Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros24L'archéologie dans les Amériques ...L'approche technique dans l'arché...Stave-built wooden vessels from t...

L'archéologie dans les Amériques aujourd'hui
L'approche technique dans l'archéologie des Amériques

Stave-built wooden vessels from the Medieval Norse Greenlandic settlements: an overview of their diversity and potential uses

Récipients assemblés en bois des établissements Norrois groenlandais médiévaux : un aperçu de leur diversité et de leurs utilisations potentielles
Recipientes ensamblados de madera de los asentamientos de la Groenlandia escandinava medieval: una descripción general de su diversidad y usos potenciales
Élie Pinta et Pierre Mille

Résumés

L'artisanat de la cuvellerie/tonnellerie est implanté en Europe au moins depuis l’Âge du Fer. Durant la période médiévale, les artisans cuvelliers/tonneliers fabriquent une large gamme de récipients assemblés ouverts ou fermés, utilisés dans le cadre de nombreuses activités domestiques quotidiennes, ainsi qu’à des fins artisanales et commerciales. Dans les établissements norrois du Groenland, les récipients assemblés en bois étaient d’autant plus importants que ceux en céramique, en verre ou en métal constituaient des biens de luxe. Cet article présente les traces archéologiques de cet artisanat dans les établissements Norrois groenlandais et tente de le replacer dans un plus large contexte social et économique. Au total, 631 objets ont été examinés. Ces artefacts, dont la chronologie couvre l’ensemble de l’occupation norroise de la fin du Xe au milieu du XVe siècle, proviennent de contextes très divers, des principales pièces de vie aux bâtiments de stockage et aux dépotoirs, et des larges manoirs occupés par l’élite aux établissements agricoles modestes. La méthode d’analyse retenue permet de proposer une reconstitution du spectre morphologique des différents récipients assemblés et leurs capacités volumétriques originelles. Plusieurs types ont été identifiés, ayant pu être utilisés pour une large gamme d’activités domestiques et artisanales, comme vaisselier, dans le cadre de la production laitière, du travail de la laine, ou pour le stockage des denrées alimentaires.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible thanks to the support of several funding institutions awarded to Élie Pinta: Martine Aublet Foundation (France), Région Île-de-France, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Fondation Fyssen. The author is also grateful to many persons working at the Nationalmuseet in Denmark, Nunatta Katersugaasivia Allagaateqarfialu in Greenland, and Parks Canada facilities, for generously granting access to collections and accommodation: Jette Arneborg, Claudia Baittinger, Morten Mortensen, Christian K. Madsen, Bo Albrechtsen, Michael Nielsen, Kevin Jenkins, and Birgitta Wallace. Thanks are also due to Konrad Smiarowski, Nicolas Bermeo for the translation of the title and abstract in Spanish, and Andrea Torvinen for proofing the manuscript.

Introduction

1Despite a relatively wood-poor environment, archaeological research in Greenland and the wider North Atlantic reveals that wood was one of the main resources selected by the Norse to manufacture tools, equipment, and furniture used in everyday life and specialized activities. Timber was also used as a construction material for various buildings and boats, as well as fuel (e.g. Mooney et al., 2022 and references therein). The importance of wooden materials in the Norse Greenlandic culture has been acknowledged since the first major archaeological excavations in the 1930s (e.g., Roussell A., 1936, 1941; Vebæk C., 1991, 1993). However, research programs focusing specifically on determining the origin, manufacture, and use of the wooden material culture are scarce (Pinta É., 2018; Pinta É. et al., 2021; Guðmundsdóttir L., 2021) and should be developed further.

2This article provides a brief overview of the diversity of selected Norse Greenlandic stave-built containers to reflect on their potential past uses. Specifically, we determine their original morphology and estimate their volumetric capacities. Our results are then compared with analogous archaeological and ethnographic data to provide valuable insight into past Norse domestic and agropastoral activities. In all, 631 artifacts were examined, originating from seven sites located across the two main regions of the Norse settlement in Greenland, and covering the entire span of the Norse presence from the late 10th to the mid-15th century.

The Norse Greenlandic settlements

  • 1 According to Christian K. Madsen (pers. com., 2024), shielings in the Vestribyggð are heavily under (...)

3Around A.D. 985/986, Norse settlers coming from Iceland established themselves in the southwestern part of Greenland in two main areas known as the Eystribyggð (Eastern settlement) in South Greenland, and the Vestribyggð (Western settlement) located at the same latitude as present-day Nuuk (Arneborg J., 2000, 2004, 2008; Madsen C. et al., 2020); see Figure 1). At their peak during the 13th century, the Norse Greenlandic settlements may have been populated by 2-3000 people, mostly concentrated in the Eystribyggð (Lynnerup N., 1998, 2014; Arneborg J., 2004; Madsen C., 2014). Over 580 Norse sites have been referenced in the Eystribyggð, of which one-third are identified as farmsteads and the rest as satellite shieling sites (Vésteinsson O., 2010; Madsen C., 2014, 2019, pers. com., 2024). Those sites are located across the entire landscape, from the outer fjords to the edge of the Ice Sheet, although primarily along inner fjord shorelines and mountainous hinterlands. In the smaller Vestribyggð, over 100 sites have been identified, of which 80 are farmsteads while the others are labeled as shielings1.

4Like in other places across the North Atlantic islands during the Medieval period, farmsteads–especially the large manor sites–were considered the main operational, legal, and religious centers of the Norse Greenlandic settlements. Complementary to the farmsteads, shieling sites' activities focused on the exploitation and production of terrestrial or marine goods (Madsen C., 2014, 2019). Initially centered on animal husbandry and seconded by the hunt for wild Arctic resources such as walrus ivory, seal hide, and polar bear fur, over time Norse Greenland's economy became more and more dependent on the exploitation of marine wildlife and resources (Madsen C., 2014; Frei K. et al., 2015; Smiarowski K. et al., 2017; Smiarowski K., 2022). Eventually, due to reasons that are still debated, the settlements declined and disappeared starting with the Vestribyggð by the end of the 14th century and followed by the Eystribyggð by A.D. 1450 (Arneborg J. et al., 2012).

Figure 1: Location of the seven selected sites within the approximate extent of the two main regions of the Norse settlement in Greenland

Figure 1: Location of the seven selected sites within the approximate extent of the two main regions of the Norse settlement in Greenland

V51 refers to Sandnes; V52a to Umiviarssuk; V53d to Austmannadalur; Ø34 to Qorlortup Itinnera; Ø171 to Tasilikulooq; Ø172 to Tatsip Ataa. Credits: Élie Pinta, based on Madsen C., 2019: Figure 1, 120).

A brief history of cooperage and its products

  • 2 We opted here for an English translation of the German words Daubenschale and Daubenbecher, used to (...)

5Cooperage refers to the craft of manufacturing composite stave-built wooden containers, in opposition to monoxylous vessels, carved or turned from a single piece of wood. The advent of coopered vessels allowed the production of much larger containers without being constrained by the diameter of the branch or trunk, which in turn presented possibilities for the storage and transportation of large volumes of goods. While most authors agree that the origin of the craft is “lost in the maze of history” (Hankerson F. P., 1947: 1), composite vessels used to store foodstuffs have been known in Egypt from at least the 3rd millennium B.C. In Western and Northern Europe, stave-built vessels are identified in archaeological contexts as early as the 1st millennium B.C. (Kilby K., 1971; Earwood C., 1993), before becoming increasingly widespread at the turn of the 1st millennium A.D., probably following the expansion of the Roman armies (Marlière É., 2002, 2003). The craft of cooperage is mostly known for having been instrumental in the storage and transportation of dry solid, and wet goods such as flour, brine, or spirits. Composite wooden containers are also being used to this day in the fermentation of foodstuffs as diverse as cereal beverages, wine, cheese, soy sauce, condiments, etc. (e.g. Pollan M., 2013; Nosrat S., 2017). In addition to large barrels, smaller ‘stave cups’ or ‘stave bowls’2 have been used as drinking vessels since the Iron Age (e.g. Schiek S., 1992; Pugsley P., 2003; Horn J., 2015; Sands R. and J. Horn, 2017; Mille P., 2022). During the Middle Ages, barrels and other derivative containers became the most standard packaging technology in Europe (Twede D., 2005), essential for storing and transporting large volumes of goods over long distances. Other types of coopered containers such as buckets, tubs, vats, etc., are often found associated with all sorts of domestic activities and specialized crafts, both in urban centers and rural settlements (e.g. Mille P., 1989, 2022; Earwood C., 1993; Morris C., 2000; Westphal F., 2006; Comey M., 2003, 2010; Cywa K., 2018).

6Traditionally, cooperage is divided into three categories: dry, wet, and white coopering (Kilby K., 1971, 2004). Although this specific classification was likely not used by the Norse, Icelandic medieval documents suggest that distinct types of containers existed (e.g. Hannesson G., 1943), which were also probably used in the Greenlandic settlements. In modern times, while dry coopers built casks to store and transport dry goods such as cereals, wet coopers had to make them water-tight to hold liquid commodities such as ale or wine. White coopers, though the least specialized are the most versatile, providing a wide range of open-topped vessels for everyday domestic and specialized craft activities such as small stave cups and bowls used to consume food and beverages, milk pails and butter churns for dairy production, and buckets and larger tubs for carrying water. In addition to stave-built containers, white coopers, especially those based in a rural setting, are known for making a great variety of other products for household and farm use such as hay rakes, ladles, spoons, cheese molds, turned bowls (Jenkins J. G., 1965: 91; Kilby K., 1983).

The selected archaeological assemblage

7Archaeological stave-built wooden vessels range from small, portable objects such as bowls and tankards, to casks capable of holding tens or even hundreds of liters. Typically, staves are the most common find associated with cooperage due to their higher proportion within the vessels. Additionally, bottom discs can also be useful for determining the minimum number of vessels represented in an archaeological context, as there cannot be fewer vessels in an assemblage than there are identifiable discs, unless there is a reason to suspect the presence of casks (Comey M., 2003: 46).

  • 3 The Norse site commonly known as GUS gets its name from the Danish Gården Under Sandet, also referr (...)
  • 4 The number of stave-built vessel components selected from this site may not reflect all the availab (...)

8Artifacts were selected from seven sites across both settlements, from middle-sized farms to large elite manors, spanning the five hundred years of Norse presence in Greenland. Each site yielded an extensive number of wooden finds, of which all the stave-built container components were analyzed. Evidence for cooperage from Norse Greenlandic sites can be divided into two groups: the assemblages recovered from midden areas–Ø34 Qorlortup Itinnera, Ø171 Tasilikulooq, and Ø172 Tatsip Ataa–all in the Eystribyggð (Figure 1), and those recovered from the main farmhouse and adjacent buildings –V51 Sandnes, V52a Umiviarssuk, V53d Austmannadalur, and GUS3–all in the Vestribyggð (Figure 1). In total, the corpus is composed of 631 stave-built container components, of which almost 84% are staves (Table 1). Important disparities in the distribution of the artifacts between the seven selected sites and the different contexts in which they were found are acknowledged. Specifically, with only 22 artifacts selected from the midden at Ø172, the results from this site are quite limited4. On the contrary, GUS, Ø34, and V51 alone represent almost 71% of the assemblage considered here.

Table 1: Distribution of the stave-built container components across the seven selected sites (n = 631)

Selected sites (and context)

Stave-built container components

Total (n)

Total (%)

Staves

Bottom discs

Lids

Ø34 Qorlortup Itinnera (midden)

151

8

6

165

26,1

Ø171 Tasilikulooq (midden)

55

7

1

63

10

Ø172 Tatsip Ataa (midden)

17

5

-

22

3,5

V51 Sandnes (farm buildings)

91

15

4

110

17,4

V52a Umiviarssuk (farm buildings)

26

17

3

46

7,3

V53d Austmannadalur (farm buildings)

40

11

1

52

8,2

GUS (farm buildings)

149

22

2

173

27,4

Total (n)

529

85

17

631

Total (%)

83,8

13,5

2,7

Methodology

9The methods applied in this analysis link typological and material approaches, allowing great insight into the technological and social aspects of the cooperage craft in Norse Greenland, as well as the potential origin of the materials used. Wood anatomical analysis suggests that a large majority of the wooden containers were made in Greenland using locally available taxa, mostly driftwood, but also native Greenlandic taxa (Pinta É., 2018, 2022). Similar results have been reported by Lísabet Guðmundsdóttir (2021). For the rest of this paper, only a generic overview of the dimensional attributes used for the typological analyses is considered.

Figure 2: Illustration of the major stave-built vessel components and associated vocabulary mentioned in the text

Figure 2: Illustration of the major stave-built vessel components and associated vocabulary mentioned in the text

Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified from Comey M., 2010: Figure 6, 14.

10It is necessary to understand the morphology of the major vessel components and the variables that differentiate them. A range of criteria is used to describe the different vessel components and typologies are developed for each of them, allowing for comparison between artifacts and assemblages. The general attributes of stave-built vessel components are illustrated in Figure 2.

Staves

11Staves are narrow pieces of wood forming the main vessel body. They are evenly pressed against one another, retained by a minimum of one external enclosing hoop, and have an internal lateral groove usually located towards the base, intended to retain the bottom disc (Kilby K., 1971). Among all the components of a coopered vessel, staves are the most numerous and display a larger range of attributes than others, such as bottom discs and lids. The length, widths (both at the bottom and the top), thickness, and positional attributes (e.g., the disc-locating groove on the inner face of a stave) each influence the overall morphology and volumetric capacity of the vessel from which it originated. Such dimensional characteristics have been recorded whenever possible for each of the staves in the assemblage.

12More specifically, by assessing the widths between the two abutting edges along the length of a single stave, it is possible to identify the general shape of a stave-built vessel.

13All in all, four main shape variants can be distinguished (Figure 3). The most recognizable is the cask, whose curved staves result in its iconic bellied profile. The other three variants involve straight staves building open-topped vessels: 1) staves of similar width all along their length (parallel sides) will result in a cylindrical vessel; 2) staves with abutting edges converging towards the top will result in an upright cone; 3) staves with abutting edges converging towards the bottom groove will result in an inverted cone. Arguably, the overall shape of a vessel has a direct influence on its use, even though it is often difficult to precisely identify what it may have held other than it being a liquid or a solid commodity.

Figure 3: Illustration of the four basic shapes of a stave-built vessel, and the general morphology of the staves in each of them: A) cask; B) cylindrical; C) upright conical; D) inverted conical

Figure 3: Illustration of the four basic shapes of a stave-built vessel, and the general morphology of the staves in each of them: A) cask; B) cylindrical; C) upright conical; D) inverted conical

Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified after Comey M., 2010: Figure 15, 26.

  • 5 This corresponds to the mathematic formula V = π*r2*h, where ‘V’ is the volume, ‘r’ is the radius, (...)
  • 6 This corresponds to the mathematical formula V = h* π/3*(r12+r122+ r1* r2), where ‘V’ is the volume (...)
  • 7 We acknowledge it is quite possible that a vessel was originally not perfectly circular but ellipti (...)

14The original volumetric capacity of vessels can be estimated by projecting the oblique abutting edges toward the inner part of the stave (Mille P., 1989, 2022; Mille P. et al., 2018). The convergence point of the projected edges corresponds to the center of a perfectly circular vessel. The distance between this point and the inside surface of the stave marks the radius of the circle (Figure 4). When a vessel is shaped like a cylinder, its original volumetric capacity can be estimated by multiplying its base area by its height from the upper rim to the disc-locating groove5. When a vessel is shaped like an upright or an inverted cone, its original volumetric capacity can be estimated by obtaining the radiuses of both the base and the top circles6. Due to the natural deformation of the artifacts by diagenesis, but also because hand-made artifacts are never exactly like one another, it is recommended to repeat the calculation by using several staves from the same vessel. Since it is common for two staves from the same vessel to give different estimated volumes, several authors urge caution when estimating volumetric capacity without a bottom disc associated with a sufficient number of staves (Marlière É., 2002: 157; Comey M., 2003: 48; Mille P. et al., 2018: 400). In this paper, for lack of stave-built components found in connection, we present estimated volumetric capacities obtained by using single staves as if they were building perfectly circular vessels7.

Figure 4: Projection of the abutting edges of a stave to estimate the original internal radius of the vessel

Figure 4: Projection of the abutting edges of a stave to estimate the original internal radius of the vessel

Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified from Mille P., 1989: 158, 2022: 200. Photo credits: Pinta É., 2022.

15Lastly, some staves display a morphological attribute generally located toward the upper rim, indicating the presence of an extension system designed to facilitate the vessel’s utilization. Such staves are often perforated to receive a handle, either a rope or a pole. Although handle staves tend to be found in pairs, located opposite of one another, some drinking vessels in particular display only one protruding handle stave. Proportionally, there are much fewer handle staves in archaeological assemblages than other, more regular staves, and they also tend to be more fragile because of their constant solicitation (Morris C., 2000: 2231).

Bottom discs and lids

16In addition to staves, bottom discs and lids also possess dimensional attributes that may be used in vessel reconstruction. Specifically, bottom discs are useful in determining the minimum and maximum number of vessels represented in an assemblage as in most cases there cannot be fewer vessels than there are bottom discs. Exceptions include sealed containers like casks or kegs that have two discs, and cases when there is reason to suspect the original bottom disc of a container had to be discarded and replaced. Lids, on the other hand, are not as useful as bottom discs in estimating the original number of artifacts in an assemblage since they can sometimes be used interchangeably between vessels. For this reason, their dimensions may also not reflect the original diameter of a vessel as a large lid could well have been used to cover a vessel whose diameter was much smaller. However, some lids seem to have been used in connection with a specific, single artifact. Those are usually characterized by the presence of two opposite lateral notches referred to as “handle-stave rebates” (Comey M., 2010: 78) whose purpose is to ensure that the lid is firmly locked on the container. Such specific lids almost always display a prehension system in the form of a handle or lateral battens that facilitate its handling (Figure 5). Bottom discs and lids can be monoxylous or composite, formed by dowelling several boards together in a way that the diameter of the container does not have to be constrained by the dimensions of the material available (Kilby K., 1971: 39).

Figure 5: Both these lids display opposite handle-stave rebates

Figure 5: Both these lids display opposite handle-stave rebates

On D11758 (A), the original position of the handle is finely carved in the wood and marked by three wooden pegs. #830 is characterized by the presence of two wooden battens (one is now missing) fixed to the lid by wooden pegs. Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.

Binding hoops

17Hoops are almost always needed to bind together a vessel’s staves, except when those are dowelled together laterally, and even so, they still may be present (Kilby K., 1971: 93). In Norse Greenland assemblages specifically, traditional hoops made of wood or metal have not been identified. However, ropes made of twisted roots and branches, some of which would most probably have been used as vessel binding hoops, are known from other areas settled by Norse Greenlanders like L’Anse aux Meadows in northern Newfoundland (Wallace B., 2003: 18) (Figure 6, A and B). Another material known to have been used as binding hoops for stave-built vessels is baleen from whales, especially in coastal regions where wood can be scarce (Kelly F., 1997: 285). In Norse Greenland, researchers have identified strips of baleen used as hoops for coopered vessels (Roussell A., 1936: 139-40; Figure 6, C and D). Baleen is an excellent lashing and stitching material, not just used in Greenland but across the Arctic, where this material is appreciated for its strength and its resistance to distortion from contact with water (e.g. Withridge P., 2016: 841; Alix C. et al., 2018: 57). We have not yet had extended access to the baleen strips thought to have been used as binding hoops for stave-built vessels, and further study is needed. For this reason, binding hoops are left aside from the rest of this article, even though we acknowledge that their initial positioning on the back side of the staves is often evidenced by slight discoloration of the wood, or even sometimes by the presence of a lateral groove carved into the stave where it would have been firmly inserted (see Figure 2).

Figure 6: Binding hoops probably used on stave-built vessels: A and B - twisted spruce (Picea sp.) roots from L’Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland; C and D - strips of baleen perforated to ensure their fixation on the vessel (found in the midden at Ø171, Greenland)

Figure 6: Binding hoops probably used on stave-built vessels: A and B - twisted spruce (Picea sp.) roots from L’Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland; C and D - strips of baleen perforated to ensure their fixation on the vessel (found in the midden at Ø171, Greenland)

Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.

Results

Minimum Number of Vessels (MNV)

18Estimation of the MNV for the present corpus has proven difficult due to the general lack of staves and other components found in connection. However, based on similarities in profile, emplacement of the disc-locating groove, and the binding hoops, one example from GUS and another from Ø34 indicate that several staves belonged to the same respective containers. In addition, an almost complete vessel composed of a minimum of 19 staves was excavated at V53d (Figure 7, A). In some cases, it is also possible to identify a single vessel based on the presence of an outstanding stave, such as one displaying decors and features that are absent from any other artifacts. This is typically the case for campanulate staves that are supposed to stand out from other vessels (see Figure 7, B, and Figure 8). Last, as mentioned above, when there is no reason to believe that a single container is characterized by more than one bottom disc, those can be used as good indicators for an MNV. In the corpus, out of 85 bottom discs identified, 65 come from farm buildings rather than midden areas (see Table 1). Assuming that some of the 20 discs found in the middens at Ø34, Ø171, and Ø172 are indicative of repair, a more accurate estimate for MNV is 65. For the rest of the article, we deliberately decided not to discuss our results in terms of a Minimum Number of Vessels, but rather to focus on presenting reconstructed original morphologies and volumetric capacities.

Figure 7: A) Upright conical bucket that could hold around 20 liters. Reconstructed from 19 staves and a bottom disc found at V53d; B) Schematic reconstitution of a campanulate stave cup based on a stave found at V52a; C) Fragment of a monoxyle bottom disc. The container originally measured 13,6 cm in diameter at the bottom

Figure 7: A) Upright conical bucket that could hold around 20 liters. Reconstructed from 19 staves and a bottom disc found at V53d; B) Schematic reconstitution of a campanulate stave cup based on a stave found at V52a; C) Fragment of a monoxyle bottom disc. The container originally measured 13,6 cm in diameter at the bottom

A) The binding hoops have been reconstructed and the accompanying ladle was not found in connection with the container (Roussell A., 1941 278; photo credits: C. Hansen).
B) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.
C) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.

General morphology of the stave-built containers

19Identifiable vessel morphology based on staves’ attributes indicates the presence of open-topped vessels only, characterized by a single disc locating groove located towards the base. In theory, it is possible that some of the broken staves for which only one extremity is conserved originally displayed two disc-locating grooves. However, only archaeologically whole staves for which we could measure the bottom, middle, and upper width (n = 389), were considered when estimating the original morphology of the containers. Since there does not seem to be any major difference between the seven selected sites, the results are presented all together. Four main groups of staves are distinguished, belonging to cylindrical (64%), upright conical (23%), inverted conical (11%), and campanulate vessels (2%) (Table 2).

Table 2: Distribution of the main morphological variants for coopered vessels among the selected staves presenting a complete width (n = 389)

Table 2: Distribution of the main morphological variants for coopered vessels among the selected staves presenting a complete width (n = 389)

The total number of staves for each category does not represent a minimum number of individuals.

20Although cylindrical containers represent the most common form that can take a stave-built vessel, it does not necessarily mean that they were not used for specific tasks. However, such tasks are not easily recognizable solely based on the morphology, without resorting to further investigation such as residue analyses. The second type of container identified was given an upright conical shape designed to constrain the content inside the vessel. Some can be rather small, used to transfer liquids from one container to another, or of much larger dimensions, ideal for storing large quantities of liquids or semi-liquid goods. The third type of container identified, which appears to have been the least common one, takes the form of an inverted cone that is characteristically easier to fill or empty. These vessels, such as water buckets or milking pails, represent 12% of the staves. The fourth group identified is represented by a handful of staves (n = 9) that were found in only three of the seven selected sites. Displaying a unique campanulate (bell-shaped) form sometimes referred to as “campanulate B” (Cleary et al., 1997: 299; Comey M., 2010: 39), they are also characterized by additional characteristics such as a lateral groove carved into the staves’ back, and a tendency to exhibit intricate decoration, making them truly distinctive from the rest of the corpus (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Staves of the campanulate B style found in V52a (A), and V51 (B), belong to fine drinking stave cups displaying intricate decors

Figure 8: Staves of the campanulate B style found in V52a (A), and V51 (B), belong to fine drinking stave cups displaying intricate decors

On the back of each stave, carved lateral grooves indicate the position of the binding hoops which were probably made of baleen or wood, maybe with different colors to accentuate the overall aesthetics (see Figure 6, C and D). Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.

Assessing the volumetric capacity of the stave-built vessels

21The evaluation of the original volumetric capacity of the vessels has been made possible based on 261 staves for which we could also determine the original morphometry (Table 3).

Table 3: Repartition of the four morphological variants of staves based on the estimated original volumetric capacities of the vessels they would have been a part of, expressed in liters (n = 261)

Table 3: Repartition of the four morphological variants of staves based on the estimated original volumetric capacities of the vessels they would have been a part of, expressed in liters (n = 261)

22With a few exceptions, the relative proportion for each of the main three morphological variants (cylindrical, upright conical, and inverted conical) appears similar for each of the five volumetric groups. Most of the corpus (Groups A and B: 76%) represent small items that could hold no more than five liters. Among those, a little less than half belong to containers with a limited volumetric capacity of no more than one liter (Group A). This category of stave-built vessels coincides with tableware utilized for various foodways, such as the remarkable campanulate stave cups mentioned earlier (Figure 8). With volumetric capacities estimated between 0,3 and 1,2 liters, these particular vessels were probably used for the individual consumption of beverages. Furthermore, considering their scarcity in the assemblage (only nine staves distributed between four of the seven sites selected), such vessels may have had a specific purpose or were used during special events. Additional containers reaching volumetric capacities of around two to three liters may also have been used as tableware, for collective usage. Over three liters, we have difficulties imagining drinking vessels that would have been too heavy to handle, but rather items used as intermediaries between a reserve container and the individual cups, or more generally for food processing or storage.

23The third group of stave-built vessels identified in the corpus (Group C: 14%) corresponds to middle-sized containers which would have held between five and ten liters. If some may still have been related to domestic activities associated with the storage of foodstuffs, most of them would probably have been used outside of the main house, in adjacent agropastoral and specialized craft-related buildings such as barns, stables, boathouses, and workshops. These intermediary containers could have been used for milking, processing dairy, transporting water, or caulking materials for boatbuilding. Only a limited number of staves representing 10% of the corpus account for much larger containers that could hold more than ten liters (Group D). Interestingly, such artifacts are not found in all the selected sites, which can indicate that they were used for specific activities that only happened in a few farms, or that such pieces of wood tended to be more recycled than others. It is also among this category of objects that are found most of the handle-staves which originally would have had an external prehension system such as a rope or a staff, indicating the necessity to easily move them around the different farm buildings (Figure 9, A). Others could be temporarily covered by a lid to prevent the intrusion of external agents, such as D11746 found in one of the rooms of stable VI at Sandnes (V51) that could be used to cover a container measuring around 17,5 cm in diameter (Figure 9, B). This object is characterized by a lateral wooden handle pegged to the disc to facilitate its handling, and two handle-stave rebates carved on the rim opposite to one another so that the lid can only be removed by lifting it.

Figure 9: A) Handle-stave from an upright conical vessel with a carved extension. Two small holes have been bored into the extension to attach a rope; B) Lid with two opposite handle-stave rebates and a handle

Figure 9: A) Handle-stave from an upright conical vessel with a carved extension. Two small holes have been bored into the extension to attach a rope; B) Lid with two opposite handle-stave rebates and a handle

B) Note the repair on the side, with the added piece carved to replace the handle-stave rebate. Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.

24The last group of containers identified in the corpus corresponds to large, upright conical storing vats (Group E). Those are represented by two broken staves found at V51, and one complete stave at GUS, although similar finds are known from other Norse Greenlandic farms (Roussell A., 1941: 174; Vebæk C., 1991: 52-54, 1992: 34-35). During the excavation at V51, the archaeologists precisely measured the container's original diameter to 169 cm, inferring a volumetric capacity that would have reached hundreds of liters (Figure 9). More precise measurements could be taken from the stave at GUS, giving an estimated volumetric capacity of around 435 liters. Those kinds of containers are usually found in specific rooms within the farmhouse referred to as búr in Old Norse (Sigurðardóttir S., 2017), which can translate to pantry. Being so massive, they were probably meant never to be moved once full, thus ensuring a life span of many years.

Figure 10: A) One of the two staves found at V51 that were part of a large storing vat; B) The imprint left by the container on the ground helped determine its original diameter; C) Those upright conical Viking Age storing vats are exhibited at the reconstructed Stöng farmstead in Iceland

Figure 10: A) One of the two staves found at V51 that were part of a large storing vat; B) The imprint left by the container on the ground helped determine its original diameter; C) Those upright conical Viking Age storing vats are exhibited at the reconstructed Stöng farmstead in Iceland

A) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.
B) Credits: From Roussel A., 1936: Figure 22, 35.
C) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.

Discussion

25The reconstruction of the original morphology and the estimation of the volumetric capacity of the stave-built containers offer a unique opportunity to explore the wide array of activities in which they may have been used, from generic domestic tasks to more specific, agropastoral-related activities. The low proportion of large containers is intriguing since they would have been present on all permanent farmsteads (Sigríður S., 2017). This may reflect the overall excavation strategies that have lately been mostly focused on middens rather than the farm buildings where such containers are usually found. It is also possible that they were frequently recycled into smaller items or as fuel, and as such we cannot draw any conclusion regarding their original morphology. Reconditioning seems likely knowing that flat and regular plank-like staves, discs, and lids can easily be turned into smaller stave-built components, or other items like spoons, trenchers, pegs, etc. Whereas only specialized woodworkers can manufacture some of the most complex containers, basic repair or reuse can be done by almost everybody. Moreover, studies on textiles (Hayeur-Smith M. et al., 2016) and additional wooden finds (Andersen E. and C. Malmros, 1993; Pinta É., 2022) show that repair and recycling were frequent in Norse Greenland, for example with some staves being used as writing support (Imer L., 2017: 291). Such activities seem to have taken place within most farmsteads, maybe driven by limited access to some materials, perhaps especially during the winter months when traveling was more difficult than other seasons.

26It is reasonable to assume that most of the smaller containers, with a volumetric capacity under five liters, were used as kitchen and dairy-ware for preparation, displaying, and serving of foodstuffs, or as tableware to eat and drink. Except for a few limited artifacts like the decorated campanulate stave cups (Figure 7), vessels that would have been used individually are not easily separated from communal ones. Since those are found in both the large manor site V51 and more common medium-sized farms, they do not seem to have exclusively belonged to the elite, but more generally, they may represent artifacts that were used for specific purposes or to drink beverages out of the ordinary. Aside from these fine items, most of the stave cups or bowls identified in the corpus are simpler, plain everyday items regularly identified in Northern European medieval archaeological collections, from the British Isles to Russia (i.e., Bartholin T., 1979; Kolchin B., 1989; Morris C., 2000).

27Among the countless activities in which stave-built containers may have been used, zooarchaeological data indicates that dairy production–from cattle, goat, and sheep–was a staple of Norse culture (Enghoff I., 2003; Nyegaard G., 2018; Smiarowski K., 2022). Traditional Nordic dairy products range from fresh milk, whey, butter, and cheese such as yoghurt-like skyr which is still a core ingredient of the Icelandic diet (Narvhus A. and R. Abrahamsen, 2023). Stave-built vessels such as pails, churns, and tubs, often characterized by the presence of a prehension system like a rope, or a baton, were used to collect, transfer, transport, and transform milk at the summer shielings and the farm buildings. Much larger storage containers are also found in association with most of the farmsteads. These would have been filled with products like skyr and sýra–fermented whey–that can also be used as a preservative agent to cure meat and plants (Gísladóttir H., 1994; Mehler N., 2011: 178-179). Usually intended to ensure that enough foodstuff will be available during the winter months, at the larger settlements such as the church farm of Sandnes (V51), it is also possible that some of these large containers were used to collect tithes from surrounding farms.

28In addition to the storage and curing of foodstuffs, written sources suggest that fermented cereal beverages were brewed in Norse Greenland for specific occasions and paleoenvironmental data show that barley was grown in the Eystribyggð (Henriksen P. S., 2016). In Iceland, there has been discussion regarding the extent to which cereal cultivation might have been driven by the status gained by brewing beer (e.g. Zori D. et al., 2013; Mooney D. and L. Guðmundsdóttir, 2020), and the same may also have occurred in Greenland. However, recent studies show that cereal grains are ubiquitous across Viking Age farmsteads of all sizes and statuses, including small dwelling sites (Ritchey M., 2019; Catlin K., 2021; Catlin K. and D. Bolender, 2022), which could imply that small-scale brewing was much more common than previously thought. Traditional Nordic beer brewing involves various stave-built containers (e.g. Nordland O., 1969; Laitinen M., 2019; Garshol L., 2020), from mashing and fermenting vats to drinking vessels, some resembling the decorated campanulate stave cups identified in several sites in Greenland.

29Several other fundamental activities for Norse agropastoral settlers across the North Atlantic islands would have necessitated wooden containers, such as wool processing (e.g. Hayeur-Smith M., 2020). Specifically, as shown by paleoenvironmental and anthropological studies in Iceland, part of the transformation process of the wool - as well as regular laundry needs -necessitated large quantities of urine which were stored in stave-built containers usually kept in the byre (Buckland P. and D. Perry, 1989; Sigurðardóttir S., 2017). Future analyses of potential residues left within the wooden containers could help better understand which activities they may have been used for.

Conclusion

30Typological analyses of 631 stave-built vessel components made possible the exploration of the diversity of morphologies, dimensions, and overall aesthetics of composite containers excavated from medieval Norse Greenland farmsteads. From small drinking cups to large storing vats, the ubiquity of stave-built vessels is substantial chronologically throughout the occupation of the settlements, and spatially from middle-sized farmsteads to elite manors.

31Within the domestic sphere, most of the vessels take a simple, cylindrical shape, and seem to have been used for processing, serving, and consuming liquid or semi-liquid foodstuffs like broth or gruel. More complex, ornamented items are also present, accounting for the Norse woodworkers' skills in designing high-status coopered tableware, some of which may represent vessels made to drink exceptional beverages. In addition, based on comparisons with contemporaneous archaeological data and more recent ethnographical contexts from Iceland and other Nordic regions, larger stave-built vessels appear to have been used in most activities related to agropastoralism, from dairy production to wool processing, with additional crafts such as brewing which can also be expected to have taken place.

32To help further investigate past domestic and agropastoral practices in the Norse Greenlandic settlements, in addition to increasing the corpus of archaeological materials, the analysis of microbotanical remains and other amorphous organic residues is needed to precisely identify which plant (e.g., tubers, berries, cereals, algae) or animal products (e.g., dairy) were previously held, processed, and cooked in such vessels (Colonese A. et al., 2017; Prado S., 2023).

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Alix, Claire, Mason, Owen K. and Lauren Norman, “Whales, Wood and Baleen in Northwestern Alaska - Reflection on Whaling through Wood and Boat Technology at the Rising Whale site” in Lee Sangmog (dir.), Whale on the Rock II, Ulsan, Ulsan Petroglyph Museum, 2018, p. 11-68.

Andersen, Erik and Claus Malmros, “Ship's parts found in the Viking Settlement in Greenland. Preliminary assessments and wood-diagnoses” in Birthe L. Clausen (dir.), Viking voyages to North America, Roskilde, Viking Ship Museum, 1993, p. 118-122.

Arneborg, Jette, “Greenland and Europe” in William W. Fitzhugh and Elizabeth I. Ward (dir.), Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga, Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press, 2000, p. 304-317.

Arneborg, Jette, “Det Europæiske Landnam - Nordboerne i Grønland” in Hans-Christian Gulløv (dir.), Grønlands forhistorie, Copenhagen, Nordisk Forlag, 2004, p. 219-278.

Arneborg, Jette, “The Norse settlements in Greenland” in Stephen Brink and Niel S. Price (dir.), The Viking World, London, Routledge, 2008, p. 588-597.

Arneborg, Jette, and Hans-Christian Gulløv, Man, culture and environment in ancient Greenland: report on a research program, Copenhagen, Danish National Museum and Danish Polar Center, 1998.

Arneborg, Jette, Niels Lynnerup, Jan Heinemeir et al., “Norse Greenland Dietary Economy ca. AD 980-ca. AD 1450: Introduction”, Journal of the North Atlantic, vol 3, 2012, p. 1-39.

Bartholin, Thomas, “The Picea-Larix problem”, IAWA Bulletin, 1979, vol. 1, p. 7-10.

Buckland, Paul D. and David W. Perry, “Ectoparasites of sheep from Storaborg, Iceland and their interpretation. Piss, parasites and people, a palaeoecological perspective”, Hikuin, vol. 15, 1989, p. 37-46.

Catlin, Kathryn A., “Small Dwelling Sites in the Medieval Settlement of Iceland”, Medieval Archaeology, vol. 65, n° 1, 2021, p. 66-97.

Catlin, Kathryn A. and Douglas J. Bolender, “Beyond the farmstead: the role of dispersed dwellings in the settlement of Iceland” in Dawn E. Mooney, Lísabet Guðmundsdóttir, Barbro Dahl et al. (dir.), Expanding Horizons: Settlement Patterns and Outfield Land Use in the Norse North Atlantic, Bergen, University Museum of Bergen, 2022, p. 45-64.

Colonese, Andre C., Jessica Hendy, Alexandre Lucquin et al., New criteria for the molecular identification of cereal grains associated with archaeological artefacts, Scientific Reports, vol. 7, n° 1, 2017, p. 6633.

Cleary, Rose M., Hurley, Maurice F. and Elizabeth Shee Twohig, Skiddy's Castle and Christ Church, Cork. Excavations 1974-77 by D.C. Twohig, Cork, Cork Corporation, 1997.

Comey, Martin, Medieval stave-built wooden vessels in Ireland and Russia, Thesis in Archaeology, University College London, 2002.

Comey, Martin, “Stave-Built Wooden Vessels from Medieval Ireland”, The Journal of Irish Archaeology, vol. 12-13, 2003, p. 33-77.

Comey, Martin, Coopers and coopering in Viking Age Dublin, Dublin, National Museum of Ireland, 2010.

Cywa, Katarzyna, Trees and shrubs used in medieval Poland for making everyday objects”, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, vol. 27, 2018, p. 111-136.

Earwood, Caroline, Domestic wooden artefacts in Britain and Ireland from Neolithic to Viking times, Exeter, University of Exeter Press, 1993.

Enghoff, Inge, “Hunting, Fishing and Animal Husbandry at The Farm Beneath the Sand, Western Greenland: An Archaeozoological Analysis of a Norse Farm in the Western Settlement”, Meddelelser om Grønland. Man & Society, vol. 28, 2003.

Frei, Karin M., Ashley Coutu, Konrad Smiarowski et al., “Was it for walrus? Viking Age settlement and medieval walrus ivory trade in Iceland and Greenland”, World Archaeology, vol. 47, n° 3, 2015, p. 439-466.

Garshol, Lars M., Historical Brewing Techniques: The Lost Art of Farmhouse Brewing, Boulder, Brewers Publications, 2020.

Gísladóttir, Hallgerður, The use of whey in Icelandic households in Patricia Lysaght (dir.), Milk and Milk Products from Medieval to Modern times. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Ethnological Food Research, Ireland, 1992, Edinburgh, Tuckwell Press Ltd, 1994, p. 123-129.

Guðmundsdóttir, Lísabet, “Wood procurement in Norse Greenland (11th to 15th c. AD)”, Journal of Archaeological Science, vol. 134, 2021, p. 105469.

Hannesson, Guðmundur, “Ílátasmíð” in Guðmundur Finnbogason (dir.), Iðnsaga Íslands Vol I, Reykjavík, Iðnaðarmannafélagið í Reykjavík, 1943, p. 365-375.

Hankerson, Fred Putnam, The Cooperage Handbook, New York, Chemical Publishing Company, 1947.

Hather, Jon G., The identification of the Northern European woods: a guide for archaeologists and conservators, London, Archetype Publications, 2000.

Hayeur-Smith, Michèle, Kevin Smith, and Jette Arneborg, The ‘Burgundian’ hat from Herjolfsnes, Greenland: new discoveries, new dates”, Danish Journal of Archaeology, vol. 4, n° 1, 2016, p. 21-32.

Hayeur-Smith, Michèle, The Valkyries’ Loom: The Archaeology of Cloth Production and Female Power in the North Atlantic, Gainesville, University Press of Florida, 2020.

Henriksen, Peter Steen, Norse agriculture in Greenland? Farming in a remote medieval landscape” in Jan Klápště (dir.), Agrarian Technology in the Medieval Landscape, Turnhout, Brepols, 2016, p. 237-245.

Horn, Jonathan A., Tankards of the British Iron Age”, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81, 2015, p. 311-341.

Imer, Lisbeth M., Peasants and Prayers. The inscriptions of Norse Greenland, Odense, University Press of Southern Denmark, 2017.

Jenkins, J. Geraint, Traditional Country Craftsman, London, Routledge, 1965.

Kelly, Fergus, Early Irish Farming, Dublin, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1997.

Kilby, Kenneth, The Cooper and His Trade, London, Linden Publishing, 1971.

Kilby, Kenneth, The Village Cooper, Shire Album 28, London, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1983.

Kilby, Kenneth, Coopers and Coopering, London, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, Shire Library, 2004.

Kolchin, Boris A., 1989, “Wooden Artefacts from Medieval Novgorod, BAR International Series, vol. 495, 1989.

Laitinen, Mika, Viking Age Brew: The Craft of Brewing Sahti Farmhouse Ale, Chicago, Chicago Review Press, 2019.

Lynnerup, Neils, “The Greenland Norse. A biological-anthropological study”, Meddelelsser om Grønland, Man and Society, vol. 24, 1998, p. 3-149.

Lynnerup, Neils, Endperiod Demographics of the Greenland Norse”, Journal of the North Atlantic, vol. 7, 2014, p. 18-24.

Madsen, Christian K., Pastoral settlement, farming, and hierarchy in Norse Vatnahverfi, South Greenland, Thesis in Archaeology, University of Copenhagen, 2014.

Madsen, Christian K., Marine Shielings in Medieval Norse Greenland, Arctic Anthropology, vol. 56, n° 1, 2019, p. 119-159.

Madsen, Christian K., Bjarne Grønnow, and Hans Harmsen, Greenland, Archaeology of in Claire Smith (dir.), Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 2020, p. 4761-4776.

Marlière, Élise, L'outre et le tonneau dans l'Occident romain, Montagnac, Éditions Mergoil, 2002.

Marlière, Élise, “Tonneaux et amphores à Vindolanda : contribution à la connaissance de l’approvisionnement des troupes stationnées sur la frontière Nord de l’Empire” in Andrew Birley (dir.), Vindolanda, The excavations 2001-2002, Bardon Mill, Vindolanda Trust, 2003, p. 128-179.

Mehler, Natasha, “From self-sufficiency to external supply and famine: Foodstuffs, their preparation and storage in Iceland” in Jan Klápště and Petr Sommer (dir.), Processing, Storage, Distribution of Food. Food in the Medieval Rural Environment, Turnhout, Brepols, 2001, p. 173-186.

Mille, Pierre, Les techniques de travail du bois au Moyen Âge - étude du mobilier domestique de la fouille de Charavines-Colletière, Master Thesis in Archaeology, École des Hautes études en sciences sociales, 1989.

Mille, Pierre, “Les bois archéologiques de Saint-Denis. Savoir-faire et usages domestiques au Moyen Age”, Recherches Archéologiques, vol. 22, CNRS éditions, Paris, 2022.

Mille, Pierre, Deborde, Gilles and Anthony Dumontet, “Le mobilier domestique en bois médiéval et moderne de la fouille de l’Hôtel du Département à Troyes (Aube)”, Revue archéologique de l’Est, vol. 67, 2018, p. 389-423.

Mooney, Dawn E. and Lísabet Guðmundsdóttir, “Barley cultivation in Viking Age Iceland in light of evidence from Lækjargata 10–12, Reykjavík in Santeri Vanhanen and Per Lagerås (dir.), Archaeobotanical studies of past plant cultivation in northern Europe, Eelde, Barkhuis Publishing, 2020, p. 5-20.

Mooney, Dawn E., Pinta, Élie and Lísabet Guðmundsdóttir, “Wood resource exploitation in the Norse North Atlantic: a review of recent research and future directionsin Dawn E. Mooney, Lísabet Guðmundsdóttir, Barbro Dahl et al. (dir.), Expanding Horizons: settlement patterns and outfield land use in the Norse North Atlantic, Bergen, University of Bergen, 2022, p. 187-208.

Morris, Carole, Craft, industry and everyday life: wood and woodworking in anglo-scandinavian and medieval York, York, Council for British Archaeology, 2000.

Narvhus, Judith A. and Roger K. Abrahamsen, Traditional and modern Nordic fermented milk products: A review, International Dairy Journal, vol. 142, 2023, p. 105641.

Nordland, Odd, Brewing and beer traditions in Norway. The Social Anthropological background of the brewing industry, Oslo, Univeritetesforlaget, 1969.

Nosrat, Samin, Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat: Mastering the Elements of Good Cooking, Edinburgh, Canongate, 2017.

Nyegaard, Georg, Dairy Farmers and Seal Hunters: Subsistence on a Norse Farm in the Eastern Settlement, Greenland, Journal of the North Atlantic, vol. 37, 2018.

Pinta, Élie, Norse Management of Wooden Resources across the North Atlantic: Highlights from the Norse Greenlandic Settlements, Environmental Archaeology, vol. 26, n° 2, 2018, p. 209-221.

Pinta, Élie, Provenance, gestion et transformation du bois dans la société norroise groenlandaise (Xe-XVe siècles) : analyse croisée d'un corpus de récipients assemblés et monoxyles des établissements de l'Est (Eystribyggð) et de l'Ouest (Vestribyggð), Thesis in Archaeology, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 2022.

Pinta, Élie, Pacheco-Forés, Sofía I., Wallace, Euan P. et al., “Provenancing wood used in the Norse Greenlandic settlements: A biogeochemical study using hydrogen, oxygen, and strontium isotopes”, Journal of Archaeological Science, vol. 131, 2021, p. 105407.

Pugsley, Paola, Roman Domestic Wood. Analysis of the morphology, manufacture and use of selected categories of domestic wooden artefacts with particular reference to the materiel from Roman Britain, BAR International Series, vol. 1118, 2003.

Pollan, Michael, Cooked: A Natural History of Transformation, London, Penguin, 2013.

Prado, Shalen, Peat, Heath, and Cereal: Investigating Contributions of Nonhuman communities to the Poiesis of Pictland through Microbotanical and Microalgae Residues, Thesis in Archaeology, McMaster University, 2023.

Rathje, William and Cullen Murphy, Rubbish!: The Archaeology of Garbage, Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 2001.

Ritchey, Melissa M., Regional Variation in Grass, Sedge, and Cereal Cultivation During the Viking Age in Skagafjörður, North Iceland the Viking Age in Skagafjörður, North Iceland, Thesis in Archaeology, University of Massachusetts Boston, 2019.

Roussell, Aage, Sandnes and the neighbouring farms, Meddelelser om Grønland, vol. 82, n° 2, 1936.

Roussell, Aage, Farms and churches in the mediaeval Norse settlements of Greenland, Meddelelser om Grønland, vol. 89, n° 1, 1941.

Sands, Rob and Jonathan A. Horn, “Bring Me Three Large Beers: Wooden Tankards at Roman Vindolanda, Oxford Journal of Archeology, vol. 36, n° 1, 2017, p. 71-83.

Schiek, Siegwalt, Das Gräberfeld der Merowingerzeit bei Oberflacht, Stuttgart, Konrad Thiess Verlag, 1992.

Sigurðardóttir, Sigríður, Þrif og þvottar í torfbæjum, Akureyri, Byggðasafn Skagfirðinga, 2017.

Smiarowski, Konrad, E172 Tatsip Ataa Midden Excavation 2009 & 2010 Preliminary Excavation Report, Unpublished field report, 2010.

Smiarowski, Konrad, Historical Ecology of Norse Greenland: Zooarchaeology and Climate Change Responses, Thesis in Archaeology, City University of New York, 2022.

Smiarowski, Konrad, Ramona Harrison, Megan Hicks et al., Zooarchaeology of the Scandinavian settlements in Iceland and Greenland, in Umberto Albarella, Mauro Rizzetto, Hannah Russ et al. (dir.), The Oxford Handbook of Zooarchaeology, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017, p. 148-163.

Twede, Diana, The cask age: the technology and history of wooden barrels, Packaging Technology and Science, vol. 18, n° 5, 2005, p. 253-264.

Vebæk, Christian L., The Church topography of the eastern settlement and the excavation of the Benedictine convent in Uunartoq Fjord, Meddelelser om Grønland. Man & Society, vol. 14, 1991.

Vebæk, Christian L., Vatnahverfi: an Inland District of the Eastern Settlement in Greenland, Meddelelser om Grønland. Man & Society, vol. 17, 1992.

Vebæk, Christian L., “Narsaq: a Norse landnáma farm”, Meddelelser om Grønland. Man & society, vol. 18, 1993.

Vésteinsson, Orri, Parishes and Communities in Norse Greenland, Journal of the North Atlantic, vol. 2, 2010, p. 138-150.

Vésteinsson, Orri, “Nomination to UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Kujataa – a subarctic farming landscape in Greenland”, 2016, https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1536/documents/.

Wallace, Birgitta, The Norse in Newfoundland: L'Anse aux Meadows and Vinland”, Newfoundland and Labrador Studies, vol. 19, n° 1, 2003, p. 5-43.

Westphal, Florian, Die Holzfunde von Haithabu, Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu vol. 11, Neumünster: Wachholtz, 2006.

Withridge, Peter, “Classic Thule [Classic Precontact Inuit]” in Max T. Friesen and Owen K. Mason (dir.), Oxford Handbook of Prehistoric Arctic, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016, p. 827-849.

Zori, Davide, Jesse Byock, Egill Erlendsson et al., Feasting in Viking Age Iceland: sustaining a chiefly political economy in a marginal environment, Antiquity, vol. 87, n° 335, p. 150-165.

Haut de page

Notes

1 According to Christian K. Madsen (pers. com., 2024), shielings in the Vestribyggð are heavily underrepresented due to a lack of surveys in the region. Considering a ratio of farmstead/shieling similar to the Eystribyggð, it can be estimated that as many as 240 shielings were present in the Vestribyggð.

2 We opted here for an English translation of the German words Daubenschale and Daubenbecher, used to describe domestic stave-built vessels used for drinking during Merovingian times.

3 The Norse site commonly known as GUS gets its name from the Danish Gården Under Sandet, also referred to as ‘The Farm Beneath the Sand’ (Arneborg J. and H. C. Gulløv, 1998).

4 The number of stave-built vessel components selected from this site may not reflect all the available material (see Smiarowski, 2010) and future work is needed.

5 This corresponds to the mathematic formula V = π*r2*h, where ‘V’ is the volume, ‘r’ is the radius, and ‘h’ is the height.

6 This corresponds to the mathematical formula V = h* π/3*(r12+r122+ r1* r2), where ‘V’ is the volume, ‘r1’is the smallest radius, ‘r2’ is the biggest radius, and ‘h’ is the height.

7 We acknowledge it is quite possible that a vessel was originally not perfectly circular but elliptic, in which case the estimated original volumetric capacity would be calculated differently than those of a cylinder or a truncated cone.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1: Location of the seven selected sites within the approximate extent of the two main regions of the Norse settlement in Greenland
Légende V51 refers to Sandnes; V52a to Umiviarssuk; V53d to Austmannadalur; Ø34 to Qorlortup Itinnera; Ø171 to Tasilikulooq; Ø172 to Tatsip Ataa. Credits: Élie Pinta, based on Madsen C., 2019: Figure 1, 120).
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 594k
Titre Figure 2: Illustration of the major stave-built vessel components and associated vocabulary mentioned in the text
Crédits Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified from Comey M., 2010: Figure 6, 14.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 136k
Titre Figure 3: Illustration of the four basic shapes of a stave-built vessel, and the general morphology of the staves in each of them: A) cask; B) cylindrical; C) upright conical; D) inverted conical
Crédits Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified after Comey M., 2010: Figure 15, 26.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 171k
Titre Figure 4: Projection of the abutting edges of a stave to estimate the original internal radius of the vessel
Crédits Credits: Élie Pinta. Modified from Mille P., 1989: 158, 2022: 200. Photo credits: Pinta É., 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 108k
Titre Figure 5: Both these lids display opposite handle-stave rebates
Légende On D11758 (A), the original position of the handle is finely carved in the wood and marked by three wooden pegs. #830 is characterized by the presence of two wooden battens (one is now missing) fixed to the lid by wooden pegs. Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 210k
Titre Figure 6: Binding hoops probably used on stave-built vessels: A and B - twisted spruce (Picea sp.) roots from L’Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland; C and D - strips of baleen perforated to ensure their fixation on the vessel (found in the midden at Ø171, Greenland)
Crédits Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 271k
Titre Figure 7: A) Upright conical bucket that could hold around 20 liters. Reconstructed from 19 staves and a bottom disc found at V53d; B) Schematic reconstitution of a campanulate stave cup based on a stave found at V52a; C) Fragment of a monoxyle bottom disc. The container originally measured 13,6 cm in diameter at the bottom
Légende A) The binding hoops have been reconstructed and the accompanying ladle was not found in connection with the container (Roussell A., 1941 278; photo credits: C. Hansen).B) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.C) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 368k
Titre Table 2: Distribution of the main morphological variants for coopered vessels among the selected staves presenting a complete width (n = 389)
Légende The total number of staves for each category does not represent a minimum number of individuals.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 33k
Titre Figure 8: Staves of the campanulate B style found in V52a (A), and V51 (B), belong to fine drinking stave cups displaying intricate decors
Légende On the back of each stave, carved lateral grooves indicate the position of the binding hoops which were probably made of baleen or wood, maybe with different colors to accentuate the overall aesthetics (see Figure 6, C and D). Photo credits: Élie Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 203k
Titre Table 3: Repartition of the four morphological variants of staves based on the estimated original volumetric capacities of the vessels they would have been a part of, expressed in liters (n = 261)
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 65k
Titre Figure 9: A) Handle-stave from an upright conical vessel with a carved extension. Two small holes have been bored into the extension to attach a rope; B) Lid with two opposite handle-stave rebates and a handle
Légende B) Note the repair on the side, with the added piece carved to replace the handle-stave rebate. Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 354k
Titre Figure 10: A) One of the two staves found at V51 that were part of a large storing vat; B) The imprint left by the container on the ground helped determine its original diameter; C) Those upright conical Viking Age storing vats are exhibited at the reconstructed Stöng farmstead in Iceland
Crédits A) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.B) Credits: From Roussel A., 1936: Figure 22, 35.C) Photo credits: É. Pinta, 2022.
URL http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/docannexe/image/19127/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 444k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Élie Pinta et Pierre Mille, « Stave-built wooden vessels from the Medieval Norse Greenlandic settlements: an overview of their diversity and potential uses »IdeAs [En ligne], 24 | 2024, mis en ligne le 01 octobre 2024, consulté le 14 février 2025. URL : http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ideas/19127 ; DOI : https://0-doi-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/10.4000/12hse

Haut de page

Auteurs

Élie Pinta

Élie Pinta is an archaeologist specializing in the analysis of wooden material culture recovered from Norse settlements in the North Atlantic, specifically in Greenland and at L’Anse aux Meadows in Canada. Élie Pinta is a Postdoctoral Fellow (Fyssen Foundation, France) and Visiting Scholar at Arizona State University’s School of Human Evolution and Social Change (USA) and the Archaeology Museum at the University of Stavanger in Norway.
elie.pinta[at]gmail.com

Pierre Mille

Pierre Mille is an archaeologist, xylologist, and dendrologist at the Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives (Inrap) in Lyon. Specializing in the study of historical woods, particularly those dated to the Middle Ages, Pierre Mille has conducted excavations at numerous medieval sites: Charavines (Isère, first half of the 11th century); moulins de Thervay (Jura, 10th-12th centuries); Tronçais (Chavagnes, Allier, 14th century); Pineuilh (Gironde, late 10th-early 13th centuries). In charge of the study of the wood collection from Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis, 9th-16th centuries), he oversaw the work Les bois archéologiques de Saint-Denis, Savoir-faire et usages domestiques au Moyen Âge, published by CNRS-Inrap in 2022. Pierre Mille also works on earlier periods, including wooden remains from the Bronze and Iron Ages, as well as from Antiquity (collections from Nîmes, Saint-Flour, Lyon, Reims, etc.). He has a particular interest in the theme of wine trade and published “Étude de trois grands tonneaux mis au jour à Reims/Durocortorum (Marne) : le savoir-faire des tonneliers antiques” in 2020 in the Journal Gallia.
p.mille.bois[at]wanadoo.fr

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search