Scientists realize 'Viking' shipwreck is something else entirely

Live Science ^ | March 5, 2025 | Tom Metcalfe

[SunkenCiv]

A more than 500-year-old shipwreck off the coast of Sweden isn't a Viking vessel after all, scientists have found.

A 15th-century shipwreck off the coast of Sweden may be Scandinavia's oldest shipwreck built in the innovative "carvel" style — a design that gave it the strength to carry heavy cannons, archaeologists say.

The wreck at Landfjärden, south of Stockholm, is one of five in the area that have been known since the 1800s. They were commonly thought to have been from ships dating to the Viking Age (A.D. 793 to 1066).

But last year, maritime archaeologists at Vrak, the museum of wrecks in Stockholm, revealed that four of the wrecks date to the 1600s and 1700s and that the oldest wreck was built before 1480 and perhaps as early as the 1460s, museum curator and project manager Håkan Altrock said in a statement.

"It's a large ship, likely about 35 metres [115 feet] long and 10 metres [33 feet] wide," he said. "The ship's frame still rises high above the seabed, and in the stern, both the sternpost and rudder remain upright."

The most significant aspect of the wreck, now known as "Vrak 5," is that it was built in the "carvel" style, with planks on the hull that were flush with neighboring planks so that the whole hull surface was relatively smooth, Altrock said.

...the use of carvel-style flush planks — an innovation from the Mediterranean dating to about the seventh century A.D. — meant that a ship's hull could be reinforced with framing to make it stronger. This was an important consideration when ships started carrying cannons in the 15th century, Altrock said, so traditional "clinker-built" ships soon became obsolete.

[Nik Naym]

You buy one, you get one free.

[Pennsyltucky Boy]

Carvel style looks more like Willie the Whale ice cream cake. Buy one please.

[Verginius Rufus]

Read Snorri Sturluson's Saga of Harald Sigurtharson (Hardruler), in the Heimskringla. He is the Norwegian king who was killed at Stamford Bridge. Snorri was not too fond of Duke William.

[Verginius Rufus]

I'm no king, but he's in my genealogical attic.

We don't get to pick our ancestors. Everyone must have ancestors who were born out of wedlock if you trace back enough generations. I have one a mere 12 generations back (I don't know his year of birth but he was more or less a contemporary of William Shakespeare).

Probably most Europeans are descended from Charlemagne, whose grandfather Charles Martel was born out of wedlock.

[SunkenCiv]

I’ve got at least one of those in my attic, but the father had not married (uh, I think) and was responsible enough that he made sure his blessed accident (actually at least two) were taken care of. Elizabethan era, like yours. And it’s merely family folklore, I’ve never done the legwork.

Given what happened to some legit birth folks who wound up doing pretty well during the Tudors, it may have been better to be born out of wedlock.

[Verginius Rufus]

I was alluding to the fact that Duke William was known as William the Bastard before he became king of England.

My illegitimate ancestor was the son of a nobleman of a small city in Europe (not in Britain)--the nobles seem to have had lots of illegitimate offspring but often took care of them. In the case of my ancestors they were set up as architects.

European royalty tended to have lots of illegitimate children by their mistresses--during the reign of Charles II of England, people who didn't want his younger brother to become king made an unsuccessful attempt to have one of Charles' illegitimate sons made the successor.

[SunkenCiv]

He’s up my tree, but then, so is Alfred the Great, Charlemagne, all thanks to my “gateway ancestor”. That’s a different line than my personal bastard. :^)