1For the County Administrative Board of Halland, southwestern Sweden, the year 2016 was an unusually busy one in regards to maritime archaeology. In the course of the year, several previously unknown shipwreck sites were reported to the authority. The main reason behind these new discoveries is coastal erosion, a serious problem for the region, which will certainly increase in years to come due to global warming (von Arbin 2017a).

2The most interesting of these newly discovered sites is located in the nature reserve of Morups Tånge, 8 km northwest of the medieval town of Falkenberg. The stony spit of Morups Tånge is demarcated by two shallow bays, Brevik to the north and Korshamn to the south. The shipwreck discussed here is located in the latter. It is buried in fine sand in ankle-deep water, approximately 50 m from land.

3In this paper, some preliminary findings regarding the Korshamn wreck are presented. Moreover, based on place names, written sources and archaeological observations, it will be argued that the vessel was abandoned in a contemporaneous harbour. Furthermore, based on the presumed harbour remains observed in the area, cargo-handling procedures during the Middle Ages will be briefly discussed: in particular the kar phenomenon of southern Scandinavia will be addressed.

1. Discovery, dating and preliminary investigation

4The Korshamn wreck was discovered in March 2016 by a birdwatcher who noticed ship timbers protruding above the sand during low tide (fig. 1). Morups Tånge is one of the most popular birdwatching sites in Sweden. The wreck is therefore likely to have been recently exposed prior to its discovery. A general inspection of the site was conducted by the author and colleagues a couple of weeks after its discovery. Site inspection also included sampling for dendrochronological analysis.

5Unfortunately, initial dendrochronological dating of samples proved unsuccessful (Daly 2016). Therefore, so-called ¹⁴C wiggle matching was performed on one of the samples. The method comprises ¹⁴C dating two or more annual growth rings in a single sample. Since the exact intervals between the analysed rings are known, it is often possible to narrow the calibration range of the ¹⁴C dates considerably (see e.g. Blauw et al. 2004).

6The result, although somewhat inconclusive, indicated a date after circa 1026–1147 (Daly 2016). This also conformed to archaeological observations made during inspection. Further dendrochronological sampling and investigation was thus considered essential and additional fieldwork was conducted in October 2016 (von Arbin 2017b). In order to access the hull for wood sampling and documentation, a trench approximately 4 m long and 2 m wide was dug in what appeared likely to be the bow section of the vessel. Fortunately, the water level was lower than usual during the five-day investigation, which allowed the work to be carried out in a semi-dry environment.

7An additional three samples were submitted for dendrochronological analysis, of which two were dated to after 1162 and 1168 respectively. Based on the newly acquired results, the previously analysed samples were re-examined. Eventually another two samples were dated, one of which dates to after 1034 and the other to after 1167 (Daly, Nielsen 2016). If the dendrochronological results are combined, it seems likely that the vessel was built relatively soon after 1168, and most probably before the turn of the 12th century. Since the analysed wood consists of Scandinavian pine, its construction is likely to have taken place within Scandinavia.

2. The shipwreck

8The limited investigation revealed a lapstrake hull with a preserved length of 12.5 m and a beam of 3.5 m. The vessel lies tilted towards its presumed starboard side, which has therefore largely survived. The port side, on the other hand, is much less preserved. Orientation of the hull indicates that the keel and keelson, possibly also stem and sternpost, are still preserved in the sand. Floor timbers, futtocks, and lower strakes seem to be made of oak, whereas the upper part of the planking is made of pine. A small stringer on the starboard side proved to be of oak, while a more massive one on the starboard side is made of spruce.

9Two levels of cross beams were recorded. The lowest one consists of so-called bitis that rest on the upper faces of the floor timbers. Bitis have arch-shaped undersides. On top of the beams at either end are standing knees that are fastened with treenails to the hull. Beams and knees seem to be made of pine. This type of assemblage is typical of Scandinavian shipbuilding up to the end of the 12th century. Other recorded features that are highly indicative of contemporaneous Scandinavian shipbuilding are tangentially split planks, decorative plank mouldings, planks with short diagonal scarf joints, clenched iron nails with rounded shafts, and wool luting (Bill 1997, p. 133–143).

10The upper section of the presumed starboard side displays a curious transition from lapstrake to carvel planking (fig. 2). The flush-laid strakes, of which there were at least three, are fastened to each other in an even more peculiar way: small treenails have been driven sidelong, through pre-drilled conical holes in the lower edge of the upper plank and the upper edge of the underlying plank. Possibly, this planking constitutes some kind of bulwark, which has prevented the cargo from being sprayed with seawater. To the author’s knowledge, there are no contemporaneous parallels to this design. A reason for this could of course be that there are few well-preserved surviving shipwrecks from the 12th and 13th centuries similar to the Korshamn wreck: the number of recorded shipwrecks from this period is still not very large.

11Artefacts found during excavation were few. Finds consisted mainly of a small number of animal bones, mainly from sheep, and some well-preserved rope fragments made from linden bast. The bones are likely to derive from provisions carried on board. The thickest rope, which has a diameter of approximately 8 cm, may have served as the vessel’s anchor cable, while the thinner ropes are likely to be rigging. Excavated organic materials are in an extraordinary state of preservation, proving that conditions in the sand are very favourable for these materials.

12In summary, the overall construction of the Korshamn wreck clearly conforms to contemporaneous Scandinavian ship building practices. At the same time, the vessel also displays features that appear highly unusual in this context. Preliminary investigation suggests that the vessel had an original length of 13–14 m or more. Contemporaneous Scandinavian ship finds of comparable size include Roskilde 2 and the Eltang and Ellingå ships from Denmark, the vessel from Möveninsel in Schleswig, Germany, and Galtabäck I and II from Sweden (Enqvist 1929; Björck 2005; Englert 2015, p. 325, 237). Interestingly enough, the latter two were located slightly more than 10 km further north along the coast.

3. The setting

13The navigational importance of Morups Tånge and its immediate surroundings in historical times is clearly evidenced in both written and archaeological sources. The spit, considered a hazard to seafarers, is marked in some of the earliest sea charts, dating to the 16th century. Due to the high number of foundered vessels in the area, a lighthouse was eventually constructed in the 1840s (Bengtsson 1979, appx. 6). North of Morups Tånge is the so-called Glomstenen, or Glumstenen, a large boulder that for many centuries served as a natural navigation aid. According to Icelandic sagas, the flotilla of the Norwegian king Harald Hardrada anchored at ‘Glummstein’ in the beginning of the 1060s (Schöldström 1881). Less than 200 years later, the flotilla of another Norwegian king, Haakon Haakonson, is said to have halted there (Storm, Bugge 1914, p. 249–250).

14Historically, there would have been two main options for harbouring ships in the area: the two bays of Brevik and Korshamn. Ship timbers of unknown date found east of Brevik, in what is now dry land, imply that the bay once reached further inland and that it actually may have served as a harbour. In the case of Korshamn (fig. 3), which literally means ‘cross harbour’, the place name itself provides an important clue to its former function (Westerdahl 1989, p. 169; Connelid, Ahnlund 2012, p. 207). In a maritime context, kors+noun may denote a place where a cross-shaped seamark was erected during the Middle Ages. The name Korshamn is known from several locations in Scandinavia, some of which have actually been proven as medieval harbour locations (Westerdahl 1989, p. 167–171).

15From a topographical viewpoint, the bay probably offered excellent harbour opportunities before it silted up and became too shallow for larger vessels to approach. During the investigation, structures, which possibly constitute the foundations of houses or sheds, were observed on land. At the waterfront, large stone structures, which may be the remains of jetties and piers, were also recorded. Of particular interest in this connection is a large accumulation of stones and rocks, known as Karet, located outside the entrance to the bay. In modern Swedish, kar is another word for stone caissons used as founda­tions for jetties, bridges or similar. Whether this massive stone assembly, which measures approximately 150 x 50 m, constitutes a natural formation, or if it is fully or partially fabricated, remains an open question.

4. The kar phenomenon and early state formation

16Large kar structures have, however, been recorded at seve­ral locations in southern Sweden (fig. 4). Unfortunately, few of them have been thoroughly investigated. The most renowned is the so-called Lödde kar, located in Öresund outside Löddeköpinge in southwestern Scania. It is semi­circular in shape with an overall length of 160 m. Carbon-14 analysis of worked timber found within the structure dates its construction to the 10th or 11th century. In the beginning of the 13th century it is mentioned as “kar iuxta ludde”, that is, “the kar close to Lödde”. In later sources, it is evident that it was of continuing importance during the ensuing centuries (Lindqvist 1981).

17Other possible medieval kars are known from Åhus (Norra karet, Östra karet and Södra karet), Kivik (Gula kar and Stora kar), and Simrishamn (Karet) (Hansen 1989, p. 7). Based on written sources, it is also known that the medieval town Malmö used to have three kars, named Kon, Blidan and Kalven (lit. The Cow, The Trebuchet and The Calf). Like Lödde kar, they were apparently in use for a long period of time (Rosborn 2015, p. 257). Another large kar-like structure has been recorded at Bossholmen, north of Oskarshamn. It was found in conjunction with the wreck of a late 13th century cog, the so-called Bossholmen or Oskarshamn cog. Geological expertise has concluded that it is a natural formation, which at some point was remodelled (Cederlund 1989, p. 33). Finally, there is a possible kar near the mouth of the Øle Å river on the Danish island of Bornholm, indicated by the place name Ølekarret (Crumlin-Pedersen 1985, p. 75–76).

18Despite limited knowledge regarding the southern Scandinavian kar phenomenon, some general observations can be made. First, kars often seem to occur in shallow and exposed coastal areas that lack proper natural harbours. Secondly, they often seem to have a geographical connection with early trading centres, or, at the very least, areas with a rich hinterland. Thus, they should in most cases probably be interpreted as wharfs, places for the transhipment of goods. Kars are generally very large structures and the resources used in their construction must have been considerable, even if natural formations often seem to have served as their foundation. Interestingly, their construction seems to have occurred during a relatively short period in history, roughly speaking the 11th-12th centuries. What is also interesting is that the phenomenon often appears to be restricted to areas that were under Danish supremacy in this period.

19Based on these preliminary findings it is very tempting to explain the kar phenomenon as the result of a conscious and co-ordinated strategy of a central power. Could it be that the building of kars during this period was directed by the Danish kings, as a means to gain control of their geographically divided territory and to exploit local resources? In order to prove such a hypothesis, however, further archaeological investigations are required. A desirable first step would be a detailed survey of Korshamn and its surroundings, including the presumed kar structure outside the bay. Considering this, further excavation of the Korshamn wreck is of course also high on the wish list.

Acknowledgements

20
The author would like to thank Thomas Bergstrand, Matthew Gainsford and Anders Gutehall, who participated in fieldwork during April and October 2016. Thank you also to Jan Bill, Niklas Eriksson and Fred Hocker, for invaluable input on medieval, and particularly Scandinavian, ship construction. The English was kindly revised by Matthew Gainsford.