Logboats

From the discovery of the famous Ljubljana cargo ship of sewn construction onwards, excavated in 1890/1891 at the site of Brezov log near Lipe in the Ljubljansko barje (Ljubljana Moor), other important remains of capable watercrafts came to light in the Ljubljanica riverbed, in the area of ancient Nauportus (present-day Vrhnika, Slovenia) that provide physical evidence for the writings of ancient Greek geographers who report on large-scale waterborne cargo traffic between the Latin colony of Aquileia, on the one side, and the Transalpine Celts in the hinterland of the northern Adriatic and the peoples of the Danubian regions, on the other.
The book focus on the results of the preventive underwater research of the Ljubljanica riverbed conducted in 2015 at Vrhnika. This revealed an approximately 14.5 m long and 1.38 m wide oak logboat from the late 2nd c. BC, with repairs and features of presumed Mediterranean origin. These include the use of woollen textile soaked in resin for caulking of the joint between substituted half of bow and parent log as well as an unlocked mortice and tenon joint featuring on detached board of approximately the same age (but of yet unverified provenance). Excavations also partially exposed the wreck of a contemporary sewn cargo ship, with constructional details very similar to those of the Lipe (Ljubljana) ship that make it one of the earliest known representatives of the Northern Adriatic shipbuilding tradition. Both add to the important role that the trade and military post at Nauportus played in the transfer and innovation of naval technology at the end of prehistory and in the early period of the Italic/Roman presence in the region.

A logboat of the early Middle Ages has been found in summer 2001in the river-bed of the Po near Boretto (Reggio Emilia). The morphological features allows to identify the logboat with a floating-hull of a pontoon, a ferry, a floating-bridge or, possibly, a floating-mill.

In 1998, during works for the expansion of a railway station in San Rossore - Pisa, archeologists came across the ancient port of Pisa, used mainly during the Imperial Ages, -when due to repeated environmental events (floods) the port was destructed- but remains from Etruscan and Hellenistic period have also been found, the river Arno and its tributaries had been extensively used for transportation.
Innumerous artefacts related to the maritime and harbour life were discovered, as well as 16 river-going vessels, some whole and others in part. Several boats interpreted as Roman lintres -boats for inshore traffic, both rivers and lagoons- have been uncovered in the layers connected with the Middle Empire floods. A small boat (Barca F) falls within this category of minor boats; it has a flat bottom, with low, straight broadsides, which has moved with a perch or oars. Its research sheds more light on Portus Pisanus’ system, as well as on knowledge about fluvial transportation in Roman Ages.
Besides, the design of the Barca F directs our attention on the small boats still used in the marshy areas of Tuscan plain (such as in Fucecchio and San Miniato), which maybe proves a continuity of tradition and its influence by the local environment.
The Barca F makes part of the permanent exhibition of the new “Museum of Ships” in the Arsenali Medicei on the Arno embankments in Pisa.

"Original: POTOPLJENA PRETEKLOST, Arheologija vodnih okolij in raziskovanje podvodne kulturne dediščine v Sloveniji . Zbornik ob 128-letnici Dežmanovih raziskav Ljubljanice na Vrhniki (1884–2012)

Urednika / Editors: Andrej Gaspari, Miran Erič
Oblikovanje / Design: Luka Seme
Fotografija na naslovnici / Cover photograph by Milan Tomažin
Angleški prevodi / English translate: Andreja Maver
Lektoriranje / Proof-reading: Katja Paladin,
Multilingual Pro d.o.o.

© Didakta d.o.o., Radovljica, 2012
Za založbo Rudi Zaman
E-pošta založba@didakta.si
Spletna stran založbe www.didakta.si
Tisk / Printed by Grafika Soča, d.o.o.
Naklada / Printrun: 400

CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji
Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana
902(497.4)(082) 903/904(497.472)(082)
POTOPLJENA preteklost: arheologija vodnih okolij in raziskovanje podvodne kulturne dediščine v Sloveniji: zbornik ob 128-letnici Dežmanovih raziskav Ljubljanice na Vrhniki (1884-2012) / uredila Andrej Gaspari in Miran Erič ; [angleški prevodi Andreja Maver]. - Radovljica : Didakta, 2012 ISBN 978-961-261-251-1

1. Gaspari, Andrej
262228224

Naslovnica: Ena redkih evidentiranih arheoloških najdb iz Bohinjskega jezera je nedatiran čoln deblak, ki so ga odkrili potapljači Specialne enote Generalne policijske uprave junija 2001 blizu južne obale na globini 32 m (foto: M. Tomažin)

Cover: One of the rare registered archaeological finds from lake Bohinj is an undated logboat, found by divers of the General Police Directorate’s Special Unit in June, 2001, near the southern shore at the depth of 32 m (photo: M. Tomažin)"

Being one of the most ancient water going vessels known to man, the logboat, or ‘dugout canoe’, finds its origins in the Early Neolithic, with the first example of such dating to c. 6300 cal. B.C. These vessels are thought to have become a popular method of travel and hunting following the afforestation of central Europe (c. 8000 cal. B.C.), especially in flatter regions. In these areas, where waterfalls, and fast flowing water bodies were lesser encountered, long-distance boat journeys were possible without any major problems, meaning that larger, heavier vessels could be constructed, instead of the lighter and more delicate skin boats. The simplicity of the logboat’s design, its diversity, and its relatively low material cost, led to the vessel being popular throughout human history, constantly being optimised and adapted since its creation and still being found in use today. In archaeological terms, no more has the prevalence of such a vessel been seen than at the site of the Bronze Age settlement of Must Farm in Whittlesey, near Peterborough, where 9 transom built examples of these logboats have been discovered (www.1). At this site, all examples of logboats seemingly follows the wider British trend of the Bronze Age; that logboats were primarily built from Oak. With this trend in mind, this paper aims to answer the question – why was oak primarily used in the construction of logboats in Bronze Age Britain?

In an attempt to resolve this query, this study will consider findings from its key case study, Must Farm, alongside those from wider excavations. Furthermore, we will look at the properties of Oak itself; analysing, comparing & contrasting different factors regarding its effectiveness in the construction of these logboats.  It will also aim to analyse the overall workability of Oak within the construction of Bronze-Age vessels, using experimental archaeological investigations and extracting relevant findings regarding the time and cost effectiveness of Oak as a material. In essence, this paper aims to discover whether Oak is, in fact the most practical wood source available for such a purpose, within Bronze Age Britain and, if not, why it was the most widely used.

A dugout canoe was found in 2001 nearby Monticelli d'Ongina (PC), from Po river. Restored between 2006 and 2008 in Po Museum  (Pallavicino-Casali Castle), the dugout, unfortunately uncomplete, is similar to others found in Po valley rivers. It is possible to think the dugout, dated to VII-VIII Century AD, was part of a floating bridgeor nautical structures. Another dugout was found nearby Spinadesco (CR), from Po river, but was destroyed by fire during 2012.

Članak obrađuje čamce monoksile pronađene u Kupi u Sisku 1983. i 1992. godine. Datirani su od kraja starijeg željeznog doba do početka rimske vladavine na prostoru Siska. U radu se daje njihov opis, pokušava se odrediti njihova namjena i smjestiti u njihov kulturni kontekst. / The paper examines the logboats found in the Kupa river in Sisak in 1983 and 1992. The boats date back to the period from the end of the late Iron Age to the beginning of the Roman rule over this territory.

Every state or region on the eastern seaboard of North America has attempted to develop a typology for both pre-and post-contact archaeologically documented logboats. In many ways these typologies have not helped scholars understand the reasons for variation or change of this technology through time. A partial fault exists in the tendency of the senior literature to downplay the complexity of possible manufacturing sequence for logboats. Even recent scholarship has attempted to look at their hull form instead of the techniques used to build them. Much has been done to describe the building sequence of logboats in European, African, and Asian/ Pacific literature over the last three decades which has removed the conclusions based on biological racism of their being inferior watercraft. Rather than highlighting cultural features, the literature places emphasis on hull form, which may be more linked to the logboats construction from a single log, and the different waterways and environments it needed to traverse. The following section is a very condensed version of the works of Arnold, Crumlin-Pedersen, Hirte, Kegler, Leshikar, McGrail, and Mowat cited in the references of this work. Ethnographic data is drawn from many sources cited in the reference section; however, the work of Barbot, Kegler, Leshikar, and Meide are of importance. All of these studies have the advantage of not being bound to the paradigm that they are simply dugouts; that is, they are all made from trees felled and burnt and dug out with stone and shell tools only. There are consistent practices of contemporary Amerindian groups using expansion and extension practices pre-and post-contact with surviving groups still making them. However, expansion and extension in logboats, which is a global technology, is largely ignored by scholars of the Mid-Atlantic. The author, knowing the audience will not be familiar with this concept, here gives a brief description of the practices of making an expanded/-extended logboat. The core of logboat technology is the log, a fact reflected in the European words for these watercraft. In Dutch they are referred to as Boomstamkano, which means " tree trunk canoe. " In German literature they are referred to as Einbaum, which translates to " one log. " Regardless of where on the planet a logboat is built, and regardless of whether the tree is felled with fire, stone, copper, bronze, or iron tools, some constraints are forced upon the builder of a logboat by the material itself. In spite of the constraints a solid log generates, logboats are extremely complex and make up one of the most diverse groups of watercraft. Peoples who live in pre-industrial societies have a far more intimate relationship with natural materials than those that inhabit our detached postmodern world. In order to understand the expanded/-extended logboat we need to build one.

The dugout canoe was used across the Americas, and was possibly the most popular of all aboriginal watercraft. In its simplest form, the dugout is a clumsy watercraft, little more than a hollowed log; but skilled native craftsmen could transform a tree trunk into a massive, curved hull designed to move with incredible speed and to withstand very rough seas. The distribution of dugout canoes extends from the farthest reaches of Alaska along the northern Pacific coast and into California, from the Great Lakes south throughout the Mississippi basin and the Southeast; across Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean, and into the Amazon and along the northern Pacific coast of South America. Dugout canoes played vital roles in prehistoric and historic trade, food procurement, and warfare; they permitted regional networks of transportation, communication, and sociocultural interaction across the Americas. The very nature of this watercraft and its integral part in social development makes it a unique way for the archaeologist to view communities through time. This paper provides and overview of the dugout canoe in the New World, reviewing the archaeological, historical, and ethnographical literature, and presents regional and functional variations in dugout construction, structure, and sailing technology.

Curci in her dissertation from East Carolina University continued the tradition of trying to create a typology of logboats based upon hull form. While in her work looking at pre-and post-contact logboats in North Carolina, she admitted that the environment in which a logboat are used often dictates the hull form. She also in her dissertation conceded that the type of tree, the constraining material, is very important to hull form. In her work as well as most recent scholarship a distinctive issue has emerged. That is preservation and recording biases can often skew data analysis of logboats. Logboats which are often chance finds, are recovered by untrained personnel, which leads to data loss and rough handling. Due to this, by the time archaeologists are contacted, logboats often become distorted from drying, fragmented, or even modified by the people who find them. The recorded data recovered for logboat finds varies between each region of the logboat find due to North America's disparate data collection traditions, each region placing emphasis on different logboat features they consider to be markers of culture or technological importance. Often logboats are recorded by local vocational groups who do not have the resources to document construction features, repairs, and other data making in depth comparison impossible. Another inherent bias is a result of site formation processes. If a logboat has been expanded, when the logboat is discarded or lost, the hull becoming waterlogged may have a tendency to relax back to the C or U shaped cross-section it started out as before being manipulated by its builders. A recent thesis at Texas A & M University, which used similar methods to Jessica Lee Curci's was unable to find clear typological order in the logboats documented. Both of these attempts were very well framed studies, but the haphazard way in which data was collected by the original principal investigators makes any attempt to differentiate site formation processes, construction constraints, and the areas in which the logboats were used by the people who built them from the features that would define any concise technological or cultural tradition impossible. European scholars, while still examining hull form, have attempted to stress aspects of a logboats initial construction and repair. A move has been made in much of the European literature to document logboats heavily first, stressing data recovery, followed by the use of the data collection to look at how the ethnic groups present when it was constructed used it. While this type of analysis does not lend itself presently to the formation of large scale typologies, until we collect data of high consistent resolution we will never be able to tease out " identity " of the people who built them. While the concept that distinct ethnic groups have distinct technological or material culture traditions is entrenched in modern historical archaeology, the use of technology or certain classes of material culture to define ethnicity can only hint at identity. Boats by their very nature are tools; they are built for various purposes but enable contact with other groups

German - English - French
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Die Untersuchung der Holzartefakte von 13 Fundplätzen des Endmesolithikums und Frühneolithikums demonstriert die intensive Nutzung der marinen Ressourcen an der südwestlichen Ostseeküste. Der Fischfang mit stationären Anlagen, Reusen und Aalstechern war weit verbreitet. Weniger häufig wurde Fischfang mit Netzen oder die Angelfischerei betrieben. Durch Funde von Einbäumen und Paddeln in der Flachwasserzone ist der Gebrauch dieser Wasserfahrzeuge gut belegt. Weiterhin wurden Jagdgeräte wie Pfeil und Bogen oder Speere gefunden. Stiele für Stein- oder Geweihgeräte zeigen die Handhabung dieser Geräte.
Die Fischfanggeräte sind technisch weitgehend ausgereift und zeigen nur geringe Veränderungen.
Chronologische Entwicklungen sind lediglich für Paddel, kaum für Aalstechersprossen nachgewiesen. Kleine regionale Unterschiede werden durch die Nutzung anderer
Holzarten für die Herstellung von Aalstechersprossen und Reusen deutlich. Insgesamt kann für die Küstensiedlungen der Ertebølle-Kultur und des Frühneolithikums die Bevorzugung bestimmter, besonders gut geeigneter Holzarten für die Herstellung spezifischer Geräte und Gegenstände deutlich gezeigt werden.
Die Gleichförmigkeit der geraden Haselruten (Corylus avellana) im Fundmaterial und der Bedarf großer Mengen Flechtmaterial für die Fischzäune weist auf die intensive Nutzung der Haselsträucher hin. Basierend auf der Form, Größe, Jahrringanzahl und Jahrringweite der Stangen kann das „auf den Stock setzen“ der Hasel seit dem Endmesolithikum nachgewiesen werden. Der regelmäßige Schnitt von weiteren Sträuchern, namentlich Rotem Hartriegel (Cornus sanguinea) und Gemeinem Schneeball (Viburnum opulus), kann ebenso angenommen werden, da gerade Stangen dieser Gehölze gespalten und für die Herstellung von häufig verwendeten Fischreusen genutzt wurden. Die Art des Fischfangs mit stationären Zaunanlagen sowie die niederwaldartige Bewirtschaftung von Haselhainen erfordert die Sesshaftigkeit
in einem begrenzten Gebiet. Diese erste stark eingreifende Maßnahme zur bewussten Produktion von natürlichen Rohstoffen leitet zum Wesen der neolithischen Wirtschaftsweise hin.

SUMMARY The investigation of wooden artefacts from thirteen Terminal Mesolithic and Early Neolithic sites shows that the marine environment of the southwestern Baltic Sea was used intensively. Fishing with the help of stationary structures, fish trap baskets and eel catching spears was widespread. By comparison, fishing with nets and hooks was less commonly employed. Travelling and transport with log boats manoeuvred by paddles is welldemonstrated by wooden finds from the shallow water zone. Moreover, hunting tools such as bows and arrows as well as spears were excavated. Handles for stone and antler axes show how these tools were hafted.
Fishing implements were already technically advanced, so there was little variation through time. Small signs of chronological development were only found for paddles and leister prongs. Furthermore, minor regional distinctions became evident in the usage of different types of wood for producing leister prongs and fish trap baskets. Generally, a preference for certain, well-suited types of wood to create specific objects or tools could be proven for coastal settlements of the Ertebølle Culture and the Early Neolithic.
The uniformity of straight hazel poles in the find material, and the requirement of large quantities of such poles for the construction of wattle fishing fences indicate that hazel
bushes (Corylus avellana) were used intensively. Based on shape, size, age and annual ring widths of the hazel poles, the coppicing of hazel bushes could be proven for the Terminal Mesolithic and later. The regular cutting of red dogwood (Cornus sanguinea) and guelder rose bushes (Viburnum opulus) can also be assumed since straight rods from these plants were split and used to build fish trap baskets, which were likewise in high demand. In addition to this kind of woodland management, the exploitation of fish with stationary structures required sedentism in a restricted habitation area as well. This is one of the first profound interventional procedures indicating a purposeful production of natural resources, thereby leading towards the Neolithic economy.

RESUMÉ L’examen d’artefacts en bois provenant de 13 sites du Mésolithique final et du Néolithique ancien démontre l’exploitation intensive des ressources marines sur la côte sudouest de la Baltique. La pêche à l’aide d’installations passives, de nasses et de foënes était fort répandue. Plus rarement furent utilisés les filets et l’hameçon. La découverte de pirogues monoxyles et de pagaies en zone peu profonde prouve l’usage de ce véhicule. On a également découvert des armes de chasses telles que des flèches et des arcs, ou encore des javelots. Les manches des outils en pierre ou bois de cerf indiquent comment ils furent manipulés.
Les engins de pêche sont très développés techniquement et ne présentent que de légers changements. On constate des évolutions chronologiques seulement pour les pagaies, à peine pour les dents de foëne. L’utilisation d’essences différentes pour la fabrication des dents de foëne et des nasses révèle nettement de légers écarts régionaux. Globalement, on peut établir que les habitants des sites côtiers de la culture d’Ertebølle et du Néolithique ancien affichaient une préférence pour certaines essences particulièrement adaptées à la fabrication d’outils et d’objets spécifiques. La régularité des verges de noisetier (corylus avellana) dans le matériel archéologique et les besoins en matériaux pour le tressage de barrages révèle une exploitation intensive des noisetiers. La forme et la grandeur des perches, ainsi que le nombre et la largeur de leurs cernes, indiquent que les noisetiers étaient « rabattus jusqu’à la souche » dès le Mésolithique final. La coupe régulière d’autres arbustes, notamment le cornouiller sanguin (cornus sanguinea) et la viorne obier (viburnum opulus), peut être aussi envisagée, vu que des perches régulières appartenant à ces essences ont été fendues et utilisées pour la fabrication des nasses fort répandues. Le mode de pêche avec des installations de palissades et
l’exploitation des bosquets de noisetiers par recépage exigent une sédentarité dans un territoire limité. Cette première mesure radicale en vue de produire sciemment des matières premières naturelles mène au coeur de l’économie de production néolithique. (Y.G.)

1924 őszén a korabeli sajtó egy „párját ritkító” régészeti felfedezésről adott hírt: a tószegi Laposhalmon folytatott ásatások során egy fából készült csónak maradványai kerültek elő. Jelen tanulmány ennek a sanyarú sorsú, a magyarországi bronzkorból máig példa nélkül álló leletnek a történetét járja körül. Az írás kísérletet tesz a csónakkal kapcsolatban rendelkezésre álló különféle források bemutatására, majd azok kritikai elemzésén keresztül a tárgy fizikai jellemzőinek, előkerülési körülményeinek, valamint későbbi sorsának rekonstruálására.

In the autumn of 1924, the contemporary press reported an unparalleled archaeological discovery: the remains of a wooden boat were found during the excavations at Tószeg-Laposhalom. The present study reveals the story and rugged biography of this finding which is still unprecedented from the Bronze Age of Hungary. The article attempts to present the various sources available on the boat and, through their critical analysis, to reconstruct the physical characteristics of the object, its archaeological context, and its subsequent history.

Ignorance is undeniably ever present in the act of knowledge generation and the published continuity of academic traditions. Ignorance and fact are woven together in cultural historical narratives to provide readers with societal " truths, " which are comforting. Most modern anthropologists would recognize that ignorance is a significant aspect of any academic publication in two ways. First, can we really quantify everything we don't know which applies to the narrative our published work is supposed to entail versus the sources we have cited? Second, how does our preference for our own societal norms via selecting comfortable accepted secondary sources contradict the generation of knowledge by framing our narrative in a manner inconsistent with the reality the primary historical data presents us with? In other words, how can we gain awareness of our own subjectivity and use that awareness to create a more objective narrative? In the field of maritime archaeology for the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, no one vessel type has been subject to the generation and continuity of published ignorance more than that of the logboat. To understand this, we must take a step back and start a narrative with influence in the Annales school of thought. Let us start our narrative at the beginning with the work of M. V. Brewington, heavily cited in our current literature. " After 1590 when the drawings of John White had made at Raleigh's Roanoke settlement were published, Englishmen were familiar with the dugout canoes the southern Indians built. The colonists were quick to adopt these canoes, so great was their need for watercraft which could not be otherwise obtained. The white man's superior knowledge of small craft soon indicated changes which would improve the canoe: sharp ends would make her easier to propel and more seaworthy; broader beam and a keel would increase stability: sail would lessen the work of getting from place to place. " From an anthropological perspective, the above quote which is often cited regarding logboats, is problematic for the Chesapeake. It is riddled with the causal yet persistent racism directed at the First Nations of North America that was part of our populist cultural historical narrative well into the 1970s. In addition, M. V. Brewington, clearly race biased in the above quote, also fails to examine cause and effect outside of a white British colonial perspective in any of his works. He fails to investigate deeper and move past his own British colonial cultural historicism. He assigns technological development to a specific race, without taking into account the fact that cultural continuity has nothing to do with ethnicity, just as technology use has no strict correlation with ethnicity.

I Norge har kystens farkoster spilt viktige roller langs de lange linjene i landets historie. Samtidig vet vi at både stokkebåter og andre småbåter har vært en viktig del av folks materielle kultur i vann og vassdrag så langt tilbake som vi kan vite noe om.

Før vi begynte å arbeide med den store stokkebåten fra Glomma og med det øvrige stoffet i denne boken, tenkte nok vi - som de fleste andre - at stokkebåten er en farkost som har stått ”på stedet hvil” siden steinalderen. Der tok vi feil. Flere artikler i denne boken viser at stokkebåter, selv om de vel som oftest er både trauste og ”enkle”, så langt i fra er noen ensartet type. Kategorien ”stokkebåt” innholder tvertimot et mangfold av forskjellige farkoster - ikke bare i tid og rom, men også i form og bruksområde.

Som innlandsbåt har ikke stokkebåtene på langt nær fått samme oppmerksomhet som kystens farkoster. Stokkebåten trekkes gjerne frem når man skal diskutere hvordan de første båtene så ut eller som typologisk utgangspunkt for mer ”avanserte” båter. Bortsett fra slike ur-, opphavs- og evolusjonsspekulasjoner har stokkebåtene stort sett fått hvile i fred for forskernes blikk. Når vi vet i hvor langt tidsrom stokkebåter har vært i bruk, og over hvor store og varierte områder de har vært i utbredt, virker dette typologi-perspektivet ganske uegnet.

Da Sørum-båten kom for dagen, ville vi gjerne gripe sjansen til å lære mer om båten og båttypen. Som nevnt i bokens første artikkel ble det definert et firedelt stokkebåtprosjekt, og takket være en anonym giver fikk vi også økonomisk mulighet til å gjennomføre alle fire delene.

Privat fullfinansiering av et arkeologiprosjekt av dette omfang er ikke dagligkost i Norge. Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum befant seg plutselig i en uvanlig priviligert arbeidssituasjon. Samtidig bidro den anonyme gaven til at vår skuffelse over det offentliges uvilje eller - i beste fall - sendrektighet ble tonet mer ned enn den nok fortjente. Det er et åpenbart tankekors at museene ikke har økonomisk mulighet til å rykke ut og ta hånd om kulturminner som uforutsett trenger sikring, eksempelvis etter flom – slik tilfellet var med Sørumbåten.

Stokkebåtprosjektets "Delprosjekt 1 – konservering av Sørumbåten" ble realisert i perioden 1997-2004 og omtales i eget kapitel om konservering i boken. Kort oppsummert kan vi si at det unike og godt bevarte funnet har gjennomgått en tilsynelatende vellykket konserveringsprosess – også hva tid og penger angår. Båten er litt endret fra utgravningen, men har bevart sine viktige særtrekk.

Vi visste at konserveringen ville ta flere år. Tiden fra oppstart av konservering til utstilling av ferdig konservert gjenstand ville vi bruke til å lære oss mer om bygging og bruk stokkebåter. Vi fant det derfor naturlig å legge ”Delprosjekt 3 – kopibygging” til denne fasen. Kopibyggingsprosjektet ble realisert i 2003 og 2004 og omtales i flere kapitler i boken. Vi ville bygge en stokkebåt med metoder og verktøy som liknet mest mulig på dem som ble anvendt ved bygging av originalen. Dette mente vi i seg selv var såpass spennende at vi valgte å gjøre kopibyggingen tilgjengelig for publikum. En prosessuell utstilling viste seg å være en god form for populærvitenskapelig formidling.

Da vi åpnet utstillingen ”Stokk konservativ – kopi av Norges eldste båt blir til” den 15. januar 2004, var det en nokså uvanlig utstilling for Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum. For det første skulle utstillingen fortelle om en tid som lå så langt tilbake at Norge og det norske på langt nær var funnet opp. Det var like langt fram til Harald Hårfagres rikssamling som fra samme Harald og fram til oss. For det andre fortalte utstillingen ikke noe om sjøfart; den var til og med kjemisk fri for saltvann. Videre pleier vi ikke å åpne utstillinger som ikke er ferdige, men denne gangen var vi på langt nær ferdig. Utstillingen skulle forandre seg fra time til time etter åpningen. Den var en prosess, hvis utstrekning i tid vi ikke kjente.

Mye ny kunnskap kom frem gjennom kopibyggingsprosjektet, både om materialer og verktøy, men også mer praktisk erfaring med håndtering og lagring av en stokkebåt. Sist men ikke minst fikk vi mulighet til å erfare båtens egenskaper direkte gjennom å padle den store kopien på Glomma.

Det var tømrer Hans Marumsrud som laget den svære stokkebåtkopien. Etter vår vurdering bør hans måte å arbeide på karakteriseres som forskning. Gjennom den håndverksmessige arbeidssituasjonen frembringer han empirisk materiale som lar seg dokumentere og prøves. Dette materialet vurderer han så kritisk i forhold til tidligere viten og kunnskap om materialer, verktøy og håndverksmessige arbeidsprosesser. Marumsruds arbeidsform representerer en viktig form for kunnskapsutvikling i skjæringspunktet mellom håndverk og kulturvitenskap.

”Delprosjekt 2 – permanent utstilling av Sørumbåten” er en realitet fra og med 11. mai 2005.
Arbeidet med planlegging av utstillingen begynte parallelt med kopibyggingen og resulterte i at en fløy i museets store utstillingssal i annen etasje ble tømt og bygget om til formålet.
Med dette har vi også startet en prosess for revitalisering av hele utstillingsarealet. Den store stokkebåten fra Glomma blir således et nytt tema i Norsk Sjøfartsmuseums faste utstillinger - en unik mulighet til å formidle bredden og tidsdybden i menneskers bruk av – og forhold til – sjø og vann. Fra museets øvrige mangeslungne arkeologiske virksomhet har vi også andre funn som med tiden vil få plass under temaet mennesket og vannet i forhistorien.

”Delprosjekt 4 – formidling og publisering” er dels realisert gjennom kopibyggingsprosjektet og utstillingen om dette. Videre ble delprosjektet realisert i perioden 1997-2005 gjennom diverse intervjuer til riks- og lokalaviser, radioinnslag i P1, P2 og P4 samt fjernsynsinnslag i NRK Østlanddsendingen og Norge Rundt. Endelig er delprosjekt 4 realisert gjennom herværende publikasjon.

Etter funnet og hevingen av Sørumbåten har det kommet syv meldinger om nye funn av stokkebåter til Norsk Sjøfartsmuseum. Inntrykket vi sitter med etter å ha arbeidet med stoff til denne boken, er at både antall registrerte funn og fylkesvis fordeling av dem bare er en bitteliten del av alle de stokkebåter som må finnes i innlandsvann og vassdrag Sør-Norge.

Det later til at stokkebåter er en kategori arkeologiske kilder vi har fått tilgang til helt tilfeldig. Hvordan funnene er gjort taler her sitt tydelige språk. Formuleringer som ”funnet etter flom i elva”, ”funnet under bading”, ”funnet i forbindelse med markfiske på myrkanten”, ”oppdaget i forbindelse med nedtapping av damanlegg” er alle typiske for beskrivelser av funnomstendigheter for de båtene vi har fått melding om. Med unntak av gravfunn er det ikke funnet en eneste stokkebåt i forbindelse med systematisk registrering eller andre arkeologiske undersøkelser.

At stokkebåter best oppbevares nedsenket i vann, og at mange av dem nok ble liggende slik etter at de gikk av bruk, er trolig en av årsakene til at selv svært gamle stokkebåter fortsatt er bevart – og skjult. Av dette må vi videre kunne slutte at primærkildene til kunnskap om bruken av vann og vannveier i innlandet i forhistorien er der, men at de er lite utnyttet.

Av artiklene i denne boka har vi sett at stokkebåters bruksegenskaper minst kan inndeles i to. Det kan være en enkel farkost – brukt fra steinalder helt opp til ny tid, da først og fremst i mindre vann som redskap til fiske, jakt og til å ferdes over kortere avstander. Vi har også sett at stokkebåter kan være mye mer. Det kan være store fraktebåter som kanskje kan utdype bildet av fortidens næringsveier, transportsystem eller sosiale organisasjon. Av andre eksempler har vi sett at det kan være spesialbygde farkoster laget for å mestre topografiske hindre og store avstander i små vassdrag. Uansett er det åpenbart at stokkebåter fortjener å bli studert på bredere basis enn utfra ”Ursprungs”-teorier.

Vårt synsfelt tilbake tilbake til forhistorien, tolket gjennom arkeologiske kilder, er bare så bredt som summen av de sporene vi har tilgang til. Arkeologer har ikke lett mye etter stokkebåter der de vanligvis ble brukt, og det er ganske naturlig. Mange av dem ligger jo under vann og undervannsarkeologi er, faghistorisk sett, en ny metodisk del av arkeologien. Mye taler for at en opptrapping av arkeologiske registreringer i ferskvann kan bli et viktig bidrag til arbeidet med å lage kunnskap om hittil lite utforskede deler av forhistorien.

Ovennevnte betraktning burde, etter vårt syn, lede til følgende konklusjon: historiene om forhistorien skrives i første rekke på bakgrunn av kilder som er tilgjengelige på land. Menneskers nære bindinger til – og bruk av – vann er både tydelige og erkjent i arkeologien, eksempelvs innen tema som bosetningsmønster, ressursutnyttelse, ferdsel, bergkunst eller annen symbolikk. Når arkeologiske historier om disse tema hovedsakelig skrives på bakgrunn av kilder som er deponert på land kan historiene lett bli ufullstendige. Hvordan hadde bildet vi har av forhistorien sett ut om kartlegging av kulturminner i vann og vassdrag hadde vært like omfatttende som registreringer på land ?

Gjennom stokkebåtprosjektet har vi klart erkjent det uforløste potensiale som ligger i en bredest mulig arkeologisk tilnærming til forhistorien. Herunder kommer bruk av nytt kildemateriale tolket gjennom metoder som også omfatter eksperimentell arkeologi. Vår overbevisning om betydningen av at land- og vannarkeologer har mye å vinne på et tettere samarbeid er ytterligere styrket.

Sometimes the ambition of researchers remains empty-handed although all the circumstances suggest that a positive outcome would have happened. This kind of situation took place just a few kilometres away from the 7,500-year-old Hotiza logboat in the Mura River. The first information from the road and riverbank reconstruction was that a carved log 7m below the surface was being explored.
However, during the excavation process, the situation got much more complicated when the first preliminary radiocarbon dating showed us that this log with a trace of carving was about 8000 years old. It was exciting when the around 3m long logboat-like trunk was re-examined from the beginning of the excavation. However, at the end of the excavation, the root system of that same trunk was discovered. After a consortium of wood specialist, dendrochronologists, forest researchers and archaeologist examined it, they decided that environmental circumstances had naturally formed a tree trunk into a logboat-like outline.
However, this information was not provided to the academics due to an 8000-year-old tree trunk, but we would like to discuss this artefact in the frame of special natural environmental processing that often gave humankind an easy way to craft and made vessels for travelling. Moreover, our ambition is also to refresh the knowledge of the excavated logboat older than 6000 years. We can find out that all around the world, a similar demand for vessels has been discovered in the specific environments where the genotype of the forest was suitable for use in logboats.

Contents :
Introduction
Boat models : morphological characteristics and attempt towards identification
Boat models : context and function
Neolithic watercraft: raw materials and technological possibilities of construction
Neolithic boats: environment
Neolithic boats: uses
Conclusions

Introduction
Maquettes d'embarcations: caractères morphologiques et essai d'identification
Maquettes d'embarcations: contexte et fonction
Embarcations néolithiques: matières premières et possibilités technologiques de construction
Embarcations néolithiques: environnement
Embarcations néolithiques: utilisations
Conclusions

The paper examines the available evidence about Neolithic boat models and boats for inland or maritime navigation in Greece and the surrounding regions. It is the first part of the paper: Marangou Christina 1996: From Middle Neolithic to Early Bronze Age: Consideration of early boat models. In H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis IV, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity (Athens 1991), Athens, 277-293.

The development and character of the so-called Scandinavian boat building tradition has traditionally been debated. It is a common thought that this tradition dates back to the beginning of the Christian era. But what happened before? The Bronze Age vessels that seem countless on rock carvings and bronzes, but nevertheless are few in the reality of the archaeological material – which tradition do they represent? In this essay it is suggested that the Scandinavian tradition was developed as early as the beginning of the Bronze Age. The basis for this suggestion is a number of observations made on ship depictions, ship settings and wrecks. The Bronze Age ship wrecks are few, but not non-existing, though. From the European continent, the British Isles and Scandinavia several log boats are known, which share important technological features like hewn out frames, rectangular/trapezoid cross-section and a considerable length (fig. 1). There are indications of relationship between these log boats and the Bronze Age plank boats, which are known from Britain (fig. 2). Furthermore a general continuity in boat technology can be traced throughout Bronze and Iron/Viking Age. This is supported by iconographical, maritime technological and monumental evidence. As regards iconography similarities in stern/stem and rudder elements are seen in Bronze Age rock carvings and Gotlandic picture stones, rune stones and Viking Age coinage (fig. 3). Concerning technology the most evident example of continuity throughout 2200 year is the hewn out cleats that occurs on the British Bronze Age plank boats, the Hjortspring boat, the Nydam boat and Gokstad ship among others (fig. 4). Another indication of continuity is a number of Bronze Age ship settings showing the pointed oval shape that characterize the Scandinavian boat type (fig. 5 b-c). Thus it seems that the Scandinavian boat building tradition has roots as early as in the Bronze Age and maybe the strange, enigmatic ship depictions on rocks and bronzes should not be perceived so strange at all.

De hidtil to eneste danske bådfund fra bronzealderen, stammebådene fra Varpelev på Østsjælland og Vestersø i Vestjylland, detailfremlægges og diskuteres. Det sandsynliggøres, at begge både på forskellig vis har haft en tilknytning til det lokalområde, hvori de er fundet. Gennem en sammenligning med samtidige fund af stammebåde fra Skandinavien, det Europæiske Kontinent samt de Britiske Øer, vises det, at de to danske fund først og fremmest knytter an til en vesteuropæisk formtradition. Et af denne traditions mest karakteristiske træk er tværgående ribber, udhugget i stammebådenes indre bund. Disse forekommer primært i perioden fra slutningen af det 3. årtusind f.v.t. til tidsregningens begyndelse, og optræder i vidt forskellige maritime topografier. Ribberne synes ikke at have en praktisk funktion, og det foreslås, at de skal opfattes som en skeuomorf – et lånetræk – fra samtidens plankebyggede både, der indtil videre kun kendes fra de Britiske Øer. Stammebådenes tilhuggede ydre, som står i kontrast til ældre fund, vurderes også som en skeuomorf fra planketeknologien. Perspektivet i dette må være, at man kan tale om en interregional maritim teknologi i Vesteuropa og Sydskandinavien i bronzealderen. Antageligt er dette produktet af langtrækkende og professionaliserede maritime netværk, som opbygges i senneolitikum og ældre bronzealder.

In this chapter, we introduce two oak logboats from Stare gmajne. The comparatively well preserved vessels contain transverse reinforcements. Dendrochronological analysis showed that both logboats are contemporary to the pile-dwelling settlement; logboat 2 was made and used at the last stage of the settlement around 3109 ± 12 BC, while the logboat 1 was probably made c. 50 years earlier.

In spite of a background of intense aquatic mobility in the Neolithic Aegean Sea, as well as across or along inland waters, concrete evidence from Greece about the craft itself being used only consists of some clay models and a few outlines of lake craft (see Crumlin-Pedersen, 1991).
Both categories are attested at Dispilio (lake of Kastoria, W. Macedonia, at 620masl; Hourmouziadis, 1996), although dating from different phases. The outlines belong to the latest phase, end of Late Neolithic (LN), or beginning of Final Neolithic (FN) (probably circa 4500 BC cal.), while the models were found mostly in the oldest...

So far, the only Prehistoric logboat recorded at the territory of the European part of Russia, is dated to the Bronze Age by 14C (1800-1700 cal BC) in the course of our study, funded by the Russian Foundation of Basic Research (project no. 19-09-00301). Other logboat finds in Russia date in the range from the Late Medieval Period to the 19th c. AD. Based on the ethnographical data of Siberian indigenous peoples and written sources of the Early Modern period from the area of Russian North, the presence of birch bark canoes and skin boats in the past can be hypothetically recognized.
The unique find of the ceramic birch bark canoe model comes from a collective burial of the Bronze Age forest hunter-gatherer-fishers in Central Russia and dates around 2200-2000 cal BC. By construction the canoe reminds that of North American Indians and according to proportions could represent a boat for two persons, about 6 m long.
Mesolithic, Neolithic and Early Bronze Age paddle finds come both from the East European Plain and the Middle Trans-Urals. Some of them were definitely used for canoes or skin boats, as they have light weight and moderate length. This contribution discusses their dimensions and decoration patterns, and concentrates also on the unique group of the Trans-Uralic items shaped to assemble either the one-blade, ore the double-blade paddle. Some Trans-Uralic peatbog wooden items which presumably could have been the canoe or the skin boat frame details, are discussed too.
As a result, much more comprehensive picture of the forest zone Prehistoric water transport has emerged after re-analyzing old and recent archaeological finds and establishing their relevance with the ethnographical data.