5.5 Skuldelev 5

Kapitel 5-5.qxd 4/1/02 8:55 PM Side 1 5.5 Skuldelev 5 5.5.1 Excavation • 246 5.5.3 Reconstruction of the ship in torso • 264 Position in the barrier • 246 Models • 264 State of preservation • 246 Lines and torso-drawing • 266 Excavation, raising and documentation • 247 Type and size of the ship • 266 5.5.2 Description of the preserved parts 5.5.4 Analysis of the ship from construction of the ship • 250 to scuttling • 269 The keel • 250 Reused parts and repairs • 269 Stems • 251 The construction phase • 273 Planking • 251 The stem • 273 Framing system • 255 Planking • 273 The floor timbers • 255 Internal timbers • 273 Bitis, beams, knees and stringers • 257 Design principles • 273 Other parts of the framing system • 259 Wear and other traces from the active use Hull parts related to propulsion, of the ship • 274 steering and equipment • 261 The scuttling and subsequent disintegration • 274 The rudder • 261 5 5 5 274 The keelson • 261 . Dating • Rigging details • 262 5 5 6 276 Oarports and shield-rack • 262 . General conclusion and parallels • Summary of the Skuldelev 5 evidence • 276 Parallels in other Scandinavian finds • 277 245 Kapitel 5-5.qxd 4/1/02 9:01 PM Side 2 5.5.1 Excavation could probably not be moved and consequently had to be left on the spot where it had run aground. The fact that the Position in the barrier drain-plug was not found in position aft in the garboard The wreck Skuldelev 5 was situated along the northern edge strake indicates that the ship had eventually been aban- of the Peberrenden channel, oriented with the bow pointing doned here deliberately. north-northwest, ca 60o offset in relation to the orientation The slender hull of the ship had come to rest on the of the main part of the barrier formed by Wrecks 1, 2 and 3 slope, with the midship part and the after end of the keel (Fig. 1). The ship had been pressed against the irregular and the remaining parts of the starboard planking lying contours of the channel’s sloping bank, so it lay in a tilted higher and more exposed, 0.5-1.0 m below the present sea position with its port planking downslope. This deposition level. The stem of the ship was found in situ, ca 1.5 m deeper, had caused several of the stones inside the ship to roll out level with the strakes of the port planking (cf Fig. 2). of the hull into the deeper part of the channel, and the planking itself to split open (Figs 2-3). State of preservation There would have been little use for the ship as part of As found, the remains of the ship consisted of the keel and the barrier in this position, since it was oriented along the fore stem, most of the planking to port, almost all of the course of the channel rather than across it. The ship would floor timbers, and several of the other framing elements, as have been more useful if it had been positioned directly in well as a small segment of the starboard planking. Within line with Skuldelev 3 and 1, in order to close the northern the excavated area of the cofferdam, only a few loose parts passage over the threshold (cf Fig. 1). Consequently, it is of this ship were found outside the coherent part of the likely that Skuldelev 5 with its load of stones had run hull. aground at the highest part of the glacial core just before it As a result of the ship’s strong list to port after its sink- was to be positioned for scuttling in line with the other ing, the upper parts of the starboard side were entirely lost, wrecks. As the ship was old, weak, and heavily loaded, it having been exposed to currents and ice-drift as well as to Fig. 1. The position of Skuldelev 5 in relation to the natural barrier (the shaded areas) rising as a threshold from the bottom of the Peberrenden channel (the white area). 246 5.5 • Skuldelev 5 Kapitel 5-5.qxd 4/1/02 9:01 PM Side 3 possible salvaging activities, leading to their disintegration covered by sediments (Fig. 5). Before the iron fastenings or removal at an early stage. Afterwards, sediments started corroded, the beams and knees were exposed to decay and building up in the lower part of the hull, leaving the they eventually also settled in the sediments collecting remaining starboard planks and frames as well as the keel- inside the wreck. son protruding along the upper edge of the slope, exposed Some years after the sinking of Skuldelev 5, another ves- to biological decay and erosion (Fig. 4). sel, Skuldelev 6, was scuttled in such a way that it covered On the port side, the sheerstrake and other parts of the a 3 m-broad part of Skuldelev 5 forward of amidships. In upper planking became the deepest part of the wreck. The this way, the decay of the covered starboard planking of forward part of these strakes broke off and probably drifted Skuldelev 5 was effectively stopped, but degradation con- away at an early stage in the disintegration of the ship. This tinued in those areas of the planking that lay exposed, until no doubt happened as the stone-filled ship settled on the these parts of the wreck were eventually covered by a thin slope and some of the stones rolled down and out of this layer of sediment. area of the hull. During the excavation, as many as twelve boulders of sizes up to 60 cm across were recorded just Excavation, raising and documentation below the ship in this area. These apparently came from the Skuldelev 5 was found in 1959 during an attempt to deter- ship, as they were embedded in marine layers of sand and mine the total area of the barrier. Two exploratory trenches shells which otherwise contained no stones of this character were cut within the stone-filled area to the north of (cf Figs 2-3). Skuldelev 1. Here, parts of a ‘fifth’ wreck (still considering The remaining upper planking of the port side of the ‘Wreck 4’ as a separate ship) were exposed, one section ca ship did not break down initially, but continued to pro- 2 m long aft at the frames 5A-7A and a depth of water of trude from the sloping bank of the channel, ca 0.8 m below 1.0-1.5 m, and another small area amidships. Simul- Fig. 2. Skuldelev 5. Photogram- metrically recorded plan of the the level of the keel. Here the sixth and seventh strakes were taneously, the orientation of the wreck in a strong list excavated ship seen from above affected by biological decay for some time before their fas- towards south-west was then known and a few parts of the and from the channel-side tenings eventually loosened and they lay flat, soon to be framing system were removed. Before conservation they Excavation 247 Kapitel 5-5.qxd 4/1/02 9:02 PM Side 4 were recorded at a scale of 1:5 by Knud J. Krogh, but no further investigations were carried out prior to the excavation in 1962. From the plan prepared in 1959 of all the observations from the investigations in 1957-59 (cf Chapter 2, Fig. 12), the hull of Skuldelev 5 was estimated to have extended no further than to some point below Skuldelev 6, as no traces of the ship were found in a small trench on the northern side of that ship. Fortunately, the 1962-cofferdam was con- structed at a minimum distance of 5 m to the then-known position of the ships. Because of this, the excavation in 1962 could expose the full length of the hull including the stem, the forward edge of which was actually found 4.5 m to the north of the wreck Skuldelev 6 and covered by ca 1.5 m of sand. The complete excavation of Skuldelev 5 began on 18 July and was completed on 25 August, 1962. During this period the wreck of Skuldelev 6, lying on top of Skuldelev 5, also had to be excavated and partly removed in order for the hull below to be fully exposed (cf Fig. 3). The photogram- metrical survey was then made on 25 August. Starting on 30 August, all parts of the ship were removed in seven work- ing days, after they had been numbered from 2001 to 2124 and from 3001 to 3146. Several of the pieces were in many fragments and 270 units were collected in total. In the conservation workshop in Brede, Skuldelev 5 was the first ship to have its planks and timbers documented. The basic recording standards at a scale of 1:1 (cf Chapter 3.1) were established at the very beginning of this task, but the drafting foil chosen soon proved to be unstable. Therefore, the tracings made of the greater part of the planks of Skuldelev 5 had to be re-traced onto the poly- thene foil chosen for the remaining documentation work. In this process some of the details recorded in the first instance, such as a few rivet holes, may have been left out unintentionally. The initial recording of the cross-sections of planks was done by a documentation technique different from that of tracing the features of the planks directly by eye and was done sporadically in this ship in contrast to the process employed in the ships recorded at a later stage.

Load more