Skip to exhibit
The Edge of Epidemiology

Sites, samples, and uncertainty

Viking Health Atlas

A cemetery, a tooth, a genome, and a piece of wood answer different historical questions. Start with the sample.

6 cited records

Markers have equal size. Color identifies evidence category; size does not imply disease burden or quality. Locations are approximate geographic anchors.

Ribe

c. AD 800–1800; separate period groups · Across periods

Sample
943 adult skeletons across three periods
Evidence
Osteology

What the record supports

The study compares adult age-at-death patterns across Viking, medieval, and post-medieval cemetery samples.

Limits of interpretation

943 is the combined sample, not the Viking-only denominator. Adult skeletal mean age at death is not life expectancy at birth. Burial selection, age estimation, and changing population structure matter.

Evidence and sources

Read every record

All evidence remains available here if the interactive map is unavailable.

Ribe c. AD 800–1800; separate period groups

c. AD 800–1800; separate period groups · Across periods

Sample
943 adult skeletons across three periods
Evidence
Osteology

What the record supports

The study compares adult age-at-death patterns across Viking, medieval, and post-medieval cemetery samples.

Limits of interpretation

943 is the combined sample, not the Viking-only denominator. Adult skeletal mean age at death is not life expectancy at birth. Burial selection, age estimation, and changing population structure matter.

Evidence and sources

Birka — grave Bj 581 10th century AD

10th century AD · Viking Age

Sample
1 individual, with two DNA samples
Evidence
Ancient DNA

What the record supports

Genomics supported a female sex estimate for the person in grave Bj 581; the burial contained martial equipment.

Limits of interpretation

The study reports no pathological or traumatic injuries. Genomic sex and the interpretation of a social role do not establish whether an individual fought in battle. One burial supplies no population prevalence.

Evidence and sources

Varnhem 10th–12th centuries AD

10th–12th centuries AD · Across periods

Sample
171 individuals; 133 permanent and 38 deciduous/mixed dentitions
Evidence
Dental examination

What the record supports

83 of 171 individuals had caries (49%). Among the permanent dentitions, 424 of 3,293 examined teeth were affected (13%).

Limits of interpretation

The excavation and jaw-preservation criteria select the sample. These are different denominators, and the cemetery extends beyond the conventional Viking Age. Tooth loss can bias observed caries prevalence.

Evidence and sources

L’Anse aux Meadows AD 1021: dated wood-cutting activity

AD 1021: dated wood-cutting activity · Viking Age

Sample
3 worked wood pieces used for exact dating
Evidence
Archaeological dating

What the record supports

A cosmic-ray radiocarbon marker places the cutting of the studied wood in AD 1021.

Limits of interpretation

These are wood samples, not human remains. The date documents activity at the site; it does not establish a disease introduction or a complete occupation interval.

Evidence and sources

Eastern Settlement, Greenland Norse occupation through the 15th century

Norse occupation through the 15th century · Later Norse

Sample
No human skeletal sample in this model
Evidence
Environmental model

What the record supports

A sea-level model evaluates coastal flooding as a possible contributor to later Norse settlement abandonment.

Limits of interpretation

The geographic marker locates the settlement region, not a sampled patient or exact model cell. Environmental pressure, epidemic mortality, and a sole cause of abandonment are separate claims.

Evidence and sources

Ridgeway Hill, Weymouth Viking Age; see dating discussion in excavation report

Viking Age; see dating discussion in excavation report · Viking Age

Sample
Minimum number depends on the skeletal inventory; consult the report
Evidence
Mortuary archaeology

What the record supports

An excavated mass burial documents decapitation and a highly selected episode of violent death.

Limits of interpretation

A mass execution is not a representative cemetery sample. The identity of the group and historical event attribution require separate arguments.

Evidence and sources

Download records (JSON) Download records (CSV) Open the research dossier →