News Section
Stories from Climate Central's Science Journalists and Content Partners

So-Called Medieval Warm Period Not So Warm After All

The so-called Medieval Warm Period (MWP), a 400-year span from about 950 to 1220 A.D. when the Vikings colonized Greenland, was relatively balmy by the standards of the past 2,000 years, leading some to argue that the global warming we’re now experiencing isn’t that big a deal. But a new report in the journal Geology argues that the MWP wasn’t all that warm after all — and certainly not as warm as the climate is today.

According to William D’Andrea of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and his co-authors, summer temperatures in the Svalbard Archipelago, a group of islands in the Arctic Ocean about 400 miles north of Norway, have been between 3.6°F and 4.5°F higher over the past 25 years, on average, than the summers the Vikings enjoyed.

View of the area around Ny-Ålesund, located on Svalbard, an archipelago in the Arctic Ocean north of mainland Europe. 
Credit: United Nations Photo/flickr

“As more research has come in over the past decade,” D’Andrea said, “it’s becoming clear that this medieval period was not uniformly warm, and we can see that for sure in this one location.” 

The question isn’t just academic. Climate scientists are convinced that rising temperatures during the 20th century, and especially over the past 50 years, are largely due to heat-trapping properties of greenhouse gases generated by the burning of coal, oil and other carbon-based fuels. If they’re going to project how fast and how high temperatures will rise in the future — to know where we’re going — it’s important to know where we’ve been.

What complicates the matter is that global temperatures can also change for purely natural reasons — and if they spiked dramatically during the MWP, it might suggest that nature has a significant role in today’s warming.

“We need to disentangle natural variability from the changes we humans are provoking,” D’Andrea said, and the best way to do that is to look to a time before humans began burning fossil-fuels in earnest.

The problem, of course, is that the Vikings didn’t have thermometers. We know from their records and those of others that the MWP was warm, but not precisely how warm. So like all scientists who want to understand ancient temperatures, D’Andrea and his colleagues relied on proxies — natural processes that change with temperature.

The bow of a Viking ship located in the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, Norway.
Credit: zement/flickr.

In this case, they looked at lipids, or fat molecules created as a biological by-product by algae in Kongressvatnet, a lake on the island of Spitzbergen. When the lake water is colder, the algae tend to churn out unsaturated fats; when it’s warmer, the fats tend to be saturated. Then, when the algae die, their fat-containing corpses drift to the lake bottom, where they’re buried deeper and deeper each year by new layers of algae and other debris.

D’Andrea and his co-workers extracted about 1,800 years’ worth of layers from the lake bottom, measured the relative amounts of saturated and unsaturated fats in each one, and came up with a detailed temperature profile of the lake water going back 18 centuries (these were summer temperatures only: in winter, the lake is frozen). 

In order to keep their lake-bottom “thermometer” honest, the scientists compared the most recent hundred years’ worth of fat levels with records from actual thermometers located on Spitzbergen. “It turns out,” D’Andrea said, “that the lipid levels really do a very accurate job of recording temperature.”

That, D’Andrea said, gave them the confidence that they really could say something meaningful about temperatures back to the Medieval Warm Period and beyond. “We can say that summer temperatures at this location have been warmer in the recent past than they have over the past 1,800 years.”

One possible criticism of the study is that it’s based on just one location. Maybe this lake, or this region, was significantly cooler during the MPW for some reason than the rest of the world. For that reason D’Andrea and his scientific collaborators are doing the same sort of research in other lakes — in Greenland, Alaska, and the Ural Mountains of Russia; and on Ellesmere Island, in the Canadian High Arctic.

Those results haven’t been published yet, but, D’Andrea said, “the more work we do, the more this finding seems to hold up.”

The research is important, not just because it reinforces the conclusion that humans are now putting their own imprint on the climate, but also, D’Andrea said, because it can help scientists predict where the climate is going from here.

“If we can understand how the climate system reacted to natural forces in the past,” he said, “we’ll have a better understanding of how it will respond to the changes we’re imposing on it.”

Related Coverage
Digging Into Past Climate
Climate and Carbon: The Link Just Got Stronger
Lake Coring in NYC and Greenland


By Ian Weiss (Newburgh, NY, 12550)
on October 5th, 2012

If you’re going to discuss the evidence regarding the MWP, please provide a broad review of all the published evidence. That’s the only meaningful way to address the issue. The above report is meaningless without that broader context.

The strong majority of research on the MWP indicates that the MWP was approximately as warm as the present, and probably warmer. The peer-reviewed literature on the topic is laid out on this webpage:

Here’s a peer-reviewed paper that reports the results of hundreds of studies on this topic. About 80% of the studies reviewed showed that the MWP was as warm or warmer than the present in the location where the study was done.

Here’s a recent study published by Nature which suggests that global temperature is approximately in same now as it was during the MWP.

Given the weight of all that evidence, it seems reasonable to tentatively conclude that the MWP was as warm or warmer than the present.

Reply to this comment

By Dr. Doug L. Hoffman (Conway, AR, 72032)
on October 8th, 2012

The argument over the Medieval Warm Period, or Medieval Climate Optimum as others prefer, and the Little Ice Age continues to rage in paleoclimate circles. The study you quote is simply another of literally thousands of studies performed since English climatologist Hubert H. Lamb first used the term back in 1965. The consensus view is that the MWP was as warm or warmer than today, but then consensus really not a good indicator of veracity and of itself does not constitute scientific evidence. The problem I have with your article is the use of the pejorative term “so-called” in introducing the MWP. The term is a valid designation for a verified period of warming and is referred to in numerous scientific papers. The use of “so-called” simply feeds the irrationalists on the AGW side of the climate change argument (witness your article being copied by the scientifically naive The argument is not that the climate is changing, or even that things have grown warmer, but rather how anomalous today’s temperatures are, how much man is contributing to the change and whether it is truly dangerous. The use of such dismissive terminology damages science and makes having a rational and unbiased discussion of the “so-called” problem impossible.

Reply to this comment

By Balthazar Margoose
on November 26th, 2012

Dear Ian Weiss,

The “CO2 Science” link that you’ve posted is produced by an organization masquerading as fair-reviewers of the science, but actually they’re funded by Exxon Mobil and have a vested interest. Beware of peoples’ motives.

Reply to this comment

By Alexander Adams
on January 4th, 2013

Co2science is oil funded because of its views, its views aren’t because of funding. The majority of funding came AFTER 1998, so its views became public. Further, the Idso family already had published papers expressing their views, meaning the oil industry would already be interested. Further Idso talks about that here:

Reply to this comment

By E K Black
on February 18th, 2013

Hey in my mind, this is part of the big first step - not in challenging the warmnest of the MWP as that isn’t the real issue here - but in the very acknowledgement that the MWP actually occured, because carbon theoried proponents of global warming have in the past generally ignored the MWP fact which while not documented scientifically in the past was well documented historically in many other ways.

Hey, it really doesn’t matter what the global temperature increase was in the MWP, this research starts to prove it happened, so please do tell the world what caused it - because we know for a fact that it couldn’t have been CO2.

Reply to this comment

Name (required):
Email (required):
Enter the word "climate" in the box below:

[+] View our comment guidelines.

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment will not appear until reviewed by Climate Central staff. Thank you for your patience.