Fishing at Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl then and now

Transcription

1 Fishing at Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl then and now fishery before fishery went to pot By: Steen Knudsen, Archaeologist and Excavation Manager Preliminary investigations at Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl, May As a part of the Fehmarn project, the old fishing facility Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl (Danish Climatic Fishfarming) west of the wind farm was removed. The large concrete basin, which was intended to supply trout and create good business in the 1980s, quickly went to pot. Normally, no archaeological material would have been preserved under the many tons of concrete. However, Lolland hides its treasures well, so once again, Museum Lolland-Falster was able to establish that you need to dig several metres into the area around the Syltholm park to find traces of Stone Age Lollanders. What we didn't know was whether there would be traces of human activity right under the fish facility. The museum therefore carried out a trial dig in May 2014 with trenches and a couple of large areas, which rendered good results. Under sand and gyttja, at least 37 metres of standing fish fence were localised along with a related wattle mat. This is one of the longest standing fish fences that we know of so far in connection with the excavation. Below, only the results from the preliminary investigation are presented, as the actual excavation is expected to take place in the autumn of The fish fence foundation A minor sensation appeared in the course of the trial dig's second week, when a part of a standing fish fence was discovered. It is rare for this sort of thing to appear. The reason why it has been preserved at all after thousands of years in the ground is that it was rapidly covered by water and sand when one of the prehistoric floods washed over the Stone Age lagoon. But it was not only the fish fence itself that was interesting. It was the fact that it stands in its original position. In other words, it tells us that in this exact place, prehistoric people would fish. Many of the things that we find have been washed around and away from where they were originally

2 A fishing structure would have consisted of three different elements, as illustrated in the picture: the fishing stakes, the wattle fence, and at the end, the trap/basket in which the fish were gathered. Illustration: Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997, p 135. located. This fish fence is in situ, in its original place. The fence would have been a part of a complete fishing structure. People would have fished like this for thousands of years, and the method was so efficient that it was eventually forbidden in the last century, in order to prevent the complete extinction of the eel population in Denmark. The upright fence can be compared to the foundation of a house. The illustration below shows one of the fishing stakes that has been dug out in its entirety. It measures 82 cm and has been jammed deep into the blue clay, into that which used to be the seabed in antiquity. The fishing stakes stand in a long row, slightly offset against each other, at regular intervals. Around the fishing stakes, there are two rows of wattle. The wattle would have reached right down to the old A fishing stake with wattle around the upright fish fence. Photo: Museum Lolland-Falster. seabed. We do not know so far why there are two rows of wattle on the fish stakes, but one theory is that they were meant to 'seal' the fence against the seabed, so that fish, eels in particular, would not be able to slip out from underneath the fence once they had been driven inside. This part of the fishing structure would have stood in the water all the time, planted solidly in the seabed. The wattle mat the building block Almost 80 metres northeast of the standing fish fence, we found another part, which would have belonged to the fishing structure. This is one of the wattle mats that we expect would have been attached to the upright fish fence. Wattle mats are known from both Denmark and abroad, and the specimen that we have found measures some seven metres. What you need to imagine is that the wattle mats are the walls in the fishing structure. People would have made them on land and then sailed them out in sections to be fastened to the actual fish fence, which we refer to as the 'foundation'. In Germany, in the great Lake Arendsee, similar wattle mats have been found at the bottom of the lake, by the old lakeside, kept in place by large rocks. You should also imagine that the wattle mats were brought in every autumn at the end of the fishing season and 'put to bed' on the seashore, weighed down by rocks. They would lie there safe and snug until the spring, when they could be sailed back out to be attached to the standing fences. We have yet to find out whether our wattle mat has detached

3 The uprights are the stakes that were jammed into the seabed, and which kept the wattle mat in place. In addition, the wattle mat was attached to the standing fish fence, 'the foundation', in an as of yet unknown way. The intertwined branches in the mat were also kept in place by the so-called tvejer. These are stakes from which the centre has been chopped out to make a Y-shape. They served as forks that kept the ends of the intertwined branches in place at the ends of the mats. Wattle mat found during the Great Belt excavations. Illustration: Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997, p 125. itself from the standing fish fence, or whether it has been placed where it was found after being put into hibernation for the winter. The section of wattle mat that we found at Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl has not been excavated in its entirety yet. But it is hardly distinguishable from the one that was found near Oleslyst by Danish archaeologist Lisbeth Pedersen during the excavations ahead of the construction of the Great Belt connection. See the illustration below. The wattle mat also resembles a garden wickerwork fence, as they can be bought at DIY centres today. It is thought-provoking that a structure has existed unchanged for that many thousands of years, and that here, we have a crystal clear example of how you shouldn't fix something that ain't broke. The wattle mat would have consisted of a row of long, pointed stakes, called upright posts, around which the thinner branches have been intertwined. Wattle mat found during the Great Belt excavations, detail. Illustration: Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997, p 128. Reconstruction of wattle trap. Illustration: Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997, p 169. Now we have the actual fish fence and the wattle mats. However, if you take another look at the photo of the complete fishing structure, you will notice that something is still missing. See illustration 2. The fence's function was to lead fish in the right direction when they were swimming with the current. But what do you do with the fish when they swim in the direction that you want? We presume that there would have been a sort of fish trap at the end of the fishing structure. The fish would get caught here, and the traps could then be sailed out and emptied when they were full. We have also got examples of Stone Age traps (see the illustration below). We have yet to find a trap, so we hope for even more success when the actual excavation starts.

4 Natural forest forestry Both the fish fence and the wattle mat were probably made of hazel. The advantage of hazel is that it has long and straight shoots, which grow relatively fast, and at a young age, the hazel is a supple tree that can withstand quite a load before it breaks. But a fishing structure of this size requires a lot of wood. As mentioned, at least 37 metres have been preserved, but originally, such systems would probably have been metres long. In other words, thousands of hazel branches would have been needed to make them. So, where did all this wood come from? Some would have been collected from the forest floor, or chopped from hazel bushes in the forest. However, as the branches needed to be straight and of uniform length and thickness, it is not realistic to imagine that only materials directly at hand were used. It is more likely that actual forestry was practised. The Stone Age people on Lolland must have known about forestry and had coppice forests near their settlements. The fragile wooden structures from the fish fence are examined with care. Photo: Museum Lolland-Falster. Through forestry, Stone Age man was able to procure building materials for e.g. fishing structures like the one that has been found at Dansk Klimatisk Fiskeavl. This means that we must abandon the romantic notion of prehistoric man living off nature to the extent that nature would give man what he needed. Even in the Stone Age, man influenced and exploited nature in order to secure his own survival. A coppice forest would also have provided other opportunities for animal life and biodiversity than a traditional high-forest, which grows without human intervention, so on the face of it, it would have been a win-win situation. This picture from the Danish Nature Agency shows the different possibilities for using tree shoots. At the bottom, a hazel tree, which has been pollarded to produce straight shoots that could be used as construction material. In any case, it says something about our ancestors' foresight. They would have worked the forests nearby, so that they would deliver the necessary materials many years ahead, providing wood both for building and for maintenance of e.g. fishing structures. Social structure, organisation, resources Territory and property right In order to be able to construct a fish fence in practical terms, you need several things. Large amounts of wood, and not least an existing social structure with organisation, logistics and labour that can be invested in the construction of the fence. Our ancestors were skilled tradesmen, but a certain number of man-hours would have been required to chop off branches, weave the fence and mats, and, of course, set everything up at open sea. We must therefore presume that it would have been a settlement of a certain size that built the fishing structure. A settlement that had surplus time and energy to invest in the fishing fence until the structure worked and gave results in the form of easily caught fish. The settlement would also have had to find the resources to maintain the fishing structure. But what about the actual area in which the fish fence was located? It is easy to imagine that property right is a relative-

5 7,000-years-old unchanged fishing method We still do not know how old the fish fence and the wattle mat are. One exciting aspect in all of this is that the fishing structure may be anything from 7,000 to 4,000 years old. This would indicate that our ancestors did not abandon fishing, although they went from being hunter-gatherers to being farmers at the time around 4000 BC. No doubt, fishing has been too good a source of sustenance for them simply to give it up, even if they had corn in their fields and cattle in their stables. The actual investigations will show in due time whether the fishing structure was built by fishing hunters or by fishing farmers. At any rate, we know that they were also foresters on top of everything else. If you would like to read more about fishing in the Stone Age, we would like to recommend 'Storebælt i år' (The Great Belt over 10,000 years). Here, Lisbeth Pedersen, among others, has written about the fine and exciting finds that have been made during the excavations in connection with the construction of the Great Belt Fixed Link. Modern fishing structure, Northern Falster. Photo: Nadja Kring Mortensen, Museum Lolland-Falster. ly new concept, but naturally, it would have been a bad investment of materials and labour to construct a fishing structure in an area that other people also used. We therefore have to imagine that the people who built the fishing structure also considered the area in which they erected it their area, and theirs alone. Illustrations from Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997 have been used with permission from Lisbeth Pedersen. Maybe there were no other people in the area. Maybe small communities participated in lose or fixed collaboration about fishing and agriculture, and yields were distributed on an ongoing basis. Or territories would have been enforced through markings and power, if necessary. Traditionally, the Stone Age is considered a peaceful period with collaboration between the communities, and in many ways, we can see examples of fruitful collaboration through the construction of large sacred areas such as the Sarup facilities. However, it is not possible to rule out that the area around Syltholm could have been an attractive fishing ground, which people would have had to defend tooth and nail. Fishing structure from the 20th century. It is quite clear that there is not a lot of difference between the fences then and now. Illustration: Storebælt i år, Mennesket, havet og skoven, København 1997, p 145.