The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? The Norwegian Evidence Revisited
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019, 523–541
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity?
The Norwegian Evidence Revisited
AINA MARGRETHE HEEN-PETTERSEN
Department of Historical Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim, Norway
This article discusses the chronology and nature of the earliest Viking activity, based on a group of early
burials from Norway containing Insular metalwork. By focusing on the geographical distribution of this
material and applying the concept of locational and social knowledge, the importance of establishing
cognitive landscapes to facilitate the Viking expansion is highlighted. It is argued that the first recorded
Viking attacks were only possible after a phase in which Norse seafarers had acquired the necessarily
level of a priori environmental knowledge needed to move in new seascapes and coastal environments.
This interaction model opens the possibility that some of the early Insular finds from Norway may
represent pre-Lindisfarne exploration voyages, carried out by seafarers along the sailing route of
Nordvegr.
Keywords: Early Viking Age, Vikings, Insular, Norway, Nordvegr, maritime mobility
INTRODUCTION and data which have not been included in
previous debates about the earliest Viking
For over a century, the earliest Viking activity. Second, the article examines the
activity in Britain and Ireland (the `Insular nature of the initial phase of contact with
area` referred to in this paper) has been a focus on maritime mobility and environ-
the topic of intense scholarly discussion. mental knowledge, which must have been
The written and archaeological evidence vital aspects but remain under-investigated
have been regularly reviewed, most components of the initial phase of contact.
recently by Emer Purell (2015) and Clare Finally, the article brings together these
Downham (2017) who have studied the elements and proposes a model of move-
first generation of Vikings in Ireland and ment and maritime communication for the
the written sources for the earliest Viking earliest voyages across the North Sea.
activity in England, respectively.
The purpose of this article is to consider
the Norwegian evidence in light of the THE EARLIEST RECORDED RAIDS AND
current discussions into initial direct THE BEGINNING OF THE VIKING AGE
contact across the North Sea. First, it
reviews the chronology and geographical Over the years, many scholars have
distribution of 16 early burials containing expressed different views about when the
Insular metalwork, including new finds earliest direct contact between Norway
© European Association of Archaeologists 2019 doi:10.1017/eaa.2019.19
Manuscript received 29 June 2018,
accepted 18 March 2019, revised 17 December 2018
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19
524 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
and the Insular world took place and the sources including letters, foreign chroni-
nature of this interaction. The relationship cles, and charters, suggest that large parts
between the archaeological evidence and of southern England were also targeted by
information recorded in the Irish annals ‘pagans’ around the same time. These
and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has been accounts are however somewhat supressed
central to these discussions. in the Chronicle, which mainly records
The first written record of a Viking the Vikings as a regular threat to southern
attack on Insular land took place in England from c. AD 830 and onwards. It
Portland, Dorset, in AD 789—or sometime appears that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is
during the reign of King Beorthric of somewhat biased towards King Alfred and
Wessex between AD 786 and 802 if we his family by playing down the impact
base the dating on a cautious use of the of the Vikings before the reign of King
sources (Dumville, 2008: 356). According Ecgberht, King Alfred’s grandfather
to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, three ships (Downham, 2017: 12).
of Northmen arrived near a royal resi- Since the early twentieth century, the
dence, where they killed the king’s reeve earliest recorded raids have generally been
who rode out to meet them. While the regarded as the starting point of contact
earliest source refers to the Northmen as across the North Sea. By tradition, this
‘Dani’ (a general term for Scandinavians), has led to the widespread notion that any
later versions of the Chronicle (Versions Insular metalwork could only have reached
D, E, and F) identify the ships as origin- Scandinavia after these events. This prin-
ating from Hordaland in the western part ciple is often referred to as the ‘Shetelig
of present-day Norway (Dumville, 2008: axiom’ and has been both influential and
356, Downham, 2017: 1). Possibly after much debated. While early researchers
the altercation in Portland, the earliest were also open to the idea of direct pre-
Viking raid on an ecclesiastical location is Viking contact, this topic became the
the well-known attack on the monastery subject of lively scholarly discussion in the
on Lindisfarne in north-eastern England 1990s. Instead of viewing the Lindisfarne
in June 793, recorded in the Northern attack as the first time the ‘Norwegian’
recension of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Vikings entered the Insular world, it was
versions D and E (Downham, 2017: 2). strongly argued that a pre-Viking phase of
In the following decade, the Insular migration and trade to Atlantic Scotland
sources record repeated raids around the took place from the early to mid-eighth
shores of Britain and Ireland. This century or even earlier (e.g. Myhre, 1993,
includes the sacking of the monastery at 1998, 2000; Weber, 1994, 1996; Solli,
the ‘mouth of the River Don’ (possible 1996). This view is sometimes referred to
Jarrow, or a monastery in South as the ‘Myhre’ model because of Bjørn
Yorkshire) and raids throughout the Myhre’s influential role in these discus-
Hebrides in AD 794, on the islands of sions. As summarized elsewhere (see
Iona, Inishmurray, Inishbofin, and Rechru Barrett, 2008: 418–21), the debate princi-
(probably Lambay Island, Co. Dublin) in pally centred around four aspects of the
AD 795, while mainland Scotland (Argyll) archaeological evidence: 1) Viking graves
and Ireland were targeted from AD 796 with early types of brooches or weapons in
onwards (Dumville, 2008; Downham, Scotland; 2) early combs from Orkney
2000). While the annals and Chronicle made of Scandinavian reindeer antler; 3)
show an emphasis on early raids on pollen analysis on Faroe indicating a pre-
Ireland and northern Britain, other written Viking presence; and 4) early Insular
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19
Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 525
objects in Norwegian graves. The first of THE EARLIEST INSULAR METALWORK:
these pieces of evidence has since been COMPOSITION
largely dismissed because the early
brooches show clear signs of wear and Over forty years ago, Egil Bakka discussed
repair and because of the difficulties of the chronology of a group of eleven early
dating Scottish graves on the basis of graves from Norway with Insular metal-
Norwegian typologies (e.g. Morris, 1998: work, all of which also contained brooches
88; Owen, 2004). The presence of of the late Vendel/Merovingian periods or
Scandinavian reindeer antler from Orkney transitional types that survived into the
has also been reviewed and has shown that Early Viking Age (Bakka, 1973; see also
the arrival of this material cannot be Wamers, 1998: 51–54). To this group,
securely dated to before the early ninth five further finds, from Ytre Kvarøy, Skei,
century (Ashby, 2009; von Holstein et al., Geite, Myklebost, and Farmen, can be
2014). The evidence for a pre-Viking Age added (Figure 1 and Table 1).
presence on the Faroes has recently been As shown in Table 1, the Insular metal-
confirmed by new pollen evidence and work comprises twenty-three objects from
dates. These results are interpreted as ‘firm sixteen graves representing fourteen female
evidence for the human colonisation of the and two male burials. The most significant
Faroes by people of unknown geographical piece is the complete reliquary from a
and ethnic origin some 300–500 years woman’s burial in Melhus (see Figure 6),
before the large-scale Viking colonisation one of only twelve largely complete Insular
of the ninth century’ (Church et al., 2013: house-shaped shrines to have survived in
231–32). While not forming part of the Europe. The grave contained a further
original discussion, an early date from a Insular find in the form of a reworked
site in Norwick, Shetland, obtained in ecclesiastical mount, which was probably
2003, has also been used to suggest Norse used as a brooch to fasten the deceased’s
settlement before AD 793 (Ballin Smith, fur cloak (see Heen-Pettersen & Murray,
2007). However, the date was obtained 2018 for a recent presentation of this
from carbonized food deposits and could find). Such decorative and gilded copper-
easily be a result of marine reservoir effects alloy mounts are by far the most common
on cooked fish, or even statistical chance, object type in the early Insular material,
since the remaining dates from the site with fifteen pieces known from fourteen
largely suggest a later settlement date locations. Three of these, from Oseborg
(Barrett, 2010: 291). At present, there is (Møre and Romsdal county) (Figure 2),
little archaeological evidence to support Grande, and Fosse are harness mounts, all
the hypothesis of a Norse settlement in of which were reworked into dress acces-
the Scottish Isles before the mid-ninth sories (Wamers, 1985: 93–96). While the
century (see Barrett, 2008, 2010). metalwork from Store Kongsvik cannot be
As shown above, much of the Insular ascribed to an identified parent object, the
evidence of possible pre-Viking contact has remaining examples were probably once
been thoroughly reviewed, and in some mounted on ecclesiastical objects. This
cases dismissed, in the last two decades. In includes an Anglo-Saxon book mount from
the following section, I shall focus on the Bjørke (Figure 2) that served as a pendant
fourth, and perhaps least studied, element suspended from a bead-necklace worn by
of evidence for early Scandinavian activity the deceased (Wamers, 1985: 95).
in the west: Insular metalwork found in The metalwork from Sanddal, Farmen,
early burials in Norway. and Myklebust is identified as hinges from
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19
526 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Figure 1. Distribution of the earliest Insular finds found in Norway.
Map by Astrid Lorentzen, Trondheim University Museum.
reliquary shrines (Wamers, 1985: 19, 95; Skjervum, Melhus, Skei, and Svennevik.
Aannestad, 2015: 80). Further pieces from On five of these pieces, secondary perfora-
either reliquary shrines or other reliquaries tions, sometimes associated with the
are represented by the mounts from remains of pin fittings and/or textiles,
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19
Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 527
Table 1. Overview of the early burials containing Insular material.
Site Type of Insular object Diagnostic grave-goods
Ytre Kvarøy, Lurøy Copper-alloy bowl Sword, Petersen special type 1
Melhus, Overhalla Reliquary shrine, copper-alloy mount (ecclesiastical) Button-on-bow brooch, R643A x 2
Skei, Steinkjer Copper-alloy ladle, hanging bowl, bucket, 2 Berdal 1A
copper-alloy mounts (ecclesiastical)
Geite, Levanger Copper-alloy bowl, 2 drinking horn terminals Animal-shaped brooches of the
‘Stor-Skogmo’ type
Grande, Ørlandet Harness mount R640 x 2
Oseborg, Ørsta Harness mount R640 x 2
Bjørke, Ørsta Copper-alloy mount (book mount) R640 x 2
Sanddal, Gloppen Hinge of a reliquary shrine R643A x 2
Myklebost, Fjaler Hinge of a reliquary shrine Axe (JP type A or B)
Vangsnes, Vik Copper-alloy mount (ecclesiastical) JP7
Skjervum, Vik Copper-alloy mount (ecclesiastical) R640 x 2, R643 x 1
Fure, Askvoll Copper-alloy mount (ecclesiastical) Button-on-bow brooch
Store Kongsvik, Tysnes Copper-alloy mount, original function uncertain R640 x 2
Fosse, Meland Harness mount R643A x 2
Svennevik, Grimstad Copper-alloy mount (from reliquary shrine) R641 x 2
Farmen, Larvik Hinge of a reliquary shrine JP17
Figure 2. Left: back and front of harness-mount from Oseborg, Ørsta. Right: Anglo-Saxon book
mount from Bjørke, Ørsta.
Photograph by permission of University Museum of Bergen/Svein Skare.
suggest that these were adapted for use as ecclesiastical pieces belong to a group of
brooches (see Stenvik, 2001: 33; mounts which may originally have been
Aannestad, 2015: 307). The remaining altar or tabernacle decorations, or
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19528 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Figure 3. Left: the flanged boss from Vangsnes, Vik. Right: the mount from Fure, Askvoll.
Photograph by permission of University Museum of Bergen/Svein Skare.
decorations on processional crosses. This bronze-bound bucket (Stenvik, 2001). The
includes the hemispherical and flanged large Insular bowls from Ytre Kvarøy (see
boss from Vangsnes and the metalwork Figure 7) and Geite belong to a group of
from Fure (Figure 3). The latter belongs copper-alloy vessels, which can be isolated
to a group of hollow, cast mounts in the from the hanging-bowl series since they
shape of a truncated pyramid, similar to lack suspension devices. The Geite grave
the mounts decorating the ‘Antrim Cross’. also included two drinking horn terminals
These two pieces were also reworked and of Insular origin.
probably worn as dress ornaments
(Wamers, 1985: 96).
Finally, the Insular finds from Ytre CHRONOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES
Kvarøy, Geite, and Skei were various
items used for serving food and drink. The material from the earliest burials,
The only hanging-bowl from this corpus which provides the best indication of
comes from Skei, where it formed part of deposition dates, consists of decorated
a fine set of serving equipment, together dress ornaments and weapon types, since
with a large bronze ladle and a small, other plain and undiagnostic finds are
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 529
more difficult to place within a narrower
time frame (see e.g. Bakka, 1973; Stenvik,
2001; Heen-Pettersen & Murray, 2018
for details about these further grave
goods). As for beads, the work of Callmer
(1977) still forms the main typology for
the Norwegian material. However, in our
case, the problem with using his classifica-
tion is the fact that Callmer explicitly used
the ‘Shetelig Axiom’ when building his
chronology and, therefore, presumed a
Figure 4. Oval brooches of R640 type from
post-Lindisfarne date for beads found Bjørke, Ørsta.
with early Insular material (see e.g. Photograph by permission of University
Callmer, 1977: 77). Likewise, when Bakka Museum of Bergen/Svein Skare.
discussed the early graves with Insular
metalwork in 1973, he had to deal with
the ‘problem’ of early styles of ornamented R643 brooches. This group is also believed
brooches in burials with imports. His solu- to date to the late eighth and early ninth
tion was to propose that the styles contin- century (see Rundkvist, 2010: 135). A
ued in use until around AD 800 and that similar date is suggested for the animal-
the deposition of Insular metalwork, shaped brooches of the rare ‘Stor-Skogmo’
therefore, largely corresponded with the type found in the richly-furnished crema-
‘Shetelig Axiom’ (Bakka, 1973: 16-17). tion burial from Geite, which has recently
Since then, a number of researchers have been confirmed by radiocarbon dates (see
studied and suggested various chronologies below).
for the brooches of late Vendel-period Two further pairs of oval brooches from
Scandinavia, including transitional types Vangsnes and Farmen (types JP7 and
surviving into the early Viking Age (e.g. JP17) are classed as ‘transition types’ (TT)
Shetelig, 1927; Ørsnes, 1966; Jansson, (Rundkvist, 2010: finds catalogue).
1985; Myhre, 1993; Klæsøe, 1999; Petersen (1928) certainly suggested a
Rundkvist, 2010). The difficulties within a slightly later manufacturing sequence for
fine chronology have yet to be resolved, the Norwegian TT examples compared
especially since these brooches were in use with the simple, thin-shelled R640 and
in the decades before and after the first R643 brooches. While he regarded JP7 as
recorded overseas raids. an early type going back to the end of the
Five of the graves in this study con- eighth century, JP17 was defined by
tained pairs of thin-shelled brooches of Petersen as one of the earliest Viking-age
R640/JP 4 type (Figure 4). While older types based on the ‘gripping beast’ motif.
research grouped these brooches collect- Rundqvist has however suggested a
ively under the type name R640, it is now bipartition of this decoration, where the
generally agreed that they can be divided beasts used on the earliest types (such as
into two main types: The Small Plain type JP17) may pre-date the Lindisfarne raid
and the Large Plain brooches. All our by a few decades (Rundkvist, 2010:
examples belong to the latter group, with 159–60).
a suggested deposition date of c. AD 770– A late eighth-century production date is
840 (see Rundkvist, 2010: table 10). A also argued for the late types of button-
further four burials contained pairs of type on-bow brooches from Melhus and Fure
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19530 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Table 2. Geite, Levanger: calibrated dates.
Sample code Radiocarbon age δ13C (‰) - Calibrated date (95.4% probability) using
(BP) AMS OxCal 4.2.4 (Bronk Ramsey, 2013)
TRa-12567 (a) 1255 ± 20 −19.1 ± 0.8 ‰ AD 676–776 (95.4%)
TRa-12567 (b) 1190 ± 30 −18.7 ± 2.1 ‰ AD 727–738 (1.7%)
AD 768–896 (91.2%)
AD 928–942 (2.4%)
TRa-12567 (c) 1230 ± 20 −22.0 ± 0.4 ‰ AD 692–747 (36.9%)
AD 762–780 (14.8%)
AD 787–876 (43.7%)
TRa-12567 (average) 1225 ± 25 - AD 693–746 (51.0%)
AD 763–779 (18.9%)
AD 791–867(25.5%)
TRa-12568 (a) 1230 ± 20 −19.7 ± 0.4 ‰ AD 699–747 (36.9%)
AD 762–780 (14.8%)
AD 787–876 (43.7%)
TRa-12568 (b) 1205 ± 20 −26.7 ± 0.4 ‰ AD 769–887 (95.4%)
TRa-12568 (c) 1220 ± 15 −25.4 ± 0.4 ‰ AD 720–742 (13.2%)
AD 766–879 (82.2%)
TRa-12568 (average) 1220 ± 15 - AD 725–739 (7.9%)
AD 766–780 (14.6%)
AD 787–877 (73.0%)
(Gjessing, 1934; Glørstad & Røstad, samples was tested three times (see
2015: 186–88). Finally, while representing Table 2 and Figure 5) and the best esti-
a slightly later find, an early date is also mates for the age are the average of the
indicated by the find of a Berdal type 1a three measurements (at 95.4% probability):
brooch with a gripping beast ornament cal AD 693–867 (Tra-12567) and cal AD
from Skei. It has been suggested that pro- 725–877 (Tra-12568). However, a closer
duction of this brooch type began during look at the individual results indicate a
the mid-eighth century, based on the finds narrower timeframe. Only one measure-
of moulds in Ribe, Jutland (Myhre, 1993: ment gave an early date of cal AD 676–776
186). There has, however, been consider- (95.4% probability), while three samples
able debate regarding the chronology of provided very similar results of cal AD
the layers associated with these finds. 768–896 (91.2% probability), AD 769–887
Feveile and Jensen (2000: 17–18) have (95.4% probability) and cal AD 766–879
reassessed the dating evidence and argued (82.2% probability). A deposition date of
that the date of the earliest occurrence of sometime after AD 766 therefore seems
Berdal brooches in Ribe must be adjusted most likely, but the results also underline
to c. AD 780–790. the methodological difficulties in obtain-
None of the above burials has previously ing the necessarily chronological resolution
been dated by radiocarbon analysis. In to confidently date burials to before or
connection with this study, two samples after the first recorded raids.
were obtained from cremated animal While this group of finds represents the
bones from the base of the Insular bowl in earliest evidence of direct contact across
the Geite burial. Since no collagen was the North Sea, it is also clear that both
preserved, the results were obtained by the typological and radiocarbon dates are
measuring the carbonate fraction in cre- coarse and offer us room to interpret the
mated bones (bio apatite). Each of the two finds as either supporting or speaking
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 531
Figure 5. Geite, Levanger: calibrated dates using OxCal 4.2.4 (Bronk Ramsey, 2013; Reimer et al.,
2013).
Figure 7. The large bowl from Ytre Kvarøy,
Lurøy, is the most northerly find of early Insular
metalwork from Norway. Bowl diameter: 31 cm.
Figure 6. The reliquary from Melhus, Photograph by permission of Tromsø
Overhalla, (length: 118 mm; height: 83 mm) is University/Mari Karlstad.
one of only twelve complete Insular house-shaped
shrines to have survived in Europe.
Photograph by permission of Norwegian
University of Science and Technology against which the imports can be inter-
Museum, Trondheim/Åge Hojem. preted becomes essential. This is especially
true for interaction models, which have
against the ‘Shetelig axiom’. Since it is dif- implications for the chronology and char-
ficult to achieve fine-grained dating, the acterisation of the earliest Norse activity in
methodological and theoretical framework Britain and Ireland.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19532 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
MODELS OF MOVEMENT movement for the earliest Norse voyages
across the North Sea.
Today, there is general agreement that some
form of pre-Lindisfarne contact must have
existed (e.g. Barrett, 2010: 297), but there FINDS DISTRIBUTION AND THE
have been few attempts to suggest new SIGNIFICANCE OF THE NORDVEGR
models of how this interaction took place
since the discussions led by Myhre. Since The location of early Insular material is
the 1990s, the evidence to support a pre- often considered to be an indicator of
Viking period of well-established connec- where the first Vikings originated
tions has been significantly weakened, espe- (Wamers, 1998: 52; Barrett, 2010: 293;
cially by Ashby’s (2009) dismissal of the Baug et al., 2018). Most early Insular
reindeer comb evidence which was used as finds are found in western Norway, in
one of the principal pieces of evidence in Hordaland to Sunnmøre, but there is also
these models. The main problem is still the a number of notable finds from further
lack of archaeological evidence for such early north, including Trondheimsfjord, Melhus
activity on either side of the North Sea. in Overhalla (Figure 6), and Kvarøya in
Admittedly, John Hines has argued convin- Lurøy (see distribution in Figure 1). These
cingly for a phase of small-scale immigration finds show that the earliest oversea
from western Norway to south-eastern voyages were not exclusively a western-
England in the fifth and sixth centuries, Norway phenomenon.
based on parallel stylistic elements found on The overall finds concentration falls
square-headed brooches and other types of within the geographical area of Norway
dress jewellery in these two areas (Hines, traditionally referred to as ‘Nordafjells’,
1992, 1996). This contact does, however, representing the area north and west of
not seem to have continued into the follow- Langfjella, a mountain chain on the south-
ing centuries (Hines, 1996: 27). Moreover, ern Norwegian peninsula. These moun-
the small amount of western glassware in tains separated the Nordmenn—the men
early eighth-century Scandinavian contexts from the north—from the Austmenn, the
are generally believed to have reached men from east of the mountains. This
Scandinavia through the continental route geographical division probably stems from
(Myhre, 1993: 189 and citations therein). at least the Viking Age (Skre, 2014:
While there are indications that the 34–35). Apart from two finds from
continental route to southern England Farmen and Svennevik, the area ‘east of
may have been known, I follow Ashby the mountains’ is remarkably lacking in
(2009: 27) in believing that ‘we still lack early Insular finds. The overall distribution
the smoking gun’ of early contact between pattern clearly strengthens the impression
Norway and the Insular world of northern that these objects reached Norway along a
Britain and Ireland. This calls for a revi- direct route over the North Sea, rather
sion or certainly a modification in the than via Denmark and continental
characterisation of the earliest, direct Europe. This is further supported by the
Norse activities. The following section lack of early finds of Insular metalwork
focuses on the geographical distribution of from Denmark (see Baastrup, 2013).
the Norwegian material, acknowledging The sailing route which connected the
the revised status of other archaeological lands north of the mountains was called
evidence for early contact in an attempt to Nordvegr, ‘the northern way’ and stretched
search for and propose a model of for more than 1000 km from Rogaland in
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 533
the south-west to Lofoten, north of the supply’ of ‘Mostadmarka’ type whetstones
Arctic circle (Skre, 2014: 35). In this part from Trøndelag to markets in southern
of Scandinavia, seafarers mastered ‘ship- Scandinavia from at least the early eighth
building, seamanship and naval warfare to century. These results also suggest increas-
a level that was difficult to match for ing economic activity in the North Sea
anyone in Northern Europe’ (Skre, 2014: area which drew large parts of Norway
43). The most northerly find in our finds into supra-regional networks in the
group, a bowl from a cemetery at Ytre decades before and after the first recorded
Kvarøy (Figure 7), is located just to the Viking attacks (as underlined by Myhre,
south of where the traveller Othere, who 1993, and Baug et al., 2018). Frisian
visited the court of King Alfred in the late Tating ware is found as far north as Borg
ninth century, is reported to have come in Lofoten (Holand, 2003: 203–09), and
from (Storli, 2007: 81–84). This may also seventh- and eighth-century Frankish
be one of the earliest finds in the current coins were recently recovered in excava-
study, based on the early type of decorated tions at Ranheim, Trøndelag (Grønnesby
sword (Petersen special type 1) found & Heen-Pettersen, 2015: 176). Further,
together with the bowl in a plough furrow. the Skei burial mentioned earlier con-
The sword is discussed by Vinsrygg (1979: tained fragments of rare Frankish textiles
67–69), who has identified it as a probable as well as a Berdal 1A brooch probably
import from the Frankish Rhine area and produced in Ribe (Stenvik, 2001: 31–37).
suggests a deposition date towards the Through such long-distance voyages,
middle or late eighth century. This date Scandinavians along the Nordvegr became
fits well with the other eleven graves from well aware of the Insular lands, either
this cemetery which are typologically dated first-hand (as demonstrated by the inci-
from the late sixth to the end of the dent in Dorset, possibly carried out by men
eighth century (Vinsrygg, 1979: tables I– from Hordaland), or through information
VIII). Further imported finds from Ytre gained second-hand on their journeys to
Kvarøy included cowry shells from the continental Europe. This activity not only
Maldives, a piece of gold-plated metal- moved goods, it also facilitated the move-
work with a Latin inscription, as well as ment of knowledge and improved naviga-
beads and brooches probably produced in tional ability, which ultimately may have
southern Scandinavians towns such as encouraged voyages of exploration further
Ribe and Birka (Vinsrygg, 1979: 67–70; west over the sea (see Sindbæk, 2011:
Sindbæk, 2011: 58–59). These finds show 58–59).
that the population of a small northern
Norwegian island had the means, seafaring
skills and connections to acquire objects ENVIRONMENTAL KNOWLEDGE AND THE
from far-away places. EARLIEST NORTH SEA CROSSINGS
The early maritime mobility of these
parts of Norway is further emphasized by An awareness of the Insular land through
the presence of reindeer antler, used for increased interaction with continental
comb making which was recovered from Europe would not have been enough to
early town layers in Ribe, indicating the transform the North Sea passage from a
existence of direct trade links already from body of water to ‘the highway to the Irish
the late eighth century (Ashby et al., Sea’ (to borrow an expression used by
2015). Likewise, Baug et al. (2018) have Barrett, 2010: 297). This process also
recently shown how there was a ‘steady involved a phase where people along the
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19534 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Nordvegr started to travel in unfamiliar to Sindbæk’s concept of ‘routinisation’ in
maritime environments and, therefore, had the Viking Age, which emphasizes how
to acquire and make use of new environ- establishing geographical routes was very
mental knowledge. This issue is often much a matter of social practice that had
implied in discussions concerning the to be experienced and ‘worked out’
earliest Viking activity but is rarely consid- (Sindbæk, 2005: 32, 274–75).
ered as a primary factor in the origin of For Scandinavians in the eighth and
the Viking Age. Rockman (2003: 4–9) has early ninth centuries, expeditions to the
emphasized the need to examine the west must have been daunting experiences,
importance of different types of environ- when ‘relatively small open vessels, in the
mental knowledge when constructing beginning probably with quite limited
general models of movement in archaeo- ability to survive severe weather, carried
logical research; and, in the following, I fairly small groups of men with few provi-
will consider the importance of two of sions’ (Bill, 2010: 38). The passage from
these aspects: locational and social knowl- western Norway to the Northern Isles is
edge (Rockman, 2003: 13–14). While pri- approximately 170 nautical miles long and,
marily developed as a tool in colonisation with the use of sail in good weather condi-
archaeology, a modified version of this tions, the crossing could have taken a day
model may prove fruitful as a framework or two (Wamers, 1998: 52). The question
for conceptualizing the nature of the earli- of when the sail was adopted in the Norse
est North Sea crossings. homelands and how this affected the
Locational knowledge refers to knowl- beginning of the earliest overseas voyages
edge of the spatial and physical character- has been hotly debated. Some scholars
istics of new landscapes and particular support the idea that sails were used in
resources present in new environments. It Scandinavia long before the Viking Age,
includes the ability to find places and while a mid to late eighth-century date
resources again after their initial discovery has been the generally accepted opinion
(Rockman, 2003: 4–5). For the earliest (see Bill, 2010; Westerdal, 2015: 18). One
Viking raiders, this included locational of the two vessels discovered at Salme in
information of desired resources and Estonia in 2008 and 2010, dates to
favourable locations to attack, such as around AD 750 and is the earliest evidence
lightly defended places with accumulated of a combined rowing/sailing vessel used
portable wealth and potential slaves. It by the Scandinavians (Price et al., 2016).
also comprised the right maritime skills For Norway, the use of sail is not archae-
and nautical knowledge needed to cross ologically attested before the Oseberg ship
the North Sea and move around in the which was constructed in AD 820 (Bill,
challenging coastal waters of the Northern 2010: 27–28), although it is unlikely to
British Isles. Locational knowledge is have been the first sailing vessel in
closely linked to social knowledge, where Norwegian waters. Nevertheless, the intro-
the latter may be understood as the pro- duction of the sail and developments in
cesses and experiences that serve as a shipbuilding technology during the Viking
means of transforming unfamiliar environ- Age in this setting should be regarded as
ments into a social landscape, for instance improvements and adaptions in response
through the attribution of names, to new uses rather than the result of revo-
meaning, and experiences to landscapes lutionary inventions (Barrett, 2010: 290).
features in a new environment (Rockman, While Denmark and continental
2003: 5–7). This approach is comparable Europe could largely be reached by sea
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 535
passages in sight of land, the situation was reefs (Crawford, 1987: 19–23). Some of
quite different when crossing the open the dangers of sailing in northern waters
North Sea, where land could at times are expressed in a number of eleventh- to
remain out of sight for days. Undertaking thirteenth-century poems and sagas which
such a journey represented a far greater describe the hazardous conditions facing
risk and required different skills and seafarers, as well as the wrecks of ships
methods for estimating a ship’s position and ships caught in storms (see Jesch,
and speed, such as latitude sailing achieved 2015). For instance, the waters of the
by using the sun and the stars to estimate southern tip of Shetland are known as
direction. Successful landings and return Dynrøst (roaring whirlpool), where tidal
voyages also involved knowledge of the currents and strong winds have caused dif-
northerly coastline and the behaviours of ficulties for many sailors. According to
the North Sea currents to avoid drifting The Saga of Håkon Håkonsson, this is
off course or arriving in hostile environ- where Harald Olavsson, King of Man,
ments (Van de Noort, 2011: 141). This and his bride Cecilia (the daughter of
was very much a cognitive and personal King Håkon Håkonsson) probably
experience: ‘Memorized characteristics of drowned when their ship was lost in AD
coasts and waters, helped along by 1248 (HHS: 295, chp. 261). The sea-
descriptive toponyms, were essential navi- farers who sailed south from Orkney to
gation aids, and pilots with local knowl- mainland Scotland also had to avoid the
edge were always valuable’ (Bill, 2008: whirlpool Svelkie in the Pentland Firth,
178–79). This practice is especially visible one of the most powerful tidal currents in
in Orkney and mainland Scotland, where the world. Many ships are known to have
a large number of Norse landmarks are been lost there, possibly also that of Earl
named after their distinctive features Håkon of Lade, which The Saga of Olaf
visible from the sea (see Jesch, 2009 for Haraldsson tells us disappeared in this
examples). Many of these probably reflect area when returning to Norway from
‘the voyages that preceded settlement’ and England in AD 1029 (Crawford, 1987:
expresses the visual perception and geo- 21; OHS, chp. 184).
graphical knowledge of the early Norse Without doubt, there must have been
seafarers (Jesch, 2009: 78). Maritime- many other Scandinavians who met a
oriented communities, such as the similar fate along the coasts of Britain and
Nordvegr, must have been especially recep- Ireland, and the success of the earliest wave
tive to the cognitive character of such of Vikings must have depended on an intim-
environmental learning (Bill, 2008: 179; ate knowledge of the maritime landscape
Van de Noort, 2011: 136–42). along the northern coastline. Wayfinding
The North Sea was very much a fluctu- based on such cognitive mapping was not a
ating and unpredictable force, which was skill acquired overnight, but emerged over
given an ‘other-than-human’ agency with time as a dynamic process where new infor-
its own will, intentions, and emotions mation was gradually added in the minds of
(Van de Noort, 2011: 231–33). After individuals (see Golledge, 2003: 31–33).
navigating this open seascape, the shortest Consequently, and following Rockman
and most direct route would take the (2003: 4–5) and Sindbæk (2005: 30–33), as
Norwegian seafarers to the archipelagic more knowledge was accumulated and
waters of Shetland or Orkney, an area natural features in the new land named and
with persistent sea fogs, strong tidal cur- understood, the journey became routinized
rents, and many skerries and submerged and the Insular land was gradually
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19536 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
transformed from an unfamiliar territory to a complete the return journey, or indeed to
socialized landscape. make it to the next target.’
When constructing a model of maritime
movement, these observations may be for-
A revised model of movement malized, although somewhat simplified, as
a suggested process involving three main
Do the observations made above allow us to stages:
propose a revised model of movement and
maritime communication for the earliest 1. Information stage: Seafarers along the
voyages to northern Britain and Ireland? Nordvegr became increasingly informed
First, regarding chronology, it is clear about the Insular land on their journeys
that we still lack the methods and conclu- to markets further south in Scandinavia
sive archaeological material that would and continental Europe (around ad
provide a fine dating of the earliest evidence 750/770)
of Viking North Sea crossings. However, it 2. Environmental learning: Consequently,
is argued here that the revised status of the this activity triggered maritime expan-
‘reindeer comb evidence’ should be incorpo- sion, ultimately leading to voyages of
rated into a current model of contact. exploration further west over the sea,
Second, concerning the importance of where some seafarers gained first-hand
maritime communication, the distribution experience with the sea routes and mari-
analysis has shown that most of the early time landscape along northern Britain
Insular finds are found in areas along the and Ireland (around ad 770/790)
Nordvegr, which indicates early maritime 3. The earliest recorded raids: The attack
mobility and sometimes early links with on Lindisfarne and other targets off
urban networks further south in the coast of Ireland and Britain from
Scandinavia. This observation is in accord- AD 793 onwards could only have hap-
ance with Sindbæk’s (2011) and Baug pened after a period of reconnaissance
et al.’s (2018) suggestions that pre-Viking and preparation. This necessarily
journeys to such urban markets may have involved a level of a priori environmen-
facilitated the movement of knowledge tal knowledge and perhaps also a con-
and improved maritime mobility, which ceptual ‘conquest’ of the open seascape.
ultimately led to the Viking expansion.
Finally, it has been argued here that the While the nature of the second phase of
earliest recorded Viking attacks were only ‘environmental learning’ would leave few
possible after a phase in which people traces in the archaeological material, it also
along the Nordvegr had acquired a suffi- opens the possibility that some of the
cient level of environmental knowledge to earliest Insular metalwork may have
navigate in new seascapes and coastal reached Norway as a result of such
environments. It also included the ability contact, presuming that this stage could
to re-locate places with accumulated involve small-scale exchange or even
wealth and resources after their initial dis- plunder. While clearly favouring the
covery. As Purcell (2015, 54) puts it, the notion of pre-Lindisfarne communication,
questions involved were ‘where the target this model does however not suggest that
sites were in relation to one another; how there was a long period of well-established
to get there; how long it would take; what migration and trade between Norway and
supplies were necessary to conduct the the northern Insular areas from as far back
attack and to ensure sufficient resources to as the early to mid-eighth century.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 537
Through these early voyages, seafarers desire to explore’ (Dugmore et al., 2010:
developed the necessary environmental 213). As shown by the distribution of the
knowledge, which, in addition to a range earliest Insular finds from Norway, such
of social and political causes (see Barrett, motivation seems to have been particularly
2010; Ashby, 2015; Baug et al, 2018 for strong amongst the seafaring communities
recent summaries or discussions), must along the Nordvegr.
have been a vital precondition for the
successful attacks from the last decade of
the eighth century onwards. These experi- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ences were materialized in distinctive
foreign goods brought back to the Norse I am most grateful to the four anonymous
homelands, creating a visual distinction referees for their constructive and useful
between families involved in overseas ven- feedback, and to Martin Callanan, Unn
tures and others within their community Pedersen, Randi Bjørshol Wærdahl and
(Aannestad, 2015). Philip Wood for their valuable help in
commenting on the original draft of the
paper.
Concluding thoughts
REFERENCES
While this article has proposed an inter-
action model which opens up a period of Primary sources
Pre-Viking contact, it is primarily with
the first recorded raids from AD 793 HHS = Håkon Håkonssons Saga, by Sturla
onwards, that the Viking activity on Porðarson. Translated and revised by
Insular land becomes visible. Indeed, Anne Holtsmark (2008). Trondheim:
much of our modern image of the earliest Aschehough & Co.
OHS = The Olaf Haraldsson Saga. In: Snorre
interaction across the North Sea is affected Sturluson, Snorres Kongesagaer (Heimskringla).
by the numerous references to the devasta- Translated and revised by Anne Holtsmark
tion and chaos caused by ‘Gentiles’, & Didrik Seip (1985). Gjøvik: Gyldendahl.
‘Northmen’ and ‘Danes’ in the late eight
and early ninth centuries. However, the
written sources concerning the ‘earliest Secondary sources
wave’ of Viking activity give the impres-
Aannestad, H. L. 2015. Transformasjoner.
sion of well-organized attacks were at least Omforming og bruk av importerte gjen-
some of the crewmembers must have had stander i vikingtid. Unpublished PhD dis-
first-hand experience with the sea route sertation, Oslo University.
across the North Sea, the northerly coast- Ashby, S.P. 2009. Combs, Contact and
line and favourable locations to attack. As Chronology: Reconsidering Hair Combs
in Early-Historic and Viking-Age Atlantic
such, the success of the earliest raids was
Scotland. Medieval Archaeology, 53: 1–33.
not purely the result of superior warfare https://doi.org/10.1179/007660909X1245
techniques and ship technology, but also 7506806081
very much a matter of maritime mobility Ashby, S.P. 2015, What really caused the
and environmental knowledge where Viking Age? The social content of raiding
open-sea crossings were encouraged by and exploration. Archaeological Dialogues,
22: 89-106. https://doi.org/10.1017/
‘motivation and the related human factors S1380203815000112
such as people’s knowledge of the sea, Ashby, S.P., Coutu, A.N. & Sindbæk, S.M.
their skills, willingness to embrace risk and 2015. Urban Networks and Arctic
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19538 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Outlands: Craft Specialists and Reindeer First Colonizers of the Faroe Islands.
Antler in Viking Towns. European Journal Quaternary Science Review, 77: 228–32.
of Archaeology, 18: 679–704. https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.
org/10.1179/1461957115Y.0000000003 06.011
Baastrup, M.P. 2013. Continental and Insular Crawford, B. 1987. Scotland in the Early
Imports in Viking Age Denmark, Middle Ages 2: Scandinavian Scotland.
Distribution and circulation. Zeitschrift für Leicester: Leicester University Press.
Archäologie des Mittelalters, 41: 85–205. Downham, C. 2000. An Imaginary Viking
Bakka, E. 1973. Eit gravfunn frå Fosse i Raid on Skye in 795? Scottish Gaelic
Meland, Hordaland og det arkeologiske Studies, 20: 192–96.
periodskiljet mellom merovingertid og Downham, C. 2017. The Earliest Viking
vikingtid. Suomen Muinaisnuistoyhdistyksen Activity in England? The English Historical
Aikakauskirja, 75: 9–17. Review, 132: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.
Ballin Smith, B. 2007. Norwick: Shetland’s 1093/ehr/cex066
First Viking settlement? In: B.B. Smith, Dugmore, A., Casely, A.F., Keller, C. &
S. Taylor & G. Williams, eds. West Over Mcgovern, T.H. 2010. Conceptual
Sea: Studies in Scandinavian Sea-borne Modelling of Seafaring, Climate and
Expansion and Settlement before 1300. Early European Exploration and
Leiden: Brill, pp. 287–98. Settlement of the North Atlantic Islands.
Barrett, J.H. 2008. The Norse in Scotland. In: In: A. Anderson, J.H. Barrett & K.V.
S. Brink & N. Price, eds. The Viking Boyle, eds. The Global Origins and
World. London & New York: Routledge, Development of Seafaring. Cambridge:
pp. 411–27. McDonald Institute for Archaeological
Barrett, J.H. 2010. Rounding up the Usual Research, pp. 213–28.
Suspects: Causation and the Viking Age Dumville, D.N. 2008. Vikings in Insular
Diaspora. In: A. Anderson, J.H. Barrett & Chronicling. In: S. Brink & N. Price, eds.
K.V. Boyle, eds. The Global Origins and The Viking World. London & New York:
Development of Seafaring. Cambridge: Routledge, pp. 350–67.
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Feveile, C. & Jensen, S. 2000. Ribe in the 8th
Research, pp. 289–302. and 9th Century: A Contribution to the
Baug, I., Skre, D., Heldal, T. & Ø.J. Jansen. Archaeological Chronology of North
2018. The Beginning of the Viking Age Western Europe. Acta Archaeologica, 71:
in the West. Journal of Maritime 9–24.
Archaeology (2018). https://doi.org/10. Gjessing, G. 1934. Studier i norsk merovinger-
1007/s11457-018-9221-3 tid. Kronologi og oldsakformer. Oslo: Det
Bill, J. 2008. Viking Ships and the Sea. In: S. Norske Videnskaps-Akademi.
Brink & N. Price, eds. The Viking World. Glørstad, Z.T. & Røstad, I.M. 2015. Mot en
London & New York: Routledge, pp. ny tid? Merovingertidens ryggknapp-
170–80. spenner som uttrykk for endring og
Bill, J. 2010. Viking Age Ships and Seafaring erindring. In: M. Vedeler & I. M. Røstad,
in the West. In: I.S. Klæsøe, ed. Viking eds. Smykker. Personlig pynt i kulturhistorisk
Trade and Settlement in Continental lys. Trondheim: Museumsforlaget, pp.
Western Europe. Copenhagen: Museum 181–210.
Tusculanum Press, pp. 19–42. Golledge, R. 2003. Human Wayfinding and
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2013. Recent and Planned Cognitive Maps. In: M. Rockman & J.
Developments of the Program OxCal. Steele, eds. Colonization of Unfamiliar
Radiocarbon 55: 720–30. https://doi.org/ Landscapes: The Archaeology of Adaption.
10.1017/S0033822200057878 London: Routledge, pp. 44–58.
Callmer, J. 1977. Trade Beads and Bead Trade Grønnesby, G. & Heen-Pettersen, A. 2015.
in Scandinavia ca. 800–1000 AD (Acta Gården i yngre jernalder – et spørsmål om
Archaeologica Lundensia Series, 40). erkjennelse? Belyst ved utgravningen av et
Bonn: Rudlf Habelt. yngre jernalders gårdstun på Ranheim.
Church, M.J., Arge, S.V., Ascough, P.L., Viking, 169–88.
Bond, J.M., Cook, G.T., Dockrill, S.J. Heen-Pettersen, A.M & Murray, G. 2018. An
et al. 2013. The Vikings Were Not the Insular Reliquary from Melhus: The
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19Heen-Pettersen – The Earliest Wave of Viking Activity? 539
Significance of Insular Ecclesiastical Myhre, B. 2000. The Early Viking Age in
Material in Early Viking-Age Norway. Norway. Acta Archaeologica, 71: 35–47.
Medieval Archaeology, 62: 52–81. https:// Ørsnes, M. 1966. Form og stil i
doi.org/10.1080/00766097.2018.1451522 Sydskandinaviens yngre germanske jernalder
Hines, J. 1992. The Scandinavian Character of (Nationalmuseets skrifter, Arkæologisk-
Anglian England: An Update. In: M.O.H historisk række 11). København:
Carver, ed. The Age of Sutton Hoo. Nationalmuseets.
Woodbridge: Boydell Press, pp. 315–29. Owen, O. 2004. The Scar Boat Burial – and
Hines, J. 1996. Tidlig kontakt over Nordsjøen the Missing Decades of the Early Viking
og de baken –forliggende årsaker. In: J.F. Age in Orkney and Shetland. In: J.
Kroger & H. Naley, eds. Nordsjøen: Adams & K. Holman, eds. Scandinavia
Handel, Religion og Politikk. Stavanger: and Europe 800–1350. Contact, Conflict
Dreyer Bok, pp. 19–30. and Coexistence. Turnhout: Brepols, pp.
Holand, I. 2003. Pottery. In: G.S. Munch, O. 3–34.
S. Johansen & E. Roesdahl, eds. Borg in Petersen, J. 1928. Vikingtidens smykker.
Lofoten. A Chieftain’s Farm in North Stavanger: Dreyers grafiske anstalt.
Norway. Trondheim: Tapir Academic Price, T., Peets, J., Allmäe, R., Maldre, L. &
Press. pp. 199–213. Oras, E. 2016. Isotopic Provenancing of
Jansson, I. 1985. Ovala spännbuclor, En studie the Salme Ship Burials in Pre-Viking Age
av vikingtidas standartssmycken med utgan- Estonia. Antiquity, 90: 1022–37. https://
gaspunkt från Björkö-fynden. Uppsala: doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2016.106
Institutionen för arkeologi. Purcell, E. 2015. The First Generation in
Jesch, J. 2009. Naming and Narratives: Ireland, 795–812: Viking Raids and
Exploration and Imagination in the Norse Viking Bases? In: H.B. Clarke & R.
Voyages Westwards. In: K. Dekker, K. Johnson, eds. The Vikings in Ireland and
Olsen & T. Hofstra, eds. The Worlds of Beyond. Before and After the Battle of
Travellers. Exploration and Imagination. Clontarf. Dublin: Four Courts, pp. 41–55.
Leuven: Peeters, pp. 61–80. Reimer, P.J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Warren
Jesch, J. 2015. The Threatening Wave: Norse Beck, J., Blackwell, P.G., Bronk
Poetry and the Scottish Isles. In: J.H. Ramsey, C., et al., 2013. IntCal13 and
Barrett & S.J. Gibbons, eds. Maritime Marine13 Radiocarbon Age Calibration
Societies of the Viking and Medieval World. Curves 0–50,000 Years cal BP.
Wakefield: Maney, pp. 320–32. Radiocarbon, 55: 1869–87. https://doi.org/
Klæsøe, I.S. 1999. Vikingetidens kronologi – 10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16947
en nybearbejdning af det arkærlogiske Rockman, M. 2003. Knowledge and Learning
materiale. Aarbøger for Nordisk in the Archaeology of Colonization. In:
Oldkyndighed og Historie, 1997: 89–142. M. Rockman & J. Steele, eds.
Morris, C.D. 1998. Raiders, Traders and Colonization of Unfamiliar Landscapes: The
Settlers: The Early Viking Age in Archaeology of Adaption. London:
Scotland. In: H.B. Clarke, M. Ní Routledge, pp. 3–24.
Mhaonaigh & R. Ó Floinn, eds. Ireland Rundkvist, M. 2010. Domed Oblong
and Scandinavia in the Early Viking Age. Brooches of Vendel Period Scandinavia.
Dublin: Four Courts, pp. 73–103. Uppåkrastudier, 11: 127–80.
Myhre, B. 1993. The Beginning of the Viking Shetelig, H. 1927. Tidsbestemmelser i viking-
Age – Some Current Archaeological tidens stilhistorie. In: C.A. Nordman, ed.
Problems. In: A. Faulkes & R. Perkins, Nordiska arkeologmøtet i Helsingfors 1925.
eds. Viking Revelations. Birmingham: Helsinki: Suomen Aikakauskirja, pp.
Viking Society for Northern Research, pp. 106-12.
182–216. Sindbæk, S. 2005. Ruter og rutinisering.
Myhre, B. 1998. The Archaeology of the Vikingtidens fjernhandel i Nordeuropa.
Early Viking Age in Norway. In: H.B. København: Multivers.
Clarke, M. Ní Mhaonaigh & R. Ó Sindbæk, S. 2011. Silver Economies and
Floinn, eds. Ireland and Scandinavia in the Social Ties: Long-Distance Interaction,
Early Viking Age. Dublin: Four Courts, Long-term Investment – and Why the
pp. 3–36. Viking Age Happened. In: J. Graham-
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19540 European Journal of Archaeology 22 (4) 2019
Campbell, S.M. Sindbæk & G. Williams, of Norway. In: H.B. Clarke, M. Ní
eds. Silver Economies, Monetisation and Mhaonaigh & R. Ó Floinn, eds. Ireland
Society in Scandinavia, AD 800–1100. Aarhus: and Scandinavia in the Early Viking Age.
Aarhus University Press, pp. 41–66. Dublin: Four Courts, pp. 36–72.
Skre, D. 2014. Norðvegr – Norway: From Weber, B. 1994. Iron Age Combs: Analyses
Sailing Route to Kingdom. European of Raw Material. In: B. Ambrosiani & H.
Review, 22: 34–44. https://doi.org/10. Clarke, eds. Developments Around the
1017/S1062798713000604 Baltic and the North Sea in the Viking Age.
Solli, B. 1996. Narratives of Encountering Stockholm: Birka Project for the Swedish
Religions: On the Christianization of the National Heritage Board, pp. 190–93.
Norse Around AD 900–1000. Norwegian Weber, B. 1996. Handel mellom Norge og
Archaeological Review, 29: 89–113. Orknøyene før norrøn bosetning? In: J.F.
Stenvik, L.F. 2001. Skei - et maktsenter frem Kroger & H. Naley, eds. Nordsjøen:
fra skyggen. Trondheim: Tapir Handel, Religion og Politikk. Stavanger:
Akademiske Forlag. Dreyer Bok, pp. 31–40.
Storli, I. 2007. Othere and his World – A Westerdahl, C. 2015. Sails and the Cognitive
Contemporary Perspective. In: J. Bately & Roles of Viking Age Ships. In: J.H.
A. Englert, eds. Ohthere’s Voyages: A Late Barrett & S.J. Gibbons, eds. Maritime
9th-Century Account of Voyages along the Societies of the Viking and Medieval World.
Coasts of Norway and Denmark and its Wakefield: Maney, pp. 14–24.
Cultural Context. Roskilde: Viking Ships
Museum, pp. 76–99.
Van de Noort, R. 2011. North Sea
Archaeologists. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Vinsrygg, S. 1979. Merovingartid i Nord-
Noreg. Studie i utvalt materiale frå grav-
funn. Unpublished Masters dissertation, Aina Heen-Pettersen is a PhD student in
Bergen University. the Department of Historical Studies,
Von Holstein, I.C.C., Ashby, S.P., van Trondheim University in Norway. Her
Doorn, N.L., Sachs, S.M., Buckley, M., research focuses on Insular-Scandinavian
Meiri, M. et al. 2014. Searching for
interaction in the Viking Age and the use
Scandinavians in pre-Viking Scotland:
Molecular Fingerprinting of Early of Insular artefacts after they arrived in the
Medieval Combs. Journal of Archaeological Norse homelands.
Science, 41: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jas.2013.07.026 Address: Aina Margrethe Heen-Pettersen,
Wamers, E. 1985. Insularer Metallschmuck in Department of Historical Studies, The
wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas.
Neumunster: Wachholtz. Norwegian University of Science and
Wamers, E. 1998. Insular Finds in Viking Technology, Trondheim, Norway. [email:
Age Scandinavia and the State Formation aina.pettersen@ntnu.no]
Une première vague d’activité viking ? Un réexamen de données norvégiennes
Un groupe de sépultures en Norvège de l’époque viking précoce contenant des objets en métal de type
insulaire sert de base à la présente étude sur la chronologie et la nature des premières activités des
Vikings. La répartition géographique de ce matériel et l’application de concepts liés aux connaissance
sociales et aux connaissances des lieux permet de mettre l’accent sur l’importance de la mise en place de
paysages cognitifs facilitant l’expansion viking. L’auteur soutient que les premières attaques vikings
connues n’ont été possibles qu’à la suite d’une phase dans laquelle les navigateurs scandinaves avaient
acquis un niveau suffisant de connaissances sur l’environnement maritime pour pouvoir se déplacer dans
de nouveaux paysages marins et environnements côtiers. Ce modèle d’interaction permet de penser que
certains objets précoces de type insulaire découverts en Norvège soient parvenus en Norvège au terme
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 46.4.80.155, on 31 Oct 2021 at 15:29:59, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/eaa.2019.19You can also read
