebåtens datering.

 

     1.november

Sjøfartsmuseet er på befaring til Brekkeparken. Båten blir besiktiget for første gang av landets marin-arkeologiske fagmiljø. Tilstede er Knut Paasche, Arne Emil Christensen, Pål Nymoen, fylkesmuseet, historielaget og pressa. Funnstedet blir også besøkt.

 

 

2004

 

Fylkeskommunen gps-registrerer funnstedet for stokkebåten.Funnsted publiseres som fornminne ved riksantikvarens nettsted kulturminnesøk - under tittelen Stokkebåt Lauv.

 

2005

     21.mars

Fagtegning av Siljan-båten gjøres ved Knut Paasche og Arne Emil Christensen.

     Mai

Siljanbåten tildeles eget kapittel i boka ”Stokkebåter”, utgitt av Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum. Artikkelen på 12 sider heter ”Like godt til lands som til vanns” og er ved marinarkeolog Pål Nymoen.

 

2006

Siljanbåten behandles i fagartikkel i "Kling og seil - festskrift til Arne Emil Christensen" ved Ole Crumlin-Pedersen, Vikingeskipsmuseet i Roskilde. (jfr brev nedenfor)

 

2007

     28.august

Historielaget mottar tilbakemelding fra lederen av Vikingeskipsmuseet i Roskilde, Ole Crumlin-Pedersen. Han anser Siljanbåten som en mulig utspendt stammebåt - uansett et meget viktig båtfunn. Det fortjener oppmerksomhet og omsorg.


2008


The International Journal of Nautical Archeology trykker Pål Nymoens artikkel "Boats for Rivers and Mountains. Sources for New Narratives about River Travel" , skrevet I 2007

2010 

    27.nov

Siljan historielag anmoder i brev til museet om eksponering av båten ved evt nytt bygg på Klosterøya.

   22.des

Museet svarer med  ønske om å få til en bedre løsning for båten.


2011


Det skal ha blitt tatt dendroprøver av båten. Konkrete resultater av disse er ikke kjent.


2012

     16.mai

Siljan historielag sender åpent brev til Telemark fylkesmuseum, der det anmodes om at båten blir utstilt for publikum. Det foreslåes også ytterligere dokumentasjon av båten. Det nye vitenskapsmuseet for sjøfart i Porsgrunn nevnes som forslag til plassering. Noe etter: Det gjøres TV-opptak fra museet, der båten og forslagene blir presentert.

Laget mottar svar fra Telemark museum at båten ikke skal til vitenskapsmuseet.

 

2014

Siljan-båten og funnstedet blir presentert i NRKs populær-vitenskapelige serie ”Arkeologene”. Den aktuelle episoden heter ”Skatter i havet”.

 

2017

  1. juli

NRK Telemark tar opp temaet stokkebåtens plassering i det planlagte publikumsbygget i Brekkeparken.

Leder av Siljan historielag anbefaler sterkt at båten innlemmes i nybygget, dersom dette blir realisert. Alternativet er at båten forblir anonym på ubestemt tid. Den har potensiale til å bli et trekkplaster for museet. Jorunn Sem Fure uttaler at avgjørelsen om båten ennå ikke er tatt. Det er utfordringer mht. både økonomi, konservering/formidling og flytting.


2019

  
Januar

Det meddeles muntlig fra museet at man ønsker å stille ut båten dersom et nytt publikumsbygg i Brekkeparken realiseres. Dette bygget er tegnet og er nå  ute på anbud.
Dersom anbud holdes innenfor vedtatt budsjett, realiseres bygget i løpet av 2020.


2020

Norsk Folkemuseum skanner digital 3D -versjon som dokumentasjon av båten.


2022

 
April

Museet åpner ny utstilling i nybyggets underetasje. Her vises den digitale 3d versjon av Siljanbåten i vann, vist på egen skjerm. Det medfølger info om båtens alder.  Det informeres også om at dette formidlingsprosjektet vil pågå videre.



2023

    15. februar


Årsmøtet for Siljan historielag vedtar å stille kr. 100.000.- til disposisjon dersom det iverksettes en fysisk formidling på museet, forutsatt fullfinansiert prosjekt med tidsplan.


    17. novemberBanksalen/Telemark Museum/seminar:

1: Pål Nymoen finner ingen som likner i form. Dette er ikke en vanlig stokkebåt. Formen åpner for helt alternative tolkninger. Smekkert skrog og utflatet bunn kan bety slede til vinterbruk. Han endrer sin tidligere hypotese fra båt til vinterslede. Altså transportmiddel med hest som trekkraft. 
2: Bruksfasen avklares nå til siste del av 400-tallet.
3: Det åpnes nå opp for gravfunn av pulk/slede og sledekroker som nye funnkategorier.

     Desember

Telemark og Vestfold fylkeskommune bevilger midler til nye dateringer av båten. Dette omfatter både årringsanalyse og ny c14 prøve.
Jørn Berget tar flere dendroprøver fra båten. Disse sendes til Nationalmuseet i Danmark. Prøver sendes også til NTNU i Trondheim for nyere type  c14 dateringer.

 2024

     Januar

Analyser gjøres des 23 / jan 24 ved NTNU og Nationalmuseet i Danmark. Årringsdatering viser ca 412 AD. Dette spriker noe fra C4 prøvene. 
Nye metoder for c14datering med wiggle-match på NTNU i Trondheim viser at eika ble felt rundt 450 AD. Bruksperiode anslåes derfor å være 2.halvdel av 400-tallet. Fellingsåret er definitivt på 400tallet.
Tidligere tolkning av alder justeres dermed fra yngre romertid til folkevandringstid.

Etter Beta-rapporten fra 2001 ble - noe feilaktig -resultatet feiltolket til 3.århundre e.kr.  Da SHLs prøve mest sannsynlig kom fra treet kjerneved, må vekstperioden tillegges anslagene. Betas analyse av 2001 innbefatter rom for datering til 5.århundre e.kr. C14 prøvene fra 2001 og 2023 motsier ikke hverandre. Den siste er mer presis.

    November

Museumsforlaget gir ut boka Det eldste Grenland. Fra romertid til vikingtid. Bind 3 i prosjektet Vikingvegen.
Artikkelen til Pål Nymoen - TGM-BM.1937-38:Ø26 - stokkebåt eller pulk? - gir her innføring i funn og forhistorie og begrunner en helt ny tolking. 
(Boka selges på Telemark Museum) 



Siljan, Lars Vaagland








 




Stokkebåten i stativ - i vognskjulet/ Brekkeparken/Telemark museum. Foto ved Pål Nymoen




















































Funnrapport ved Telemark museum:
















Brev i 2010 til Telemark museum: 

Eksponering ønskes av stokkebåten fra Siljan

  

Siljan historielag har vedtatt på styremøte 17.11.d.å. følgende:

Siljan historielag ønsker at stokkebåten fra Lauv i Siljan blir utstilt i det nye museet på Klosterøya. 

Begrunnelse:

En synliggjøring på en sentral plass i det nye museumsbygget på Klosterøya vil plassere båten i samsvar med dens verdi som historisk referansekilde:

Stokkebåten bør plasseres på øverste hylle av fornminnefunn i Grenlandsregionen.

Den bør følgelig oppgraderes fra nåværende lager til et inspirerende blikkfang for hele regionen.

Båten har perspektiver på oppstarten av den regionale utvikling. Dette var en forutsetning for den seinere framvekst av Skien som møtepunkt.

En plassering på Smieøya vil være et strategisk riktig valg: Nettopp der innlandsbåt møter havgående fartøy, og et handelssted gradvis vokste fram.

Båten kan således symbolisere den historiske betydning av både distrikt, vassdrag og handel i Telemark.

 

Opplysninger om båten:

Stokkebåten ligger i dag i vognskjulet til Brekkeparken/Telemark museum. Der har den ligget siden innlevering ved godseier Treschow midt på 1930-tallet.

Følgende kunnskap og hypoteser er kjent om denne farkosten:

  1. Den er artsbestemt til eik. (Vikingskipsmuseet i Oslo.)
  2. Datering ved c14 analyse er gjort til ca 240 e.kr., dvs yngre romertid. ( Siljan historielag).
  3. Båten er laget av en halvkløyvd stokk, måler ca 5.7 meter og har en mer tilpasset form enn den klassiske stokkebåt: Den kan være et eksempel på utspent stammebåt.
  4. (jfr. Crumlin-Pedersen, Vikingskipsmuseet i Roskilde.)
  5. Den har rester av bærehåndtak i hver ende, og har ikke stammerundt snitt. Tolkning: Like god til lands som til vanns. ( jfr. Pål Nymoen, Norsk sjøfartsmuseum.)
  6. Det er laget en fagskisse med tverrsnitt etter inntørking av båten. (Knut Paasche og Arne Emil Christensen, 2005.)
  7. Båten har krympet inn, også etter dette. Det opprinnelig tilpassete stativet, kan gi en indikasjon på båtens form ved innlevering. Så vidt vites, finnes ingen ingen skisser eller foto fra innleveringsfasen.

Tolkning og muligheter:

Som man ser, her gjenstår et forskningspotensiale:
Håndtverksspor, årringsanalyse, opphavslokalisering, komparative analyser, rekonstruksjon etc. kan iverksettes, og gi mulighet for en vitenskapelig prosess.

Båten kan tolkes som eksempel på øst-norsk innlandsbåt. Den signaliserer et handelsnettverk fra innland til kyst allerede i yngre romertid.

-Kan den ha vært typisk for hele regionen, også over et lengre tidsspenn?

Et høyt håndtverksnivå signaliserer dette.

Denne anmodning om eksponering aktualiserer altså spørsmål om ytterligere forskning på båten.

En faglig konservering bør samtidig iverksettes.

Vi imøteser et positivt svar på en videre prosess.

  

                                            Hilsen  Siljan historielag   

Siljan, 27.nov. 2010

 















Åpent brev i 2012 til Telemark Museum:    
Stokkebåten fra Siljan til Du verden i Porsgrunn.

 

Det nye sjøfartsmuseet Du verden i Porsgrunn er nå på vei til å reise seg.

Du verden skal gi hele regionen et visjonært løft. Aktivitetshuset er tenkt som en inspirasjonskilde til forskning, nysgjerrighet og framtidstro – med særskilt fokus på ungdom.

Etter intensjonen skal den også bli en samlende møteplass.

Dermed bør museet også bidra til regional stedsbevisthet og stolthet.

En nesten ukjent ressurs venter på synliggjøring:

I Siljan ble rundt 1930 trukket opp en intakt stokkebåt. Den hadde ligget under vann – lenge.

 

Kort beskrivelse av denne båten:

Det viste seg at båten var ca 1800 år gammel. Bruksperiode: 200 tallet e.kr. - dvs yngre romertid , en blomstrende tid for vår region. Båten rangerer med dette som Norges nest eldste båt.

Et tilleggsmoment: Båten har en annen utforming enn både denne eldste (fra Glomma) og et relativt stort antall stokkebåter fra vikingetid og middelalder:

Skroget er smekkert. Tverrsittet er ikke stammerundt, men formet. Stevnene er massive. De er like i hver ende. Den har to bærehåndtak, alt økset ut av samme halvkløyvde eikestokk. Båten er spesialtilpasset vassdrag med drageid og fossestryk.

Den representerer både håndtverk og funksjonalitet på høyt nivå.

Båten kan i tillegg være et svært sjeldent eksemplar av utspent stammebåt – slike ble brukt i innlandet som transportmiddel. Båten kan være tidstypisk for Østlandet og Telemark over lange tidsperioder. En kort oppsummering:

Grenland og Telemark innehar et nasjonalt klenodie for ferdsel på vann.

 

Men båten ligger pr.dags dato avstengt i vognskjulet til Telemark museum, og skrumper inn.

 

Båten hører hjemme i det offentlig rom:

Du verden er den rette plassering for denne unike båten, fordi:

Båten representerer ferdsel på vann. Å beherske vannet utgjør et hovedelement i den nordiske kultur.

Båten representerer handel og impulser – den er symbolet på nye nettverk.

Båten utgjør et uvanlig godt håndtverk –den avslører både skaperevne og praktisk dyktighet.

Båttypen må i sin tid ha utgjort et stort teknisk framskritt. Seinere båter med bordganger har bygget videre på samme grunnform.

Båten er av tre – og kan vise til en miljømessig ressursutnytting våre forfedre behersket. En utfordring til vår tid.

Båtens gradvise inntørking kan være en del av prosjektet. Endringene bør være gjenstand for vitenskapelig observasjon og dokumentasjon. -Hvorfor ikke engasjere publikum?

Båten innehar flere forskningspotensialer: Gjenskape de opprinnelige linjer, lese håndtverksspor, lage nøyaktig kopi, teste lasteevne, stabilitet etc. Her står prosjektmuligheter i kø.

Båten fra skogbygda kan vise til distriktenes betydning for utvikling av byene. -Og hva er dagens sentra uten levende omland?

Båt som historisk verdi gjenspeiles i de mange båt-ristninger i Gjerpen - spor helt tilbake til bronsealder – Dette er enda en storhetstid for regionen.

Båten er unik i Norden, og er en unyttet attraksjon. Vi har ikke råd til å forbigå denne muligheten!

 

Til slutt:
Vi er svært glade for de klare meldinger fra prosjektleder som ble gitt på nrk Østafjells torsdag 3.mai. Båten tiltenkes nå en plass i Du verden.

Finansiering bør skje ved et spleiselag med museet, staten og fylkeskommunen.

Plassering bør stå i forhold til båtens betydning – en hedersplass i foyaeen.

Den vil dermed bidra til regionens stolthet og være en inspirasjonskilde i lang tid framover.

 

Hilsen Siljan historielag

Siljan 16.5.2012.







Lauv sett fra lufta. Gorningdammen til venstre. 
Funnsted for stokkebåten: Nederst  i venstre hjørne.
Foto ved Pål Nymoen



The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (2008) 37.1: 3–16 doi: 10.1111/j.1095-9270.2007.00159.x

Boats for Rivers and Mountains: Sources for New Narratives about River Travel?

Pål Nymoen

Norwegian Maritime Museum, Bygdøynesveien 37, 0286 Oslo

What is a boat? Our notions of what constitutes a good boat are tested when it comes to logboats. They are often considered to be of low status, both technologically and functionally. However, logboats are more interesting than that. This article presents three logboats dated to the Roman era and late Viking age, found in the region of Telemark, Norway. The principal concern is to discuss how notions about prehistoric boats can be made known, challenged and discussed by examining the three boats in the context of the rivers and lakes in which they were most probably used.

page1image18640592

SPB.OlaNUckYRwMCeElOl SPEuFNbOliRshNinEg WLtdNARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

Key words: Norwegian river systems, logboats, Roman, Viking.

Boats and ships from coastal regions play important roles in archaeological narratives about the lines of development in the

cultural history of Norway. Interpretations of rock carvings from the Stone and Bronze Ages, as well as research on Viking ships and medieval seafaring, emphasize the central role of boats in cultural history (for example Nielsen, 1905; Christensen, 1982; Christensen, 1985; Kvalø, 2004; Østmo, 2005). The role of the Nordic tradition of clinker con- struction in promoting mobility and overseas contact and trade in coastal areas is especially in focus.

A glance at a map of Norway reveals a unique topography: a rugged coastline cut by deep fjords and long river systems. These connect the coast and the interior, both as hindrances to transit and as ‘highways’ for the transport of goods and people across long distances. Historically, both logboats and other types of small boats have been important in the material culture associated with lakes and rivers. However, compared to the study of coastal boats, research on freshwater vessels is far less common (Hougen, 1941; Klepp, 1984; Christensen, 1996; Christensen, 2000).

In this article, I will present three logboats found in the region of Telemark in Norway. The contexts of the finds are similar, and the boats share certain formal features. I will describe and document these boats by means of technical drawings. My principle concern, however, is to discuss how notions about prehistoric boats can be made known, challenged and discussed by examining the three boats in the context of the rivers and lakes in which they were most probably used. Further, I would like to discuss what these boats can tell us about the representativeness of the archaeological sources with particular regard to our knowledge about the use of inland waters in coastal areas.

Logboats, in common with boats that are generally referred to as ‘inland boats’ in Norway, have been treated in a rather slighting manner both by cultural heritage and preservation institutions in Norway and by scholars. Two of the boats that I examine in this paper have been kept in storage on private farms for the last 45 years, and the third has been kept in a storage building without a regulated climate at the local museum for the Telemark region. This kind of find situation appears to be typical for logboats, so the possibility of discovering more logboats in storage would seem to be quite good.

Three logboats, two river systems

In 1930 a boat was found at the edge of a bog near a small lake about 25 km from the coast at Siljan, Telemark, Norway. A narrow river winds around the north and south ends of the lake. The lake itself lies in the middle of a river system which connects a broad, mountainous region in the north with a region of lowlands, large lakes

page1image1566464page1image1562304

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 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.

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page2image1323824page2image1324032 page2image19333568 page2image1235040 page2image1235248 page2image1235456 page2image1235664 page2image1235872 page2image1236080 page2image1236288page2image1236496 page2image1236704

Figure 1. The Siljan waterway, its lakes and tributaries—a possible area for the use of the boat. The find-spot of the Siljan boat is marked with an arrow. (Jostein Gundersen)

Figure 2. The Siljan boat as it is kept today at the Telemark Museum in Skien, October 2006. (Pål Nymoen)

page2image1236912

and the sea in the south, near the fjord town of Larvik. This is the Siljan river (Fig. 1). The boat which was found here is made of a single tree- trunk, and fits the definition of a logboat, being a hollowed-out tree-trunk used as a vessel (McGrail, 1978; Philipsen, 1983). Many years later, it was documented that the logboat is in fact one of the oldest boats found in Norway. C- 14 analysis indicates that the boat dates to the

Roman era, c.240+/−70 AD. Although the Siljan boat is made of a single piece of wood, it is more specialized than a general logboat. Among other things, the boat challenges our notions regarding what a boat is and how it should look (Fig. 2).

Since its discovery, the Siljan boat has not been treated in any way. After the boat was removed, in 1930, from the peat bog that had preserved and protected it, it began drying out, with the

page2image1237120

4 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

page3image1449072page3image1449280

Documentation drawing of the Siljan boat. (Knut Paasche and Arne Emil Christensen, 21 January 2005)

Figure 3.

Drawing and photograph showing the preserved ‘handle’ from the Siljan boat. (Pål Nymoen, 8 February 2007)

result that the wood (oak) has now split in several places. In order to secure the continued value of the boat as an archaeological resource, it has now been measured and documented with a 1:1 scale drawing (Fig. 3). Despite the damage caused by the wood drying out and splitting, there are several stretches along the sides of the boat where its contour is completely preserved, making it possible to reconstruct the vessel’s

Figure 5. Ring-ray diagram showing where the Siljan boat was hewn from the original tree trunk. (Pål Nymoen)

original form. Aside from the damage caused by desiccation and the fact that parts of the gunwale are missing, the boat is relatively complete. It seems unlikely that the last owner of the boat abandoned it in the bog because it was damaged.

An interesting detail of the boat’s construction is that there are bow-shaped cut-outs hewn out at each end of the boat just at the transition from the bottom of the boat to the sternpost (Fig. 4). While this part of the boat is broken off at one end, traces of the cutting are still visible, confirming that there were similar cut-outs at both ends of the boat. As the section drawings and Fig. 5 show, the boat was fashioned from one-half of a log split along its length in such a manner that the top of the gunwale and the bow-shaped cut-outs

page3image1449488 page3image1449696

Figure 4.

page3image1449904

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 5

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page4image1243152page4image1243776 page4image1212416 page4image1212624 page4image1212832 page4image1213040 page4image19335584 page4image1216784 page4image1216992 page4image1217200 page4image1217408 page4image1217616 page4image1217824 page4image1218032 page4image1218240 page4image1218448 page4image19335360 page4image1219072 page4image1219280page4image1219488 page4image19336480 page4image1220112 page4image19335920 page4image19336592 page4image1221152 page4image1221360 page4image1221568 page4image19335808 page4image19336704 page4image19336816 page4image19336928 page4image19337040 page4image1224480 page4image19337152 page4image1225104 page4image1225312 page4image19337264 page4image19337376 page4image1226352 page4image1226560 page4image19337488 page4image1227184 page4image1227392 page4image1227600 page4image19337600 page4image1228224 page4image19337712 page4image1196240 page4image1196448 page4image19337824 page4image1197072 page4image19337936 page4image19338048 page4image1198112 page4image1198320 page4image19338160 page4image1199360 page4image1199568 page4image1199776 page4image1199984 page4image1200192 page4image1200400 page4image19338272 page4image1201024 page4image1201232 page4image1201440 page4image19338384 page4image1202064 page4image1202272 page4image1202480 page4image19338496 page4image19338608 page4image1203936 page4image1204144 page4image1204352 page4image1204560 page4image1204768 page4image1204976 page4image1205184 page4image1205392 page4image1205600 page4image1205808 page4image1206016 page4image1206224 page4image1206432 page4image1206640 page4image1206848 page4image1207056 page4image1207264 page4image1207472 page4image1207680 page4image1207888 page4image1208096 page4image1208304 page4image1208512 page4image1208720 page4image1208928 page4image19338720 page4image1209552 page4image1209760 page4image1209968 page4image19338832 page4image1210592 page4image1210800 page4image1211008 page4image1211216 page4image1211424 page4image1211632 page4image1211840 page4image1212048 page4image1179648 page4image1179856 page4image1180064 page4image1180272

Figure 6. The map shows the Hjartdøla waterway, Heddøla, Heddalsvannet and the connection to the town of Skien and the coast. The find-spot of the Hjartdal boats is marked with an arrow. (Jostein Gundersen)

forward and aft were once near the innermost part of the trunk. The boat is both wider and lighter than most of the other logboats from Norway.

It was probably hewn with an iron edge; most probably several different edges or axes were used during the different phases of the forming process. The traces left by the iron tools are still visible, especially on the floor of the boat. The hull is thick at the bow and stern, while the sides are only 1–2 cm thick. The chosen material and manner of construction determined the open form and nearly-flat underside of the boat. While the underside retains the form of the original tree-trunk, it appears that there was an attempt to make the interior appear even and symmetrical. There is no indication that extra planks were attached to the hull, nor that strengthening ribs were used to counteract outward pressure. There is no evidence that an outrigger frame was attached to the boat, which is 5.7 m long and about 90 cm wide.

The majority of logboats found in Norway retain more of the roundness of the original tree- trunk in cross-section than does the Siljan boat. While oak was used to make some of the Norwegian logboats, most of them are made of pine. So far there has been no systematic, comparative study of the Norwegian logboat material. My comments regarding other logboats are based solely upon publications of individual finds (for example Molaug, 1977; Molaug, 1984; Belland, 1986; Fossen,

1992; Christensen, 1996; Arisholm, 1997; Kristiansen, 1997; Carpenter, 2005; Christensen, 2005).

Based upon Per Smed Philipsen’s (1984) com- prehensive study of 224 logboats from Denmark, it appears that the bow-shaped cut-outs at the bow and stern of the Siljan boat are an unusual feature. Philipsen refers to this kind of cut-out as a ‘handle’ and has documented the feature on only two of the Danish logboats. It is interesting to note that a logboat with similar cut-outs has also been found in Ireland (Parret, 1930: 110; McGrail, 1978: 68). I will return to the interpretation of these cut-outs later in connection with my discussion of the use and properties of the Siljan boat seen within the context of the system of waterways in which it was found.

In my search for boats with features that parallel those of the Siljan logboat, I have examined the available publications of logboat finds in Norway. In addition, I have searched the registers of the public institutions responsible for the cultural preservation of vessels. Based upon these investigations, I would like to direct attention to two other boat-finds from the same region as the Siljan boat. As we shall see, these boats have a similar find history and, probably, similar find contexts, properties and uses. The boats differ, however, in age. The two boats were discovered in 1960 in connection with a dam- building project during the construction of the power-plant at Hjartdal in Telemark (Fig. 6). A

page4image1180480

6 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

page5image1183184page5image1184432

Figure 7. Documentation drawing of the boat ‘Breidvannet 1’ boat from Hjartdal, Telemark. (Pål Nymoen, 18 October 2006)

Figure 8. Documentation drawing of the boat ‘Breidvannet 2’ boat from Hjartdal, Telemark. (Pål Nymoen, 18 October 2006)

page5image1184640

local informant explains that six boats were found and removed when a lake was drained. I have been unable to find out anything more about four of them, but the remaining two are stored on a private farm in the area. A recent C- 14 analysis of the boats, ‘Breidvannet 1’ and ‘Breidvannet 2’, indicates that they date to respectively 990+/−80 years BP and 1015+/−50 years BP (Figs 7 and 8).

So far, there has been no analysis of the type of wood used to build the two boats from Hjartdal, although pine is most likely. The boats were approximately 4.5 and 5 m long respectively, and 55–60 cm wide. As the drawings show, they were also fashioned from half of a tree-trunk; they are thinly hewn and lightweight. However, the bows and sterns are relatively thick. Neither of the boats has any sign of an outrigger, additional planking or ribs. ‘Breidvannet 2’ is quite fragmentary and consists of two main pieces, while the other boat is almost whole. Except for the fact that the two boats were found in the same lake, there are no other details known regarding the circumstances of their discovery. Unfortunately, it is impossible to ascertain whether they were found near land or whether they were intentionally sunk in the lake. ‘Breidvannet 1’, however, was found with a paddle (Fig. 7).

Let us conclude this description of the three logboats from Telemark by raising a question:

what is a boat? Our notions of what constitutes a good boat are tested when it comes to logboats. Conceptions connected to the term ‘boat’ usually include something that floats, something that can transport cargo and people, and the notion that the bigger and more seaworthy it is, the more ‘proper’ it is. Because of these ideas, logboats are often considered to be of low status, both technologically and functionally. However, log- boats are more interesting than such notions would allow, and the Siljan boat, in particular, has something extra. It is both light and elegant with some unusual details. I believe that there are grounds to claim that this boat is an atypical logboat. First, it is thinly hewn and more streamlined in its contours than other known logboat finds. Second, it is older than most of the logboats (with known dates) found in Norway. Last, the bow-shaped cut-outs in the bow and stern are not found on any earlier boat either identified or described in connection with other finds from Norway.

Primitive boats?

As mentioned above, there are a number of premises and expectations regarding the properties and appearance of a boat, underlying our notions of what a boat is. For example, we associate the material object boat with a tool whose properties include the ability to travel over

page5image1184848

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 7

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page6image1180896

water. Furthermore, the notion of a vessel’s value is understood in terms of the qualities connected to withstanding and exploiting the wind, currents and waves. It is easy to see that logboats do not score well when such criteria for value are applied. Or do they? The fact is that in Norway the tradition of sea-going keelboats is strong, and inland boats, like flat-bottomed rowing-boats and logboats,areusuallyseenassecond-rank,primitive and peripheral (Klepp, 1984; Christensen, 2000: 164). When logboats, called eiker in some Norwegian historical sources, are compared with other types of boat, such as lapstrake coastal vessels, they appear rather primitive. Such comparisons and attempts at creating typologies are not especially precise, because the respective contexts of the different boats (for example, place of origin and use) are not taken into account.

The history of the field shows that even boat archaeologists, certainly unconsciously, have contributed to the stigmatisation of logboats as primitive (for example Halldin, 1950). In the search for the line of ‘development’ of the clinker technique, logboats are often mentioned as one of two possible origins for clinker-built boats. Thus, logboats are seen as prototypes for a more ‘developed’ type of boat. In this line of thought, logboats with added courses of boards along the sides are seen as more advanced, incorporating improvements to increase their seaworthiness (Christensen, 1966; Crumlin-Pedersen, 1970; Westerdahl, 1989). When the focus of research is on technological origins and change is understood as improvement in a developmental line from simple to complex, logboats appear to be less- developed as boats. The following citation exemplifies this kind of positivistic thinking in which the logboat is presented as the zero-point in the evolution of boats:

When boatbuilders first had learned to attach a row of planks or a ‘course of boards’, it was only a matter of time until they found a way to attach two or more rows of boards. When this stage was reached, the logboat was no longer needed as a starting point. It was steadily reduced in size and remained at the end only in the form of a bottom board or keel, as we know it from later types of boat. (translated from Torgvær, 1984: 47, inspired by Molaug, 1984: 34).

It is mainly this ‘prototype’ perspective, a technological evolutionary perspective developed by Ole Crumlin-Pedersen (1970), which is repeatedly used to explain the invention of the lapstrake (clinker) technique. Based on the evidence of over

30 finds of expanded logboats dating from the 1st century AD to about 1700, Crumlin-Pedersen (2006: 38) (and Fig. 9) compares the introduction of supporting ribs to a ‘magical transformation’. He interprets the introduction of ribs as giving rise to the origin of the idea of the clinker- building technique which is understood as producing a proper boat shape. Crumlin-Pedersen clearly distinguishes between what he calls ‘common’ logboats, that is, those types of boats where the finished boat does not extend beyond the dimensions of the original tree-trunk, and expanded logboats.

Crumlin-Pedersen (2006: 47) has described the Siljan boat as resembling an expanded logboat— possibly an unfinished boat in which the ribs had not yet been added. When it comes to the interpretation of the form, properties and use of the boat, I am rather sceptical as to how much an evolutionary perspective like that of Crumlin- Pedersen contributes. In my opinion, this focus of explaining the appearance of boats and culturally-based boatbuilding traditions from a linear, technological evolutionary perspective has contributed to a reductionist and overly- simplified understanding of the logboat as a boat-type. I do not mean to say that the well- argued technological shift represented by the lapstrake technique (clinker) cannot be traced in the expanded logboats, but the empirical foundation is too thin to make categorical statements here. Some experts have argued that the lapstrake tradition can be traced back to the late-Neolithic period (Østmo, 2005). Recently re-dated remains of a boat from Haugvik in Norway extend the history of the lapstrake technique in the north back to the period between 840 and 420 BC (Sylvester, 2006). The find has parallels to the Hjortspring boat (Sylvester, 2006) from the middle of the 4th century BC (Crumlin-Pedersen and Trakadas, 2003), and it demonstrates that the chronology of the lapstrake tradition in north-western Europe is still rather ‘shaky’.

The fact that ‘ordinary’ logboats have been built and used continuously from the Stone Age to recent times makes an evolutionary interpretation problematic (Fig. 10). Therefore, the method for studying these boats should not be based on interpreting them in connection with ‘the clinker- built boats of the coast’, but rather see them within the context of the terrain and climate as well as the transport and storage possibilities of the region. Seen in light of the landscape in which

page6image1185056

8 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

page7image1530160page7image1530368

Figure 9. Ole Crumlin-Pedersen’s ‘magical transformation’ of achieving a proper boat shape by both expanding and extending the tree-trunk beyond its own dimensions. A ‘proper boat’ is here represented with a boat from the Kvalsund find, Kvalsund, Norway, c.700 AD. (after Crumlin-Pedersen, 2006: 37, with permission)

Figure 10. A ‘primitive boat’ in use in recent times: a photograph of a man in a logboat. (after Fossen, 1992, with permission)

page7image1530576page7image1530784

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 9

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page8image1185680

the Siljan and Hjartdal boats were found, it appears that these criteria for investigating the form, properties and meaning of these boats may be more productive.

The find contexts within a transport landscape?

The two boats from Hjartdal (Figs 7 and 8) were made and used during the transition from the Viking age to the middle ages. The clinker-building technique was already well established in Norway at this time. There is no reason to think that the people who used these boats were not acquainted with this technique. I base this assertion on the fact that the distance to large lakes with connections to trading centres on the coast was relatively short. Archaeological investigations have shown that whetstones, among other things, were exported by ship in large quantities from these centres (Myrvoll, 1986; Myrvoll, 1991, Nymoen, in press). In England and several places in Scandinavia, whetstones originating from this region of Norway have been found in Viking-age contexts (Moore, 1978; Mitchell et al., 1984). This shows that the extraction and transport of this raw material from the inland waterways to the river delta had an early industrial character and that this export was well established in Viking times—the early- medieval period (Myrvoll, 1986).

The other major natural resource that the region of Telemark is known for is iron. A number of iron-extraction works show that extensive iron production took place here during the period when the Hjartdal boats were in use (Martens, 1971). The areas with the richest iron-ore are located in the marshes, an alpine landscape in the mountains at the source of the waterway system (Dalland, 2001). These areas were relatively inaccessible. At the same time, the demand for this and other inland products in the maritime trading network called for the organisation of a system of transport of pig-iron from the large production-centres in the mountains to the coast (Resi, 1995). We can picture the rivers and lakes as transport arteries from the sources of the iron ore in the highland marshes to the coast. There are, thus, good reasons to suppose that the Hjartdal boats may have had a role in this transport system. Differences in altitude, numerous rapids and waterfalls and relatively-long overland stretches divide the topography of the watercourse into several zones that were navigable by boat. Therefore, it seems likely that these boats were adapted for

use in limited zones within the river system. The types of boats associated with these zones have been described earlier as being particularly suited to the natural conditions and climate, while the zones are defined by the topography and the stretches of water where boats could be used (Westerdahl, 2000: 14ff).

In the county of Aust-Agder in south-western Norway, two presently-undated logboats have been found in a context associated with early iron production (Carpenter, 2005: 81). These boats have not been thoroughly studied. In other words, there is little empirical basis for any assumptions regarding the use of the Hjartdal boats at the present time. Nevertheless, as a hypothesis and a topic for further investigation, it is relevant to consider the boats in connection with the transport of two significant natural resources from the region, whetstones and pig-iron. Because of the obstacles presented by the terrain, it is possible that transport may have taken place in several stages or zones and that different boats were used in the different zones.

Unfortunately, there is little archaeological evidence from the Roman period, the period in which the Siljan boat was in use, that can help us to understand what kind of expectations and demands people had in relation to their boats. Finds of imported goods and materials in grave- mounds suggest that the inhabitants of the area had a close connection to the coast (Mikkelsen, 1976; Vaagland, 2002). The existence of close ties between the inland and coastal areas connected by the same system of rivers is a phenomenon that can be observed throughout Norway. The Skien river system, in part of which the Hjartdal boats may have been used, lies just to the west of Siljan (Fig. 11) and exemplifies this situation. The archaeological landscape along this river system has a noticeable concentration of remains of early settlements along the rivers and around the lakes (Munch, 1962; Kaland, 1969). Finds of imported goods from the same area clearly show that the watercourse provided opportunities for trade and other forms of contact between the inland areas and the coast, and thereby, across the North Sea basin (Myrvoll, 1984; Myrvoll, 1986).

The small lake where the Siljan boat was found lies, as mentioned earlier, in the middle of a system of waterways. Small rivers and streams lead from the small lake, by way of other lakes, to larger lakes in the south. The rivers are connected to one another throughout the area. From the find-spot

page8image1185888

10 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

page9image19344992

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

Figure 11. The two systems of waterways, Siljan and Breidvann, with parts of the Skien watercourse. (Jostein Gundersen)

of the Siljan boat, there is a distance of 24 km to the fjord in the south at the mouth of the low- lying lake, Farris, which lies at a height of 21 m above sea-level today. The land-mass in this region has risen about 8 m in the course of the last 1700 years or so (Henningsmoen, 1979). This means that the difference in the elevation of the outlet of Farris lake and the sea was only about 13 m when the Siljan boat was in use.

This river system extends for several kilometres northward. From the find-spot at Siljan, there are watercourses that, by means of streams, small rivers, lakes and overland stretches, extend far into the mountain regions. The system runs north-south and is separated from two large river systems, Numedals-Lågen in the east and the Skien waters in the west (Fig. 1), by two watersheds. Physical remains of sunken roads have been documented in several places in the district of Siljan (Vaagland, 2002: 21), and it is likely that transit routes also crossed the Siljan river system going east-west even in prehistoric times. At the place where the sunken road meets the Siljan waterway, there is a rather large burial place, probably of the Roman era, as well as a 12th- century stone church. The presence of both these sites indicates that this location was a junction for transit in the area. Evidence for the use of waterways is far less clear than for the use of sunken roads. Wakes left by the boats of the past

have disappeared, and there are few archaeological sources that can be used to understand the meaning that these lines of transit had. While there are harbours, seamarks, rock carvings, cemeteries and place-names that can provide at least an indirect indication regarding the use of the sea, there are fewer such sources relating to the use of inland waterways. In addition, little research has attempted to examine how the earlier inhabitants of inland regions, the locations of their burial-places, and their use of sunken roads, functioned within the context of transit within a system of small rivers.

More general reflections on the possible use of the Siljan boat for travel, transport, fishing and hunting should be seen in the light of the local topography. The definition of what constitutes a good boat is then more dependent upon its intended use, and the uses and topographical conditions themselves set the terms for how the vessel is shaped. If we imagine that a boat should be able to carry its navigator and others over a quiet stretch of river or be used in fishing and hunting in the same waters, then it seems unlikely that a boatbuilder would go to as much effort as must have gone into building the Siljan boat. A more coarsely hewn, and thereby also heavier, logboat, perhaps in pine, would function just as well under such circumstances. Possibly the boat was built to be used for longer trips and under

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 11

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page10image1107088

more varied conditions, as well as for fishing and hunting (Nymoen, 2005).

In addition to attempting to understand the Siljan boat in terms of its possible use and the opportunities and limitations imposed by its topographical setting, it is also useful to consider the boat from a social perspective. If we imagine that a boat should be able to transport both people and cargo over rivers and lakes, and that it should also be light enough to be pulled or carried over land to other waters, then the Siljan boat is not only functional but well adapted to its intended uses within its environment. From the perspective of those who used the boat, we can imagine that it was an important tool. Perhaps there was a degree of status attached to owning such a vessel. The boat gave its owner the ability to transport both himself, other people, a deer- carcass or iron-ore with relatively little effort across long distances. Perhaps the boat was of such importance that the owner became associated with it (Arnold, 1995: 733): an owner who had to be contacted whenever goods were to be transported or people were to be fetched; someone who owned a tool which made it possible to reach the airlock in a beaver lodge, to lay traps and to set up guide fences; or perhaps to carry raw materials from the mountains all the way to the coast—and return with salt?

The three logboats raise many questions. Our modern view of what a boat is limits our ability to answer them. Still, if we ask ourselves how the terrain was at the find-spot and what kinds of opportunities owning the boat gave to the owner as opposed to not owning the boat, then several new questions and interpretations arise. Especially with regard to the Siljan boat, there are a number of features which indicate that it was built to be used over long distances in the system of waterways. In this respect, the most important features of the Siljan boat are the building-material, its weight, and the cut-outs in the bow and stern. By considering the design of the boat and the extent and location of the water system instead of focussing solely upon the boat in terms of a typology and chronology of boat-types, the use of the term ‘primitive’ to describe the boat is inappropriate. It is possible that the boat is unusually sophisticated: perhaps the bow-shaped cut-outs at each end are specifically adapted to the landscape in which the boat was built and used. Might they be handles that were to be used when pulling the boat, and might they be features as important as the boat’s buoyancy?

Multi-functional boats?—an interpretation

The person or persons who made the Siljan boat were probably quite careful to exploit the potential of the material and to fashion the boat to meet the conditions of the landscape and the types of use. Did they intend to build a boat that would work equally well on water or on land ? (The Norwegian phrase, like godt til vanns som til lands, comes from a popular folktale.) Similar questions may be raised to examine the functional properties of boats from other periods. The Bårset boat, a clinker-built boat found on Nord- Kvaløya in the county of Troms (Gjessing, 1941) and dated by dendrochronological analysis to c.800–895 AD (Pedersen, 2002; Wickler, 2002), may serve as an example. The preserved fragments show that it was a light, easily-steered rowing- boat equipped with eight or nine pairs of oars, making it especially well suited for use on the fjords. It is likely that this type of boat was built in such a manner so that it could be carried over the numerous narrow isthmuses along the coast (Nymoen, 1997). The significance of including portages (drageid in Norwegian) in studies of transport zones, both as transit points within such zones and as catalysts for the adaptation of vessels, is well documented and has recently come into greater focus (Westerdahl, 2000; Westerdahl, 2006). Norwegian sagas, among other sources, record a number of examples of the use of portages. Here, the sources usually describe the use of isthmuses (eidene in Norwegian) along the coast or along inland waterways in connection with the desire to avoid a dangerous stretch of water or as a tactic to surprise an enemy in battle. Another description that gives a better picture of how the light logboats may have been used comes from the Norwegian hunter and explorer Helge Ingstad’s stories of hunting expeditions in a canoe in Alaska:

It was important to find the easiest way through the terrain with the heavy equipment. Rivers and waterways were the least demanding and, where the elevation and distance to the next lake or river was shortest, the vessel and the cargo had to be carried, the so-called portages (translated from Ingstad, 1937: 37).

Nikolay Makarov has conducted thorough archaeological landscape analyses in northern Russia. Here he finds that the use of portages has long been a central element in transit along the waterways of the northern areas (Makarov, 1994). In Norway, there are many areas where both the

page10image1107296

12 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

page11image1531616page11image1532448

Figure 12. Aerial photograph of the lower part of the Siljan watercourse with parts still under ice. Skagerrak is visible farthest out and to the right. (Dag Jostein Andresen)

place-name and the features of the landscape indicate that the place has been used as a portage, especially along watercourses. According to Rygh (1898), the name eid originated on farms with an overland pass between two lakes or waterfalls and rapids in a river that boats had to be dragged over (Rygh, 1898: 48). The eid-names allude to places that had to be crossed or a landscape with water on both sides. The name Eid is associated with several locations along the two watercourses in which the Siljan and Hjartdal boats may have been used.

Finds of boats are among the archaeological sources that are most relevant for a study of the portages along the inland waterways of Norway. Research examining the relationships between boat-types, landscape and use of isthmuses has resulted in new insights into boat-based travel and transport along inland waters (Nymoen, 1997; Westerdahl, 2006). The Siljan boat has much to offer to this kind of research. As mentioned earlier, evidence indicating how the boat was used is apparent in the form of the boat itself, as for example, the handles at each end.

In order to document the find-spot, establish a basis for further study of the topography and estimate the possible radius of use for a boat like the logboat from Siljan, a series of aerial photographs over the entire river system was taken, in late winter when the ice had started to break up. Looking at these photos, it occurred to

me that a lightweight boat of this type could have been built for use as both sled and boat. The highest parts of the river are still frozen (Fig. 12), and it is likely that the ice is thick enough to bear the weight of one or more persons and a light boat. Further down, about midway in the Farris lake which runs into the sea, a belt of unstable ice is discernible in the photo. This critical point in the trip could have been managed by having a light boat that could be pulled over the ice and thereafter used as a boat on the open water to and from the sea. This hypothesis is based on a visual analysis of the landscape and climate and is only mentioned here as a topic for further study.

To summarize this interpretation, we can say that the Siljan and Hjartdal boats were relatively light boats. They could negotiate both shallow stretches of river and small streams. For the transport of iron or unworked whetstones, for example, it was important that the hulls were shallow and that they were relatively flat on the underside. Boats fashioned from a single tree- trunk, despite the thinness of their hulls, are stronger than boats built with boards. I have had the opportunity to try out a couple of logboat replicas in a river. The logboats were more stable than I had expected and it seemed that the stem and stern took the brunt of the strain since they often hit stones in the shallows. Of course, these paddling experiments are not representative or

page11image1534736

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 13

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page12image1105424

scientific, but just the same, the experience provides food for thought. The theory that the boats were used over great distances along the waterway all the way to the outlet to the sea may explain the need for boats that could stand up to difficult and varied conditions, such as shallow and stony stretches of rivers and streams. These conditions may explain the relatively sturdy stems of the Hjartdal and Siljan boats.

This interpretation proposes that the three boats may have been used across great distances, probably in relation to seasonal activities. I think that the connection to seasonal activities is especially relevant for the Hjartdal boats. Because of the topographical conditions along the waterway, the boats may have been made for use in more limited stretches and several boats, specifically adapted for these stretches, may have been needed. The climate and the need for storage in these areas requires boats that could tolerate storage under ice. Boats built with boards are more fragile, so the Norwegian winter, combined with use in shallow rivers, may be a factor in explaining why logboats were used on inland waters from the earliest times up to our own.

Are there more?

In Norway, there are many areas with small watercourses that are topographically comparable to the areas in which the Siljan and Hjartdal boats were found (Fig. 11). If we examine the maps with the idea that rapids and isthmuses do not represent barriers to the use of small, light boats, there are many places where we might expect to find such boats. Why, then, have we not found more of them?

The first, most obvious, explanation is that there have been few attempts in Norway systematically to register finds of cultural material under water in inland waters. Further, a quick look at the finds of logboats registered at the Norwegian Maritime Museum reveals that all of them were found by chance. Finds made in connection with flooding, the draining of lakes and waterways, digging associated with building or public works projects, the salvage of sunken logs, and fishing excursions, are examples of what has been recorded under the heading ‘find circumstances’ in this register.

The other explanation may depend partly on how logboats were kept. The most secure way to prevent a logboat from splitting and from other types of damage is probably to ‘store’ the boat

by filling it with stones and sinking it in water (Christensen, 1996: 240). What then happens when the owner does not come back to recover the boat one spring? What happens after a few years when the bog becomes overgrown? When no-one looks for them, they are found only by chance, as in the case of the Siljan boat. Once, when I was surveying the find-spot, I was told that the find was made by chance when a chunk of peat was turned up, revealing the boat. It is often coincidental both that a boat is found and that it is then kept. Perhaps it is not so strange that so few logboats have been recorded?

Our view of prehistory, interpreted through the archaeological record, is only so wide as the sum of the remains we have recovered. Archaeologists have not searched for logboats in the areas in which they were usually used. The reason for this is that many of them lie under water, and underwater archaeology is seen as a relatively new method in terms of the history of the field— even in Norway.

Sources of new narratives?

The archaeologist’s view is limited, and an increased effort to register archaeological material associated with inland waterways can make an important contribution to our understanding of this little- studied part of prehistory. The close ties between people and water—and the use of water—are both obvious and acknowledged in archaeology, particularly in relation to themes like settlement patterns, resource exploitation, trade, transit, rock art and other symbolic uses. When archaeological narratives about these themes are written based mainly upon sources that have been deposited on land, or when the narratives we make about transport and transit on water focus exclusively on the maritime sphere, the narratives are incomplete. How would the picture we have of prehistory look if the survey and registration of cultural material from lakes and waterways was as thorough and comprehensive as it is for material found on land? ‘Maritime archaeologists’ must therefore shift their focus inland to a greater degree—where there is clearly great potential to find boats from periods that are less well-known and to shed light on themes that are little understood. In my opinion, such a broadening of scope would raise new questions and open up new evidence and new perspectives for research on how people used water as well as on their relationship to water.

page12image1105216

14 © 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

P. NYMOEN: SOURCES FOR NEW NARRATIVES ABOUT RIVER TRAVEL?

page13image1105840

With the exception of research into the origins of boat-types and evolutionary perspectives on boat development, scholars have mainly left logboats in peace. Since we know something about how long logboats have actually been in use and how they have been used over large areas with varied terrain, it seems that the evolutionary perspective is not suited to create narratives about these boats (Nymoen and Arisholm, 2005). My view is that we will find new narratives about the oldest boats by looking at the systems of waterways that connect the inland regions with the coast. Some of the new narratives may be about travel, extent, and organising of transport between these areas. They might also enlarge the picture of ‘sea routes’ linking two coasts to include extensions of these routes far into inland regions. Perhaps these stories will also tell about boats that function both in coastal and inland regions?

Acknowledgements

It seems that logboats are a type of archaeological source to which we only coincidentally have got access. The find circumstances clearly attest to this fact. With the exception of grave finds, there has not been a single logboat found as part of a systematic survey or any other archaeological investigation in Norway. Because logboats are best kept when they are under water, and because many of them remained under water when they ceased to be used, it is likely that even very old logboats are still preserved—and hidden. From this we must conclude that sources of knowledge about the use of lakes and inland waterways in prehistory exist but that they are little used in research. Close study reveals that logboats are far from a homogeneous type of vessel and that they do not follow a line of technological evolution. Rather, logboats represent a multitude of different vessels, not only in terms of time and space, but also in terms of their functions.

I would like to thank Lisa Benson for translating the text from Norwegian to English. In addition, I would like to thank Lars Vaagland of the Siljan Historical Society and Halvor Åbø, Sverre Haugan and Ambros Langåsdalen in Hjartdal for assistance and information about the logboats. Thanks are also due to Dag Jostein Andresen who took the aerial photographs, Linda Marie Rustad for commenting upon the text, and Jostein Gundersen for the GIS maps.

References

Arisholm, T., 1997, Norges eldste båt opp av mudderet etter 2000 år, in H. Sørheim (ed.), Arkeologi og kystkultur, 105–13. Ålesund. Arnold, J. E., 1995, Transportation Innovation and Social Complexity among Maritime Hunter-Gatherer Societies, American

Anthropologist 97.4, 733–47.
Belland, S., 1986, 1000 års gamal stokkebåt funnen i Haukomvatnet, in Birkenes historielags årsskrift. Birkenes.
Carpenter, S., 2005, Fra stokkebåt til flatbunning?—En vurdering av materialet fra Aust-Agder, in T. Arisholm and P.

Nymoen (eds), Stokkebåter—Nytt om Sørumbåten og andre sørnorske stokkebåtfunn. Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum. Skrift nr 4,

69–83. Oslo.
Christensen, A. E., 1966, Frå vikingskip til motorsnekke. Norsk Kulturarv 2. Oslo.
Christensen, A. E., 1982, Viking Age Ships and Shipbuilding, Norwegian Archaeological Rewiew 15.1–2, 19–28.
Christensen, A. E., 1985, Boat finds from Bryggen, The Bryggen Papers, Main series Vol I, 47–278. Bergen.
Christensen, A. E., 1996, Innlandsbåtene, spennende men lite kjent, in T. Fossum (ed.), Årbok for Norsk Skogbruksmuseum

14, 229–46.
Christensen, A. E., 2000, Some archaic details of Norwegian fresh-water boats, in J. Litwin (ed.), Down the River to the Sea.

Proceedings of the 8th ISBSA, 163–8. Gdansk.
Christensen, A. E., 2005, Stokkebåt, Norsk Arkeologisk Leksikon 362. Oslo.
Crumlin-Pedersen, O., 1970, Skind eller træ. En studie i den Nordiske plankebåds konstruktive opprinnelse, in Hasslöf et al.

(eds), Sømand, Fisker, Skib og værft. Introduksjon til maritim etnologi, 213–39. København.
Crumlin-Pedersen, O., 2006, Den nordiske klinkbåds grundform—en totusindårig tradisjon og dens rødder, in T. Arisholm,

K. Paasche, and T. L. Wahl (eds), Klink og seil—Festskrift til Arne Emil Christensen, 36–56. Oslo.
Crumlin-Pedersen, O. and Trakadas, A. (eds), 2003, Hjortspring. A Pre-Roman Iron Age Warship in Context. Ships and Boats

of the North 5, Roskilde.
Crumlin-Pedersen, O., 2006, Den nordiske klinkbåds grundform—en totusindårig tradisjon og dens rødder, in T. Arisholm,

K. Paasche, and T. L. Wahl (eds), Klink og seil—Festskrift til Arne Emil Christensen, 36–56. Oslo.
Dalland, Ø., 2001, Telemark—i lys av vannet. Oslo.
Fossen, A., 1992, Historien om de Norske skogfinnene. Oslo.
Gjessing, G., 1941, Båtfunnene fra Bårset og Øksnes. Tromsø museums årshefter 58, Tromsø.
Halldin, G., 1950, Bilder av primitiva farkoster m.m. sammanställda för studiet av de skandinaviska hällristningarnas

skeppsbilder, Sjöhistorisk Årsbok, 11–96. Stockholm.
Ingstad, H., 1937, Pelsjegerliv. Blant Nord Kanadas Indianere. Oslo.

page13image1106464

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society 15

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 37.1

page14image1113328

Henningsmoen, K. E., 1979, En karbon-datert strandforsyvningskurve fra søndre Vestfold, in R. Nydal, S. Westin, H. Ulf, and S. Gulliksen (eds), Fortiden i søkelyset. 14C datering gjennom 25 år. Trondheim.

Hougen, B., 1941, Islendingen i eika, Viking V, 51–74.
Kaland, S. H. H., 1969, Studier i Øvre Telemarks Vikingtid, Universitetets Oldsakssamling Årbok, 67–216. Oslo.
Klepp, A., 1984, den styggeste av alle vore farkoster ... en undersøkelse av flatbunnede båter i Norge, Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum

Årsberetning 1983, 67–127. Oslo.
Kaland, S. H. H., 1969, Studier i Øvre Telemarks Vikingtid, Universitetets Oldsakssamling Årbok, 67–216. Oslo. Kristiansen, F., 1997, Nytt stokkebåtfunn innrapportert til Vitenskapsmuseet, Trondheim, Spor 1, 23. Trondheim.
Kvalø, F., 2004, Facing the sea in Bronze Age Norway: the ship, the sea and society, in P. Clark (ed.), The Dover Bronze Age

boat in context: society and water transport in prehistoric Europe, 148–52. Oxford.
McGrail, S., 1978, Logboats of England and Wales. BAR Brit. Ser. 51; I and II. Oxford.
Makarov, N., 1994, Portages of the Russian north: Historical geography and archaeology, Fennoscandia Archaeologica XI,

13–27. Helsinki.
Martens, I., 1971, Møsstrond i Telemark. En jernproduserende fjellbygd før svartedauen, Viking 36, 83–114.
Makarov, N., 1994, Portages of the Russian north: Historical geography and archaeology, Fennoscandia Archaeologica XI,

13–27. Helsinki.
Mikkelsen, E., 1976, Arkeologiske undersøkelser i Siljan-vassdraget. Oslo.
Mitchell, J. G., Askvik, H., and Resi, H. G., 1984, Potassium-argon ages of schist honestones from the Viking Age sites at

Kaupang (Norway), Aggersborg (Denmark), Hedeby (West Germany) and Wolin (Poland), and their archaeological impli-

cations, Journal of Archaeological Science 11, 171–6.
Molaug, S., 1977, Stokkebåt fra Kroktjern Søndre Fange, Norsk Sjøfartsmuseums Årsberetning 1976, 13–14. Oslo.
Molaug, S., 1984, Utriggerkano og pram fra Holmsbu, Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum årsberetning 1983, 129–5. Oslo.
Moore, D. T., 1978, The Petrography and Archaeology of English Honestones, Journal of Archaeological Science 5.1, 61–73. Myrvoll, S., 1984, Trade in Telemark and the Earliest Settlement in Skien, Offa Band 41, 41–55. Neumunster.
Myrvoll, S., 1986, Skien og Telemark—naturressurser, produkter og kontakter i sen vikingtid og tidlig middelalder, Viking

1985/86, 161–80.
Myrvoll, S., 1991, Skien i Grenland—om kommunikasjon, økonomi og makt i sen vikingtid og tidlig middelalder, Gunneria

64.2, 289–301. Trondheim.
Munch, J. S., 1962, Borg og bygd. Studier i Telemarks eldre jernalder, Universitetets Oldsakssamling Årbok 1989/1990, 7–175.

Oslo.
Nielsen, Y., 1905, Middelalderske samfærdselslinjer i Norge, langs kysten og paa indsøer og elve, Norske geografiske Selskabs

Aarbog XVI. Kristiania.
Nymoen, P., 1997, Der er en eiendommelighed ved den Norske kyst—Om eidenes betydning for ferdselen til sjøs, Kysten 1,

16–20.
Nymoen, P., 2005, Like godt til vanns som til lands ?—En stokkebåt fra Siljan i Telemark, in T. Arisholm and P. Nymoen

(eds), Stokkebåter—Nytt om Sørumbåten og andre sørnorske stokkebåtfunn. Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum. Skrift nr 49, 57–68.

Oslo.
Nymoen, P., in press, Fatal feilnavigering med tung last ?—om en samling brynesteinsemner ved Kvaasefjorden, Kristiansand. Nymoen, P. and Arisholm, T., 2005, Oppsummering, in T. Arisholm and P. Nymoen (eds), Stokkebåter—Nytt om Sørumbåten

og andre sørnorske stokkebåtfunn, Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum, Skrift nr 49, 125–7. Oslo.
Østmo, E., 2005, Over Skagerak i steinalderen. Noen refleksjoner om oppfinnelsen av havgående fartøyer i Norden, Viking

LXVIII, 55–82.
Parret, O., 1930, Die Einbäume in Federsee-ried und im übrigen Europa, Prähistorishe Zeitschrift 21, 112.
Pedersen, W. M., 2002, Bårsetbåten. En revurdering av rekonstruksjonen fra 1937. Upublisert hovedfagsavhandling i arke-

ologi, Institutt for samfunnsvitenskap, Universitetet i Tromsø.
Philipsen, P. S., 1983, En analyse av Danske stammebåde. Upublisert hovedfagsoppgave i arkeologi, Århus universitet.
Resi, G. H., 1995, The Norwegian iron bar deposits: have they most to tell about production or consumption, Varia 30, 131–

46. Oslo.
Rygh, O., 1898, Norske gaardsnavne, Forord og Indledning. Kristiania.
Sylvester, M., 2006, Haugvikbåten fra Sømna—en plankebygd båt fra yngre bronsealder eller førromersk jernalder, Viking

LXIX, 91–106.
Torgvær, T., 1984, Fra trestamme til nordlandsbåt, Leddiken Årg. 5. Øksnes.
Vaagland, L., 2002, Den hemmelighetsfulle dalen, Kult makt og ære i Siljan—Fra Skrim til Farris, bind VI, 7–73. Siljan

Historielag. Larvik.
Westerdahl, C., 1989: Norrlandsleden I. Kallor till det maritima kulturlandskapet. Länsmuseet–Murberget.
Westerdahl, C., 2000, From Land to Sea, from Sea to Land. On the transport zones, borders, and human space, in J. Litwin

(ed.), Down the River to the Sea. Proceedings of the 8th ISBSA, 11–20. Gdansk.
Westerdahl, C., 2006, On the Significance of Portages. A survey of a new research theme, in C. Westerdahl (ed.), 2006: The

Significance of Portages. BAR Int. Ser. 1499, 15–51. Oxford.
Wickler, S., 2002, Båtkonstruksjon i Nord Norge, accessible at: http://www.imv.uit.no/ommuseet/enheter/ark/

forskning_Botkonstruksjon.htm
Østmo, E., 2005, Over Skagerak i steinalderen. Noen refleksjoner om oppfinnelsen av havgående fartøyer i Norden, Viking

LXVIII, 55–82.

page14image1113536

16

© 2007 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2007 The Nautical Archaeology Society

  • Treff: 4970