Bornholm`s fortresses - Magt – borg og landskab :: Borgforskning.org

Transcription

Bornholm’s fortresses: status and perspectives from the Neolithic to Medieval Periods
Bornholm’s fortresses: status and perspectives
from the Neolithic to Medieval Periods
By Finn Ole Sonne Nielsen and Benny Staal
There are seven fortresses on Bornholm that have been known throughout historical
times. Even though these fortresses are well known in the literature, none of them
have been accurately investigated and described (although several attempts have been
made to do so). Numerous aspects need to be clarified in order to be able to correctly
interpret the fortresses – no one really knows how old they are, for example, or if they
were in use at the same time. The Bornholm Fortress Project was therefore established
in 2011 with two objectives: To fully describe the known fortresses and to identify
the sites of unknown ancient fortresses. This article mainly focuses on the first task.
Bornholm Museum has also started working on the second task, however, and has
already identified more than 50 potential sites with archaeological remains of unknown
ancient fortresses.
Runsa borg – Representative Life on a Migration Period Hilltop Site 255
Introduction
The Danish island of Bornholm is located in the
southern Baltic Sea between Germany-Poland
and Sweden. Linguistically and historically,
the island is most closely connected with the
southeasten part of the Swedish province
Scania. Bornholm is largely a rocky island,
and the northern coast consists of vertical rock
cliffs. To seafarers arriving from the north,
Bornholm seemed to tower above the sea like
a castle. This is perhaps why the Vikings called
the island Burgenda Land, the Viking word
“burg” being related to the present-day Danish
word “borg”, meaning stronghold, fortress
or castle. In the 1231 census compiled for
Danish King Valdemar II, the island is called
Burghændhold, later Borringholm. However,
the names Borglandet or Borgholmen are more
probably suggestive of “the country/island with
the many fortresses”.
Adam of Bremen wrote in about 1070 that
Ulmo/Holmus was the busiest Danish harbour
and reliable anchoring site for the ships sailing
towards the barbarian countries and Greece
(Lund, 1978). In several Middle Age writings,
Bornholm is referred to solely as “Holmen”,
meaning “the island”.
Seafaring has always been dangerous. Thus,
right up to modern times, mariners have sought
landfall during the whole voyage as a safety
measure. Bornholm has, as is also the case today,
been an optimal place to seek shelter when
storms threatened; irrespective of the wind
direction, the island has been able to provide
shelter. Access to clean water and fresh food was
also of vital importance to seafarers right up to
modern times. Bornholm’s favourable location
with good natural harbours and landing stages
with possibilities for provisioning has not only
resulted in rich trade, but also the need for
protection, as trade, robbery and assault often
go hand in hand. The Baltic Sea did not allow
for winter navigation, but during the rest of
the year the population most likely lived in
perpetual fear of attack from the sea. Fortresses
and fortifications were thus constructed at
easily defended strategic spots, perhaps as early
as the Stone Age and Bronze Age. Warning
beacons were used to warn of a possible hostile
attack or an actual invasion. On the other
hand, the island provided a good view out over
the Baltic Sea. Here it was possible to keep
watch and be prepared to attack commercial
vessels that strayed too close to the coast. When
Bornholm’s pirates faced retaliation, effective
defences and fortresses were a necessity.
Together with the Swedish islands of Øland
and Gotland, Bornholm belongs to the rich
Baltic islands with numerous treasure finds
from the Danish Late Iron Age (375 AD to
750 AD), Viking period (750 AD to 1050 AD)
and Early Middle Ages (1050 AD to 1350 AD).
Another common feature shared by the three
islands is the presence of many fortresses.
For many years, Bornholms Museum has
wanted to continue Ole Klindt-Jensen’s fortress
research – an endeavour that was interrupted
by his untimely death in 1980 (Klindt-Jensen,
1951; 1957).
Seven fortresses are clearly visible on
Bornholm: Ringborgen. Gamleborg in
Paradisbakkerne, Gamleborg in Almindingen,
Lilleborg, Hammershus, Borgen and Storeborg
256 Runsa Borg – Representative Life on a Migration Period Hilltop Site
Fig. 1 The Baltic region around the year 880. The English merchant Wulfstan sailed south of Bornholm at that time
and wrote “Burgenda land was on our port side and they have their own king”. After Bately, 2009, fig. 5.
(Zahrtmann, 1927 Thrane, 2011). Their
construction dates have not yet been fully
determined (fig. 2).
This does not sound like a large number, but
we are quite certain that there used to be
many more. The known fortresses alone have
several associated defence works and baileys
that have not been registered or investigated.
Although it has hitherto proven difficult to
date these fortresses, new technologies such
as LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)
maps, geophysical measurements and the use
of metal detectors make it much easier for us
to select the best sites for investigation. Of
the known fortresses, Borgen, located in the
forest Rø Plantage, and Storeborg, located
near the bog Spellingemosen in Rø Parish,
have not yet been dated. The objective is to
reliably date all the fortifications. As objects
of research, Denmark’s prehistoric fortresses
are a generally neglected area despite the
fact that these were of great and perhaps
decisive significance for societal structure
and development, not least for unification
of the state in the latter part of the Danish
Iron Age (Andersen, 1992). “Borgprojekt
Bornholm” (The Bornholm Fortress Project)
was initiated in 2011. This article describes
the current status of fortress research on
Bornholm focussing on the seven known
fortresses. In addition, we will review theories
and methods for future fortress research on
the island.
Castles and defence
in historical sources
Bornholm’s central location in the Baltic
Sea has probably necessitated a military
organisation and a warning system as far back
Fig. 2 Bornholm’s four herreder/counties (red) and fifteen sogne/parishes (black) boundaries. The seven known
fortresses are indicated by red stars. The place names mentioned in the article are also shown.
as the Neolithic Period. In the archaeological
material, however, a picture of a military
organisation with weapons and traces of
horsemanship first appears in graves from
the 1st century BC (Jørgensen, 1991; 1999;
Nielsen 1996). It was also at that time that
the island’s economic, political, judicial and
religious centre, Sorte Muld, was established
near Svaneke, probably ruled by a local king
(Adamsen et al., 2009). Around 880 it is
noted that Bornholm has its own king (Bately,
2009) (see fig. 1). During the 10th century,
the island lost its independence and became
subservient to the Danish crown. According to
Snorre Sturluson’s (1178–1241) saga about the
Norwegian King Olav Tryggvason, Bornholm
was ruled by Earl Veset during the reign of
King Harald Bluetooth (940–986), (Hødnebø
and Magerøy, 1997). Veset’s two sons were
well known Jomsvikings – Viking mercenaries
based at Jomsburg on the Baltic coast. The
saga also relates that King Olav defeated the
Bornholmers when they attacked him. From
this and other sagas we also know that there
were disputes between Veset and his colleague
Strudharald, the Earl of Scania, that resulted in
several of the farmhouses on Bornholm being
burnt to the ground.
The Knytlinga saga from around 1250 tells that
there were 12 royal farms on Bornholm run by
the king’s provost. Around 1080, the post was
held by Egil Ragnarsen. According to the saga,
it was his duty to maintain a marine defence
force and meet the king’s other responsibilities.
We also know from the saga that Egil spent the
summers plundering in Vendland with 18 ships
(Ægidius, 1977).
The presence of fortresses on Bornholm is not
mentioned in written documents until 1264,
when Pope Urban IV accused Archbishop Jakob
Erlandsen (1249–74) of having dispatched an
army to “Borendholm” to completely destroy
the king’s castle (Lilleborg) (Christensen, 1957).
The first specific reports of fortresses date from
1624, at which time local priests were required
to submit a local historical and archaeological
report to the Danish antiquary Ole Worm. One
such report states: “Between Bolsker Parish
and Ibsker Parish there is a large hill on which
one can see the remains of some dilapidated
ramparts and building stones. It is believed that
the inhabitants used it as a refuge when under
attack by enemies, and that they repelled them
by throwing stones times before muskets and
canons came into use” (Bulmer, 1926).
The fortress in question is Gamleborg in
Paradisbakkerne, which is located precisely
on the boundary between Øster herred/
County and Sønder herred/ County (see fig.
2). When Ole Klindt-Jensen investigated the
hill fort, several depots of throwing stones were
discovered (fig. 3) (Klindt-Jensen, 1957).
Fig. 3 Depot of fist-size throwing stones found at
Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne. Photo: National
Museum, Copenhagen.
In the Borringholm’s Chronicle from 1671, the
fortresses are explained as places to which the
population retreated to when foreign enemies
landed on the shores (Ravn, 1671).
Previous investigations of the fortresses
The oldest fortress excavations and surveys
were carried out in 1820–22 at Lilleborg in
Almindingen by Forest Superintendent Hans
Rømer (1770–1836) with the agreement of the
Antiquities Commission in Copenhagen (fig.
4). In 1824, Crown Prince Christian – later
King Christian VIII (1836–48) – performed
archaeological investigations at Gamleborg in
Paradisbakkerne (Klindt-Jensen, 1957). The
hill fort was surveyed by Peter Hauberg (1844–
1928) in the late 1870s. In addition, Hauberg
surveyed the other six fully preserved fortresses
between 1876–78 (figs. 5–7).
From 1885 onwards, Hauberg was employed at
the National Museum and headed restoration
of Hammershus and Lilleborg (Hauberg,
1911 and 1912; Demidoff et al., 1997). Even
though comprehensive excavations were
carried out, the work was not performed by
trained archaeologists – as was the custom
then. The first real archaeological excavations
were performed by Ole Klindt-Jensen
between 1948–58 when he was curator at
the National Museum in Copenhagen. The
archaeological investigations at Gamleborg
in Paradisbakkerne were published in 1957
(fig. 8–9) (Klindt-Jensen, 1957), while the
investigations at Ringborgen (figs. 11–12)
and Gamleborg in Almindingen have only
been published in preliminary reports (Hertz,
1964).
Klindt-Jensen’s investigations at Ringborgen
were based on local historian Peter Thorsen’s
(1872–1947) investigations (fig. 10), which in
turn contained information from the official
records of Poulsker parish priest J. P. Kofoed
(1821–1880) that there were some prominent
earthworks in the parish. Kofoed thought
that they must have been remnants of ancient
fortifications erected by the oldest inhabitants
of the country to combat foreign invasion
(Hartvigsen, 1934). Peter Thorsen expanded
upon the priest’s ideas and ensured that all
the old earthworks in Poulsker, Pedersker and
Bodilsker parishes were recorded. With the
acceptance of the landowners, preservation
orders were placed on the best preserved sections
(Thorsen, 1929). Klindt-Jensen attempted
to date Ringborgen, the nearby earthworks
Bukkediget and the Holtsemyre earthworks
located 2.5 km east of the fort. They could not
be dated, though, in his opinion, a few artefacts
from Ringborgen it self could be dated to
around 400 AD.
New investigations at Ringborgen and
Lilleborg
In 1989, aerial photographs revealed the
presence of an additional circular rampart and
moat around Ringborgen in Pedersker (Nielsen,
1998b). Excavations started in 1995. The main
focus has been on the extensive fortifications
from the Neolithic Period (about 3000 BC)
(Kaul et al., 2002; Nielsen and Thorsen, 2010).
The excavations also included a single crosssection through the moat (fig. 13) and of one of
the enormous posts that supported the rampart
(fig. 14). At Snaphøj, one of the gateways to
the Iron Age hill fort was investigated between
1999–2000. In the meadow outside the hill fort
complex, a cross-section was placed through a
28 metre wide moat on the western side (fig.
15). At Snaphøj, parts of a Roman Iron Age
(0–375 AD) cemetery were investigated in
1996–98, and a further three graves were
investigated in connection with construction
of a car park in 2007, two of which could be
dated to around 700 AD. Between 2006–11,
a geomagnetic survey was made of most of
the hill fort complex (fig. 16). Through state
purchase in 2004, it has been possible to ensure
preservation of 10.1 ha of land around the hill
fort (fig. 17).
Interest in the fortresses was renewed in 2008
in connection with the restoration work on
Lilleborg carried out by the Danish Culture
Agency. During a subsequent investigation in
2010, Michael Thorsen of Bornholms Museum
succeeded in collecting datable material from
a hitherto undisturbed cultural layer enabling
the documentation of the individual main
phases of the castle’s history. An extensive ash
layer previously considered by all to be the
visible evidence that Lilleborg was conquered
and burnt in 1259 (Helbaek, 1957) proved to
derive from the transition between the Roman
and Germanic periods around 400 AD. The ash
layer contained large amounts of carbonised
wood and cereal grains that lay in enclosed
layers together with Iron Age pottery shards.
At the bottom of the stratigraphic sequence
there was a cultural layer and the remains
of a palisade ditch from the late Funnelbeaker Culture around 3000 BC. The new
observations also suggest that the historical
Lilleborg was constructed on top of an older
fortification around 1150. (Thrane, 2011).
Fig. 4 Lilleborg in Almindingen. Ground plan drawn by
O.J. Rawert on 24. September 1821.
From the investigations at Gamleborg
in Paradisbakkerne and Gamleborg in
Almindingen, we know that the fortresses were
constructed in several phases. It should therefore
come as no surprise that the other fortresses are
the result of several phases of construction,
with each phase being constructed on top of
earlier fortresses. This, however, has rarely been
documented. A general problem is that we
often lack information about the earliest phases
of the fortresses – and about which strongholds
existed at the same time.
Current status of the research
Of the seven fortresses on Bornholm that have
been known in historical times, only five have
been dated archaeologically:
•
•
•
Ringborgen at Rispebjerg in Pedersker
Parish – Neolithic Period (about 3000 BC),
1st–3rd century AD and 7th–8th century AD
Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne in Ibsker
Parish–Late Bronze Age (1700–500 BC),
2nd–3rd century AD and 10th–11th century
AD
Gamleborg in Almindingen – 10th–11th
century AD
Fig. 5 Borgen/Borgehoved in Rø Plantage drawn by P.
Hauberg in 1878.
•
•
•
•
Lilleborg in Almindingen – Neolithic
Period (about 3000 BC), 5th century AD
and 12th–13th century AD
Hammershus–12th–13th century AD up to
1684/1743
Borgen in Rø Plantage – not yet dated
Storeborg in Rø Parish – not yet dated
The Bornholm Fortress Project
The new project focuses on dating the fortresses
that have not yet been dated as well as on
dating earlier phases of the dated fortresses,
i.e. Hammershus and Lilleborg, which are
in all probability located on the site of earlier
fortifications (Skaarup, 1985).
When Klindt-Jensen excavated at Gamleborg
in Paradisbakkerne, he was aware that there was
an unknown bailey, indicated as the hatched
area in fig. 8. Apart from a few notes on the
site map, however, the outer fortifications are
neither penciled in nor investigated.
It had not previously been recognised that the
majority of fortresses had outer fortifications.
As the fortresses lie in uncultivated land,
the whole network of roads leading to and
from the fortresses is largely preserved as
hollow roads. The new project will examine
Bornholm’s fortresses not just based on the
known fortifications, but also based on the
former population’s need for places of refuge,
i.e. including those places where there should
have been fortresses if the population was
to be able to defend itself in times of attack.
In areas where an unknown fortress might
be expected to have existed, the site of the
fortress might be revealed by examination of
hollow roads leading to and from it, even if it
is almost impossible to date the hollow roads
themselves.
The project also examines the settlements,
both ancient and historic. A congregation of
buildings around topographic elevations or
the presence of royal or church farms could
indicate the presence of a fortress in the area
(Marstrander, 1957).
The population of southeastern Bornholm
had its largest strongholds at Gamleborg
in Paradisbakkerne and Ringborgen at
Rispebjerg. Gamleborg is located on a herred/
county boundary, Ringborgen on a sogne/
parish boundary. Borgen in Rø Plantage and
Gamleborg–Lilleborg in Almindingen also
lie on county boundaries. The authors believe
that the largest ancient fortresses were placed
so as to be able to meet the refuge needs of
large areas, and perhaps determined where the
country boundaries subsequently came to lie.
The fortresses thereby came to cover parts of
both the counties on whose border they lay.
As Bornholm is divided into four herreder/
counties, this theory entails that at least one yet
to be recognised fortress should have existed
on the boundary between the northern and
western counties. As with Ringborgen, the
Fig. 6 Gamleborg in Almindingen drawn by P. Hauberg in 1877.
fortresses could also have been located on
parish boundaries, and fortresses could well be
hidden at places with names containing Danish
words relating to the word fortress, for example
places beginning with “Borre-”, “Kastel-” and
“Ringe-” or ending in “-borg” (Bornholms
Stednavne 1950–1951) (figs. 18–19). Our
hypothesis is that the ancient fortresses are out
there but they have not yet been discovered.
Theory
In this project, we base our search for possible
ancient fortresses on the hypothesis that there
should be one large fortress for each county,
i.e. four large fortresses located on or near
the county boundaries. Additional working
hypotheses are that in pre-Medieval times the
island was covered by fortresses spaced about
8–10 km apart and about 1 hours walk (3–4
km) from the coast, and that defence of the
population was associated with the 21 parish
guilds known from the Middle Ages (Nielsen,
1998a; Wallin, 1974). The latter means that a
number of minor fortresses may have existed
that served as the local inhabitants’ first place
of refuge when under surprise attack from the
coast or during local conflicts.
Topographically, easily defendable hills that
are still used by the military in the present
day could also have played a defence role in
earlier times (Salchow, 1814; Skaarup, 1985). It
is assumed that fortresses were built to enable
local inhabitants to seek temporary refuge with
their livestock and other valuables in times of
conflict. Once established, the fortresses have
been maintained, renewed and re-used.
In this project, we have established the
following criteria for a fortified site to be
deemed a fortress:
Fig. 7 Lilleborg in Almindingen drawn by P. Hauberg in 1911. 1: Entrance, 3-5, 14 and 17-20: Buildings, 6-7:
Original walls, 2. New tower and wall (8), 9:Gate, 10-11:Obstructions. 12: Earthwork, 13: Western watch tower,
15: Ramparts and moat (16), 20: Eastern watch tower? and walls (20-21).
•
•
•
•
•
•
Topographically it had to be located on a
high point that is easily defendable. It had
to be as hidden as possible and as difficult
to access as possible yet, at the same time,
offer good vantage points.
It had to have an outer enclosure large
enough to contain a large amount of
livestock.
Water had to be available in or near the
fortress – springs, streams, dams or wells
There had to be fortifications between the
fortress and the coast to obstruct invading
forces.
Demography: There had to have been a
sufficiently large population and some form
of organisation. Craftsmen and materials
had to be available for construction work,
and there had to be a number of armed
men to take on attacking enemies.
Logistics: There had to have been a sufficiently
•
large catchment area to enable construction,
supply and maintenance of the fortress.
Infrastructure had to have been established
at and near the fortress, i.e. a network
of roads and embankments through
wetlands.
The fortresses could have had several functions,
and these differ depending on the fortresses
topographical location, i.e. whether they are coastal
fortresses, small local fortresses or large central
fortresses. The most probable functions were:
•
•
•
•
•
Refuge
Defence/warning system during invasions
Policing function – protection of privileges,
markets and harbours/landing places
Safeguarding valuables, e.g. livestock
Local meeting place – court, trading
centre, cult site
•
Prestige/symbol of power (Middle Age
phenomenon)
The individual functions were not mutually
exclusive and could have varied. Likewise, it
can sometimes be impossible to differentiate
between offensive and defensive roles.
Methodology
This project mainly focuses on the prehistoric
elements of the fortresses, which in Denmark
means prior to 1050 AD. The investigations
encompass the following aspects:
1. Date of construction/use
2. Location/size
3. Function
4. Infrastructure – roads and settlements
5. Nearby landing places
6. Military organisation
7. Warning system
– beacons and guard
posts
8. State of preservation.
All land at and around the fortresses will be
investigated with metal detectors by members
of the Bornholm Amateur Archaeology Society.
The purpose is twofold:
•
•
Necessary recovery, registration and
documentation of metal artefacts at the
sites.
Avoidance of unauthorised metal detecting
at the sites, which takes place despite the
use of metal detectors on preserved land
being prohibited without the permission
of the Danish Culture Agency.
The initial archaeological investigations will
be performed as preliminary (exploratory)
trenches and 1–2 m2 pits. Aspects such as
Fig. 8 Map of Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne drawn by
Povl Simonsen in 1950.
water availability, house sites, roads/alleys and
entrances will be recorded if revealed during
the preliminary investigations and will help
determine whether or not to proceed with
actual archaeological investigations. If the
terrain permits, more extensive geophysical
mapping will be performed.
Objectives and results
The main objective is to achieve precise dating
of the fortresses, this being a precondition
for determining which fortresses were in use
simultaneously as well as determining the
historical perspective in which they should be
viewed and placed. Military organisation has
always been a key factor of societal development.
Bornholm’s central location in the Baltic Sea has
meant that the inhabitants have had to protect
Fig. 9 Ground plan of Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne drawn by Povl Simonsen in 1950.
themselves against attack from the sea. At the
Slusegård grave site there are traces of violent
actions in the first centuries AD (Klindt-Jensen,
1978), and votive offerings of weapons in the
Knarremose and Balsmyr bogs bear witness to
strife in the 4th to 7th centuries (Jørgensen,
2008). Numerous treasures were buried during
the Germanic Period of the Iron Age (375–750)
(Horsnæs, 2013) continuing into the Viking
Period. The 11th century seems to have been
a particularly troubled time (Ingvardson,
2013). The treasures were buried in all haste
at homesteads with the intention of recovering
them at a more peaceful time. Unknown
tragedies are probably the reason why so many
of the treasures remained unrecovered.
In addition to the known fortresses, the
project focuses on more than 50 other possible
fortifications. A number of these are classified
as being from historical times, but might
possibly be built on top of older fortifications. A
few battlefields are also included. Many of the
locations are what we call peripheral defences,
however, i.e. ramparts, moats and ditches, and
natural obstacles such as steep ravines. Their
purpose was to delay an attacking enemy while
concomitantly giving the defenders time to
safeguard people and valuables and time to
organise defence of the fortress itself. Very little
research has been done on these peripheral
defences. One of the best examples of what
these outer defence lines must have looked like
is preserved around Ringborgen at Rispebjerg.
Perhaps it was built as a “Hackelwerck” or
“Wehrhecke”, i.e. a minor rampart planted with
hawthorn trees and bushes, as is known from
Germany (Thorsen 1929; 1934). In the project we
differentiate between coastal and inland defences.
At the coast one had to fight off an invasion,
but there must also have been constructions to
protect trading vessels and warships.
In the inland defences, we find two types
of fortress: local refuges of various sizes
and centrally located strongholds lacking
in a natural catchment. At Gamleborg in
Almindingen, many finds from around 1100–
1150 indicate that it was a central stronghold
with a permanent garrison. Gamleborg
resembles a Slavic Burgwall, and alone its
location indicates that it was not just a local
refuge. As it is located at a county boundary,
however, the possibility cannot be excluded
that it was originally built to protect the local
population. It was very difficult to reach the
fortress, as it lay in the wasteland 9 km from
the coast. If Lilleborg in Almindingen is also to
be considered an Iron Age refuge in the 5th to
7th centuries, then it, too, was very difficult for
the local population to reach.
Apart from the fortresses and fortifications
themselves, there are several other factors
that have to be present and function together.
In addition to a sufficient number of armed
defenders, there has to be access to water,
preferably in large amounts. We have to imagine
that it is not just the people that have had to
retreat to the strongholds in times of strife, but
that their livestock had also to be saved from
the enemy. When a whole region’s livestock
is collected in one place, large amounts of
water and food are required. At several of the
fortresses a minor water supply is known to have
been present in the inner stronghold, but this
must have been water for the human beings
Fig. 10 Defensive earthworks and fortifications in southeast Bornholm. 1: Ringborgen Hill Fort. 2: Bukkediget
earthworks. 17: Holtsemyre earthworks. The closest parallel to these defensive earthworks are the so-called
“Hackelwerk” found in Eastern Prussia: here, impenetrable hawthorn bushes prevented/hindered attacking enemies
from reaching the fortress. On Bornholm, the names of several of the earthworks incorporate the word “kur” as
according to folklore they were built to resist pirates from Kurland in present-day Latvia. After Thorsen 1929.
sheltering there. Immediately outside in the
outer courtyard, there would have been water
in the form of springs, streams and lakes that
could have provided for the livestock. The outer
courtyard often covers just as large an area as
the inner stronghold, and sometimes even more.
Fortresses were major fortifications that
required extensive investment during the
construction phase as well as to cover
maintenance and running costs. This required
strict control in the form of a centrally
controlled military organisation. In the Middle
Ages (11th to 16th centuries), Bornholm was
organised into 4 counties and 21 guilds. The
guilds were responsible for maintaining the
warning beacons, defensive emplacements,
guard posts and roads. The guilds possibly
based themselves on both a commercial and
military organisation, but we have yet to prove
how far back in time this can be traced. This
was a major task in that a total of 234 coastal
Summary
Fig. 11 Map of Ringborgen at Rispebjerg drawn by Povl
Simonsen in 1950.
defensive emplacements and 93 warning
beacons have been recorded (Nielsen, 1998a).
State of preservation
Another important objective of the present
project is to assess the state of preservation of the
fortresses. It is well known that modern farming
practices and agricultural machinery destroy
or damage ancient monuments. Less attention
has been paid to the fact that modern forestry
can also do the same. The belief that as long as
ancient monuments lay in the forest they were
well protected has proven to be unfounded.
It is therefore vital that preservation orders
are applied to these monuments to safeguard
them from the ravages of large modern forestry
machines. The first precondition for being able
to ensure conservation and preservation of such
ancient monuments is a detailed knowledge of
their location, structure, extent, etc.
We know with certainty that more fortresses
exist on Bornholm than the seven that have been
known for more than a century. In addition to
investigations in and around the seven known
fortresses, the new Bornholm Fortress Project
will therefore include a further 50 localities
where it should potentially be possible to find
remnants of fortifications, actual fortresses
and battlefields. Most of the localities have
been selected based on topography, others are
based on place names, literature and previous
research. Over the past few years around 20
localities have been inspected, but considerable
work remains to study all the localities and draw
up a prioritised list of the localities at which
preliminary excavations should be performed.
It is vital to obtain new material – artefacts and
dates of construction/use – if fortress research
is to advance. The Bornholm Fortress Project
provides a unique opportunity to acquire
completely new knowledge of the island’s early
history, particularly at the time of upheaval
around the turn of the first millennium, when
states formed and religions changed. The first
steps will be taken in the coming years with
a long-awaited archaeological investigation of
Hammerhus (fig. 20) and with the processing
and publication of the finds from Lilleborg and
Gamleborg in Almindingen.
Bornholm’s ancient
and medieval fortresses
Ringborgen
Ringborgen at Rispebjerg is the largest Iron Age
fortress on Bornholm. It is located 3.2 km from
the coast in the middle of a densely populated
area. The actual hill fort lies on a ridge in
At the beginning of the first century AD,
the headland was used to build Ringborgen.
Archaeological investigations over the period
1995–2007 have revealed that the fortress lives
up to its name “ring” in that it consists of two
concentric ramparts and moats 200 metres
apart (fig 15).
Fig. 12 Ground plan of Ringborgen at Rispebjerg
drawn by Povl Simonsen in 1950.
previously uncultivated land on the boundary
between Pedersker Parish and Poulsker Parish
near two superior roads.
The fort is built on a distinctive, natural and
easily defendable headland that rises up to 15
m above the stream Øleå to the north and west
(figs. 11–17). Several springs at the western
side of the fort ensured a good supply of water.
The oldest fortifications on the site date back
to the late Funnel Beaker Culture (2900–2700
BC), where three fortifications with extensive
palisades have superseded each other. The
palisades seem to have been defensive. Enclosing
an area of 10–15 ha they represent the largest
stronghold or cult site from Neolithic times
known on Bornholm (Nielsen and Thorsen,
2010).
The total area encompassed by the outer
rampart is 45000 m2. A moat has been detected
in the river valley west of the fort, and a narrow
valley containing a hollow road in the northeast
might possibly also have formed part of the
outer fortifications. We do not yet know the
full extent of the fort, but it covers at least 6 ha.
The rampart called Bukkediget located 500 m
northeast of Ringborgen has been interpreted
as an outer fortification (fig 15). An excavation
in 1950 carried out at this up to 7.5-m wide
and 1.5-m high rampart failed to date it. An
excavation in 1999 showed that no moat is
present in front of the Bukkediget.
The inner stronghold is delimited by a 115-m
long semicircular rampart with one entrance
in the northeast and another in the southwest.
It measures 78 x 47 m and encloses an area
of 4000 m2. The rampart is 2 m high. A well
or spring inside the fort, known from Peter
Thorsens descriptions, is no longer visible. The
outer moat is still visible. An entrance ramp is
preserved on the west side. The outer rampart
and moat of Ringborgen are only preserved at
Snaphøj and a small section at the northern end
alongside an existing hollow road that partly
coincides with the original rampart (fig. 15).
Even though the majority of the outer rampart
had been removed, it is still possible to identify
the rampart and three entrances from crop-
marks from aerial photographs. Excavations
revealed that the entrances had been paved
with stones, and that the earthen rampart had
been reinforced with a strong wooden retaining
structure.
Two grave fields have been found in the area,
one from the 1–3 centuries and one from the
7–8 centuries (fig. 15). The first cemetary was
found within the outer rampart west of Snaphøj
in 1996. Only the northernmost part of the
grave field has been excavated. This revealed
ten burials dated to around 50 AD, and 22
cremation graves that can be dated to 100–200
AD. In addition, a single later undated burial
was found that contained an individual who
had been completely hacked to pieces. Together
with observations from the Slusegård cemetary
located 3 km south of Ringborgen at the mouth
of the river Øle, where several mutilated bodies
and numerous caches of buried weapons were
found, the grave at Ringborgen bears witness
to the times of strife in the first centuries AD
(Andersen, 1991;1996; Rasmussen, 2010).
In 2007, a car park was built just outside
the Iron Age fort at a spot that subsequently
proved to be inside the Neolithic enclosure. In
this connection, four burials were discovered,
three of which were excavated. The two graves
that could be dated contained women buried
around 700 AD together with their jewellery
and a dog.
Ringborgen is the only one of the fortress
on Bornholm known to have been used in
historical times. During the Thirty Years War
(1618–48), for example, a large part of the
Bornholm Militia gathered at Rispebjerg in
1645. From approximately 1658 right up to
1867, the site was used as a military training
ground (Skaarup, 1985).
The inner part of Ringborgen was first surveyed
in October 1876 by P. Hauberg. The artefacts
from the excavation carried out by Ole KlindtJensen are kept at the National Museum in
Copenhagen. The results have only been partly
published (Davidsen, 1975). A large number of
artefacts found during the surface surveys, and
during the excavations undertaken since 1995,
are kept at Bornholms Museum. A preservation
order was placed on the inner Ringborgen in
1894 and on Snaphøj as a Bronze Age burial
mound in 1937. The area is owned by three
private landowners. The Danish Nature Agency
purchased the central 10.1 ha of Ringborgen in
2004. (figs. 11–17)
Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne
Gamleborg in Paradisbakkerne is a fortress
located 4 km from the coast in former
wasteland/outfield on the boundary between
Østre and Søndre herred/counties, which
Fig. 13 Ringborgen at Rispebjerg. Cross-section of the
outer moat. Photo: Bornholms Museum.
high rampart of stone and earth that encloses
an elongated 187 m long and 80 m wide inner
stronghold, although the rampart is lacking at
the most easily defendable stretch. The main
entrance to the fort is towards the south. At
this point, the rampart splits into four separate
sections that are staggered relative to each other.
This construction made it easier to ambush an
enemy if the main entrance was attacked. To the
northwest and east, there are additional rampart
sections in front of the main rampart to protect
an entrance in the northwestern part of the fort.
Fig. 14 Ringborgen at Rispebjerg. Posthole from a 1,7
m deep and 35 cm width post supporting the Iron Age
rampart. Photo: Bornholms Museum.
also makes the boundary between Ibsker
and Bodilsker Parishes. The fortress consists
of an inner stronghold covering 1.4 ha and
outer defenseworks encompassing an area of
approximately 2.5 ha (figs. 8–9). Only the
northern part of the defenseworks near the
almost dried-out lake Borresø/Borgsø is fully
preserved. A causeway dam and several outer
ramparts hindered access from the north. As
the area around the fort has only been partly
cultivated, it is still possible to follow the
alignment of many roads that have lead to and
from the fort.
Ole Klindt-Jensen’s archaeological excavations
for the National Museum in 1948–50 and in
1954 revealed that the fort underwent at least
three construction phases. Many pottery sherds
and a flint knife/løvkniv can be dated to the
late Bronze Age. An almost complete pot can
be dated to the late Roman Iron Age (2nd/3rd
centuries AD). Large pottery sherds from a
decorated vessel (Baltic/Slavic pottery) belong
in the late Viking Period (10th/11th centuries
AD). Several sherds from storage vessels cannot
yet be dated with certainty, but probably derive
from the late Iron Age and Viking Period
(375–1050 AD). Several Iron Age gravestones,
monoliths, stood inside the outer defenseworks
until around 150 years ago.
The location of the fort on an easily defendable
steep rocky plateau protruding 14 m above the
surrounding terrain was ideal. Towards the south,
the cliff has a 10 m high sheer face that makes
the fort inaccessible from that side. A supply of
water was ensured by damming to create a large
reservoir inside the fort. Immediately south of
the fort, there is a large spring. The fortifications
consist of a 2–3 m wide and approximately 1 m
Some of the results of the excavations were
published in 1957 (Klindt-Jensen, 1957). The
finds are stored in the National Museum.
The oldest local historical and archaeological
report submitted by the local priest to the
Danish antiquary Ole Worm in 1624 states that,
according to folklore, the people who sought
refuge in Gamleborg defended themselves
against attackers by throwing fist-size stones.
That the folklore is correct is confirmed by the
archaeological excavations as several caches of
large pebbles for use as throwing ammunition
were found just inside the rampart (fig. 3 and
figs. 8–9).
Gamleborg has been subject to a preservation
order since 1899. The area is owned by two
landowners.
Gamleborg in Almindingen
Gamleborg in Almindingen is located in the
centre of the island near the boundary between
Sønder and Vester counties. Being located
9 km from the coast in a fairly inaccessible
wasteland, 2–3 km from the nearest farmstead.
The archaeological evidence indicates that
Gamleborg was built as a refuge in the 10th
century during the Viking Period and then
enlarged with a stone wall and a permanent
garrison in the 11th century. From 900 to 1150
AD, i. e. during the Viking Period and Early
Middle Ages, Gamleborg was Bornholm’s
main fortress (cl). It does not have a natural
catchment, and there is no castle farm associated
with the fortress. Vallensgård, the largest farm
on the island, is located 1½ km south of the fort
and could have served as its “castle farm”.
Gamleborg lies on a virtually inaccessible rocky
plateau that rises steeply as much as 22 m above
the Ekkodalen. The southern and northern
Fig. 15 Iron Age Ringborgen with marked Iron Age burial fields.
Fig. 16 Geomagnetic map. The majority of the Ringborgen Hill Fort site was geomagnetically mapped in 2006–11
by geophysicists from Moesgård Museum and Kiel University. Most of the features belongs to Neolithic enclosures
– the wide black features reflect the Iron Age moat.
slopes are less steep, and the ramparts here are
particularly strong, the northern rampart being
as much as 6 m high. The fort courtyard is
264 m long in the north–south axis and 110
m wide, covering an area of at least 2.7 ha (fig.
6). The area has never been cultivated, and
everything is preserved, i.e. dams, roads and
outer fortifications.
Ole Klindt-Jensen carried out archaeological
excavations of the hill fort for the National
Museum in 1951–55. In 1953, a systematic
metal detecting survey was made using military
mine detectors. The artefacts recovered at that
time indicate that the fort was built during the
Viking Period (750–1050 AD). A fragment of
a Viking oval fibula was found in an ash layer
under the closed-off southern gate.
The Viking fortress consisted of a rampart
of boulders set in clay of which remains are
visible at the northeastern part of the fort.
Access to the fort was through a northern and
a southern gate. The entrances were protected
by a moat and an outer rampart. A pond in
the northwestern part of the fort provided the
inhabitants with water. It rarely dries out, and
the bottom was paved with stones to provide a
foothold for those collecting water.
Within the fort it is very apparent, especially
to the north and east, that the topsoil had
been removed for construction of the
ramparts. Close to the centre of the fort
there are some f lat areas where buildings
might have stood.
Fig. 17 Ringborgen at Rispebjerg in 2008 seen from the west. A few of the Stone Age and Iron Age structural
remnants have been exposed and are now visible in the terrain. Photo: Michael Vennersdorf.
Around the year 1100 AD, Gamleborg was
altered and improved. The rampart around the
western part of the plateau on which the fort
stands was reinforced with a 2-m thick, 275m long and up to 6-m high granite wall. The
old earthen rampart in the northwest of the
fort was possibly fitted with a guard tower. The
southern gate was closed off, and a new wider
entrance was opened up in the southwestern
part of the rampart. The cornerstones of the
entrance were made of square blocks of local
limestone from a quarry at Limensgade 8 km
south of Gamleborg.
The northern entrance to the fort and the
rampart were also reinforced. The width of the
rampart was doubled, and the entrance was
lengthened correspondingly. An iron hinge still
remains preserved in the new southern gateway.
The majority of artefacts found at the fort stem
from around 1100 AD. Apart from remains
of a lime kiln from the renovation work,
numerous objects were found that indicate
more permanent habitation of the fort, e.g. iron
knives, arrow heads, stirrups, grinding stones,
pottery vessels and loom weights. A single
limestone block from a window or gateway
Fig. 18 Storeborg (Grønneborg) at Rø. The oldest cadastral map dating from 1817. Downloaded from the Danish
Geodata Agency, Danish Ministry of the Environment (www.gst.dk).
was found in the rampart. Many pieces of
charcoal were found in the burnt mortar.
Carbon dating of the charcoal will be able to
reveal the construction date of this stone fort,
which is probably the oldest stone building on
Bornholm.
No further archaeological investigations were
undertaken in connection with the extensive
restoration work carried out in recent decades.
Gamleborg has been subject to a preservation
order since 1821. The area is owned by the
Danish Nature Agency (fig.6).
A short time after Gamleborg was “modernised”,
it ceased to be used as a stronghold. In 1150
AD, Lilleborg was built 700 m to the west as a
replacement for Gamleborg.
Lilleborg
The artefacts found at Gamleborg are stored at the
National Museum in Copenhagen. Apart from a
preliminary map, the results of the excavations
have not yet been published (Hertz, 1964).
Lilleborg was built as a royal castle just 700 m
northwest of Gamleborg on a naturally wellprotected, up to 14 m high, rocky plateau next to
the lake Borresø. The castle was a central fortress
lying 9.7 km from the coast on a relatively
inaccessible part of the island. An extensive
system of fields has been revealed within a radius
of 1 km from the castle. In all probability, these
belonged to the castle farm, which was located
immediately east of the castle. The foundations of
several outbuildings can still be seen on the small
bank. The castle and castle farm were completely
surrounded by water through artificially raising
the water level in the lake and surrounding
wetlands by the construction of dams that also
served as roadways.
No wells have been found in the castle or castle
farm. The water supply had to be met using
water from the lake. Roads to the castle farm
traversed wetlands both to the west and east,
but there was only one access road to the castle
itself. In the early 19th century, the remnants
of a pile bridge and wattle were found near the
eastern road during peat digging.
The earliest coins found on Lilleborg can
be dated to King Knud III. (1146–57),
but Bornholm belonged to his fellow King
Svend III Grathe (1146–57). In 1149, Svend
transferred control of three of Bornholm’s four
counties to the Archiepiscopal See in Lund,
keeping for himself Vester County, with its
old fortress Gamleborg. As a replacement for
the hill fort, we believe that around 1150,
he built Lilleborg to meet the 12th century
requirements for a robust stronghold. The castle
itself consists of a circular wall surrounding
a 75 m × 40 m oval courtyard covering only
2,600 m2. During subsequent rebuilding work,
a large 9.4 m square tower with 2.4-m thick
walls was incorporated into the eastern part of
the castle wall for the defence of the entrance
road and castle gate. A mighty rampart with
an outer dry moat was constructed in front of
the tower. The residential buildings at Lilleborg
were built along the inside of the castle wall
Fig. 19 Borre on the boundary between Rutsker
and Olsker Parishes. B.F.Hammer 1750. Bornholms
Museum.
to the north and south. For the household
there were buildings outside the wall to the
southwest and to the east at the site of the
castle farm. Including the castle farm and outer
fortifications, Lilleborg covers approx. 1 ha.
The investigations at the castle have revealed
a number of artefacts such as door latches,
hinges, hooks, etc. Pieces of a polished granite
column and a limestone column and window
glasses suggest that the buildings were of a high
standard. Household artefacts have been found
inside the buildings.
Lilleborg was destroyed in 1259. Numerous
crossbow bolts, stirrups and parts of armour
indicate that its destruction must have been
accompanied by hard fighting. This fits with
the fact that the mid 13th century saw a bitter
conflict between the Archbishop of Lund, Jakob
Erlandsen, and King Christoffer I (1252–59).
The Archbishop joined forces with the king’s
enemy, Prince Jaromar II of Rügen. Together
with the Archbishop’s brother, Andreas
Erlandsen, Jaromar occupied Bornholm and
stormed Lilleborg. In a letter of complaint to
the Pope, the king stated that about 200 of his
men had been killed.
Lilleborg was never rebuilt. However, the
discovery of about 20 coins minted there during
the reign of King Erik Klipping (1259–86)
bears witness to continued activity at the site
after the castle’s destruction. These coins might
possibly stem from the subsequent clean-up
and demolition work on Lilleborg. During the
period when Bornholm was ruled by Lübeck
(1525–76), material was collected from the castle
for use as building material. At the beginning of
the 19th century, Forest Superintendent Hans
Rømer collected 2–3,000 loads of stones from
the castle for various construction projects in
Almindingen. In 1820–22, Rømer carried out
the first excavations and surveys of the castle.
Between 1887–1923, P. Hauberg uncovered
the walls and performed restoration work.
This resulted in the discovery of numerous
artefacts (Isler, 2004). In 1954–57, Bornholms
Museum sieved and removed the piles of waste
earth excavated by Rømer and Hauberg within
the castle. A large mound of excavated earth
remains as yet untouched southeast of the castle
on the furthermost bank of the lake.
The first real archaeological excavation of
Lilleborg was undertaken in 2010 in connection
with restoration work. Archaeologists from
Bornholms Museum discovered a palisade and a
Neolithic cultural layer from around 3000 BC,
as well as an ash layer containing large amounts
of carbonised cereal grains from the Germanic
Iron Age around 400 AD. In contrast, it was
not possible to detect any ash layer from the
castle’s destruction in 1259. The large amounts
of carbonised cereal grains and seeds previously
recovered from Lilleborg Castle had hitherto
been assumed to stem from the Middle Ages
(Helbaek, 1957). No evidence was found of any
5th century fortress but the presence of the 5th
century artefacts at this site 3–4 km from the
nearest known settlements indicates that the
site could have been something special.
A treasure consisting of Roman silver denars
and gold rings was found in Lake Borresø
during peat cutting in 1830; of these, 16 denars
and a golden spiral ring still exist (Horsnæs
2010, 2013). A small Roman bronze statuette
found at the same time has not been located at
the National Museum.
The area around Lilleborg is a well preserved
fossil cultural landscape from 1259. All the outer
fortifications and access roads are preserved. The
archaeological finds from the castle are stored at
the National Museum in Copenhagen and at
Bornholms Museum. Lilleborg has been subject
to a preservation order since 1821. The area is
owned by the Danish Nature Agency (fig.4).
Hammershus
Hammershus, locally only called “the Castle”,
is a coastal fortress located south of the
Hammeren promontory, the northernmost
part of Bornholm, between two natural
harbours to and from which it has been easy
to sail (fig. 20). The castle is somewhat isolated,
and in order to ensure food supplies it had to
have its own farm. All suitable land within 1.5
km of Hammershus has been cultivated despite
the fact that the soil is rather poor. There are,
however, large areas that have not possible to
cultivate. All access roads to and from the castle
are largely preserved.
The rocky plateau on which Hammershus is
built rises as much as 74 m above sea level. The
terrain falls steeply towards the sea to the west,
and the castle plateau is surrounded on all other
sides by ravines and deep valleys. A pond at the
top provides a water supply, making the plateau
an ideal site for a fortress. Large dams retained
water to the south in the Mølledalen valley
and to the north in the Paddesænke valley and
concomitantly functioned as roads. The main
access road was from the east.
The inner stronghold measures 50 m x 30 m.
Including the walled courtyard, the castle
measures 320 m north–south and 205 m
east–west. The whole area within the outer
fortifications is at least 7 ha.
In 1149, King Svend III Grathe transferred most
of Bornholm to the Archiepiscopal See in Lund,
keeping only Vester County where the royal
castle Lilleborg was located. Hammershus was
the Archbishop’s largest castle, built to provide
him with a safe residence and refuge. The oldest
castle at the site seems to have been built after
1149. Outside the western wall of Hammershus
Castle, a rampart built exclusively of stone and
earth is assumed to belong to the oldest castle.
From its location it is clear that the fortress
was not built to fill the needs of the local
population, but rather for the benefit of the
Archiepiscopal See in Lund, as it was the best
place from which to transfer the taxes collected
from the local population (both monetary and
in the form of goods) to Lund via Ystad on the
coast of what is now Sweden. The remains of
the old road between Ystad and Lund still exist.
In the years following 1254, when Jakob
Erlandsen became Archbishop of Lund,
construction work was carried out on the castle.
The inner part of the castle is assumed to have
been completed no later than 1265, the year
that King Erik V Klipping (1259–86) captured
it for the first time. The oldest datable artefact
recovered at the castle is a coin minted during
Klipping’s reign (1259–86) found in the stone
wall of the court house/Thinghus.
In 1259, the archbishop’s supporters had
captured and destroyed the royal fortress
Lilleborg Castle in Almindingen. That castle was
never rebuilt, and Hammershus Castle became
the island’s main fortress instead. During the
conflict between the king and the archbishop,
Hammershus was repeatedly captured by the
king, each time only to be returned to the
archbishop after a short time. In 1327, Vester
or Rønne County was also transferred to the
Archiepiscopal See in Lund, and until 1522
Bornholm was ruled from Lundaborgen in
Lund. Several archbishops used Hammershus
as their permanent residence, and two of them
died there in 1361 and 1379, respectively.
In 1522, Hammershus Castle and Bornholm
were returned to the monarchy. However, soon
afterwards, in 1525, the king had to mortgage the
island to Lübeck for 50 years. The Lübeckians
restored and expanded Hammershus, but after
the end of their rule in 1576, the castle was
allowed to fall into disrepair.
The wars with Sweden in the 17th century
underscore the fact that Hammershus had
outlived its role as a fortress, though it was used
as a prison until 1743. New fortifications were
constructed at Ertholmene from 1684, and a
new primary fortress was established at Rønne
in 1689. After the island’s administration was
moved to Rønne, a Vice Commander lived at
Hammershus until 1743. That same year, the
state began demolishing the old castle. Until
a preservation order was placed on the castle
ruins in 1822, Hammerhus Castle served as a
large stone quarry from where people from all
over the island collected building materials.
Between 1885 and 1928, P. Hauberg of the
National Museum carried out extensive
restoration work on Hammershus. In that
connection, parts of the castle were rebuilt.
Due to the numerous phases of its construction,
it is difficult to work out the castle’s detailed
construction history. Unfortunately, the people
involved in the early restoration were largely
unaware that the key to dating the phases of
the castle lay in the surrounding layers of earth.
Eagerness to expose the masonry during the
restoration work resulted in removal of the soil
layers that could have dated the structures.
There are reports that Viking artefacts were
once found in an earthen rampart near the
court house/Thinghus (Skaarup, 1985), but
no archaeological investigation has been
undertaken. During restoration work in the
1960s, bricklayers were permitted to collect
material from the rampart in the western
courtyard in the belief that the structure was
relatively new, originating from the time of
Hauberg’s restoration
Several earthen ramparts exist that have not
been surveyed, among others those enclosing
the western bailey. Only few modern surveys
have been made of the ramparts and access
roads to Hammershus. In 2012, geophysicists
from Kiel University performed a geophysical
survey of large parts of the castle complex. In
connection with a major financial grant from
A.P. og Christine Møllers foundation, attempts
will be made to date the oldest phases of this
major fortification in 2013–14.
The majority of artefacts recovered from
Hammershus are stored at the National
Museum. Some of the artefacts are on
permanent loan to Bornholms Museum and
can be seen in a small exhibition at the castle
visitor centre. Artefacts from the archaeological
excavations performed after 1994 are at
Bornholms Museum.
Hammershus Castle has been the subject of
a preservation order since 1822. The area is
owned by the Danish Nature Agency (fig.20).
Borgen
Borgen/Borgehoved in Rø Plantage is a local
fortress located on the boundary between
Rø and Østerlars Parishes and the county
boundary between Nørre and Øster Counties.
The fort lies 3.1 km from the coast in wasteland/
outfield. It is built on a rocky plateau that forms
a promontory at the junction of the northern
Fig. 20 Hammershus Castle in 2012 seen from southwest. Photo: Krystian Trela, Warsaw.
and southern Borgdal valleys. Steep 12-m high
cliffs make it almost inaccessible from the
river valleys to the north and east. The wide
access from the southwest is obstructed by an
approximately 275-m long angled stone wall
that runs 240 m in a north–south direction
and 35 m in an east–west direction, enclosing
3.2 ha of fortress (Skaarup, 1985). There seem
to be three entrances to the fort, one in the
northeast, one in the northwest and one in
the southwest. A network of hollow roads
leading to and from the fort is still preserved
in the area. Water sources have been found
within two places at the fort. The largest spring
is in the northern part. The fort has been
interpreted as uncompleted, but the presence
of five monoliths and the many hollow roads
indicate that it has been used. The fort remains
undated and no archaeological investigations
have been performed at the site. The first metal
detector survey of the site was made in the
autumn of 2012, but this only revealed half of a
horseshoe from the Viking Period. A couple of
the monoliths at Borgen have been the subject
of individual preservation orders since 1943,
while the remainder of the fort (i.e. the stone
wall) is preserved as an ordinary visible ancient
monument incompliance with the 1975 Nature
Conservation Act. The area is owned by the
Danish Nature Agency (fig.5).
15 metres above and is surrounded on three
sides by wetlands. On the least steep sides to
the north and west there are remains of a low
angled rampart of stone and earth inside which
there is a shallow depression. The western
rampart is only 35 m long in a north–south
direction, and the northern rampart is 15 m
long in an east–west direction. Together they
enclose an area of only 1800 m2. Access to the
fort is from the southwest, where a road follows
the western rampart and rounds the northern
rampart with access from the east. The access
road was almost completely destroyed by the
establishment of a railway line between Rø and
Klemensker in 1913.
Storeborg
The fortress was surveyed by P. Hauberg in the
1870s, but no modern surveys have been made
of the fortifications and access road. The fort
has been subject to a preservation order since
1943. The area is owned by Bornholms Regions
Kommune/Municipality (fig. 18).
Storeborg (also called Grønneborg) lies 3.5
km from the coast in wasteland/outfield on a
pronounced rocky plateau in the southwestern
part of Spellingemosen bog in the middle
of Rø Parish. The plateau rises steeply, some
There are reports that peat cutting in the bog
in 1942–44 revealed a paved road leading
to Storeborg from the southeast (Skaarup,
1985). Storeborg has not yet been dated, and
no archaeological excavations have ever been
performed at the site.
Due to the modest size of the fort, doubts
have been raised as to whether it was an actual
fortress. With only 38 farmsteads, Rø Parish
is already the smallest parish on the island.
Alternatively, Storeborg could indicate that
even as few as 15–20 farmsteads could have
joined together to build a local fortress.
REFERENCES
Adamsen, Chr. et al. (eds): Sorte Muld. Wealth, Power and Reglion at an Iron Age Central Settlement on Bornholm.
Bornholms Museum, Wormianum, The Heritage Agency of Denmark 2009.
Andersen, H.: De glemte borge. SKALK 1. 1992
Andersen, S.H. et al.(eds.): Slusegårdgravpladsen III. Gravformer og gravskikke. Bådgravene. Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs
Skrifter XIV,3. 1991
Andersen, S. H. et al. (eds.): Slusegårdgravpladsen IV.Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs Skrifter XIV,4. 1996.
Bately, J.: Wulfstan’s voyage and his description of Estland: the text and the language of the text. In Wulfstan’s Voyage. The
Baltic Sea region in the early Viking Age as seen from shipboard. Ed. A.Englert & A. Trakadas. Maritime Culture of the
North.Vol.2. 2009.
Bornholms Stednavne 1.-2.bd. Danmarks Stednavne Nr. 10. Stednavneudvalget. 1950–51.
Bulmer, J.: Beskrivelse over Bornholm udfærdiget 1625 ved Landprovst Jens Pedersen. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd.17.
1926.
Christensen, C.A. (red.): Amtsudgaven af Danmarks Riges Breve – Bornholm 1250–1332. 1957.
Davidsen, K.: The Final TRB Culture in Denmark. A Settlement Study. Arkæologiske Studier. Vol.V. 1978.
Demidoff, L. et al. (eds.): Hammershus. Bornholmske Samlinger III.rk.Bd.11. 1997.
Hartvigsen, O.: Præsten J.P. Koefoeds Optegnelser om Poulsker. Bornholms Samlinger Bd. 22. 1934
Hauberg, P.: Lilleborg. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd. 6. 1911.
— Hammershus. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd. 7. 1912.
Helbaek, H.: Bornholm Plant Economy in the first half of the first Millennium A.D. I Ole KlindtJensen: Bornholm i Folkevandringstiden. Nationalmuseet. 1957.
Hertz. J.: Nogle ruinrestaureringer på Bornholm i 1962. Bornholmske Samlinger II.rk.Bd.1. 1964.
Horsnæs, H.W.: Roman coins from Bornholm – a preliminary overview, In: Ulla Lund Hansen & Anna Bitner
Wroblewska (eds.): Worlds apart? Contacts across the Baltic in the Iron Age. Network Denmark-Poland 2005–2008. Nordiske
Fortidsminder ser. C, vol. 7. København – Warszawa 2010.
— Crossing boundaries. An analysis of Roman coins in Danish contexts. Vol. II Bornholm, Publications from the National
Museum, Studies in Archaeology and History, vol. 18.2. 2013.
Hødnebø, F & H. Magerøy: Snorre Sturluson Kongesoger. 1997.
Ingvardson, G.T.: Nørremølle – the largest Viking Age silver hoard of Bornholm (Denmark). Journal of Archaeological
Numismatics 2, Brussel. 2012
Isler, R.: Genstandene fra Lilleborg. Bornholmske Samlinger III.rk.Bd.18. 2004.
Jørgensen, L.: Våbengrave og krigeraristokrati. Etableringen af en centralmagt på Bornholm i det 6.–8. årh. e.Kr. I Fra
Stamme til Stat i Danmark 2. Høvdingesamfund og Kongemagt. Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs Skrifter XXII:2. (eds.):
Mortensen, P. & Rasmussen, B.M. 1991
Jørgensen, A.N.: Waffen und Gräber. Typologische und chronologische Studien zu skandinavischen Waffengräbern 520/30
bis 900 n.Chr. Nordiske Fortidsminder Serie B Vo.17. 1999.
Jørgensen, A.N.: Jernalderen i Nordeuropa. Porskjær Mosefund. (Knarremose og Balsmyr, Bornholm). Jysk Arkæologisk
Selskab.2008.
Kaul, F. et al. : Vasagård og Rispebjerg. To indhegnede bopladser fra yngre stenalder på Bornholm. Nationalmuseets
Arbejdsmark 2002.
Klindt-Jensen, O.: Freds- og krigstid i Bornholms Jernalder. Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark 1951.
Klindt-Jensen, O.: Bornholm i Folkevandringstiden. 1957.
Klindt-Jensen, O.: Slusegårdsgravpladsen I–II. Jysk Arkæologiske Selskabs Skrifter XIV,1–2. 1978.
Lund, A.A.: Adam af Bremen: Beskrivelse af øerne i Norden. Højbjerg, Wormianum, 1978.
Marstrander, S.: Bygdeborgene – våre eldste militære anlegg. Særtr. av Årbok 1957 for Det Kgl. Norske Vidsk. Selsk.
Museet.
Nielsen, F.O.: Forhistoriske interesser. Bornholms Amt. Tekniske Forvaltning. 1996.
Nielsen, F.O.: Middelalderens Bornholm. Bornholms Amt. Tekniske Forvaltning. 1998a.
Nielsen, F.O.: Nyt om Ringborgen på Rispebjerg, I Bornholms Museum – Bornholms Kunstmuseum 1996–97. 1998b.
Nielsen, F.O & M.S. Thorsen: Solkult på Rispebjerg. I Dronningen og Arkæologien Red. Jesper Laursen. 2010
Rasmussen, B.M.: Slusegårdsgravpladsen V. Fundoversigt og genstandstyper. Med bidrag af Birgit Lind, Wava Armfelt og
Ole Klindt-Jensen. Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs Skrifter XIV,5, 2010.
Ravn, R.P.: Borringholms Krønike 1671. Udgivet af Johs. Knudsen. 1926.
Salchow,U.: Militair-Beskrivelse over øen Bornholm. udarbejdet i Vinteren 1813 til 1814. Eds.: Aa. Rohmann & Th. Lind.
1954.
Skaarup, H.E.: Bornholms Militære Domiciler. Eds.:J. Gram-Andersen. Østre Landsdelskommando.1985.
Thorsen, P.: Bornholmske Langvolde. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd.20. 1929.
Thorsen, P.: Lidt mere om de bornholmske Langvolde. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd.22. 1934.
Thrane, H.: Centrale pladser og befæstede bopladser i Sydskandinavien som baggrund for Runsa. I M. Olausson (red.)
Runnhusa – bosättning på berget med de många husen. Skrifter från projektet Runsa Borg, Eds socken, Uppland nr 1.
2011.
Zahrtmann, M.K.: Bornholms Forsvarsværker inden Milisens Oprettelse 1613. Bornholmske Samlinger Bd.18. 1927.
Wallin, C.: Knutsgillen och av S:T Knud påverkade sockengillen på Bornholm. Bornholmske Samlinger II.Rk. Bd.7. 1974.
Ægidius, J.P. Knytlinge Saga. Knud den Store, Knud de Hellige deres Mænd, deres Slægt. Med indledning og noter ved
hans Bekker-Nielsen og Ole Widding. 1977
Østmo, E.: Fresteåsen og andre bygdeborger i Vestfold. Viking 1977.

Bornholm`s fortresses - Magt – borg og landskab :: Borgforskning.org

Transcription

Similar documents

WELCOME TO ROENNE BORNHOLM

Green Solution House

Kursus for brugere af Regionalmodellen

Rupea-Cohalm Fortress

Welcome to Bornholm Folk High School

Axel Vervoordt`s Castle Photographer: Michael Paul Rights: The

Grayskull - Dan DeCapua

Welcome to Bornholm Folk High School

to the Cinderella`s Castle Pattern

Castle - University Games