Battle of Hjørungavåg

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The battle of Hjørungavåg took place around 986 or around 994 between the Jarl Håkon and a Danish fleet that was supposedly supported by the Joms Vikings . Both the time and place of the battle as well as its participants and course can no longer be clearly determined from the sources.

As far as we know today, the battle took place here.
Monument in memory of the battle. Inaugurated by King Olav V on August 14, 1986

The sources

Texts

The following sources are now considered to be relevant for the investigation of the events:

  • Ten to eleven stanzas by the Icelandic skald Tindr Hallkelsson, which are reproduced in later texts. A contemporary source.
  • Þórður Kolbeinsson composed his Eiríksdrápa around 1015 in honor of Erik Jarl, the son of Håkon Jarl and a fighter in battle. Also a contemporary source.
  • Around 1200 the Icelander Þorkell Gíslason wrote his Búadrápa (12 stanzas have survived) and the bishop of Orkney Bjarni Kolbeinsson wrote the Jómsvíkingadrápa (verses 1-40 in the Snorra Edda ; (GkS 2367 4to); verses 41-45 in the Heimskringla, Saga about Olav Tryggvason) about this train of the Jomsvikingers.
  • A normal translation of a work on Olav Tryggvason , written in Latin by the monk Oddr Snorrason , in which the campaign is also described, comes from the same period .
  • At the same time, Saxo Grammaticus reported the campaign in his work Gesta Danorum .
  • around 1220 the collection of Fagrskinna was put together. The Icelandic author probably wrote in Norway. He reports more details than the previous ones.
  • Around 1230, Snorri Sturluson wrote his story about the Norwegian kings. He describes many things in the same way as the Fagrskinna , probably drawn from the same source, but offers more details.
  • The Jómsvíkinga saga was written around 1230 and is the basis for the different traditions that later became known. The text of the Fagrskinna and Snorri's royal story was probably based on the oldest and probably slightly different version.

content

The sources cited agree on the following:
There was a major battle in Møre during the reign of Jarl Håkon. The attackers came with their fleet from the south. Both skalds call them "Danes". Tindr also calls them "Vikings", or a group of Wends. The leaders of the attack were Sigvalde and Búi. A warning of the attack came in good time. Håkon Jarl and his son Erik organized the defense and proclaimed the Leidang . This is the earliest mention of this Norwegian coastal defense. The Norwegian Defense Fleet consisted of different types of ships : Snekkja, Skeide and Knorr . Erik built on this particularly tall stern against Sigvald. During the fight, which was breastplate of Håkon Jarl so damaged that he threw it from him. In the end he was victorious and 25 enemy warships were "purged" by Danes and Búi went overboard.

Criticism of other traditions

In a very late version of the Jómsvíkinga saga it is said that the Danes sailed to Norway with 60 longships and names Sæmundur fróði as the source . Bishop Bjarni Kolbeinsson writes very distantly about the events and repeatedly intervenes formulations such as "It is told ...", "One hears ...", "The people remembers ..." and shows that he is reporting on hearsay to which he is is critical of. Saxo Grammaticus refers to Icelandic sources in his foreword. It can be assumed that his report reflects the oral tradition in Iceland around 1200, although his Danish-friendly and moralizing attitude may have changed the content. In his portrayal of Olav Tryggvason, the monk Oddr Snorrason draws from the oral tradition of Iceland, but does not adopt Sæmundur fróði's critical point of view, but instead weaves in legendary traits according to the taste of the people. He wants to offer good entertainment. There are many indications that Fagrskinna is based on the oldest version of the Jómsvíkinga saga. But the reports about the Jómswikings from around 1200 were mainly based on oral tradition. This becomes clear in the poetry of Bishop Bjarni Kolbeinsson, who expressly mentions the oral reports.

Fagrskinna also reports that the Jómswikings left immediately so that the Norwegians could not be warned beforehand and that they arrived in Jæren on Christmas night and immediately began pillaging and pillaging. Þorkell Gíslason and Oddr Snorrason also expect a winter trip. At the time, it is very unlikely that a fleet would drive over the Skagerrak in winter and then carry out raids on land. A full Leidang defense contingent was completely impossible in winter. Snorri knew that too, although he had no other information than tradition. He doesn’t mention the funeral beer, doesn’t give a time to leave and assumes that there will be sufficient advance warning to make a Leidang contingent possible. He started from the firmly organized order of suffering of his own present and projected it into the time of Jarl Håkon. It can be doubted that at the time of Jarl Håkon der Leidang was already such a well-organized organization. The different types of ships rather indicate that there were also many private ships and not the ships of passion that the coastal residents were later obliged to build and equip.

The role of the Jómsvikinger gradually took on fairytale-like features in the sagas. They should have come fighting on the Danish side with 120 ships. The Norwegian fleet is said to have had 360 ships. After the Fagrskinna , it is said to have been the greatest battle that took place between Danes and Norwegians. Against this, however, is the fact that the smaller historical works from the 12th century, Historia Norwegiæ , Ágrip and the work of Theodoricus Monachus do not mention the battle at all. But the contemporary skaldic poems show that the battle did indeed take place.

Bjarni Kolbeinsson reports on three military leaders on each side. Jarl Håkon, Erik Håkonsson and Årmod faced the Jómswikinger Sigvald, Búi and Vagn. In the Fagrskinna the third military leader is Svein Håkonsson. The skalds of the time know only two military leaders of the Danes: Sigvald and Búi, but not Vagn. It was only added in the Icelandic storytelling tradition.

The Norwegian archaeologist Per Fett (1909–1996) doubted at all that there was actually a place name Hjørungavåg at that time and thought it was an invention of the saga writers. There was a gender "Hjorr" in Norway. The members of this sex were called "Hjorungar". One of the members in the 9th century was the skald Fleinn Hjörsson. "Fleinn" is a norrön word and means throwing spear. "Hjǫrr" (sword) and "Fleinn" (throwing spear) are relatives, Fleinn a Hjørungar. The storm that Þorgerð caused against the Jómswikings was a rain of javelins, a wave of sword relatives, a hjørungavåg. He did not believe that the battle was a historic event . Halldór Laxness made a similar statement . The Jómsvikinga saga is pure heroic poetry. The sacrifice of the seven-year-old son by his father Jarl Håkon on an island with the strange name “Primsigd” is an evil twisting of the biblical son-sacrifice motif. The skaldic verses need not come from the men to whom they are ascribed. He too doubted whether the Jómsvíkinga saga was based on real events.

The background

The causes of this battle can be traced back to the dispute between Erik Blutaxt and Håkon the Good . Erik Blutaxt was driven out by Håkon and his sons sought protection and support against Håkon from the Danish King Harald Blue Tooth , who wanted to gain sovereignty over Norway. King Håkon introduced the Leidangwesen (general, district-wise obligation to present warships) for national defense.

After his death, Erik's sons came into play. King Harald moved from Denmark to Tønsberg in 960 and received homage there as king. With that he won the upper kingship over all of Norway. He installed Harald Graumantel and the other Erik sons as sub-kings and demanded a hunting falcon annually as a symbolic tribute . The sub-kings ruthlessly fought all opponents and killed Sigurd Ladejarl in the process . This led to enmity between the Harald Hårfagres family and the Ladejarlen. When the sons of Erik stopped paying tribute and rejected the upper kingship of the Danish king, King Harald allied himself with the son of the slain Sigurd Ladejarl, Håkon Ladejarl Sigurdsson, lured Harald Graumantel into a hearing at the Limfjord and killed him there (see Norwegian Jarle under Danish sovereignty ). Then he used Håkon Ladejarl to Jarl over Norway.

Harald Blauzahn was a Christian, Håkon Ladejarl was a staunch pagan and opposed the royal mandate to take missionaries with him to Norway. That broke them up. In 974, despite the support of Håkon Ladejarl's troops, Harald Blauzahn suffered a heavy defeat against Emperor Otto II . Jarl Håkon used this weakening to renounce the supremacy of the Danish king. Not only the religious contrast played a role here, but also the increasing awareness in Norway that the Danes were "foreigners" who occupied the country. The first signs of national awareness emerged.

Tradition gives two immediate reasons for the army march to Norway:

  • Saxo Grammaticus thinks it is a punitive expedition against Håkon Jarl, who he mistakenly believes to be his son Harald Gråfell because he refused to pay tribute to the Danish king. The monk Oddr is of the same opinion.
  • The Icelandic storytelling tradition and, following it, the Fagrskinna , Snorris Heimskringla and the more recent versions of the Jómsvikinga saga describe that the king outsmarted the Jómsvikingers over a funeral beer to promise to drive out or kill Håkon Jarl.

Point of time

The time of the battle is not clear from the sources, not even who was actually behind the battle, Harald Blauzahn or his son Sven Gabelbart . The Icelandic annals consistently name the year 994. Gustav Storm has proven, however, that all Icelandic annals used a common basic source, either the Heimskringla by Snorri or an older common source also used by Snorri. So there are no sources independent of Snorri. According to the Icelandic-Norwegian sagas, Sven Gabelbart, King of Denmark, continued his father's policy. It was not only about fighting an insubordinate Jarl, but also about the unification of the Danish Empire under Christian auspices.

After extensive investigation, PA Munch also came to the conclusion that the battle of 986 had taken place. Against the year 994 he objected that the victor in this battle should have been murdered a year later, namely in an uprising in 995, given the popularity he had thereby gained, which he considered implausible. The people named in the saga for this battle are also mentioned in other sagas, so that their approximate age is known. In 994 some of them were probably too old to take part in the battle. The strategic military situation in Denmark also spoke more in favor of 984. When Emperor Otto II moved to Italy in 980, the time was favorable for a military engagement in Norway. After that, the battle would have to take place in the middle of the 980s, around 986. The Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus also writes that the battle still took place during Harald Blauzahn's lifetime. Saxo seems to go back to an older Icelandic tradition. Adam of Bremen and the saga about Olav Tryggvason by the Icelandic monk Odd Snorreson also name King Harald Blue Tooth as the initiator of the campaign.

The battle

When the Danish invasion was on the horizon, Jarl Håkon called out the Leidang , the general mobilization. All sources indicate that Jarl Håkon felt like a Norwegian ruler who had to defend the empire against foreign enemies.

The place

In 1888 V. Voss saw the battle formation.

Hjørungavåg was first mentioned as the site of this battle in the Jómsvíkingadrápa by the poet Bjarni Kolbeinsson. The monk Oddr also mentions Hjørungavåg as a battleground. The norrone word “hjrrr” means “sword”, which allows the conclusion that the place was named after the battle and not the other way around. That would mean that Hjørungavåg is definitely the site of the battle and that contemporaries still knew where this place was. However, it is noticeable that the historiography of the 12th century deals with the reign of Jarl Håkon, but does not mention the battle. Neither in the Historia Norwegiæ nor in Theodoricus Monachus nor in the Ágrip it occurs. From this, Knut Helle draws the conclusion that there was no living local tradition in Nidaros , the likely location of its origin. It was therefore probably the Icelanders who fostered the memory of the battle and gave the place its name. Sverre Bagge contradicts this, who refuses to allow such a conclusion from the silence. Because the aim of this very ancient historiography was not to record the most important historical facts of the country, but to consider the events from a salvation-historical perspective. In this perspective, the pagan Jarl Håkon was a dark contrast to the Christian kings, and the battles he fought were of no significance in this view.

There was a very long discussion about which place today is meant by “Hjørungavåg”. The connection between Hjørungavåg and Liavåg occurred in the 1750s when Hans Strøm heard from everyone he asked in the local area that Liavåg was formerly called Hjørungavåg. He considered this to be sufficient evidence of local tradition. But it cannot be ruled out that this attribution was invented beforehand and does not come from the time of the battle. As a possible example, Larsen points to the humanist and Lagmann Povl Helgesen (around 1550 - 1625/1626) who had settled near Liavågen. He mastered Latin and Norrön, owned an extensive library and archive, and it is quite possible that he provided the identification of Hjørungavåg with Liavågen, which was then passed on until Hans Strøm visited. In 1897 the historian Gustav Storm pursued the theory about Liavåg as the former Hjøringavåg. Even more recent research is based on the later Icelandic tradition, if only because there is no other. In particular, it is trusted that Snorri, based in Norway, was knowledgeable enough to provide a reliable location description. After that, what is now known as Hjørungavåg is the site of the battle. Ottesen doubts, however, that Snorri was there just because he was in Norway. Voss pointed out early on that the sources expressly let the battle take place “in” Hjørungavåg and Liavåg is much too narrow that 60 ships could have lined up next to each other, which is why he depicts the battle on his sketch in front of Hjørungavåg (in his case Liavåg ) takes place.

Other researchers have Haugsfjorden (Bernt Stokkenes 1993), Ulsteinfjorden (Olaf Welde 1958), Aspevågen (Einar Klokkersund 1982), Vegsundet (Ole Barman 1930 and Olav Nørve 1939), Ørskogvika (Einar Landmark 2009), Hjørundfjorden (Anders Hustangsfnes 1982) (John Strandabø 2007) and Ørstafjorden (Martin Furseth 1992). None of these proposals caught on.

The sequence

The Norwegian fleet assembled after Snorri with 180 ships at Hallkjellsvik in the Voldafjord , southeast of the island of Hareidlandet. When the news came that the Danish fleet was sailing northward, the Norwegian fleet advanced to Hjørungavåg and awaited the enemy there. Now the heroic poetry overlays the events so strongly that nothing can be historically established. According to tradition from around 1200, the Jómswikings gained the upper hand in the first phase of the battle. The turning point only came with the storm that started now. According to Þorkell Gíslason and Fagrskinna , the hailstones should have weighed an ore (= 27 g). Þorkell, Bjarni, the monk Oddr and Saxo agree that the storm was caused by magic, at least with the help of pagan gods. Bjarni and the monk Oddr know more about this: There is talk of a magical sacrifice Håkon Jarls, namely that he sacrificed his seven-year-old son to the ancestor of the Jarls family Þorgerð, so that this with a host of Valkyries caused a great storm with a blizzard over the battlefield, the enemy were no match. Saxo lets him sacrifice two sons in order to be able to judge him morally even more sharply. Gro Steinsland notes that human sacrifices were not common at this time and therefore the report represents a literary exaggeration of the Jarl's willingness to make sacrifices. It is clear, however, that Håkon Jarl won the battle in the end. The author of the Fagrskinna apparently does not believe in sorcery and the intervention of pagan gods, but leaves it at the storm. Snorri is also skeptical: "That's what the people say." You can even question the hailstorm itself. Because the contemporary poet Tindr Hallkelsson uses the usual formulation for the shower of arrows that fell close above the enemy, "combat storm" and "Odin's storm". Knut Helle thinks it is possible that later narrators of the oral tradition exaggerated this formulation into real hail.

The storm during the battle

Bjarni, the monk Oddr and Fagrskinna agree that when the fortunes of battle turned against the Jómswikings, Sigvald drove part of the fleet aside. Oddr even writes that Sigvald sailed away with half the fleet, 30 ships, while Búi fought on, but then jumped overboard with his men and gold boxes. The description varies in the sources. Þórkell, Bjarni, Oddr and Fagrskinna all report that Búi perished in the battle. But it is very likely that the gold boxes were added to the Icelandic tradition. According to Oddr, the battle is said to have lasted three days. In the end, only Vagn Åkesson continued the fight. After Þórkell Erik Håkonsson cleaned his ship, while the one at Bjarni with 30 men resisted and then went ashore with them. After Fagrskinna , Vagn and his 30 men were captured when Jarl Håkon came to the aid of his son Erik. Probably the whole episode was invented, since the oldest tradition of a third military leader Vagn knows nothing. The following scenes with the execution of some of the prisoners and the pardon of the others out of respect for their bravery is interpreted by Knut Helle as an added Icelandic heroic poem.

The sea in the area of ​​the island of Hareidlandet is in a bad weather area, which is very unfavorable for an attacking fleet. A surprise attack north of the Stadlandet peninsula is hardly possible.

The result of the battle was that the Danish sovereignty over Norway was shaken off for a long time.

reception

Literary processing

The battle at Hjørungavåg was the subject of Scandinavian poetry early on.

  • Iceland: In the 16th century Bergsteinn blindi Þorvaldsson composed a poem about the Jómsvikingers, but it is lost. In the 17th century, the pastor Jón Jónsson von Staðarhraun (1590–1610) wrote the Rímur af Jómsvíkingum (AM 607 4to). There are nine poems, the material of which comes from the Jómsvikinga saga AM 510. Next, Sigurður Eiríksson Breiðfjörð (1789–1846) wrote the Rímur af Jómsvíkinga sögu .
  • Faroe Islands: The poem Vagnur Akason (CCF 214) exists in three known, very similar versions, which were written down in 1830. Jomsvikinga visa (Corpus Carminum Færøensis No. 20 = CCF 20) is available in two versions. Version A with 38 quatrains, version B with 36 quatrains. They were written down in 1847. The authors are not known. The Jomsvikinga visa is based on an oral tradition from the late Middle Ages. On the other hand, some loan words from Danish in Vagnur Akason allow the conclusion to be drawn from a late drafting. One suspects Jens Christian Djurhuus or his son as the author. In any case, he also used the Færeyinga saga . Because a Sigmundr Brestisson takes part in the battle at Hjørungavåg, who is only mentioned in the Færeyinga saga , but not in the rest of the battle tradition.
  • Denmark: Scandinavianism and national romanticism stimulated the turn to the old heroic legends in the 19th century. In 1802 Adam Oehlenschläger wrote his romantic poem Håkon jarls død , in which he did not include the battle itself, but the sacrifice of the son by the Jarl. It was a draft for his tragedy Hakon Jarl hiin Rige from 1807. It begins after the victory of Hjørungsvåg and describes his downfall. Johann Peter Emilius Hartmann set the tragedy to music for an opera. In 1945 Josef Petersen wrote the historical novel Jomsvikingen Hake Havborsøn , which also describes the battle at Hjørungavåg.
  • Norway: Although the battle had a great significance in Norwegian history, it has received little literary processing. In 1879 the little-known poet Peter Marius Petersen (1845–1917) wrote a play about the battle of Hjøringavåg. The one-act act was never performed. The Norwegian author Wibeke Knagenhjelm (1918-2003) wrote the play Maktkamp ved Hjørungavåg , which premiered in 1986 at the National Monument dedicated to this battle. Although women are the main characters here, the story of the saga has largely been adopted.

Legends

In most versions of the Jómswiking saga, at the end of the battle, Búi jumps overboard with two gold boxes. The version “Codex Holmianus 7”, which is also called “Stockholm perg 7 4: to” (Sth.7), adds that the popular opinion is that Búi has transformed into a sea monster that like a huge worm lying on top of the gold boxes. The Icelandic bishop Guðmundur Arason (1161-1237), who had to leave the country because of a deep conflict with Icelandic chiefs, came after a legend that arose after his death, with a ship on a trip from Trondheim to Bergen also to Hjørungavåg and wanted to call at the port there. There the worm blocked his way. He poured holy water on the worm, and they drove over the worm into the harbor. The next morning they found the worm cut into 12 pieces and thrown onto the land.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ After Helle pp. 51–52.
  2. ↑ Tindr verse 5; Þórður stanza 4.
  3. ↑ Tindr verse 9; Þórður stanza 1.
  4. ↑ Tindr stanza 5.
  5. ↑ Tindr stanza. 4
  6. ↑ Tindr stanzas 2 and 10; Þórður stanza 3.
  7. ↑ Þórður stanza 1.
  8. ↑ Tindr verse 9; Þórður stanza 4.
  9. ↑ Tindr stanzas 4, 5 and 9; Þórður stanzas 1, 2 and 4.
  10. ↑ Þórður stanza 3.
  11. ↑ Tindr stanza third
  12. ↑ Tindr stanza. 4
  13. ↑ Tindr verse 10th
  14. ↑ AM 150 4to after Helle p. 54.
  15. ↑ On the previous one: Helle p. 55.
  16. ↑ On the previous one: Helle p. 57.
  17. ↑ Crag p. 101.
  18. ↑ Jómsvíkingadrápa stanzas 12-14 and 20-21.
  19. ↑ a b Helle p. 60.
  20. ↑ Ottesen p. 45.
  21. ↑ a b Larsen p. 19.
  22. ^ V. Voss: "Om Aarsagen til Jomsvikingernes Nederlag ved Hjørungavaag". Historisk Arkiv. Et Maanedsskrift for popular Skildringer af historiske Personer og Begivenheder. Ny Raekke. Udg. from FC Granzow and SB Thrige. 19. – 20. Vol. Copenhagen. XX. Pp. 1-17.
  23. ↑ Jómsvíkingadrápa stanza 28.
  24. ↑ Nes p. 201.
  25. ↑ Helle p. 64.
  26. ↑ Larsen p. 249 fn. 11 with reference to Sverre Bagge: "Theodoricus Monachus - Clerical Histography in Twelfth Century Norway.". In: Scandinavian Journal of History . 14 (1989) pp. 113-133.
  27. ↑ Larsen p. 259.
  28. ↑ Helle p. 64; Gustav Storm: "Historisk-geografiske Studier i den nordenfjeldske Norge." In: Historisk Tidsskrift [Norway], first row, fourth volume. 1877. pp. 412-431.
  29. ↑ Helle p. 67.
  30. ↑ Ottesen pp. 76-97.
  31. ↑ Búadrápa stanza 9.
  32. ↑ Búadrápa verse 10.
  33. ↑ Jómsvíkingadrápa stanza 32.
  34. ↑ a b c Helle p. 59.
  35. ↑ Gro Steinsland: Norrøn religion. Myter, riter, samfunn . Oslo 2005. p. 255.
  36. ↑ Jómsvíkingadrápa verse 33.
  37. ↑ Búadrápa verse 11.
  38. ^ Jómsvíkingadrápa stanza 37.
  39. ^ Búadrápa stanza 12.
  40. ↑ Jómsvíkingadrápa stanza 38 f.
  41. ↑ Helle p. 63.
  42. ↑ Finnur Jónsson: Bókmentasaga íslendínga fram undir siðabót , Copenhagen 1904–1905. P. 463.
  43. ↑ Larsen p. 214.
  44. ↑ Larsen p. 222.
  45. ↑ Larsen pp. 225-232.
  46. ↑ Larsen pp. 233-234.
  47. ↑ Ottesen p. 43. There it says that the legend is in the Biskupa sögu . The story of Bishop Guðmundur Arason is not included in the newer edition from 2003, but in the edition of the Sturlunga saga from 1988. It does not contain this legend.

literature

  • Knut Helle: “Jomsvikingeslaget - islandsk heltediktning. Tolkning and forslag til syntese. ”In: Stein Ugelvik Larsen: Striden om stedet. Hjørungavåg-slaget in norsk history and culture debate . Sunnmørsposten Forlag. undated [2006]. Pp. 51-68.
  • Claus Krag: Vikingtid og rikssamling 800–1130. Oslo 1995. Aschehougs Norges historie vol. 2.
  • Stein Ugelvik Larsen: "Hjørungavågslaget i det politiske balanspunkteet for vikingetidens Kyst-Norge." In: Stein Ugelvik Larsen: Striden om stedet. Hjørungavåg-slaget in norsk history and culture debate . Sunnmørsposten Forlag. undated [2006]. Pp. 9-26.
  • Stein Ugelvik Larsen: “Skjønnlitterær impuls. Håkon Jarl and Hjørungavågslaget i nordiske literature. ”In: Stein Ugelvik Larsen: Striden om stedet. Hjørungavåg-slaget in norsk history and culture debate . Sunnmørsposten Forlag. undated [2006]. Pp. 213-244.
  • Stein Ugelvik Larsen: “Sannheten om slugt og stedet. Teoretiske og metodiske refleksjoner “In: Stein Ugelvik Larsen: Striden om stedet. Hjørungavåg-slaget in norsk history and culture debate . Sunnmørsposten Forlag. undated [2006]. Pp. 245-260.
  • John Megaard: "Hvor sto 'Slaget i Hjörenavágr'? (PDF; 282 kB): Jomsvikingeberetningens stedsnavn og Sæmundr fróði", Alvíssmál 9 (1999): 29-54 (English summary, p. 54).
  • Lutz Mohr : Sea War with Norway. The fiasco of the Jomswikinger 995. In: Carfunkel Combat. The annual special for military history ... Wald-Michelbach, No. 3/2007, pp. 59–61
  • Lutz Mohr: Dragon ships in the Pomeranian Bay. The Jomswikinger, their Jomsburg and the Gau Jom . Edition Rostock maritime series. Edited by Robert Rosentreter . Rostock: Ingo Koch Verlag 2013. ISBN 978-3-86436-069-5
  • Oddvar Nes: "Namnet Hjørungavåg." In: Stein Ugelvik Larsen: Striden om stedet. Hjørungavåg-slaget in norsk history and culture debate . Sunnmørsposten Forlag. undated [2006]. Pp. 191-212.
  • Johan Ottesen: Slagstaden. Kvar møttest north menn and jomsvikingar? Fotoarkivet 2010.

Coordinates: 62 ° 21 ′ 30 ″  N , 6 ° 6 ′ 0 ″  E