There are peculiarities in its structure, testifying to the abundance both of material and skilled labour. The timber or heavy planks, for instance, instead of being sawn into boards of equal thickness—or thinness—throughout, are cut thin where thinness was desirable, but thick at points of juncture, that they may be mortised into the cross-beams and gunwale, instead of being merely nailed. The vessel has two bows, or rather is alike at bow and stern, with thirty rowlocks, and it is noticed that these, along with the helm, are reversible, so as to permit the vessel to be rowed with either end forward.[1] The gunwale rises with the keel, at each extremity, into a high beak or prow, a notable feature of the Norwegian boats of the present day. The build is of the kind technically called "clinker," each plank overlapping that immediately below, from the gunwale to the keel: in the peat-moss containing these remains many other testimonies to wealth and industrial civilization, especially to boat-building, were found.
It is alike interesting and instructive to trace the progress of these northern tribes, and the mechanical means at their disposal which enabled them to construct vessels which could in safety navigate distant
- ↑ We have also a record of the discovery in England of two very ancient oak boats of considerable size. The first was found in 1822, in a deserted bed of the River Rother, near Matham, in Kent, and has been fully described in the Archæol. vol. xx. p. 553. This boat, which was sixty-three feet long by fifteen feet broad, appears to have been half-decked, and to have had at least one mast. It had been caulked with moss. The second was found in 1833, at North Stoke, near Arundel, in what was formerly a creek running into the River Arun. This boat, which was made of the half of a single oak-tree, hollowed out like a canoe, was thirty-five feet four inches long, and four feet six inches broad. It is now preserved in the British Museum, having been presented to that institution by the Earl of Egremont.—Vide Archæol. vol. xxvi.
