The Bronze Age of Northwestern Scandinavia

Vol. 1: text

rjan Engedal

Dissertation for the degree doctor philosophiae (dr.philos.) at the University of Bergen

05.01.2010

The Bronze Age of Northwestern Scandinavia

by

rjan Engedal
Dissertation for the degree doctor philosophiae (dr.philos) at the University of Bergen

Time and place for public defence:

The 10.12.2010, 9.30, Bergen

Supervisor:

Opponents:
Opponent:

Professor Kristian Kristiansen University of Gteborg Professor Christopher Prescott University of Oslo Professor Lars Forsberg University of Bergen

Opponent: Committee member:

Chairperson:
Christard Hoffmann University of Bergen

_________________________________
(Signature of candidate) Leikanger, 19.10.2010

Abstract
The Bronze Age of Northwestern Scandinavia has three main purposes: 1) the written evaluation of individual artefacts along with plates and catalogues, should fill a long standing gap in the Nordic and European Bronze Age database Northwestern Scandinavia; 2) it is an holistic interpretive attempt at the Bronze Age as history, and at the integration of NW Scandinavia in a larger Bronze Age world without loosing sight of the particularities of local data; 3) it is an attempt to face up to critique of modernity from an archeological perspective, and thus to do archaeology in light of the extended human mind and without simplistic use of society and the social. As point of departure I take the ongoing critique of the modern within philosophy, and natural and social sciences: the dichotomies and paradoxes linked to nature, culture, social, body, mind, word, and world. This critique is evaluated from a strictly archaeological point of view, and three methodological gates are sketched, leading to an archaeology compatible with the idea that the human mind is plastic and extends into the body and into the surrounding world. These three methodologies treat artefacts as societies, as minds and as acts. After reconsidering bronze artefacts as archaeological data in light of this, I formulate three specific strategies for Parts I-III of the thesis. The first strategy in Part I explores webs or networks wide in space and time, and focus on bronze as societies or types and as a source of information on spatially extensive networks and a historical rhythm of time. 523 metal artefacts and casting moulds are given a basic typological, spatial and chronological assessment. This culminates in a presentation of the Bronze Age as a series of maps of distribution and networks. Diachronic change and the integration of NW Scandinavia in a larger geographic context are given priority. The second strategy in Part II explores webs dense in time and space, and takes on bronze as congealed action. Now the focus is on the transformation of bronze through casting and displacement of bronze through long distance mobility. The aim is to localise and close in on a series of non-human elements involved in these events, and to close in on human skills and sensory experience. The third strategy in Part III closes in on explanation in archaeology. I argue that explaining is an act of distributing agency/the ability to influence, among human and non-human participants in prehistoric networks. The third strategy and the thesis culminates in three chapters (9-11) that seek explanation in the Bronze Age from different points of view, scales of space and rhythms of time. These three chapters are also meant as a demonstration of what can be gained by rigorous adherence to the methodologies sketched in chapter 1, and thus also as a test of the project writ large. In chapter 9 I pick up the threads from Part I and explore further the Bronze Age as history as a diachronic series of wide webs, and I finally present explanations to these dynamic networks. The value of fur from the Norwegian alpine mountains and Fennoscandinavia in Central Europe and the Mediterranean is set higher compared to earlier studies. One significant claim is that the networks in question should not be classified as down-the-line but as directional, intentional networks related to trade in fur. In relation to the critique of the modern, this chapter is an attempt to do justice to the archaeological horizon of experience, to aim

explanation onto the puzzles given by traditional archaeological tools (typology, spatial distribution, drawings, maps). In chapter 10 I pick up the threads from Part II and explore further aspects of sensory experience within networks of single events, primarily events that involved bronze. In relation to the critique of the modern, this is an attempt to do justice to mindful, sensing and skilled humans in their dealings with metal in the Bronze Age. In chapter 11 I explore a third rhythm of time, that of the human biography. In light of the critique of the modern, this is an attempt to explore the becoming, plastic human being with a mind immersed in matter of body and surrounding world. The biographical perspective also allows me to re-encounter a series of subjects familiar to Bronze Age research, and to finally face up to social anthropology: specialization, political economy, feasting, power, death rituals, and social organization. In chapter 12, the conclusion, I summarize the main results of the thesis, point at some consequences for other geographic areas and periods of time, and sketches elements for new directions in Bronze Age research.

COMMENTS TO THIS VERSION, DECEMBER 2010.

The following errors in the original thesis have been corrected for an updated version, december 2010. page 37, line 19: operating in the LN (Map 6) changed to operating in the LN (Map 7-8) page 109, line 25: at my I at the transition II/III changed to at my I at the transition I/II page 111, line 13: carved at or after 1300 BC changed to carved at or after 1500 BC page 250: note 28 changed to note 27. page 279: note 29 changed to note 28. MAP 2: VEJLE AMT added. MAP 8: Circles misplaced in interior Sweden and eastern Norway, corrected. MAP 11: (legend): Underre type (Norway and Denmark mapped) changed to Underre type (only Norway mapped) MAP 16: gold sheet double-spiral arm rings: 1 from Lolland and 1 from Zealand added. MAP 18: large hoard from Svenes, Oppland C., Norway with 20-30 Ullerslev type spears added. MAP 30: (legend): BA VI burial green square changed to green circle. I became aware of some relevant works after I had handed in my thesis, and would like to make the following notes: 1) Late Neolithic gold rings. Two gold coiled rings with twisted ends, one small (finger) from Braut (nr. 111) and one larger (arm) from Lista (nr. 110) are dated to the EBA in my thesis. Others have argued that their high silver content and their twisted ends place them more comfortably in the LN. They also argue that the Lista ring was actually discovered in a burial along with a piece of pure tin (Carrasco 2009; Valum 2009). It should also be noted that the relevant images are misrepresented in both Marstrander 1977 and Johansen 1986. I fully agree wtih the above arguments, and this gold network, and potentially also a tin network, should be considered in light of my Maps 8, 23, and 25. The Norwegian rings are best linked to the nearset cluster in Eastern Jutland, and the contemporary extraordinary findings from Skeldal (bronze bee-hive) and Gallemose (bronze chariot poles). In the larger perspective, I believe these rings strenghten the idea of the western Nordic-Mediterranean networks displayed on Maps 23 and 25. Carrasco, L. 2009: Maritim praksis i senneolitikum og eldre bronsealder - en analyse av btristningene p Lista fra et maritimt perspektiv. MA Thesis. Institute of arkeology, conservation and history. University of Oslo. Autumn 2009. - Valum, M. S. 2009: Hellig eller profan? Hus og husoffer som kilde til kosmologi i senneolitikum og bronsealder p Lista i Vest-Agder fylke. MA Thesis. Institute of arkeology, conservation and history. University of Oslo. Spring 2009. 2) The Blindheim sword. In his thesis from 2004, Stefan Schwenzer makes a thorough analysis of the early metal hilted daggers, including some of the early ogival short swords. This makes it somewhat easier to make a clearer interpretation of the Blindheim sword, its provenance and routes of distribution. In my thesis I hesitate to decide whether it was brought from the western part of Europe via Jutland and a maritime route, or via Eastern Sweden and an overland route. I leaned towards the former alternative (p. 126). It is now clear that the hilt of the Blindheim sword is not made in the same way as those from Roum, Jutland, or Rastorf and Nebra, Germany. These seem all to be made as two separate halves, and have a rivet at the front of the socket. Blindheim has a hilt cast as a single unit with a rivet through the side of the socket. The best parallell, in light of Schwenzers study, is now the short sword/long dagger from Felsberg, Switzerland (Schwenzer 2004: nr. 282). The pair of daggers with socketed hilt and collars at the rim of the socket, from Karlevi, Sweden and Overdiessbach, Switzerland (Schwenzer nr. 292), makes a contemporary link between the Alps and the north. In light of a closer examination of the daggers and early sword from the western Alps, although fewer and less impressive than those from Hajdusamson, Apa or Nebra (esp. Schwenzer nr. 282,283, 292), I conclude that the Blindheim sword was made in the western Alps and came to NW Scandinavia along the peculiar network displayed on Map 24 (and on Map 25, but not the maritime one). Thus, the image of the beginning of the EBA in western Norway becomes clearer (cf. 125pp): all the exotic findings from Vevang, Blindheim and Steine can now be explained by the very same overland network to Eastern Sweden. - Schwenzer, S. 2004: Frhbronzezeitliche Vollgriffdolche. Mainz 2004.

Abbreviations
EM: MM: LM: EN: LN (I & II): BA: EBA: LBA: PRIA: IA: EIA: LIA: IE: CSWS: AK: Old: Minnen: Early Mesolithic Middle Mesolithic Late Mesolithic Early Neolithic Late Neolithic Bronze Age Early Bronze Age Late Bronze Age Pre-Roman Iron Age Iron Age Early Iron Age Late Iron Age Indo-European Central Swedish Water System (cf. chapt.8.2). Aner Kersten Oldeberg 1974 Montelius 1917

MN (a & b): Middle Neolithic

ii

Figures:
1. Initial results of chrono-typological study (burials with bronze) ......................................... 79 2. Initial results of chrono-typological study (bronze hoards) ................................................ 80 3. Metal analyses of early bronzes in NW Scandinavia ........................................................... 86 4. Facet types on socketed axes ............................................................................................. 92 5. Suggested chronology of the bronze deposits in the rock-shelter Skrivarhellaren ........... 120 6. Colour, temperatures and melting points ........................................................................... 144 7. Bronze Age melting procedure .......................................................................................... 149 8. Mould terminology ............................................................................................................. 161 9. Elements of core print designs ........................................................................................... 177 10. Agents in bronze casting in light of Bronze Age imagery and IE mythology .................... 287 11. The path of the Bronze Age spiral ornament ...................................................................... 294 12. Reconstructed women from the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia ......................................295 13. The carved slab from Kyrkje-Eide and interpretation of the motives ..................................300 14. The Bronze Age as history and flow of generations........................................................... 313 15. Rhythm of the sun in a mountain valley ............................................................................. 325

iii

Maps (Vol. 2)
Map 1 Map 2 Map 3 Map 4 Map 5 Map 6 Map 7 Map 8 Map 9 Map 10 Map 11 Map 12 Map 13 Map 14 Map 15 Map 16 Map 17 Map 18 Map 19 Map 20 Map 21 Map 22 Map 23 Map 24 Map 25 Map 26 Map 27 Map 28 Map 29 Map 30 NW Scandinavia geography Counties in Northwestern Europe EM (9500-8000 BC)
MM-LM (8000-4000 BC) EN-MN a (4000-2800 BC) MN b (2800-2350 BC) LN I (2350-1950 BC) LN II (1950-1700 BC)

Northern prelude (c. 2000-1700 BC) BA Ia (1700-1600 BC) BA Ib (1600-1500 BC) BA II early (1500-1340 BC) BA II late (1340-1300 BC) BA III (1300-1100 BC) BA IV (1100-900 BC) BA V (900-700 BC) BA VI (700-500 BC) The Central Swedish Water System (CSWS) The North Way The fur-trade 800-1100 AD Triangular metal-hilted daggers in Europe The Ster- Ripatransone Network The Vester Skjerninge Byblos Network The Vevang-Mycenae Network The Svanekjr Mose S-Alpine Network First Swords (1700-1500 BC) Early BA II (1500-1340 BC) Late BA II (1340-1100 BC) Scandinavia Volga Networks Jren, 1700500 BC

Plates (Vol. 2)

Copper, gold and bronze artefacts (nr. 1-523) ....................................................... Pl. 1-45 Moulds (mould 1-32) ............................................................................................. Pl. 46-53 Parallels for the Vigrestad brooch from Zealand and Lneburger Heide .............. Pl. 54 Parallels for the Tennevik & Trondenes collars ..................................................... Pl. 55 Parallels for the B dagger: the Albertsdorf burial ................................................ Pl. 56 Parallels for the bracelet and axes from Steine and Vevang .................................. Pl. 57 The Rishaug slab and the Anderlingen burial ........................................................ Pl. 58 Selected rock art motives ....................................................................................... Pl. 59 Parallels for Jarfjord, Vektarlia and Leirbukt (Seima-Turbino) ............................. Pl. 60 Slate harpoon heads, copper arrowheads, and early Arctic socketed axes ............ Pl. 61 Parallels for the moulds from Tjesseim and Randaberg: Luusuavaara and Kemi . Pl. 62 Seima, Nordic, Hittite: figurines, spearheads, axes and blades ............................. Pl. 63 Axes and moulds of Ananino and related types in the west .................................. Pl. 64

iv

Acknowledgements
This thesis has been written without financial or institutional support. This has been made possible by Monica and Bjarte Engedal who graciously allowed me a place to study. Nor had this been possible without the patience and encouragement of Kjellfrid and Bjrn Engedal, and their tolerance towards the various experiments and trials being conducted on their property. Thanks to Per Ditlef Fredriksen for all discussions, literature, and encouragement, and for taking the time to read and comment on several chapters. Thanks to Tor Arne Waraas for discussions, literature, and help. Thanks to my previous tutors Randi Hland and Gro Mandt for discussions, support, coffee and tea; and to Lene Melheim for literature and help. I would also like to express my gratitude to members of the staffs at the archaeological museums who have facilitated my research: Svein Ove Agdestein, Liv Helga Dommasnes, Sigrid Kaland, Svein Skare, Hans Davanger, Sonja Innselset, Kari Kristoffersen, Else Kleppe and Melanie Wrigglesworth at Bergen Museum; Torbjrn Aasvang and Torkel Johannesen at Vitenskapsmuseet in Trondheim; sa Dahlin Hauken at Archaeological Museum of Stavanger and Monica Kristin Hansen at Troms Museum. Thanks also to the staff at the University of Bergen Library. Finally, would like to thank Oddhild Dokset for encouragement, support and patience.

Contents:
List of abbreviations .............................................................................................................................i List of figures ........................................................................................................................................ii List of maps & plates ............................................................................................................................. iii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ iv 1. Introduction plan for an escape .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Reasons for leaving - there is a soundless song from across the river ................................. 2 1.1.1 Trouble at the soft bank .................................................................................... 3 1.1.2 Trouble at the hard bank ................................................................................... 7 1.2 Keys to break free - another look at things .......................................................................... 9 1.2.1 Artefacts as societies ........................................................................................ 11 1.2.2 Artefacts as minds ............................................................................................ 13 1.2.3 Artefacts as acts .............................................................................................. 18 1.3 The plan ............................................................................................................................... 21 1.3.1 Bronze artefacts as data .................................................................................... 21 1.3.2 First strategy: tracing wide webs ...................................................................... 22 1.3.3 Second strategy: tracing dense webs ................................................................. 23 1.3.4 Third strategy: explaining changing webs ........................................................ 25

Part I Wide Webs

2. Before bronze: networking the Stone Age ...................................................................................... 27 2.1 9500-8000 BC, Beginnings, (Map 3) .................................................................................. 27 2.2 8000-4000 BC, MM-LM (Map 4) .................................................................................... 29 2.2.1 Pecked/ground round axes and shaft-hole mattocks ........................................29 2.2.2 Rock-art and slate ............................................................................................ 30 2.2.3 Borderland Hustadvika .....................................................................................31 2.3 4000-2800 BC, EN-MNa (Map 5) .................................................................................... 32 2.3.1 FBC types ........................................................................................................ 33 2.3.2 Slate knives ...................................................................................................... 33 2.3.3 Borderland Hustadvika .................................................................................... 34 2.4 2800-2350 BC, MNb (Map 6) .......................................................................................... 35 2.4.1 Selected battle axe types ................................................................................ 35 2.4.2 Decorated slate projectiles ............................................................................... 35 2.5 2350-1700 BC, LN (Maps 7-8) ............................................................................................36 3. First attempt ..................................................................................................................................... 40 3.1 Brooches ........................................................................................................................... 40 3.1.1 Early brooches ................................................................................................. 41 3.1.2 Late brooches .................................................................................................... 43 3.2 Pins ................................................................................................................................... 44 3.2.1 Spiral-headed pins ............................................................................................44 3.2.2 Disc-headed pins ..............................................................................................45 3.2.3 Other pins .........................................................................................................46 3.3 Tweezers ........................................................................................................................... 46 3.3.1 Undecorated tweezers ...................................................................................... 47 3.3.2 Decorated tweezers ...........................................................................................47 3.4 Studs and buttons ............................................................................................................. 48 3.4.1 Double-studs .....................................................................................................48 3.4.2 Bar-studs .......................................................................................................... 50 3.4.3 Buttons ............................................................................................................. 50

vi
3.5 Bracelets and rings for arm and finger ................................................................................. 51 3.5.1 Ribbed bracelets ............................................................................................... 51 3.5.2 Spiral arm rings ................................................................................................ 52 3.5.3 Other arm and finger rings ............................................................................... 52 3.6 Neck collars and neck rings ............................................................................................... 55 3.6.1 Neck collars ..................................................................................................... 55 3.6.2 Neck rings ........................................................................................................ 56 3.7 Belt plates and tutuli ........................................................................................................ 57 3.8 Single edged blades: razors, knives and sickles ................................................................. 59 3.9 Double edged blades: swords, daggers and projectiles ........................................................ 61 3.9.1 Blades with complete or partial bronze hilts .................................................... 61 3.9.2 Flange and tongue-hilted blades ....................................................................... 64 3.9.3 Tanged blades .................................................................................................. 65 3.9.4 Riveted blades ................................................................................................... 67 3.9.5 Blade fragments ............................................................................................... 68 3.10 Spearheads ................................................................................................................... 68 3.11 Miscellanea ................................................................................................................... 71 3.12 Initial results: reassessing the trajectory of burials ........................................................... 73 3.12.1 BA II early ........................................................................................................ 74 3.12.2 BA III ................................................................................................................ 75 3.12.3 BA II late ........................................................................................................... 76 3.12.4 The burials from Vigrestad, Kleppe II, Gjrv and Rykkja I ............................ 77 3.12.5 BA IV-VI .......................................................................................................... 80 4. Second attempt: axes ....................................................................................................................... 82 4.1 Flanged axes ........................................................................................................................ 82 4.1.1 Types Oldendorf and Underre ........................................................................ 82 4.1.2 Type Extreme Oldendorf ................................................................................ 83 4.1.3 Type Hheim-Steine ..................................................................................... 84 4.1.4 The Bersagel axe ............................................................................................. 86 4.1.5 The Vevang axe ................................................................................................ 87 4.1.6 The axes from Veen, Stokke and Lomen .......................................................... 88 4.2 Paalstaves ..........................................................................................................................88 4.2.1 Type Nordic weapon-paalstaves .................................................................. 89 4.2.2 Y-decorated paalstaves (Norddeutsche Typ) ................................................ 89 4.2.3 Simple flat paalstaves ....................................................................................... 90 4.3 Shaft-hole axes .................................................................................................................... 90 4.3.1 Type Faardrup .................................................................................................. 90 4.3.2 The ceremonial axes from Lunde and Rimbareid ............................................ 90 4.3.3 The Raknes axe ................................................................................................. 91 4.4 Socketed axes ....................................................................................................................... 91 4.4.1 Group 1: medium and large axes with facet A ................................................ 92 4.4.2 Group 2: medium and large axes with facet B ................................................. 93 4.4.3 Group 3: axes with thin-ribbed Y-ornament .................................................... 94 4.4.4 Group 4: axes with straight rectangular depressions ....................................... 94 4.4.5 Group 5. large looped axes with extended neck .............................................. 95 4.4.6 Group 6: small looped axes with extended neck ............................................ 96 4.4.7 Group 7: small looped axes ............................................................................ 97 4.4.8 Group 8. small loopless axes ........................................................................... 97 4.4.9 Group 9: small decorated axes .................................................................... 98 4.4.10 Other socketed axes .................................................................................... 99 4.4.11 The socketed axe and the Taiga-connection .................................................... 100 5. Third attempt: selected non-bronze data ...................................................................................... 108 5.1 Boat 1: Rectangular hull without keel-extensions ............................................................... 108 5.2 Boat 2: In-turned prows, keel-extensions, and steering ore ............................................. 110

vii
Selected rock art motives and rock art in burials ............................................................... 112 Asbestos tempered pottery ................................................................................................ 114 Slate pendants ................................................................................................................... 115 Radiocarbon dating ............................................................................................................ 116 5.6.1 The introduction of cremation ........................................................................ 116 5.6.2 The introduction of three-isled long houses .................................................... 117 5.6.3 The radiocarbon sequence from Skrivarhellaren ............................................. 118 5.6.4 The introduction of face-urns ........................................................................ 121 5.6.5 Radiocarbon dates from monuments on Karmy .................................... 121 5.6.6 The massacre at Sund ..................................................................................... 122 6. Making the first step: networking the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia .................................. 124 6.1 2000-1700 BC, northern prelude (Map 9) .......................................................................... 124 6.2 1700-1600 BC, Nordic BA Ia (Map 10) ............................................................................. 125 6.3 1600-1500 BC, Nordic BA Ib (Map 11) ......................................................................... 127 6.4 1500-1340 BC, Nordic BA II, early (Map 12) ................................................................. 129 6.5 1340-1300 BC, Nordic BA II, late (Map 13) ...................................................................... 130 6.6 1300-1100 BC, Nordic BA III (Map 14) ............................................................................. 132 6.7 1100-900 BC, Nordic BA IV (Map 15) .............................................................................. 135 6.8 900-700 BC, Nordic BA V (Map 16) ................................................................................. 137 6.9 700-500 BC, Nordic BA VI (Map 17) ................................................................................ 138 6.10 Towards Bronze Age history ....................................................................................... 140 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Part II - Dense Webs

7. Transformation ............................................................................................................................. 142 7.1 Qualities of copper and bronze ....................................................................................... 142 7.2 The melting of bronze ................................................................................................... 146 7.2.1 Crucible ........................................................................................................ 147 7.2.2 Fuel ............................................................................................................... 152 7.2.3 Tuyere ............................................................................................................ 156 7.2.4 Bellows .......................................................................................................... 157 7.2.5 Furnace ........................................................................................................... 159 7.3 The making of moulds ..................................................................................................... 160 7.4 Early moulding projects in the Central Zone .................................................................. 162 7.5 The Vigrestad, Gjrv & Kleppe projects ............................................................................ 168 7.6 The paalstave-mould from Voile ..................................................................................... 170 7.7 Blade moulding ............................................................................................................... 174 7.8 Cored moulds ................................................................................................................... 176 7.8.1 First generation soap-stone moulds for socketed axes ................................... 178 7.8.2 The Nyhamar projects ................................................................................. 179 7.8.3 The Hiksdal project ....................................................................................... 180 7.8.4 Small socketed axes ......................................................................................... 181 7.8.5 Arctic and Nordic methods of handling cores ............................................... 182 7.8.6 Casting in cored soap-stone moulds .............................................................. 184 7.9 The transformation of metal in NW Scandinava ........................................................ 187 8. Displacement .................................................................................................................................. 189 8.1 Towards assemblies of long-distance movement ........................................................ 189 8.1.1 Animals ......................................................................................................... 189 8.1.2 Snow-technologies ........................................................................................ 190 8.1.3 Boats ..........................................................................................................192 8.2 The Central Zone and the Central-Swedish-Water-System (CSWS) ................................ 197 8.2.1 The CSWS .................................................................................................... 197 8.2.2 From the fjords to the CSWS ........................................................................ 201 8.2.3 The Central Zone CSWS journeys ............................................................... 205

viii
8.3 The maritime journeys along the North Way ...................................................................... 207 8.3.1 Barriers and bypassings .................................................................................... 208 8.3.2 Travelling the North Way ............................................................................... 211 8.4 The final act of displacement ............................................................................................... 213 8.4.1 Recycling .......................................................................................................... 213 8.4.2 The condition of bronzes .................................................................................. 214 8.4.3 Water and rock ................................................................................................. 217 8.4.4 Burials and houses ........................................................................................... 219 8.4.5 The final web ................................................................................................... 220 8.5 In between transformation and displacement ...................................................................... 221 8.5.1 Edges and points bronze and physical impact ............................................... 222 8.5.2 The heavy cutting edge 9500-500 BC .............................................................. 226 8.6 The displacement of bronze into NW Scandinavia ....................................................... 228

Part III Shifting Webs

9. From the Alps & the Urals - agency in wide webs .......................................................................... 231 9.1 Enigmas, compensations & mechanisms in Bronze Age history ....................................... 231 9.1.1 Enigmas of the northern Bronze Age .............................................................. 232 9.1.2 Compensations for metal: amber, textiles and fur ........................................... 233 9.1.3 Mechanisms of displacement: the Gift, the Journey & the Karoum ................ 238 9.2 Scandinavia & the Alps ....................................................................................................... 241 9.2.1 The fall of the Unetice Culture ......................................................................... 241 9.2.2 From dagger to sword ...................................................................................... 245 9.2.3 The rise & fall of the North Way .................................................................... 250 9.2.4 Decisive events in the history of North-South networks ................................. 254 9.3 Scandinavia & the Urals ..................................................................................................... 257 9.3.1 Volga-Kama and the Seima horizon ................................................................. 257 9.3.2 From Seima to Ananino ................................................................................... 260 9.4 Jren A close-up view ..................................................................................................... 263 9.5 Explaining Bronze Age history .................................................................................... 265 10. Metal in mind - agency in dense webs ............................................................................................ 269 10.1 Concepts of containment, causation and change .............................................................. 269 10.2 Molten metals & malleable minds .................................................................................... 272 10.3 Birth of bronzes ................................................................................................................ 278 10.3.1 Breath of Celestial Horses ............................................................................... 279 10.3.2 Vehicle of the Sun ............................................................................................ 281 10.3.3 Body of Fire ..................................................................................................... 283 10.3.4 Body In-Between .............................................................................................. 283 10.3.5 Making bronze artefacts ................................................................................... 286 10.4 Sticky spirals & tempting waists ........................................................................................ 291 10.5 Re-gathering the girl ......................................................................................................... 298 10.6 Woven & cast .................................................................................................................. 302 10.7 Facing the other ................................................................................................................ 303 10.8 Making & breaking bodies ................................................................................................ 304 10.9 Underneath the axe ............................................................................................................ 306 10.10 Bronzes & minds ............................................................................................................ 309 11. From cradle to cairn - biographies of the Bronze Age .............................................................. 312 11.1 Becoming human ......................................................................................................... 312 11.2 Children of the Long-House ....................................................................................... 315 11.3 Within rhythms of the world ....................................................................................... 323 11.4 Beyond the Long-House ............................................................................................... 327 11.4.1 The path ......................................................................................................... 328

ix
11.4.2 The bride from beyond ................................................................................ 233 11.4.3 Into the world ................................................................................................... 237 11.5 Nurturer, destroyer, gatherer ......................................................................................... 339 11.6 From cradle to cairn ......................................................................................................... 349 12. Bronze Age beyond bifurcation ................................................................................................. 350 12.1 Wide and dense webs ......................................................................................................... 350 12.2 What happened in the Bronze Age? ................................................................................... 352 12.3 Technology, authority, and the malleability mind ............................................................. 355 12.4 . Bronze Age studies beyond bifurcation ..........................................................................357 Notes .................................................................................................................................................. 359 References.......................................................................................................................................... 365 App. I. Copper, bronze and gold artefacts .................................................................................... A.1 I.1 Brooches ............................................................................................................................ A.1 I.2 Pins .................................................................................................................................... A.1 I.3 Tweezers ............................................................................................................................ A.2 I.4 Studs and buttons ............................................................................................................... A.2 I.5 Bracelets, arm and finger rings ......................................................................................... A.3 I.6 Neck collars and neck rings ............................................................................................... A.5 I.7 Belt plates and tutuli ......................................................................................................... A.6 I.8 Knives ................................................................................................................................ A.6 I.9 Double-edged blades ......................................................................................................... A.7 I.10 Spearheads ...................................................................................................................... A.9 I.11 Miscellanea ..................................................................................................................... A.10 I.12 Flanged axes ..................................................................................................................... A.12 I.13 Paalstave axes .................................................................................................................. A.12 I.14 Shafthole axes ................................................................................................................. A.13 I.15 Socketed axes .................................................................................................................. A.13 App. II. Moulds ..................................................................................................................................A.17 App. III. Burials ................................................................................................................................ A.19 App. IV. Hoards ................................................................................................................................ A.27 App. V. Selected findings outside Northwestern Scandinavia ..................................................... A.29 V.1 Daggers comparable to B I ........................................................................................... A.29 V.2 Tanged pommels comparable to Hognestad .................................................................... A.29 V.3 Assemblages with narrow ribbed bracelets comparable to Rege I and N-Braut ............ A.29 V.4 Assemblages with broad ribbed bracelets ....................................................................... A.30 V.5 Reposs decorated belt plates ......................................................................................... A.31 V.6 Belt plates with raised rope-style boss-collars comparable to Kleppe II ....................... A.31 App. VI. Notes to simulations and trials ......................................................................................... A.32 . App. VII. Radiocarbon dates ............................................................................................................. A.37

Chapter 1. Plan for an escape

With this thesis I intend to: 1. Develop arguments firmly grounded in the preserved metal artefacts, regarding the history, the minds, and the lives of people in the Bronze Age of Northwestern Scandinavia. 2. Develop theoretical perspectives and methodological strategies for the study of prehistoric artefacts in general and bronze artefacts in particular. In this introductory chapter I will sketch a plan for an escape from an archaeology, a science and a philosophy that have drifted too far from what is given in human experience, i.e. from the experience of archaeologists on the one hand and from the experience of people in prehistory on the other. In the last two decades there has been an increasing heterogeneity among archaeologists and their scientific activities and a lack of consensus when it comes to the most basic issue of what archaeology is (cf. Svestad 2003): 1. What is archaeological data and what is the aim of archaeology? 2. What separates archaeology from other scientific disciplines? 3. What methods enable us to produce knowledge from archaeological data, relevant to the aim of the discipline? I am about to argue that the aim of archaeology is to gain knowledge of the prehistory of human beings, that our data are the material traces of human beings preserved from prehistory, and that it is the character of this data that separates archaeology from other disciplines. Any suitable methodology must thus take into consideration the characteristics of the data it will be applied to, and I shall claim that methods that seek to trace human transformation and displacement of matter from the data, are best suited to produce relevant knowledge. I thus join in the chorus of critical voices arguing that archaeology as a discipline suffers from a lack of methodology and theory coming to terms with and embracing the materiality of its data (e.g. Svestad 2003; Olsen 2003, 2004; DeMarais et.al. 2004; Tilley et.al. 2006). Still, the above claims are each and all controversial, and I will below attempt to justify my statements.

1.1 Reasons for leaving - there is a soundless song from across the river
The discipline of archaeology has along with other modern sciences drifted to a position where what is given in experience is disregarded and it is this position I seek to flee from. Archaeology has developed through three main stages, cultural-historical, processual and post-processual, each stage involving an increasing concern with methodological and theoretical issues (Trigger 1996; Olsen 1997). The problems that the increased level of disciplinary soul searching brought to light, first through processual archaeology (Trigger 1996: 214pp.; Olsen 1997: 61pp.) and then through post-processual archaeology (Olsen 2003: 89pp.; 2006), might all in some way or another be tied to major paradoxes embedded in the project of modernism, and thus embedded in all scientific disciplines that modernity gave birth to. The reason why this now seems so clear is that the project of modernity has been thoroughly historicised, i.e. that detailed tracings have been made of the origin of the various aspects of modernity (Latour 2008: 38). Bruno Latour presents and explores one paradox that captures the essence of the issue, and it is one that we can all relate to. He argues that we are forced to choose between two types of meaninglessness: either we can speak of the senseless molecules that nature is really made of (and speak scientifically and true); or we might speak of the unreal, but meaningful nature as we sense it (and speak unscientifically, poetically but false). Philosopher Alfred North Whitehead diagnosed this philosophy as suffering from a bifurcation of nature (Whitehead 1920 in Latour 2008: 10). When we speak of hearing the nightingale, smelling the rose and seeing the red sunset, we are indulging in a nature that is meaningful to us, but one that is not real, because :
In a nature that has bifurcated, its in vain that the nightingale sings: the singing is entirely in our mind, or even in our brain. If we could look directly at nature [...] it would be soundless: the nightingale would simply agitate the air, the waves of which will strike our eardrums triggering some electric effects in our neurons, and somewhere in the auditory folds of our cortex a pure invention will emerge which has no correspondence whatsoever with anything of a similar tone in nature: the song of the soundless nightingale (Latour 2008: 11).

If we acknowledge this paradox, it means admitting that most of us have no reality in our speech, and that most of us speak of unreal matters. How can we live meaningful lives, how can we think critically, and how can we do archaeology underneath a philosophical umbrella that claims that the nightingale sings silently?

3 Bruno Latour attempts to find a way out, to find a route that will bring reality back to our speech. For this purpose he uses the metaphors of a river, a bifurcated river and the opposition between the banks of a river. Bifurcation refers to the point where a common stream is separated into two isolated streams, and this is used as a metaphor for the way western philosophy and modernity in their birth attempted to split the world into two major categories. He also likens these two categories or sets of dichotomies to two separate riverbanks. One riverbank is the world, material or the natural; the other bank is the word, the social or the mind (Latour 2008: 34). The difference between the two river banks, between the dull and senseless stuff that nature is really made of on the one hand, and the song of the nightingale as we hear it, on the other, is also the difference between primary and secondary qualities. Western philosophy argues that there exists no resemblance between these sets of qualities (ibid: 12). Philosophy and a range of scientific disciplines, including archaeology, have been engaged in the project of building various types of bridges between these riverbanks. According to Latour these are all impossible ventures because the gap to be bridged is not real and out there, but imaginary and an early invention made by the same philosophy that has ever since engaged in bridging it. In order to bring reality back to our speech, and give sound back to the nightingales song, we must not let the river bifurcate into separate streams in the first place. The recent historicising of science and the modern has illuminated this pre-bridge phase, and it has illuminated the cause of some of our most significant scientific challenges (ibid: 38). Thus, the problem lies not downstream and is not solved by bridges, both the problem and the solution lies further upstream at the bifurcation, the place were we are so inclined to let the single stream become two. When it comes to exactly how we are to proceed if we return to the place of bifurcation, Latour recommends that we should follow the flow of the river, rather than bridging it, place ourselves on the river as paddlers rather than standing on one of the banks. In order for this to become meaningful as new directions for scientific strategies and methodologies, it is necessary to first follow Latour to each of the riverbanks. It is essential that adjustments are made on both sides of the river, to the bank of the social and the bank of nature, because both the soft and the hard sciences have been conducted under the very same bifurcated point of view (ibid: 15p.).

1.1.1 Trouble at the soft bank

Bruno Latour argues that the science of the social has lost both its initial goals and its explanatory capacity (2005). What was originally to be explained, the social and society,

4 have become explanations in themselves (Latour 2005: 8, 13). His critique was initially spurred by the sociology of science project, in which the domain of sociological explanation was expanded to the scene of natural science and technology. According to Latour, sociological explanation in the laboratories became a total failure. There were two reasons: the world of natural objects, non-humans, seemed to impose on the social domain, and the humans studied resisted being explained by the social. Latours radical conclusion is that social explanation failed not only in the domain of natural science and technology, but in all other fields as well. The reason that the short-comings became evident in this particular case, was that the objects studied (scientists) was in a position to protest in a way that farmers, the poor, fetishists, fanatics, priests, lawyers and businessmen could not (ibid: 94pp, 98). The science of the social took a significant turn when the ideas of Emilie Durkheim raised to dominance over those of his older colleague Gabriel Tarde at the end of the 19th century (ibid 2001; 2008: 14pp.). This brought to the forefront the sociology concerned with humans only and with social structures that we know today. The exclusion of non-humans and the reliance on the abstract notion of structure are the two major problems on the soft bank. Latour attempts to remedy this situation by a return to the sociology of Gabriel Tarde. Tarde did not separate human societies from those of non-humans, but saw in stead all things as parts of societies, and all things as made up by smaller societies. He described the innerworkings or social-laws of all kinds of societies, as repetition, opposition and adaption:
[...] they have to repeat themselves in existence, to oppose one another in order to proceed forward, or to adapt to one another by differing from one another no matter how slightly (ibid 2008: 16).

Not only did Tarde propose that humans and non-humans were mixed into common societies, and that humans operated by the same principles as animals or molecules; he proposed a significant change in philosophical perspective. Rather than the being and I am central to western philosophy, we should put having and I have centre stage:
So far, all of philosophy has been founded on the verb To be, whose definition seemed to have been the Rosettas stone to be discovered. One may say that, if only philosophy had been founded on the verb To have, many sterile discussions, many slowdowns of the mind, would have been avoided. From this principle I am, it is impossible to deduce any other existence than mine, in spite of all the subtleties of the world. But affirm first this postulate:

5
I have as the basic fact, and then the had as well as the having are given at the same time as inseparable (Tarde 2000 quoted in Latour 2008: 17).

Latour claims that Tarde provides a solution, and that by taking the position of Tarde we are at once between the banks, flowing on the river:
So what does the front line of this current, this stream forward, look like now? Its made up of what could be called betting organisms having differences among themselves, provided that you accept the use of the word organism as a synonym of societies, that is, provided you extend the difficulty of being to all organisms, to the so-called material, biological ones as well as the so-called social ones. Those betting organisms have trajectories which define what they have been and what they might become if they manage to persist by exploring enough differences. Sociology (conceived by Tarde as a really general science) becomes the documentation of those trajectories, or those networks, to use my own expression, what is transported, sent carried over, enunciated, from one moment to the next, from one site to the next, from one actant to the next (Latour 2008: 17).

In this way, the singing nightingale, its potential mates, the poet writing about its song, the common listener as well as the bird ethologist recording its song, make up a society in which they are all moving forward, each of them entering into relations in order to have enough differences in order to prolong their existence a bit longer (ibid: 18). Latour highlights one more significant point made by Tarde: when any society is seen from outside or far away, and in bulk, we suspect that there are structural features, something between the individual parts, something that makes the sum of the whole larger than the sum of its parts. Viewed from the inside, these are all, like human societies, made up by differences and events. The radical effect is that: [...] structures, social structure especially, are just the illusion one has to escape to establish a solid sociology (ibid: 19). The illusion of structure is thus a major reason why philosophy lets nature bifurcate and it leads merciless into the divides between macro and micro, and between structure and event in social science:
[...] the link between a structure and some event is what happens to the bridge builders and not to the practitioners of kayaking... For the bridge builders, events are always lacking something, namely the law of their development which is always supposed to be somewhere else, and this somewhere is either a Platonic idea or thought, or a projection, or some law dictating its pronouncements from nowhere. In the same way as in perception where the mind has to do the work of adding secondary qualities to meaningless primary qualities in order to obtain something that makes sense, in social sciences and in science generally

6
the structure is needed to make the elements have a connection that has been withdrawn first by the divide between agencies (Latour 2008: 21).

Latours final point from Tarde is the notion of how sciences are adding themselves to the world:
[...] the sciences (in the plural) are adding differences of equipment and attention to the world; they are not what allows us to jump to the other side of the bank smack in the middle of primary qualities which are real but unknown [...] (ibid: 23).

There exist no laws of science, of society or nature, which has not been added to the world by individual scientists and their tools:
There is no law or scientific theory (any more than there is a system of philosophy) that does not bear its authors name still legibly written. Everything here originates in the individual; not only the materials, but the general design of the whole, and the detailed sketches as well; everything, including what is now diffused among all cultured minds, and taught even in the primary school, began as the secret of some single mind, whence a little flame, faint and flickering, sent forth its rays, at first only within a narrow compass, and even there encountering many obstructions, but, growing brighter as it spread further, it at length became a brilliant illumination (Tarde 2000 in Latour 2008: 24).

Thus, the sense-perception of science, the world sensed through the microscope, must be treated by the same principles as our common, unscientific sense-perceptions:
For example, the fire is burning and we see a red coal. This is explained in science by radiant energy from the coal entering our eyes [...] The real question is, When red is found in nature, what else is found there also? Namely we are asking for an analysis of the accompaniements in nature of the discovery of red in nature (Whitehead 1920 in Latour 2008: 25).

According to Latour, a merging of the sociology of Tarde with the philosophy of Whitehead, enables us to escape the bifurcation of nature:
The attempts of science studies, of sociology in Tardes sense is to look at those accompaniements in order to detect what else is found also. How many other things are accompanying, flowing with the flow, when we try to be attentive to new features of what is also given in experience? (2008: 25).

Summing up, what needs to be done on the bank of the social is mainly to not artificially split the mass of organisms or societies into human and non-human variants, and to avoid the temptation to see them as governed by structures or laws. Let us follow Latour to the other side of the river.

1.1.2 Trouble at the hard bank

The hard bank is characterized by its ability to produce hard matters of fact. But the matter of fact is not what it appears to be: a summary or skeleton of common sense experience. Quite on the contrary, the matter of fact of natural science depends on a highly specific aesthetic:
No doubt, matters of fact are the result of a specific style, they do not stand for reason, they do not stand even for empiricism, if we by this label we mean what is given in experience. And they certainly do not stand for the sciences, as if those had nothing else to do but to bridge the gap between words and worlds. [...] how come we have, for three centuries, discounted what is given to us through experience and replaced it instead by something never experienced that philosophers have nonetheless the nerve to call empirical and matters of factual (Latour 2008: 35).

The reason that it is now possible to recognize the strange character of the matter of fact in this way, is that the fuller tapestry of their emergence have been studied and historicized:
We dont have, on the one hand, a harsh world made of indisputable matters of fact and, on the other, a rich mental world of human symbols, imaginations and values. The harsh world of matters of fact is an amazingly narrow, specialized, type of scenography using a highly coded type of narrative, gazing, lighting, distance, a very precise repertoire of attitude and attention [...]. While it seemed barely possible in the time of Whitehead to overcome the bifurcation of nature because of the total grasp the first empiricism had on European minds, it is much easier now that matters of fact appear for what they always were: a certain style as convoluted, as interesting, as historical, as artistic as Lois the XIVs court etiquette, Leibnizs baroque monadology, Maurice of Nassaus invention of military drilling or Immanuel Kants interpretation of the Copernican revolution. [...] The opportunity is there to be seized: science has been so thoroughly historicized that we can now ask in an entirely new light: what has happened to us under the name of (first) empiricism? How can it be that common sense has been forced to drift so far from what is seized on by experience? And even more important: whats next? (ibid: 38).

Latours proposal for a new scenography, a second empiricism, and an escape from bifurcation, is to shift from matters of fact in the above sense, to matters of concern:
A matter of concern is what happens to a matter of fact when you add to it its whole scenography, much like you would do by shifting your attention from the stage to the whole machinery of a theatre.[...] Instead of simply being there whether you like it or not they still have to be there, yes (this is one of the huge differences), they have to be liked, appreciated, tasted, experimented upon, mounted, prepared, put to the test. It is the same world, and yet,

8
everything looks different. Matters of fact were indisputable, obstinate, simply there; matters of concern are disputable, and their obstinacy seems to be of an entirely different sort: they move, they carry you away, and yes, they too matter. The amazing thing with matters of fact was that, although they were material, they did not matter a bit, even though they were immediately used to enter into some sort of polemic. How really strange they were (Latour 2008 39).

The origin of bifurcation on the bank of nature seems to be entangled in a specific kind of human engagement with matter, namely art, and specifically the art of two-dimensional representation involving artist, pencil, paint, canvas and the environment to be depicted:
Without the experience of being tricked by painting in taking a plane variously coloured for a convex figure, philosophers would never have sustained for long the idea that the world itself could be made of primary streams of causalities that our mind transforms into non existing secondary qualities. Similarly, without the obsessive metaphor of painting, epistemologies never would have imagined that in science there are only two steps a copy and a model and a mimetic relation between the two. To put it much too bluntly: the idea of a bridge between representation and the represented is an invention of visual art. [...] I am sorry to say but epistemology is the fault of Dutch painters and merchants... You the Dutch impressed visitors so much, and especially Descartes, that he ended up confusing the white piece of paper on which figures are drawn with its res extensa! Catastrophic consequences for philosophy: never did it recover from this confusion between ontology and visualisation strategies (ibid: 42).

Thus, the new visualization strategies of naturalistic and perspective painting and drawing, as well as the camera obscura profoundly influenced the notion of matters of fact, and paved the way for the next decisive step when matters of fact: [...] shift from being a descriptive mode, a style of reasoning, to what is furnishing the world itself (ibid: 44). In other words, the bifurcation of nature arose in two steps: first, the form, what is seen, and can be drawn on a white paper, was separated from matter, what is drawn; and then, the matter of fact was born when this descriptive mode, this ability of the scientist to distillate form from matter, was fused with the ways matter itself transports its material component through time.
I hope it is clear that there is no possible reconciliation between art and science, no aestheticisation of beautiful results of science (fractals, galaxies, brain scans, etc.), but an immense building site where once again, just as in the 16th and 17th century every intellectual skill from artist, scientist, politicians, statesmen, organizers of all kinds, merchants and patrons, are trying to reinvent an Art of Describing, or rather an Art of Redescribing matters of fact to stop the fraudulent export and uptake what is given in experience (46). I

9
believe it is the responsibility of Europeans to refuse to live in the ruins of the modernist scenography and to have the courage, once again, to put their skills to work in devising for matters of concern a style that does justice to what is given in experience (Latour 2008: 50).

Archaeology was also born through the development of a specific way of looking at things, and archaeology has also drifted away from the experience of archaeologists (Olsen 2003; 2006). We do not do justice to what is given in our experience, and by implication, we do not do justice to the experience of prehistoric humans. Can archaeology in any way take up this challenge, and strive towards a style of reasoning that does justice to what is given in our experience as archaeologists, and also reason in a way that does justice to what was given in the experience of those who produced our data in prehistory?

1.2 Keys to break free another look at things

The boat-trip with Latour to both the soft and hard banks of science, brings the following challenge: how can we as archaeologists strive towards a style of reasoning that does justice to what is given in our experience as archaeologists, as well as a style that does justice to what was given in the experience of those who produced our data? First it is necessary to investigate how archaeologists actually experience their data. It is essential that we recognize the specific archaeological mode of aesthetic, our mode of seeing, and the effects of this mode. For this we need to return to the point of bifurcation where archaeology was born as a discipline, and take another look at how artefacts were initially experienced. It is here we will find keys to break free from a bifurcated archaeology. A specific archaeological way of looking seems to have developed through three cumulative stages before and in the initial phases of the birth of archaeology as a scientific discipline: first it recognized things as human made (artefacts), then also as Stone, Bronze or Iron Age artefacts, and finally also as types of Stone, Bronze or Iron Age artefacts. Archaeologists have also added differences of equipment and attention to their data, particularly through two-dimensional black-white drawings and spatial plots on twodimensional maps. During the late 16th century the cabinets of the renaissance that mixed human made and natural things, gave way to new art-cabinets that separated cultural from natural things. This seems to be the very first sign of the culture-nature dichotomy (Svestad 2003: 268). Here lies one of the fundamental characteristics of archaeological practice: to separate artefacts from natural things. Any archaeologist who has participated in an excavation recognizes this dilemma which stone to bag, which to throw away? Archaeologists are

10 trained to make this decision in seconds. How? What is it that we see? We look for a discrepancy from the natural order of things, something at odds with the non-human forces of the world. We recognise either a transformation or a displacement of matter, or both, that carries a distinctly human signature. If we do not recognize such a signature we do not bring the thing back to the museum, and we do not bother to measure and draw the markings. This is the most fundamental characteristic of the entities that make up the archaeological data: they have all been transformed and/or displaced by human beings in prehistory. It is hard to imagine any other principle of sorting that would enable us to direct archaeology towards the study of past humans or have archaeological collections of data at all. To break free of the culture-nature dichotomy does not mean that we ought to gather more natural things. To battle the paradoxical dichotomies that modernity has brought us, does not necessitate a simple merging or blurring, nor should the distinctive archaeological glance become less sharp or less discriminating. The emergence of archaeology as a scientific discipline in the first half of the 19th century involved the gathering and ordering of artefacts according to their materials. In fact the crucial momentum was a strategy and question akin to Whiteheads question above: when a bronze artefact is found in nature, what is also found, i.e. the study of closed findings in which different artefacts were combined (Grslund 1987: 7; Trigger 1996: 64). A subsequent development at the end of the 19th century, hinged on a distillation from the messy domain of artefacts, the type (cf.Trigger 1996: 62pp.; Svestad 1995: 160pp., 198p.). This distillation of form, of measuring, drawing and seeing artefacts, was related to the earlier innovation of two-dimensional perspective painting made by Dutch artists. If the latter led to the emergence of the matter of fact and the bifurcation of nature, I would say that the distillation of the type led to a stabilization of prehistoric artefacts, almost matter-offact-like. The artefact came to represent a type, a position in a typological chain, a timeperiod, and a culture. So, how do we as archaeologists experience our data? We see and touch them, some enthusiasts might even smell and taste them, but more importantly: archaeology became a science when it started to draw them, measure them, take pictures of them, compare them, sort them according to a range of attributes into categories, types and variants based on similarity and difference, and plot them on two-dimensional maps. On the basis of the work of generations of archaeologist we have developed a glance that recognizes similarities and

11 differences at various levels, and one that separates the doings of humans from those of animals, frost or bacteria. In order for archaeology to exist as a discipline we have to acknowledge that we are gatherers of things and sorters of things. If we do not gather things preserved from the past and if we do not sort them into categories, we will have little data and no time frame. It is within this initial formation of archaeological data, that I find keys for an escape, and the potential to an upgrade of our way of looking.

1.2.1 Artefacts as societies

Oscar Montelius, founding father of typology, saw typological collectives as a process an evolutionary, growing, developmental kind of force. This was challenged by Sophus Mller, and the idea of types as growing plants gave way to a concept of types mainly as blocks of time, e.g. a BA II type, and as certain patterns on the maps, e.g. Nordic (cf. Svestad 1995: 212pp.). The type became a time-space box, and the individual artefact was left to hover freely within the 200 year life-span of the type (200 year brackets characteristic of the Bronze Age). Archaeology has been blamed of confusing its specific distillate of form, the type, with those who made and used these types, their minds, or abstract collectives such as races, cultures, or people (e.g. Tallgren 1937a; Gjessing 1951: 222; Olsen 1997: 40pp.). This innovation, this style of reasoning, also brought the solid foundation of typo-chronology still very much in use. In fact, the style of reasoning of the first paradigm of cultural-historical archaeology came to rest on three highly specific two-dimensional tools: 1) the distillate of the type as two-dimensional drawings of artefacts; 2) the maps on which the find-places of types were plotted and cultural groups circumscribed; 3) the tables of time-space boxes showing the history of cultures through space. These tools are still fundamental to the discipline. Is it possible to reconcile these products of a bifurcated world-view with one that its not? Can archaeology escape bifurcation without leaving its favourite, the type, behind? I believe so, and a first step is to bury any notion of the type as something more than the sum of its individual artefacts, some abstract law or structure comparable to the structure of the social. But if there is no law or structure to hold the type together, how are the entities of a typological collective related? How do these entities move forward in a common direction of similarity? In my opinion this is where archaeology made and makes continuously a shortcut that leads us effectively into difficulties further downstream the chain of inference. If the type represented merely a certain degree of similarity we could not have used the notion of

12 type for dating neither for assumptions of the existence of common ideas or cultures. It must be that the members of a typological collective are similar to the degree that we believe there has to be some kind of bond between them or those who made them. Thus, the processes of transformation of matter in these cases not only bear distinctly human signatures, but signatures so similar that we suspect there is a link between these transformations and between the societies that transformed. One significant flaw of archaeology is the lack of serious attempts at tracing the becoming of specific artefacts and from one artefact to the next within typological collectives. In order to vitalize type-collectives, we have to reinstate the sense of coming into being, a growth, akin to Montelius original perspective, and stop taking them for granted. Rather than analogies from biology, this must be initiated by tracing the coming into being of each part of the collective, and bring in all entities necessary to make each artefact come into being, involving also the skilled human body. What remains to be done is to, in some way or another, reconstruct, simulate, suggest, and regenerate the coming into being of the type-collective with its similarities and its spatial distribution. The focus should be shifted to the rise and fall of type-societies, the way humans and non-humans manage to create and maintain similarity, the way they move forward in the same direction. The type should be seen as a movement, a trajectory and a network: with its epi-centre(s) of initial production, the paths of distribution of the artefacts, towards potential new epi-centers of production. We ought to treat the type as Gabriel Tarde treats the Laws of Nature:
There is no law or scientific theory (any more than there is a system of philosophy) that does not bear its authors name still legibly written. Everything here originates in the individual; not only the materials, but the general design of the whole, and the detailed sketches as well; everything, including what is now diffused among all cultured minds, and taught even in the primary school, began as the secret of some single mind, whence a little flame, faint and flickering, sent forth its rays, at first only within a narrow compass, and even there encountering many obstructions, but, growing brighter as it spread further, it at length became a brilliant illumination. (Tarde in Latour 2008: 85-86)

Hence, I do not believe typology is a dead end, I do not believe typology is merely a useful project in order to construct chronologies, or one that was useful but now completed. Quite on the contrary, I believe the only way to escape is through the type. Before we sort artefacts into types, we have already recognized them as being transformed or displaced by distinctly human forces. It is somewhat odd that our very

13 criteria for what is archaeological data and what is not, and what seems so very crucial initially, becomes so vague once the decision has been made. The bronze axe made from Alpine coppers discovered in a bog in NW Scandinavia must be accounted for it is a state of affair in need of an explanation. Seen from this angle it is not important how it was used, what it was used for, what it meant, who used it, whether it was lost, stored, sacrificed or buried, where, exactly, in the landscape it was deposited, or whether it signals asymmetric social relations or not. What is important is to account for the discrepancy from the natural state of affairs. Typically, we make hazardous short-cuts, moving too swiftly from things to issues of the social, i.e. group size, social structure, culture; and we end up with monumental accounts that actually do no account for the basic insights provided by the data: the transformation and displacement of matter. I must stress that this is not in any way advocating true, verifiable knowledge of the past, i.e. that there is not hazardous inferences involved in tracing the associations that moved and transformed matter. It is rather about engaging our data in a more effective way, and about not drifting too far from experience. The bronze axe is both a society in itself, of atoms and molecules in a specific mix of copper, tin and a range of other species, arranged in a cast structure inside, and a polished flanged axe, type Oldendorf on the outside. Atoms and molecules only gather into such societies when humans, fire, forced air, fuel and clay are involved - they are found also. Each individual artefact ought to be recognised as both a society in itself and as a member of a society, in the sense of Tarde and Latour. I contend that archaeology should be a discipline that traces associations and relations from, within, and between their artefacts; and in this it ought to strive towards greater distance to the ontological status of entities in both the non-human and human domains, and it ought to strive towards a higher degree of accountability in its narratives, leaving fewer associations in the dark. When it becomes clear that the bronze axe can only be traced through fire and clay, we should not back off, not pass by or leap over. Accordingly, I propose an escape from bifurcation through recognizing artefacts and types as societies that have been transformed and displaced by skilled human bodies.

1.2.1 Artefacts as minds

If first empiricism in Latours sense confused its drawings and its acts of drawing form from matter, with the world of matter and its workings; I believe it is fair to say that culturalhistory of archaeology with its magnificent innovations of typo-chronology confused their types, maps and tables with human engagements with the world. It could also be that the

14 vein of post-structuralism in more recent years confused their texts with artefacts, and their writing, i.e. their way of using coded information in texts, with prehistoric peoples way of using artefacts to cope in the world (Olsen 2006). In effect, this means that our minds are malleable and that our dealings with our environment inflicts on our conceptualization of the world and its inner causation and workings. In particular, our powerful modern technologies of perspective drawing, photography, writing and computing, have had decisive influence on its most authorative users: scientists, artists, philosophers, authors and their congregations of readers, spectators and admirers. If our specific ways of engaging with the material world have forged our minds in recent history, is it not likely that prehistoric minds were equally malleable and victims of their specific engagements with the world? The age-old question of the workings of human beings, for long split between philosophy and biology, is now caught in between a wider range of disciplines, and a subject of cross-disciplinary research. It seems clear that we are not what we thought we were. No other creature, as far as we know, has felt an urge to make a working-replica of itself in alternative materials. The attempts to make a copy of the human being, a robot with artificial intelligence, were revealing in many respects. The early attempts were modelled on the computer analogy: a software-mind inside a hardware-body. These robots performed well in tasks involving abstract reasoning, like playing chess, but had great difficulties in doing the simplest of practical tasks, like getting in and out of a room. This problem was remedied only by opening the robot to feedback from the hard, physical world outside. This simple lesson has become entangled in the broader scientific discomfort with modernity and our most fundamental categories, and their interworkings (Clark 1997; Malafouris 2004). A first step was made towards an embodied mind, or enminded body, by phenomenological philosophy from Husserl, Heidegger and Merlau-Ponty, aimed at breaking down the distinction and hierarchy of mind and body. Inspired by these philosophers, ground breaking work was made by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. They argued that human beings can only form concepts through the body, and only such concepts can be used for framing our understanding of ourselves, others and the world. Since both concepts and reason derive from the body and its sensori-motor inferences, the mind does not exist independently of the body thus, the mind is in the body (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 555). A second step, was towards the extended human, or extended mind, focusing on breaking down the distinction between the body-mind on the one hand and the world on the

15 other: since we do not exist before the world, but emerge and become in and with a changing outside world, we are intelligent only in a world of real, physical resistance (Clark 1997; Malafouris 2004: 54p.; Gosden 2006: 427pp.). So, in simple words: the human mind and intelligence have been extended from a narrow confined space in our heads, into our bodies, and finally into the surrounding world. Our bodies and brains are fast working entities, and the human beings becoming in the world is largely unconscious. The path ahead seems to be leading towards investigations into the complex, reflexive interaction between brain, body and the physical world:
[...] the efficacy of material culture in the cognitive system lies primarily in the fact that it makes it possible for the mind to operate without having to do so: i.e. to think through things, in action, without the need of mental representation. In other words, my hypothesis is that material engagement is the synergistic process by which, out of brains, bodies and things, mind emerges (Malafouris 2004: 58).

It is also important to note that this seems still to be unfamiliar terrain to cognitive science. The consequences of an extended mind and a levelling of the hierarchy between mind, body and thing, are largely unexplored:
At the present stage of research, the majority of these models remain sceptical and undecided about entering the treacherous territory of the extended mind, preventing as such the missing masses of materiality that balanced the fabric of social theory (Latour 1992) from exerting a similar effect in the fabric of cognitive science (Malafouris 2004: 55).

What consequences does the notion of an extended mind bring to archaeology? Should we be pessimistic by the weight put on the sensual interface between us and our surrounding world; a forever lost world of smells, tastes, sounds and tactility? Are we left defeated by the focus on the unconscious by the task of grasping insights that were concealed even to prehistoric people themselves? Quite on the contrary, there seems to be a tone of optimism and self-confidence in recent archaeological writing (e.g. DeMarais et.al. 2004; Tilley et.al. 2006). I suspect that, from the perspective of archaeology, chasing the extended mind and the integrated mind/body/world, seems no more challenging than trying to grasp the mind/body>world version of phenomenology, or the original mind>body/world of modernity. The extended version of humanity brings one very reassuring insight: the dead things of archaeology are not arbitrary. In a prehistory populated by human beings with their minds extended into the physical world, things are again crucial and highly relevant. This optimism is also related to a prophesied levelling of disciplinary hierarchy. There is a larger cross-disciplinary admittance of ignoring things for too long. In this race to rediscover

16 the thing, archaeology starts on the same line as the others. There is now a broad call for archaeology to think for itself; i.e. to develop its own methods and strategies in light of the extended mind:
We do have an original contribution to make to wider theoretical discourse, but to make it we need to begin to develop theoretical orientations appropriate to our own discipline (Boivin 2004: 69). Moreover, if we avoid the fundamentalist trap of swearing allegiance to this or that theoretical regime, in other words caring more for things needs than for the purity of philosophies, we may also dare to develop a relational approach that acknowledges that there are qualities immanent to the signifiers (beings, actants) themselves, properties that are not accidental or only a product of their position in a relational web (Olsen 2006: 99). It is hard to resist the impression that a new paradigm is emerging through a combination of neuroscience, robotics, artificial intelligence, animal intelligence and an interest in material culture through archaeology and anthropology (Gosden 2006: 441).

Despite this optimism, on the sensory workings of things in a long term perspective, there seems to be some hesitation when it comes to actually how we are to feed of things in a different way than we have done before:
[] the crucial point is to become sensitive to the way things articulate themselves and to our own somatic competence of listening to, and responding to, their call. (Olsen 2006: 98) [] we should replace our view of cognition as residing inside the potters head, with that of cognition enacted at the potters wheel (Malafouris 2004: 59). We need to return to the material world. Whilst not losing sight of the gains we have made, we must reunite mind, body and matter in a holistic approach that recognizes that material culture is not a product of human history, but an integral part of the human story (Boivin 2006: 64).

Such a new way of feeding of things, exploring the immanent qualities of the signifiers, becoming more sensitive to things, enacting at the potters wheel must have something to do with intimacy. A call for such intimacy is found in a range of phenomenological inspired attempts in archaeology. Joanna Brck is critical in her assessment of phenomenological archaeology in Britain:
Perhaps the most important question here is whether contemporary encounters with landscape whether achieved using virtual reality modelling or acquired via embodied engagement with the landscape itself can ever approximate the actual experience of people in the past. Most readers, I suspect, would agree that such an assumption is problematic. However, this suggestion implicitly underlies Tilleys approach (Brck 2005: 54).

17 A critique of phenomenology in general, has been its failure to extend the mind not merely into the body, but also into the surrounding world, and to deal with the bifurcation on the bank of nature:
[...] bifurcation is unfair to both sides: to the human and social side as well as to the nonhuman or natural side a point always missed by phenomenologists (Latour 2008: 15p.).

The main weakness of phenomenological attempts in archaeology is that they have chosen to construct cases of simulations that do little to specify the interface between body and world. Methodologically, cases involving a researcher moving within monuments, architecture or rock art panels are problematic because everything is still, except for the researcher, there is no human transformation or displacement of matter; the relation mind/body and world is too loose, open, simple and unspecified. It is a simulation in which there is little resistance from outside the researcher, landscapes and architecture do little to specify action, relatively speaking. Shifting the focus to cases of the coming into being of the same architecture, monuments and rock art, brings at once action, movement, resistance and feedback into the case. Strategies of intimacy in archaeology have been justly criticized, and the shortcomings have two main causes: the cases of simulation have been too narrowly constructed and they have applied a concept of the human being that still separates the mind from the material surroundings. Although archaeologies of intimacy and simulation have been justly criticised, this general line of methodology should be adjusted and broadened rather than abandoned: the theoretical base should be that of the extended mind, and methodologies should be put to trial on cases with a higher degree of resistance and material dynamics i.e. cases involving the transformation and displacement of the material world. To take the above critique seriously, in my opinion, is for archaeology to refamiliarize with things and the non-human world in a very concrete, bodily and practical manner. To probe into aspects of mind/body/world, such as for instance mind/body/trees, would mean (re-)learning the world of trees, how the pine, the oak or the birch present themselves to human senses, and particularly how they let themselves be cut, split, bent, barked, with a variety of specific human made edges and procedures. We need to seek the details of operational chains, and chase as rich as possible descriptions of the vibrating web surrounding humans as they engage in transformations and displacements. While archaeologys greatest disadvantage at first glance is our lack of living humans that we can

18 observe and interview, I believe the real pressing issue is our ignorance of the world of nonhumans. There is one significant difference between human and non-human collectives:
[...] this is not what you might think; its a difference of numbers not of kinds; paradoxically, non-human societies are much more numerous than human societies. There are only nine billion humans but the smallest stone, the tiniest brain, the humblest table has many orders of magnitude, more atoms, neurons or molecules than the largest human society (...). Because of its small numbers we have a much more intimate knowledge of human societies than we have of other non-human societies viewed from the outside and so to speak in bulk, or statistically (Latour 2008: 18p).

The recent critiques of the demarcations of mind, body and material world, and the notion of the extended mind, is a call for intimacy in archaeological strategies, a call to rediscover, refamiliarize with and to get within sensory distance of the world of non-humans; because they have been extensions of human minds in prehistory, as they are extensions of our minds today. A second key to brake free is thus to treat artefacts as extensions of prehistoric minds.

1.2.3 Artefacts as acts

What happens to time when the mind is extended? Time is at hearth of archaeology and its legitimacy: the discipline with the longest time-perspective in the family of social science. There are two interesting strands of critique related to time. The first is about short time what time is, and how time is created through movements in the physical world (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 157pp). The other is about long time, history versus evolution, the temporality of culture and biology respectively (Tomasello 1999; Ingold 2000: 373pp; Gosden 2006). Human concepts of both space and time are grounded in basic experiences of movement. There is a particular part of the brain that detects movement, thus movement is not a metaphorical concept (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 157). This direct perception of movement makes it function as a source domain for metaphorical reasoning (ibid: 140). Important in this respect, is the inherent dualism to movement from the perspective of the individual; that of himself moving, and that of movements in his environment. Lakoff and Johnson argue that three basic metaphors, involving space, time and motion, are motivated by this direct human experience of motion (ibid: 145): 1. The Time Orientation Metaphor relates aspects of time (present, future, past) to spatiality (point of observation, in front, behind). Here is now, behind is in the past, in front lies the future.

19 2. The Moving Time Metaphor relates times to objects, and the passage of time to motion of objects. In this case the observer is fixed in a location, and there is movement in the environment. 3. The Moving Observer Metaphor relates times to locations, and passage of time to motion of observer. In this case the observer is moving, and each location on his path is a time. The reason why these metaphors seem to be universal in languages around the world is that they are grounded in very basic and common everyday experience of functioning in the world (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 151). Time is thus something we create through movement in the world:
[...] time is something created via our bodies and brains, yet it structures our real experience and allows us an important understanding of our world, its physics and its history (ibid: 167).

How similar is the Bronze Age bronze founder and I (founder: the occupation of casting metals)? The traditional answer would be that: in an anatomically and genetically sense we are very similar, both being homo sapiens sapiens with same brain, having the capacity for upright walking, speech and complex symbolic systems, both on the same evolutionary stage. The obvious differences are cultural, and that is an entirely different (hi-)story (rather than a product of evolution). A new answer more in line with recent perspectives on how the human being works would be: we are not similar at all, since we developed in vastly different circumstances we are in principle not even identical organisms:
There is, in truth, no species specific, essential form of humanity, no way of saying what an anatomically modern human is apart from the manifold ways in which humans actually become. These variations of developmental circumstance, not of genetic inheritance, make us organisms of different kinds (Ingold 2000: 391).

This radical perspective comes with the notion of an extended mind (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 3; cf. Gosden 2006: 428): Our mind is inherently embodied; most of our thinking is unconcious and most of our understanding is metaphorical. We learn through our bodies, and our bodily activities are rooted in a real world of resistance (Gosden 2006: 429). There are no guaranties or recipes inscribed in the new born child, promising a future typical adult human being. The characteristics of homo sapiens sapiens are not genetically inscribed but allowed for; and its potential needs to be developed (grown/ dwelled) through active participation in characteristic environments of humans and things. This means that we are

20 deeply entangled in and moulded by our physical environment. Since the anatomy of our brain changes when we learn skills, what is conventionally termed cultural evolution is also a biological evolution (not genetical) (Ingold 2000: 376, 379). Thus, our different experiences of developing-in-the-world make both our minds and our bodies different, and we have become, in principle, different organisms. The outside input onto the child becoming human is sensory only, and our focus on the coded sound of human speech and coded vision of writing, ought to be rebalanced since it makes up, after all, just a tiny portion of the environment available to human perception (Olsen 2006: 95; Spyer 2006: 125p.). We find ourselves suddenly in a situation knowing very little about just how things and the physical world, in general, mould human beings (Gosden 2006: 429). The dichotomy of history and evolution has in reality deprived archaeology of 100 000 years of profound change, of brain-change, between the upper Palaeolithic art and language revolution and historical times. An archaeological response to the novel perspectives on the social, the mind and in particular to time, ought to be a re-evaluation of the different rhythms or time-wheels available to us, and how we might better exploit each of them. A tentative list of archaeological time-scales embedded in artefacts: 1. The congealed acts of things, in particular the operations involved in the transformation and displacement of matter into artefact. 2. The biography of things, from they are made to they are deposited 3. The biography of a type, i.e. the way similarity come into being, manages to exist and gives way to other forms, actions and procedures. 4. The biography of a category of things, doing tasks that other categories do not (e.g. the arrowhead implicate certain mind-brain-body-bow-arrow-target operations unique to this category) From this list, it is clear that archaeology with its reliance on type-time (typically 200-year beats in the Bronze Age) is somewhat off-beat with the orchestra of other sciences. In order to better tap into the rhythms typically found in cognitive psychology, anthropology, history and sociology, and to become compatible and feed of these disciplines, we need to first make some bridges: from archaeological long-times of types and periods, to times more directly relevant to human experience (not to be confused with bridges between the soft and hard banks, cf. above). Only by making these bridges we are able to explore the fuller potential of larger time-scales. In this way, we might turn our basic periodical system

21 into serious explorations of: what did bronze do during the Bronze Age. And what have fire, the sharp edge or the boat done to humans through the ages? The potential of temporality in archaeology, particularly the long term rhythms of materiality, can only be realized by studying the long term in light of how each thing educates individual human skills and minds in the short term. The status of archaeology as a genuine discipline among others will depend on our ability to relate our long term view of material traces of human activity to momentary human experiences. This can be achieved through exploring artefacts as congealed temporality and action. Hence, the third and final key to break free is to treat artefacts as acts. I have located the following keys for an escape from an archaeology and a philosophy that have drifted too far from what is given in experience: artefacts as members of prehistoric societies, artefacts as extensions of prehistoric minds, and artefacts as prehistoric acts. With these at hand I will now start planning the escape in greater detail.

1.3 The plan

In order to sketch the strategies and aims of the thesis, it is necessary to first explore the general characteristics of the data that is to be investigated.

1.3.1 Bronze as data

It is crucial to acknowledge that the time-rhythm of the Bronze Age is fundamentally based on types of bronzes. Through 150 years of Bronze Age research the basic studies of Sophus Mller (1877;1891;1909), Oscar Montelius (1885; 1900; 1917), Karl Kersten (1935), JohnElof Forssander (1936); Hans C. Broholm (1943; 1944; 1946; 1949), Evert Baudou (1960), Ebbe Lomborg (1960; 1966; 1969a), Klavs Randsborg (1968; 1972; 2006), Ekkehard Aner & Karl Kersten (1973ff.), Henrik Thrane (1965/67, 1971/83; 1975), Jrgen Jensen (1997), Ulrich Zimmermann (1988) and Helle Vandkilde (1996), have constructed a typological framework that provides the Nordic Bronze Age with a basic rhythm with six beats, potentially nine or more. Radiocarbon dating have in the last decades mainly consolidated the assumed 200-year pulse of the periodic system, but in some cases improved on the precision of the system in terms of absolute chronology (e.g. Randsborg 2006). Although autonomous and complementary Bronze Age rhythms are underway, based on rock art dated through shore-displacement (e.g. Sognnes 2003; Ling 2008), we are still fundamentally dependent on the rhythms provided by bronze types. Thus, when seeking rapid time-pulses as close to human-biographies as possible, bronze-rhythms are still the best candidates.

22 But bronzes are also testimonies of highly complex acts of transformation and displacement. The transformation from ore to artefact, and the spatial displacement from mine to site of deposition, implies complex human engagements with the material world. From this perspective, bronze artefacts also provide us with another rhythm. Each bronze artefact has a biography or a trajectory, from smelting of ores of copper and tin, through alloying and one or more castings into artefact(s), through spatial displacement in the hands, bags or boats of travelling humans, through its intended use and to the final acts of displacement into the earth. There is thus the life-span, trajectory or biography of each and every bronze artefact. And within each step of such a bronze biography there is a rapid pulse beating as bronze is transformed or displaced: the bellows are worked, the crucible is taken out, molten metal is poured. From bronze artefacts it is possible to trace networks or societies of different kinds, especially those which I will refer to as wide and dense. From a retracing of the actions congealed in every bronze artefact, it is possible to trace into a skilled human body and a range of non-human participants. From a typology of the internal structure of molecules (metallurgical fingerprint) it is possible to hint at the point of departure for this biography. From the conventional typology of the morphology of the artefact it is possible to locate its typological relatives in space, and thus give further hints to the network that displaced the artefact. My first two strategies are about locating and tracing participants in webs or networks, in line with Latours propositions: (...) whenever you want to understand a network, go look for the actors, but when you want to understand an actor go look through the network it has traced. In both cases, the point is to avoid the passage through the vague notion of society (2001: 124). The third strategy is about what to do when more agents have been brought into light, it is about explanation and who to blame when webs change.

1.3.2 First strategy: tracing wide webs

The first strategy is a strategy aimed at the type and the long rhythm and wide spatial webs that it provides, and it seeks ultimately to bring forth a history of networks through the Bronze Age. It involves applying the conventional typo-chronological tool box on 523 metal artefacts (copper, bronze, gold) and 32 casting moulds from NW Scandinavia. The first and

23 second attempts seek to decide upon their typological status, locate the rest of the members in each typological collective, and decide upon their chronological status. The third attempt seeks help from a selection of relevant non-metal data and radiocarbon dates. The first strategy and the first step are completed with a presentation and interpretation of networks at work at different stages of the Bronze Age in resonance with the long rhythm of bronze. The classic map of spatial distribution will be a crucial element in this first strategy. These are scaled large in order to prevent the breaking off of networks at the border of the study area, and they are specified with direction, i.e. I am to draw up the lines between the dots. This is not in any way a straightforward task, but it is one that has to be solved. Only by being specific in this first step and by making these decisions, will I be able to proceed to the second and third strategies. I am thus wielding as much material as I can manage, in order to pick the most likely candidates of paths, directions and links to things, societies or agents outside the study area.

1.3.3 Second strategy: tracing dense webs

Through the first strategy, the first step and part I, I will roughly outline the biography of many bronzes: where they came from, which routes they were brought, where they were made, and where they ended up. The second strategy aims at locating a different set of entities those most intimate to specific bronze artefacts at each of these biographical stages. In particular it is aimed at exploring the webs that transformed and displaced bronze. This second strategy simply asks: when bronze artefact X was in stage Y of its biography, what else was found also? When it was about to melt, what else was found also? When it solidified, what was found also? What accompanied bronze as it transformed from one shape to another? When a bronze artefact was moved between A and B, what accompanied bronze as it moved along the path? When a bronze artefact was deposited, what else was also found in this new position? The second strategy aims at locating agents in such dense webs; i.e. those entities that moved forward as societies in order to transform bronze into a new shape, those that moved forward in order to bring bronze from spatial location A to B. On the one hand it is about exploring the missing non-humans in order to account for these changes; the fire that melted, the clay that contained, the boat that carried; on the other hand it is about exploring the human actions and skills involved in these changes. In order to trace bronze through its shifts from solid to fluid and back again, the trajectory of bronze knits into other entities each with webs of their own: fire, fuel, bellows, crucible, clays etc. Tracing the axe through its everyday existence brings in the haft, the tree, and diverse wood-working

24 projects. As it was made, it was a member of a bronze casting society; when constructing a house it was part of a house building society; as it was moved it was part of a travelling society, as it was exchanged it was part of a feasting society, as it was deposited it was part of e.g. a funeral society. So why not simply link up information from natural science to those of social science? Is there anything (of interest) that natural scientists on the hard river bank do not know about things of nature? They might very well drown me in matters of facts on fire, clay, quartz, copper, tin, temperature and gasses, which are clearly useful and important. But they fail to give me an account of how these enter a collective that moves forward in order to make a flanged axe, and an account that does justice to what is given in experience outside their laboratories and their highly stylized aesthetic of reasoning (cf. above). To those lacking a temperature gauge and the descriptive mode it implicates, copper melts at 1083 C, is a matter of fact no more interesting or useful than copper melts when it is very hot, or copper melts when placed in a specific constellation of agents for a certain period of time. I seek a style of reasoning that does justice to what is given in experience without a gauge, and outside the modern laboratory or foundry. This calls for me to get within sensory distance of bronze in order to sense and explore the ways bronze interacts with me and a range of non-humans. Modern metallurgical science, diverse manuals, ethnographic accounts, and ethno-archaeological studies will be called upon, but these have one drawback in common: they are ignorant of the precise nature (morphology, material) and constellation of the non-humans in the societies that transformed bronze in the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia; and our reliance on these sources leads us to ignore specifics in our data. Experimental trials and simulations are integrated in the second strategy: bellow-making, mould-making, bronze melting, casting etc. An account of my trials and simulations with bronze, clay, soapstone, fire and wood is given in Appendix VI. When it comes to exploring the other major class of societies, those that displaced bronzes, I am forced to employ a different methodology. Exploring the relevant longdistance paths through simulation has not been attempted, but would be, in my opinion, a plausible strategy. In stead, I have resorted to exploring these paths through maps and information on the paths from hikers-guides, historical travel accounts and guides for coastal navigation. The main challenge is to relate the two-dimensional paths of the map to human efforts, travel time and obstructions in the world and thus to account for the displacement of bronze in a style that does justice to human experience.

25

1.3.4 Third strategy: explaining changing webs

The third strategy seeks to deepen the exploration of networks in order to propose explanations to their dynamics and their coming into being. Part III with chapters 9-11 seeks to, through different points of view, scales of time and space, feed of essentially the same set of networks located in parts I-II. Hopefully, the two first strategies have made some contribution to bridge a significant divide between archaeology and sciences of the mind, of history and of social anthropology: rhythm and temporality. The pulse of time is allowed to structure part III: chapter 9 focuses on historical time, chapter 10 focuses on events and chapter 11 focuses on human biographical time. The third strategy is thus aimed at the history, the minds and the lives of the Bronze Age. Chapter 9 targets the Bronze Age as historical trajectory, and involves a further extension of the networks presented in part I, and a significant broadening of the spatial outlook embracing the dynamics of Eurasia between the Altai and the British Isles, the Barents to the Mediterranean. The strategy for exploring the networks, typically longdistance networks on a time-scale compatible with history and sociology, will be an analysis of what is transported in these networks, as well as a distribution of agency to the different participants in the networks. Chapter 9 strives to reason in a style that does justice to what is given in our experience as archaeologists, to move bronze into the patterns we have plotted on our maps by convincing arguments. Chapter 10 aims at those minds that in some way or another were extended into bronze artefacts in the Bronze Age, i.e. it seeks explanation and causation in the dense webs discerned in part II, and it seeks a style of reasoning that does justice to what was given in their experience. The tools for a thorough investigation of what goes on in such dense webs at the scale of events and moments are borrowed from the works of Lakoff & Johnson (1999) and Gell (1992, 1998). Chapter 10 strives to reason in a style that does justice to what was given in the experience of those who sensed our data in the Bronze Age. Chapter 11 aims at a shift from the temporality embedded in the data, the long and short rhythms of bronze (or history and events), to a rhythm more compatible with anthropology; the act within life, the event within the human biography. Here I will seek to embrace the malleability of human beings and explore their process of coming into being while immersed in a material world. The tools for an exploration of human biographies are borrowed from Tomasello (1999) and in particular Ingold (2000). Chapter 11 strives to explore human lives or biographies from things.

26

Part I Wide Webs

By the term Northwestern Scandinavia I mean the coasts, fjords and highlands west of the lowland interior of the Scandinavian Peninsula. The dividing line is drawn from Kvsefjord in the south along the border between Vest-Agder and Aust-Agder Counties, northwards embracing parts of Oppland and Hedmark Counties, then along the modern Norwegian border till river Pasvik in the far north (cf. Maps 1-2). This line is drawn with the total distribution of bronzes in mind (cf. Johansen 1993: fig. 45), in order to separate the clusters along the lakes, rivers and fjords in the eastern lowlands from those in the highlands and neighbouring mountain-valleys in a more reasonable way than modern borders of state administration. The reason for including the northern coasts is mainly because it represents the full potential maritime North Way, the route and phenomenon that gave name to the modern state of Norway. In the following, the term North Way is used to designate the maritime path from the tip of the peninsula to Varangerfjord. There are also strategic aims behind this choice: the best documented areas on the peninsula in terms of Bronze Age bronzes are eastern Norway (Johansen 1981; 1986) and Sweden (Oldeberg 1974; 1976), and one of the aims of this study is to fill this western gap and contribute to making the Scandinavian bronze data complete and available for further research. Maps 1 and 2 are meant as a general aid to ease the readers orientation in relation to geography and the many geographical terms and places in the text. Through a review of the Stone Age background in NW Scandinavia, an artefact-byartefact exploration of the typological and chronological position of metal artefacts and moulds, as well as a review of selected non-bronze data, Part II aims at a chronological trajectory of spatial networks gathered in chapt. 6 and visualized in Maps 9-17

27

Chapter 2. Before bronze networking the Stone Age

In this chapter I aim to sketch a historical background to the Bronze Age, focusing on longdistance mobility in the landscapes of NW Scandinavia. Seen from a distance, i.e. from Continental Europe, the Stone Age of NW Scandinavia is characterized by its slateindustries, its rock art, its large axe quarries, and moreover for the weak impression made by the southern megalithic and Corded Ware phenomena. It is not until the Bell Beaker phenomenon, i.e. the related Scandinavian flint dagger phenomenon, that this area becomes intimately related to the south. This transition c. 2500-2000 BC, is considered the most significant transition in the Stone Age, in fact as a watershed in the prehistory of NW Scandinavia at large (Nry 1993; stmo 2005a; Engedal 2006; Prescott 2008). Significant processes attributed to the Stone Age are the development towards sedentism, territoriality, farming and social hierarchies. Particularly sedentism, farming and competition has been wielded as the significant wheels of evolution, as these lead directly towards the sedentary, hierarchal farmers of the Late Iron Age and the advent of written history (cf. also Prescott 2008: 4p.). I propose that this focus has kept other significant phenomena, historical processes and events in the dark, and constructed a simplistic long term evolusionary trajectory. This is a trajectory in which the South, the Domestic (animal/grain), the Maritime, and Hierarchy are linked together to a super-agent in which all potential change rests. The southernmost area of Jren and Lista is conventionally seen as a bridgehead for this super-agent; as the crucial node through which the coast further north was changed. Although this may be unfair to many nuanced studies, it is beyond dispute that this has become the grand narrative of archaeology in NW Scandinavia (e.g. Hagen 1967; Magnus & Myhre 1986). I find this tale to be a poor point of departure for an in-depth study of the Bronze Age and its networks. In the following I therefore intend to highlight what I consider to be indications of a different and more complex tale: a tale in which Jren plays a more modest role, a tale that captures and involves more of the complexity of the networks further north, and one that balances the importance of maritime networks against overland networks, and the domestic against the wild game.

2.1. 9500-8000 BC, Beginnings, (Map 3)

The first traces of human activity appear on the bare strip of land revealed from underneath the ice-cap, (cf. Map 3)1. There is now a broad agreement that the earliest assemblages, all along the warm Gulf Stream from Lista in the south to the Kola Peninsula in the north, are

28 closely related to those of the Continental Ahrensburg complex (Woodman 1999; Bjerck 2008). The ice cap effectively channelled the entering of the pioneers: they arrived by boat, moved mainly along the coast, and arrived either from the now sunken North-Sea Continent or more likely along the coastline from Southwestern Sweden (Bjerck 2008: 553). The reestablishment of the Gulf Stream brought warm waters northwards and a warmer climate along the coast, and this was one crucial precondition, besides the melting of the ice, to the apparently sudden and swift migration northwards c. 9500 BC. The flow of humans seems to stop at the entrance to the White Sea were the Gulf Stream ends (Woodman 1999: 309). Another precondition was a novel maritime technology including a stabile boat-construction and familiarity with the open seas (cf. Bjerck 1995: 139pp.; 2008: 561pp.; Engedal 2006: 171pp.). These early assemblages are totally dominated by flint, occasionally combined with a minor percentage of rock-crystal. The only structural remains are fireplaces and cleared fields or rings of stones, interpreted as remnants from tents. The flint assemblages are considered to be derived from local flint-nodules deposited by ice-bergs during the ice age, since there is no flint in the geology of NW Scandinavia (stmo 2005c: 112). The homogeneity in both raw-material and technology prevents us from drawing any borders along the coast. Heterogeneity is merely discerned in the uneven spread and clusters of findings along the coast. Movement of materials is mainly seen as coastal flint at mountain sites, and rock crystal from the mountains in minor percentage at the coast. The assemblages are considered as highly functional and short-lived because of the method of sharpening, by stroke rather than grinding. Assemblages are also characterized by the short time-investment in production. Accordingly, there are no obvious typological candidates to plot on a map at this early phase. From recent research on the pioneer-phase, there are two tendencies of particular interest in this context. Firstly, despite the notion of extremely mobile groups, there seems to be a clustering of sites, indicating a preference for a few zones: Bohusln (Scmitt et. al. 2006, 2009); Boknafjord (Bang-Andersen 2003) Nordvestlandet (Bjerck 2008: 552p.), and Varangerfjord (Woodman 1999). Secondly, despite the notion of a maritime economy an increasing number of sites are discovered in the alpines close to the ice-cap. These inland sites seem to be linked to the preferred coastal zones: Myrvatn-Flyrli in the mountains above Boknafjord (Bang-Andersen 2003: fig. 3), several sites in Trollheimen and Sunndalsfjella above Nordvestlandet (Bjerck 2008: 563 with further referances). The above

29 coastal zones might have been characterized by concentrations of flint nodules on the beaches, easy access to reindeer on the alpine plateau - and by their status as home for larger human populations. In between lay mainly vast stretches of hunting grounds.

2.2. 8000-4000 BC, MM-LM (Map 4)

At the beginning of the Boreal phase (9000 BP) there seems to be a uniform change in stone technology along the entire coastline, a shift towards the production of micro-blades from conical and cylindrical blade-cores. This shift went parallel to a significant drop in the use of tanged points (Olsen 1994: 31, 35; stveit 2008a: 571pp.). In addition there are now two artefact categories suitable for a network analysis: the ground/pecked axe and the shaft-hole stone club (cf. Map 4).2 They are both made from relatively rare raw materials, they are made by time consuming technologies and they both have a wide spatial distribution. Presumably, these were displaced through long-distance mobility and were objects of exchange. In these we have the first artefacts with extended biographies. Both are also conventionally considered to be phenomena originating in the south. Two other phenomena are brought in to balance this southern bias; the formation of the slate complex and rock art.

2.2.1 Ground/pecked round axes and shaft-hole mattocks

From a plotting of ground axes of different materials, and the different types of shaft-hole clubs, a series of zones can be sketched from south to north: 1) a Southern Axe Zone, with round-axes made from the Hespriholmen quarry and mattocks of simple, cross, star and miniature shapes; 2) a Central Axe Zone, with round-axes made from the Stakanes quarry and only sporadic findings of mattocks; 3) a Central Mattock Zone between Hustad and Rana, with clusters of mattocks, simple and cross-shaped, and a total lack of axes; 4) a Northern Axe Zone with round-axes probably made from undiscovered quarries in the north, and sporadic findings of mattocks, and finally 5) an Arctic Zone lacking both axes and mattocks. Activity seems to have been instigated at both quarries at Hespriholmen and Stakaneset c. 8200 BC (Alsaker 1987; Bergsvik & Olsen 2003: 396). An EM style flake-axe made from this material, adds to the qualifications of Hespriholmen as the centre of innovation towards round-axes and ground/pecked technology. The Stakanes quarry is established secondary to this centre. North of the Central Axe Zone there is a large zone without axes (Alsaker 2005: 37), but axes reappear from Rana northwards. A trail of axes from the Stakanes quarry cross this zone, and provides a bridge between the north and south.

30 Interestingly, there is another trail of axes, originating in the Hespriholmen quarry, from Hardangerfjord across the highlands, bypassing the Central Axe Zone, down to Halsafjord. The largest cluster of the presumably earliest type of mattock, the simple type, is the southeastern cluster at Bohusln. From the distribution in Sweden it seems clear that it was spread through inland networks north to Mlardalen and River Dallv. Those north of this area, are better linked to the Northern Mattock Zone in the west. West of the major cluster between Rivers Gta and Glomma, there is another cluster, this to dominated by simple mattocks. The dense clusters of simple mattocks to the north of Hustad, suggest that this zone was linked to the southeast rather than to the Hespriholmen Zone. This assumption is supported by the trails across the highlands dotted by mattocks (cf. maps in Skr 2003). The stone-clubs of complex types in the southern highlands (along the Hallingdal and Bandak-Totak channels) point rather clearly towards the Hespriholmen Zone. Three starshaped clubs as well as the two miniature-clubs represent types exclusive to the southwest. Even the clubs of the Southern Diabase Zone could be attributed to these cross-alpine networks, rather than to coastal links. Hence, the shaft-hole mattocks and clubs indicate that intensive relations across the interior were instigated as soon as the ice-cap disappeared, and they indicate the relative isolation of the Central Axe Zone when it comes to interior networks.

2.2.2 Rock art and slate

Adding rock art and slate to the map, provides us with two northern centres of innovation which were to influence large parts of the Scandinavian Peninsula. Map 4 embraces an immense period of time, 4000 years. The greatest challenge posed by this wide time frame, is perhaps to deal with the rock art phenomenon. What to make of so few images within such a vast time-span? One way to deal with this fact is to dissolve the idea of a single origin the carving of an animal on the rocks was rather something that arose time and again, in the intersection between man, rock and game. Another solution is to narrow the time-gap and see the images as results of short episodes, but still see them as related into a tradition with a single origin in the Scandinavian context. If we add rock art to the map with the latter option in mind, it is possible to distinguish a southern sub-zone within the large Northern Axe Zone. Between Rana and Ofotfjord there is a distinct group of early, ground rock images3. These first carvings are large, naturalistic figures made with a distinctive grinding technique. These have been given a date within the MM (Hesjedal 1992). This area lacks rock art made with conventional pecking techniques, and presumably it lacks later carvings.

31 The pecked figures north and south of this zone, might thus be considered secondary to this centre of rock art innovation, and generally later. A plotting of potential Mesolithic rock art sites demonstrates an uneven occurrence, clusters between Hardanger and Alta, and moreover in the southeastern lowlands. The first major cluster to the south is the NamsfjordBeitstad cluster extending into the Swedish highlands (cf. Forsberg 2006). The second is the dense cluster around the border between the Central Axe Zone and the Mattock Zone. The inspiration for these carvings might have been brought by rather direct links, possibly the same as those which brought Stakanes axes to the north, and that brought early slates southwards. Finally, south of this lies the major Vingen site, and Rykkje and Vangdal in the Hardangerfjord represent the southernmost border of Mesolithic rock art. The southernmost sites in Hardanger might best be linked to the trail of Hespriholmen axes across the highlands directly to Halsafjord. In a similar vein, the two rock art clusters east of the highlands would best be linked to the Hustad cluster. The origin of the Vingen site could be seen in light of direct coastal links to the northern extremes of the Central Axe Zone, or in light of meetings at the inland sites. North of the original zone of innovation the first carvings inspired the establishment of the significant clusters in Altafjord, and these again inspired the establishment of the rock art tradition at Vyg by the White Sea to the far east. Adding the earliest groups of slate artefacts makes it possible to discern a northern sub-zone within the Central Mattock Zone around Rana-Vefsn4. The earliest slates in northern Europe seem to be the large, leaf-shaped blades from the Suomosjrvi phase of the Finnish Mesolithic (Edgren & Trnblom 1992). The few slates of comparable forms in the west (Mllenhus Trollheimsund and Hamnes types) are clustered in the Rana, Vefsn, Tjtta area (Mllenhus 1959: 36). This seems to be a core-area also for the use of other slate forms (Sborg 1986). Interrestingly, from the core-area at Vefsn and from Smla come the two northernmost specimens of round-axes made from Stakanes diabase. Thus, the formation of the slate-complex and of the northern round-axe might have been related and involved longdistance, direct journeys between Rana-Vefs, Smla and Hustad. There is no clear chronological trajectory of slate types, and no clear typological border corresponding to that of LM-EN. Still, the developed slate-complex is most often placed in EN and MN.

2.2.3. Borderland Hustadvika

The border running along Tingvollfjord-Avery is of particular interest. There is a quite sharp drop in axes made from Stakanes diabase at this line, in fact there seems to be a sharp drop in axes in general. Ground or pecked Mesolithic axes have not been clearly discerned in

32 Trndelag (Alsaker 2005: 37). This northern border of Stakanes axes corresponds well with the southern border of the mattocks in the Central Mattock Zone. 3-4 southern axes are found north of the line, while simple and cross-shaped mattocks are sparsely but evenly distributed southwards. The fjord systems of Halsafjord and Tingvollfjord might also be seen as the main gateways to the highlands for the coastal area between Hustad and Trondheimsfjord. It is also of interest that the northernmost round-axe at the bottom of the Halsafjord, is made from the southern Hespriholmen greenstone. It can be linked to three more such axes far from the Hespriholmen Zone: at Vgavatn, Upper Glomma, and Lrdalsfjella. If considered as part of a single phenomenon, this ought either to be expeditions northwards from the Hardangerfjord, or more likely, northern hunters using the plateu southwards to Hardanger. The moose rock art carvings in Hardangerfjord could be related to the very same journeys. Summing up, there are two arguments I would like to stress. The first is that significant new networks across the highlands were enabled by the disappearance of the icecap. This seems evident in four cases: the Hespriholmen Zone, the Central Mattock Zone, the Northern Axe Zone and the Arctic Zone. I believe a significant flaw in conventional interpretations on the MM-LM of Northwestern Scandinavia, is that the engagement of the Northern Mattock groups in the central alpines and eastern lowlands has not been highlighted. The second point I would like to make, is that the Central Axe Zone (Stakanes Zone) is distinct in its isolation from the interior and its lack of engagement in cross-alpine networks.

2.3. 4000-2800 BC, EN-MNa (Map 5)

From c. 4000 BC Southern Scandinavia is characterized by the introduction of farming and the Funnel-Beaker Culture (FBC). A plotting of imported FBC artefacts as well as axes made from the Hespriholmen and Stakanes quarries provide the basics for a mapping of ENMNa networks (Map 5)5. From a plotting of Vespestad type axes made from Stakanes diabase and Hespriholmen greenstone, it is clear that the border at work in the MM-SM, around Fensfjorden, was maintained throughout the EN-MNa. The Stakanes Zone seems to have retracted somewhat in the north, the limit of Stakanes axes now runs somewhere in the Moldefjord, south of Hustadvika.

33

2.3.1 FBC types

From a plotting of FBC imports (point and thin-butted flint axes and battle axes), onto the background of these borders, the following can be read: 1) The Hespriholmen Zone has 7 thin-butted flint axes, 4 polygonal axes, and 2 double-edged battle axes, clustering at Jren; 2) the Stakanes Zone has no FBC imports; 3) there is a cluster in the Halsafjord-Moldefjord area, with two rare point-butted axes, a thin-butted axe, and a double-edged battle axe; 4) there is a cluster between Gaula estuary and Beitstad in Trondheimsfjord, with two thinbutted and 2 double-edged battle axes; and finally 5) there is a cluster between Namsfjord and Rana, with one point-butted and one thin-butted axe, as well as 4 double-edged battle axes. Several findings in the northern and central interior hint at the networks at work from Moldefjord northwards, leading eastwards towards the major clusters in Sweden and Oslofjord. That the northern axes were brought along the coast from Jren is hardly a convincing interpretation. My reason for including the Mesolithic networks above was precisely to demonstrate that the interior networks were at work well before the Neolithic, and so was the characteristic isolation of the Central Axe Zone (Stakanes Zone). The lack of FBC imports in the Central Axe Zone, the high number of FBC imports in the north relative to Jren, as well as the presence of early types (point-butted axes) in the north rather than in the Southern Axe Zone (Hespriholmen/Jren), all indicate direct links between the area to the north of the Central Axe Zone and Oslofjord and Sweden. The group of three pointbutted axes dated to the earliest Neolithic from Rana and the Halsa-Moldefjord area is remarkable since these are rare even in the Oslofjord region. It seems clear from the total distribution of FBC axes that there were links between Lake Vnarn and Trondheimsfjord along Klarlv and between Mlardalen and Rana across the Swedish interior.

2.3.2 Slate knives

While there is a clear division between EN-MNa (FBC) and MNb (Corder Ware, Battle Axe) in southern types, no such clear divisions have been discerned in the northern slate gallery. Since EN-MNa is conventionally considered the peak of the slate-complex, all slate knives which are not of the earliest types are tentatively added to the map. This creates some interesting patterns. Firstly, the cluster of FBC artefacts in Trondheimsfjord is clearly outside the slate knife territory. Secondly, there is a drop in slate knives south of the northern border of Stakanes axes, but there is a trail south to Stadt. Thirdly, the area with the most

34 significant overlap between slate projectile and FBC artefacts is Mlardalen in eastern Sweden. It must be taken into account that many of the mapped slate knives might actually represent the following period, the MNb. I believe there is a difference between FBC artefacts and slate projectile. FBC artefacts are seen as objects made by farmers that very well could be procured and used by northwestern hunters. Slate projectile on the other hand, I believe were objects linked more intimately to individual hunters and would not be procured by southeastern farmers, or even farmers engaging in seasonal hunts in the interior. Therefore, I suggest that the map indicates northwestern coastal groups hunting in the alpines and interior to the southeast.

2.3.3. Borderland Hustadvika

Again, as on the previous map, the Hustad area stands out. The engagement of these groups in the interior in this period can be seen as a direct continuation from the Mesolithic. The interior rock art sites dots a trail to the southeastern cluster in the vicinity of the megalithic burials at Hurum. The two point-butted axes in the Halsa-Moldefjord area can be linked to the 9 specimens in the Oslofjord area (cf. stmo 2005e: 458). This relationship is supported by the southeastern cluster of slate projectile. The recent discovery of small cairns with EN and MNa dates from Nyhamna enables us to support this network by a trail of burials. From loc. 67 at Nyhamna four small cairns were dated to 3360-2930, 3495-3045, 2920-2880, 3025-2890 BC (all cal.BC) (stveit 2008b: 593p.; 2008c: 387pp.). Their status as burials is strengthened by high levels of phosphate (ibid). Comparable burials are known from
Ertesprang, Buskerud C. (C 20524: thin-butted axe type III, EN) and from Rnnegvammen, Buskerud C. (C 21450: thin-butted axe type VII, MNa) (Reitan 2005: 66, fig. 7.7; tab. 7.2). Although a less clear case, a cairn from 820 m.a.s.l. at the alpine crossing at lstadstra,

Oppdal C. was dated to 3510-3370 BC and 2030-1760 BC (Hofset 1991; 2001: 143pp.; Skauen 2005: 279). Hence, these burials, the FBC artefacts in Moldefjord and the slate
projectile in the southern highlands and around the FBC enclave in Hurum, could all be seen as indicative of seasonal journeys made by hunters from Moldefjord. This was a continuation of

the networks of MM-SM, although there might be a shift from the Halsa-Tingvollfjord gateways just north of Hustad, to the Romsdalsfjord gateways just south of Hustad. The intensive alpine-inland engagement characteristic of the zone north of Hustad in the Mesolithic, thus spreads south to Moldefjord in the EN-MNa. Summing up; the main point I would like to make is that journeys across the interior were more important than coastal traffic along the North Way in the displacement of FBC

35 artefacts on the Scandinavian Peninsula. Of particular significance are the links between the Hustad area and the eastern lowlands and the relative isolation of the Central Axe Zone between Stadt and Fensfjord.

2.4. 2800-2350 BC, MNb (Map 6)

The most significant changes in MNb are 1) the appearance of battle axes of the Battle Axe variants of the Corded Ware complex, 2) the end of activity in the major southern axe quarries of Hespriholmen and Stakaneset (Olsen & Alsaker 1984), and 3) arguably the introduction of farming (cf. Hjelle et. al. 2006; stveit 2008b: 594).

2.4.1 Selected battle axe types

I have mapped a selection of Battle Axe types (Map 6): the Hurva type (and related specimens), the South-Swedish type, the Finnish type, the Danish Single-Grave type, and the East Swedish/Continental type.6 I believe the distribution demonstrates three phenomena. Firstly, the low number of Single-Grave type axes in the southwest speaks against a direct maritime relation to Jutland across Skagerrak. Secondly, the southern distribution indicates that Jren procured these axes across the interior highlands rather than via the southern coast. Thirdly, the typological make-up of the clusters along the coast does not indicate that battle axes were distributed northwards from a southern centre in Rogaland. In my opinion battle axes entered NW Scandinavia via a series of interior routes from Oslofjord, southern Central Sweden and the Swedish East coast. The high number of axes of Finnish and South Swedish types in Trndelag indicates links to Sweden rather than Oslofjord (it must be noted that Finnish type axes are found in plenty in Sweden, and it is doubtful that this type in any way was made exclusively in Finland). Between Rogaland and Trndelag, there is an interesting occurrence of Hurva type axes: a cluster in the Moldefjord area, and a trail of Hurva axes from the coast of Sunnhordaland via Hardangerfjord across the highlands. Again, the former Central Axe Zone (Stakanes Zone) is remarkably empty of imported artefacts.

2.4.2. Decorated slate projectiles

Slate projectiles with decoration are dated to MNb within the former Central Axe Zone (T.B. Olsen 2004), but to MNa at Nyhamna (stveit 2008b: 593), and within the MNa-MNb timespan, possibly at the very transition MNa/MNb at Auve. Auve included only specimens with notches on the sides of the tang (stmo 2008: 86pp., 166). Accordingly, it is likely that a

36 mapping of decorated projectiles would capture networks working across the MNa-MNb border. Despite these difficulties, I believe the plot is interesting. Decorated projectiles are mainly found on the coast between Nordfjord and Rana, but I believe the sparse distribution to the south and southeast of this area reveal important networks. These seem to indicate both a coastal and a high alpine network linking the slate zone to Jren and the coast of Agder. Decorated projectiles in the highlands can be seen as part of the Hurva axe network. The zig-zag decorated projectile from the southern alpines (Hardangervidda) indicates the presence of northern hunters. I believe it is important to not separate Battle Axes from slate and from hunting economies. The alpine-bridge from Moldefjord to Hardanger seen on the MNb map, recalls the one discerned on the Mesolithic map (Map 4), and from the slate knives on the EN-MNa map (Map 5). The slate point from Bore at Jren with rhombus-decoration has its only parallel from lok. 67 Nyhamna in the Hustad area. Among the complex changes hinted at by Map 6, my main interest is to highlight 1) the expansion in slate use from Hustad down to Nordfjord, as well as the coastal networks aimed for Jren in the far south; and 2) the engagement of groups around Hustad in extreme alpine networks in a southward direction. Earlier focus has been on whether battle axes could be linked to farming and a male competitive ideology characteristic of the larger Corded Ware complex. I believe this has overshadowed the likely existence of highly mobile hunters in the southern end of the slate-complex engaged in long-distance networks both along the coast and in the interior, procuring prestigious artefacts and possibly domestic animals from farming populations. In this context, it is more important to trace and explore these networks, than to decide whether farming was practiced or not.

2.5. 2350-1700 BC, LN (Maps 7-8)

The Late Neolithic brings a set of important new challenges to our study7. These are brought about by the high number of imported bifacial flints, the majority of which were produced in Northern Jutland. Qualitatively, there are no clear boundaries along the coast as flint daggers are distributed north to Alta. The relatively denser clusters of flint daggers at Jren, compared to those at the Oslofjord, the cluster of tanged Bell-Beaker points and a Bell Beaker-vessel, are the first clear indication of a direct maritime link between Jren and Northern Jutland (cf. Scheen 1979; Apel 2001; stmo 2005a). The distribution of flint daggers along the western coast from Lista to Alta, have conventionally been interpreted as a

37

straightforward coastal route, with Jren and Sunnmre as the nodes (e.g. Apel 2001: fig. 9:17). Significant revisions have been made to Ebbe Lomborgs basic study of Danish flint daggers. Lomborg saw the typological variance basically as diachronic development through his three sub-periods of the LN. A major aspect of the critique of Lomborgs study was his failure to recognize contemporary regional workshops producing different types and subtypes (Madsen 1978; Apel 2001: 265pp.). This led eventually to a revision of LN chronology and to regional divisions. LN is now divided into LN I and LN II, with two major areas of production. In LN I, the Limfjord area produces types IA-C while Zealand, Lolland and Skne produce types ID, II and III. In LN II there is a decrease in overall dagger production, particularly in the Limfjord area. In this period types IV-V are produced in the eastern area. The distribution of LN I daggers types I-III marks out Lista, Jren and Karmy in the south, and the Tingvoll-Stadt zone in the north (Scheen 1979). It is important to contemplate the possibility that although there is little doubt as to the major role played by Jren as a distributor of Jutish flints northwards, it is close to impossible to assert whether flints were brought to the north via other eastern routes as well the types and raw-materials are all the same. Hence, the interior networks suggested on Maps 4-5 might still have existed in the LN and we would have great difficulties in discerning them from coastal networks. Despite these difficulties, I believe there are rather clear indications of a complex web of networks operating in the LN (Map 7-8). Flint daggers type ID produced mainly in Zealand, Lolland and Scania (Lomborg 1973: 39p)., have an interesting distribution: 2 in Vest-Agder, 2 at Jren, 1 from Askvoll, and then a cluster of 7 specimens between Stadt and Storfjord, then another close by at Hustad, and finally 4 specimens spread on the coast and inland to the north. The StadtStorfjord cluster is clearly better linked across the interior to the southeast, rather than to Jren in the south. To the immediate east, there is a cluster of 4 specimens in the Oslofjord, and 1 at Mjsa, 1 at Glomma River and 1 close to Trysil/Klarlv River. Interestingly, the Oslofjord cluster is rather small relative to the Stadt-Storfjord cluster. A more likely candidate would be the dense clusters in Bohusln and the area around the southern part of Lake Vnarn. This is an important alternative to keep in mind as we close in on the Bronze Age. The flint dagger type III is also an eastern type (Ebbesen 1975: 108, fig. 1), but the distribution in the west is more complex. Type III B are relatively rare in the south, with 1 from Lista, 5 from Jren, 6 specimens spread between Sotra and Stadt, and then a cluster of

38 6 daggers in Moldefjord, and finally 4 daggers spread between Hustad and Vikna. The Moldefjord cluster is more likely linked to the marked cluster east of Oslofjord with a tail along Glomma-Mjsa. Types IIIC, on the other hand, is confined to the area HardangerLista, with a cluster at Jren and a dense cluster at Lista. Type IIIA is largely confined to Jren, with only sporadic findings from Langesundfjord to Moldefjord. I propose that the distribution of flint daggers types ID and IIIB indicates that inland networks were crucial to the area north of Stadt. Here we might also note that there seems to be two neighbouring centres: Moldefjord with type IIIB daggers and Stadt-Storfjord with type ID daggers. Although the chronological position is somewhat unclear, I have mapped a selection of northern non-flint features: 1) perforated slate harpoon projectiles8, 2) fluted slate projectiles of type Sandtorg (large) and type Sundery (small)9, 3) axes of Sandshamn type10, and f) selected rock art motives11. First, the two main types of perforated projectiles, with single and double perforation, form a border along Tingvollfjord. The distribution of double-perforated projectiles seems to correspond to the flint dagger type IIIB and ID clusters between Stadt and Tingvollfjord. A projectile of this same type is found at Skjerpe, H M., Jren, while double perforations made on a fluted Sandtorg spearhead is found at Mykletun, Hordaland C. These clearly indicate direct maritime journeys between Stadt-Tingvoll and Jren, as well as a novel hunting technology involving a perforated slate point (cf. Engedal 2008). The southern distribution of Sandshamn axes seems to replicate the alpine route between the StadtTingvoll zone and Hardangerfjord suggested on Maps 3 and 5. The presence of northern hunters in the southern alpines is suggested by the Sundery projectiles as well. The presence of northern features in Rogaland is significant: three different types of harpoon projectiles, a halibut rock art motive and two Sandshamn axes. These indicate the presence of persons from the Stadt-Tingvollfjord area, but also persons from further north: the halibut-motive points to either Trondheimsfjord or Forselv in the far north, the small point from Solasanden with agnora and single perforation has its only parallel at Sanna, Trna, Nordland C. LN II daggers are plotted on the next map (Map 6). Type IV daggers are few, and there are few clear clusters. There are eleven daggers from the stretch Mandal to Karmy, three of them from Jren. There are three daggers from the north side of the inner Sognefjord, a high number considering the low number at Jren, and the low number of earlier daggers in this area. There are six daggers between Stadt and Tingvollfjord, and two

39 on the Fosen peninsula. The three type IV daggers found at Jren might even indicate that Jren is at the far end of these networks, and thus a case in which Jren receives daggers from the north. Considering type V daggers, there is only a single specimen between Langesundfjord and Jren. This is from Lista, otherwise well represented by all types I-IV. Jren has again a rather dense cluster, compared to type IV daggers, but the Karmsund area is empty. There is a cluster of 4 daggers on the southwestern archipelago around Stord. There are only two findings between Stord and Stadt, but seven daggers between Stadt and Hitra. Five daggers outside Fosen and one more at Trondheimsund is a relatively high number. A cluster of three daggers in the Lofoten archipelago to the north adds to this impression, and hints at direct journeys between Lofoten and Fosen. Summing up, I believe Maps 5-6 demonstrate that networks at work in the LN were far more complex than a quick glance at the distribution of flint daggers would imply. In addition, I suggest they are best interpreted as northern hunters operating the coastal and alpine routes north of Jren. Throughout the Stone Age the two areas designated as favourable zones for the early pioneers, Boknafjord and Nordvestlandet (cf. Map 3) were engaged in long-distance networks. With some adjustments, these two zones reappear in the Bronze Age. I believe that a significant flaw in previous studies of the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia, is that the complexity in the Stone Age background has not been recognized. The Jutish LN flint daggers have worked as a barrier between research on the Stone Age and that of the Bronze Age. With this chapter I have attempted direct focus to this problem, bring some noise from the Stone Age with us into the BA, and balance the presentation of the Stone Age background in relation to dichotomies of north-south, hunting-farming, overlandmaritime. With this in the back of our mind we are now ready to have a close look at the bronze artefacts of NW Scandinavia.

40

Chapter 3. First attempt

523 copper-alloy and gold artefacts and 31 soapstone casting moulds, from Grense-Jacob estuary in the north to Otra estuary in the south make up the core-data of this study12. The first strategy aimed at the wide webs of bronze and a basic chronological trajectory, is split into three attempts: the first deals with all artefact categories except for axes, a second attempt is dedicated exclusively to axes, the largest single category of metal artefacts, and finally a third attempt is aimed at a selection of non-bronze data such as stone artefacts, rock art motives, and contexts with radiocarbon dates. Closed findings in which different typological collectives are represented and combined (cf. Grslund 1987: 7), are linked to two phenomena in particular in this area. The first is the monumental burials of BA II and III, and the second is to hoards of BA V and VI. These phenomena, and the patterns discerned through explorations of them, have been the basic foundation to all major presentations of the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia (e.g. Mllerop 1963; Gaustad 1965; Mandt 1991; Johansen 1993; 2000; Larsen 1996; Aakvik 2000; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998; 2004). The first attempt is aimed particularly at a reevaluation of these two phenomena: the burials of EBA and the hoards of LBA. Even if conclusions will not be formed until chapter 6 at the end of part II, it is important to keep this aim in the back of our minds as we proceed. For the purpose of typological study, mould-cavities are translated into ghost types and included as such besides actual castings in the plate section. Capital letters are used when referring to a burial context with bronze (listed in App. III), and when referring to a hoard context with more than one bronze (listed in App. IV). These are also referred to as bur.1-107 and hoard 1-25, linking them to App. III and IV respectively. Casting moulds (listed in App. II) are referred to as M 1-32. All metal artefacts, bronze, copper and gold, including single findings as well as those from burials and hoards, are listed in App. I, and referred to as nr. 1-523. Reference numbers from App. I are also used on both plates and maps in order to ease the readers navigation.

3.1. Brooches
The Bronze Age brooch is a composite artefact consisting of a pin and bow. They are perhaps the most important typological collectives of the Nordic Bronze Age because of their complexity and great detail, and because they are part of both male and female accessories, and thus part of a large number of closed findings. There are two main

41 categories, the small simple brooch of the EBA and the larger more elaborate spectaclebrooch of the LBA. Basic studies of the early brooches are those by Oldeberg (1933), Kersten (1935), Broholm (1943; 1944), and Randsborg (1968; 1972). The most important typological divisions made on the early brooches, in terms of chronology, are those between round, flat (equals broad in Broholms terminology), hourglass and cross-headed pins. Round refers to a round cross-section of the head, flat refers to a pin-head resting on its flat back against the termination of the bow, and the hourglass and cross refers to the outline of the pin-head. The first change is from a round-headed brooch of early BA II to a hourglass shaped flat-headed brooch of late BA II. The next important shift is from relatively large, flat heads with hourglass shape (in several variations) to smaller, flat heads with a cross shape. Traditionally, this second shift was synchronized with the shift from BA II to BA III (Kersten 1935: 36; Broholm 1943: 166). In his studies of the changes from BA II to III (1968), and from BA III to IV (1972), Klaus Randsborg has made valuable contributions to the typology and chronology of early brooches: he demonstrates that the hourglass shape continuous into BA III (1968), and the existence of other flat-headed shapes, disc and crutch-headed, that crosses into BA IV (1972). As will be clear, Randsborgs work is of particular interest to NW Scandinavia, and several of our brooches were central to his arguments. Recently, the final treatment and publication of the dendro-chronological dates of the Danish oak-coffins seem to confirm and specify the shift from round to flat-headed brooches to 1340-30 BC (Randsborg 2006: 11). The other main category, the so called spectacle-brooches still rests on the basic study of Andreas Oldeberg (1933), since they received only cursory treatment in Evert Boudous major study of the Nordic LBA (1960).

3.1.1. Early brooches

There are 12 early brooches with pin-heads preserved. Only one, the brooch from HOLEN I (nr. 1, bur. 85), is of the round-headed early BA II type. Four brooches, from SVANY (nr. 2, bur. 26), REGE I (nr. 3, bur. 55), LUNDE (nr. 4, bur. 60) and SOLA I (nr. 5, bur. 50) have pin-heads with flat backs and hourglass shapes. Two brooches have flat back-sides and an outline closer to the cross shape; a large specimen with less distinct cross shape from T-H I (nr. 6, bur. 5), and a typical, small specimen with a clear cut cross shape from SRHEIM (nr. 7, bur. 77). Two brooches, from ANDA III (nr. 8, bur. 73), and STORESUND I (nr. 9, bur. 36), both lack the outer ridge on their pin-heads, and it is difficult to decide whether

42 they are incomplete or whether they were made this way. Randsborg referred to them both as having a narrow hourglass shape with a straight middle section (1968: 93p., note 253, 260). It seems to me that the Storesund brooch has a larger, more waisted shape, i.e. closer to the hourglass, while the Anda brooch is clearly a smaller, decorated, more delicate BA III form. The brooch from ANDA IV (nr.10, bur.76) was by Oldeberg designated as atypical, and probably a result of local production (1933: 57). Randsborg included this brooch in his small group of late crutch-headed brooches (1972: 37, app.12, map.11). It also has a characteristic basket-ornated bow. The brooch from the GUNNARSHAUG I (nr.11 bur.38) is part of a small group of disc-headed brooches (ibid: 40). The brooch from RYKKJA II (nr. 12, bur. 21) is fragmented and the only diagnostic feature is that the head most likely has a flat backside. Fragments of brooches with little typological information are moreover known from TJTTA (nr. 13, bur. 82), RISTESUND (nr. 14, bur. 25), KLEPPE II (nr. 15, bur. 70) and REHEIA III (nr. 16, bur. 42). None of them have preserved pin-heads, accordingly they allow a wide time frame from BA II-IV. The brooch from VIGRESTAD (nr. 17, burial nr. 92) has several features which make it unique, and it represents the first major challenge of this study. Considering the complexity of the brooch and the rich burial assemblage it is part of, it is an important challenge to deal with. The Vigrestad brooch is an extremely large brooch, 24 cm long, with a simple smooth and round-headed pin, and a thin and flat, willow-leaf (Weidenblatt) shaped bow decorated with a wolf-tooth pattern. A thin rod coiled into opposing spirals runs through the bow, a feature un-paralleled on other Scandinavian brooches. The pin carries the remains of a similar coiled rod. The Vigrestad brooch can be interpreted as an innovation that combined existing elements into something unique. The spiral-rods running through the bow and the pin are reminiscent of those seen on a pin from Tjrnemark, Holbk C., Denmark (Pl.54; Broholm 1944: 220, fig. 78; AK II: 988). In this case four thin rods run through the pin and curl into four pairs of opposing spirals. Broholm argued that this pin was unique and that it resembled artefacts from the Mycenaean shaft-graves (1944: 220). Apart from the spirals, the Tjrnemark pin relates to a small group of EBA pins in the Nordic Zone, generally seen as imports from Southern Germany (ibid: 123). A look in this direction brings to light a second clue. Variant Bleckmar of the Bohemian disc-headed pin (Bmisch scheibennadel) has a coiled rod incorporated at the intersection of the pin and the disc (Laux 1976: nr. 345-46). Such a pin is actually known from land, Kalmar C. Sweden (Old. 2051). The incorporation of thin, coiled rods as seen on the Vigrestad brooch, the Tjrnemark pin

43 and the variant Bleckmar pins, is a very rare feature in the Bronze Age and it probably reflects a cast-on procedure, i.e. incorporating the coil in the mould for the pin (cf. chapt. 7.5). These potential links to Germany are also strengthened by the extremely large, flat bow of the Vigrestad brooch. This is comparable to Kerstens Sonderform 1 of North-Hannover (1935: 36), i.e. the hair-knot brooches of Lower Saxony (Laux 1973). The Vigrestad bow resembles closely the variants with Weidenblatt shaped bows found in the Lneburg area (these were apparently not used as hair-knot brooches), and one of these, from Ripdorf, has a comparable wolf-tooth decoration (Pl.54; Laux 1973: nr. 112). It is thus possible to see the Vigrestad brooch as a combination of a basic Nordic brooch design, cast-on spirals borrowed from the Blechmar pins, and the excessive size and design of bow borrowed from the Lneburg brooches. These links are all at odds with an early BA II date suggested by the round head. Interestingly, the shift from round to flat heads did not occur on the hair-knot brooches of Northern Germany, and round pin-heads were used at least into BA III. Their vase shaped heads are also very similar to the head of the Vigrestad pin (Pl.54; Kersten 1935: 36; Laux 1973: nr. 109-112, 125). I propose that the Vigrestad brooch represents a unique case of creative merging of regional styles from late BA II or early BA III, and an important case that I will return to.

3.1.2. Late brooches

The so-called spectacle-brooch is an important feature of the LBA. There are three specimens within our area: two from LOM (nr. 18-19, hoard 11) and one from SKJERDALEN (nr. 20, hoard 14). The three of them carry the same decorative schema of relief-bands, arranged as concentric, open-ended rings (Oldebergs bandformiga figurer inskrivna i varandra). One of the specimens from LOM (nr. 18) belongs to a typological collective of 32 specimens, i.e. an early version with relatively small discs, but with a broader bow than the earliest specimens (Oldeberg 1933: 113, 134p). The other brooch from LOM (nr.19) as well as the one from SKJERDALEN (nr. 20), belong to a later version with larger, oval discs. In fact, both also belong to a collective of 7 specimens, distinguished through their characteristic anatomic shape of the discs (Oldeberg 1933: 186p.). All three specimens are thus to be placed in BA VI, even though one of Lom brooches (nr. 18) is likely to have been made in BA V.

44

3.2. Pins
Pins were not popular in the Nordic Zone before the LBA (Broholm 1943: 123), and the basic studies of LBA pins are those of Evert Baudou (1960), Klavs Randsborg (1972) and Jrgen Jensen (1997). There are 14 pins from the area.

3.2.1. Spiral-headed pins

First, there are two quite similar spiral-headed pins, from RYKKJA I (nr. 21, bur. 20) and Indre Hoem (nr. 22). They are of similar size, and are both made from a rod with square cross-section in the spiral section, and with round cross-section in the shaft section. The pin from Indre Hoem is larger, better preserved and carries decorative nicks on the spirals. A third pin from GJRV (nr. 23, bur. 4) has a shaft that splits into two separate opposing spirals. Although the spiral comes in a vast variety of shapes throughout the Bronze Age, it has been difficult to find any convincing parallels to these three pins (Bjrn 1935a: 32pp.; Moberg 1941: 76, 78; Gaustad 1965: 67pp). The most common Nordic spiral-pins, dated to BA V and VI, are either smaller, or they have shafts bent into various angular shapes, or they have double-spirals coiled in the opposite direction to those on the Gjrv pin (Hansson 1927: Pl. 34; Baudou 1960: Taf. XVII; Jensen 1997: Pl. 94, 96-98). The most immediate solution to this problem would be to, as Bjrn did (1935a: 32pp), see them as variations on a theme very popular at the very end of the Bronze Age. In order to do this one has to either argue that the assemblages of RYKKJA I and GJRV were not closed findings, or one has to argue that the rest of these assemblages is late as well. Bjrn chose the last alternative, relied on the contextual relationship, and considered the entire assemblages as late (1935a: 32pp.). Moberg seems to have chosen the former alternative, and doubted the contexts (1941: 76). Gaustad on the other hand, re-evaluated the individual artefacts as well as their contexts, and placed both RYKKJA I and GJRV in the EBA (1965: 64, 67pp). In his argument for an EBA date of GJRV, Gaustad brought in the Vigrestad brooch (nr. 17, bur. 92) and below I will attempt to develop this argument further. The nearest pins in space and time of the basic Rykkja-Frna design are a few, much smaller pins from Northern Germany (Pl.54; Laux 1971: 53; 1976: nr. 222-227; 1996: 287). A fourth spiral pin from T-H V (nr. 24, bur. 9) is more readily ascribed to a Nordic typological collective, that of swan-necked pins with small spiral-head (Schwanenhalsnadeln mit kleinem Spiralkopf). In 1960 these numbered 16 specimens, 13 from Denmark and 3 from Sweden. Only one of them came from a datable context, the large BA VI hoard from

45 Rgerup (Moberg 1941: 80; Baudou 1960: 85, 280, type XXV F4, T-H V pin not included; Gaustad 1965: 71). Hence, three out of four spiral-headed pins from the area do not belong to the common categories of Nordic spiral-headed pins. These three pins constitute the second major challenge, an important one since any decision on this matter will have significant impact on the overall interpretation of the Trondheimsfjord in the Bronze Age (cf. chapt. 3.12).

3.2.2. Disc-headed pins

There are five disc-headed pins from the area, spanning from the simplest to the very complex forms. The pin from SOLA V (nr. 25, bur. 54) is a disc-headed pin with straight shaft, i.e. with the disc facing upwards (Baudou 1960: type XXV B1, Sola pin not included). In 1960 these numbered more than 240 specimens, the vast majority from Denmark (ibid: 78). 23 findings date them to BA IV and the transition BA IV/V, and only a single finding in Germany indicates a BA V date (ibid). A few are actually combined with BA III artefacts (Randsborg 1972: 65). The pin from VESPESTAD (nr. 26, bur. 31) is a disc-headed pin with bent shaft and a disc decorated with concentric circles. This pin was included in Baudous study within an early sub-group of the bent pins with decorated discs, numbering 47 specimens (1960: type XXVb, frhform, nr. 47). Eight closed findings date this sub-group to BA IV, and to the transition BA IV/V at the latest (ibid: 79). In three cases the pins are missing and only the discs are preserved: from SKJERDALEN (nr. 27, hoard 14), STAV (nr. 28, hoard 7) and from STRE HAUGE (nr. 29, bur. 104). These are all large and decorated with concentric ridges. All three also belong to Baudous Hrnvi type, and to the mainland sub-group numbering 21 specimens from 19 findings (including the stre Hauge and Stav specimens that were missing in Baudous study). Six findings date the mainland sub-group to late BA V and early BA VI (ibid: type XXVc, festlandsform, nr. 6, 79; cf. also Moberg 1941: 78; Jensen 1997: 54). Bjrn designated the Stav specimen as a tutulus, and it has figurated as such in the literature ever since (Jensen 1997: 316). Gaustad made a convincing argument that it was in fact a fragmented pin (1965: 65pp.). Finally, there are three pins with multiple discs. The pin-head with missing pin from Ullandhaug (nr. 30), has three discs arranged in a triangle. Baudou included this pin in a

46 collective numbering nine specimens, dated to BA VI through the hoard from Altuna, Uppsala C. (Boudou 1960: 268, nr.9). The two identical pins from VIKEDAL (nr. 31-32, hoard 21) have four discs arranged in a rectangle, with a fifth disc in the middle. The Vikedal pins are members of an exclusive category, with a third known specimen from the Vestby hoard, Oppland C. Both VIKEDAL and Vestby are dated to BA VI (ibid: Hort 200, taf. XVI).

3.2.3. Other pins

The final complete pins are bar-headed pins (Stangkopfnadeln). The one from GUNNESY (nr. 33, hoard 6) has a profiled transversal bar with thin bronze-leafs attached through eight loops, and large discs at each end of the bar. This is considered one of the baroque types developed in BA VI (Jensen 1997: 52). No exact parallels are found, but comparable leafattachments are seen on complex multi-disc pins from BA VI (ibid: Pl. 74.2). The pin from VLEBRU (nr. 34, hoard 12), is now lost, but according to Johansen it was of Baudous BA V variants (cf. ibid: 81p.; Johansen 1981: 72). The final pin is represented by two fragments of the shaft of a pin from SKJEGGESNES (nr. 35, bur. 2). These fragments give few if any clues for typological treatment.

3.3. Tweezers
There are 10 tweezers from the area. Tweezers were introduced to the Nordic Zone in BA II and remained an important part of male burial assemblages throughout the rest of the Bronze Age. The earliest type is a pair of tweezers that, when seen from the side, bends into a wide, circular arch with thick edges at the mouth; and when seen from the front has a narrow bow sloping down into a wide mouth (Kersten 1935: form 1, 58). Kersten made a subdivision of this early form, according to the shape of the sides: straight, waisted and parallel sides ending in a strongly splayed mouth (ibid). Form 1 belongs to BA II. The next generation tweezers are narrower and simpler both in shape and decoration. If decorated at all, they most often have simple lines along the sides, and sometimes a band of pearls or triangles is added. Rather than the thick lips of form 1, there are now thin lips bent sharply inwards. Kersten dated this type to BA III (ibid: 59; Baudou 1960: 39). It is worth noting that Baudou considered undecorated tweezers not to be among the datable types (1960: 40). They are, though, more common in BA III and IV than in BA II and V. Tweezers decorated

47 with simple lines along the sides also continues into BA IV (Baudou 1960: 39). Characteristic traits for BA IV and V tweezers are 1) decorative bowls like those resulting from a repouss technique, present in both BA IV and V; 2) strichband decoration, typical of BA IV and the IV/V transition; and 3) decoration with wavy, multiple lines (Linienband) characteristic of BA V (ibid). The greatest variation in tweezers forms is seen during BA IV and the transition BA IV/V (ibid: 40). In BA VI these basic shapes are replaced by the characteristic Hallstatt shapes (ibid: 39p.).

3.3.1 Undecorated tweezers

There are four tweezers without recognizable decoration. The tweezers from T-H VI (nr. 36, bur. 10) generally fit into Kerstens early form 1: the bow makes a circular arch, the sides are slightly waisted and the lips are thick. Randsborg included these tweezers in his group of Kleine Pinzetten mit dicken, leicht nach aussen geschwungenen Lippen, in an argument that these smaller variants were actually part of a sub-II phase, i.e. that they were BA II forms still in use into BA III (1968: 120, note 320). Two tweezers from TH XI (nr. 37, bur. 15) and from B (nr. 38, bur.1) are small, undecorated with slightly waisted sides, and with thin lips bent inwards. These give few clues other than a general BA III-IV date. A fourth fragmented pair of tweezers comes from VESPESTAD (nr. 39, bur. 31): rather broad at the bow and with straight, almost parallel sides. There are vertical lines or ribs on the inside of the bow-section. These ribs might have had a function during production, or they might have been an innovation towards a spring effect in the tweezers. It can be included in Baudous wide category of undecorated tweezers, and it gives few chronological hints other than LBA.

3.3.2. Decorated tweezers

The tweezers from GUNNARSHAUG I (nr. 40, bur. 38) are narrow, with parallel sides on the upper section, widening from the mid-section into the mouth. They carry simple double lines along their circumference and a wolf-tooth pattern along the sides. They belong to Baudous type B.1, which is dated through seven burials to BA IV. But, his type has a direct precursor in a few similar but narrower specimens from BA III (Baudou 1960: 40). Randsborg considered them a large Period IV pair of tweezers (Randsborg 1972: 51). The tweezers from REGE II (nr. 41, bur. 56) is a pair of relatively narrow tweezers with double lines with short, transversal lines between them (Strichband) running along the

48 sides, but not connecting in the lower section. It was not included by Baudou, but it is clearly of his type B (Scmale Pinzetten mit geradliniger Verzierung), and of the second variant (Ohne Querlinien auf den Lippen). Boudou listed 90 specimens in this group, and 23 assemblages date them to BA IV (1960: 40p.). The tweezers from STORESUND II (nr. 42, bur. 37) carry a strichband running in waves around three raised bowls. A pair of tweezers from SELE II (nr. 43, bur. 59) has a group of simple lines, three raised bowls and a chain of dots and Cs along the lines. Both were included by Baudou as type D (Scmale, mit umlaufendem Strichband verzierte Pinzetten). This type is very common in Denmark, and is dated through 50 findings; the majority to BA IV, some to the transition BA IV/V, and a few atypical specimens to BA V (ibid: 225, nr. 233-234). The SELE II tweezers are broader, have a richer decoration and it is not clear whether the lines actually coil around the bowls in waves. For these reasons they might actually belong to the next group (and to BA V). The tweezers from Finny (nr. 44) and BORE II (nr. 45, bur. 64) are both broad with characteristic splayed edges. This feature alone would place them in BA V (none of them were included by Boudou). The Finny tweezers have sun-ray patterns in stead of bowls, and a group of five lines and a row of S-patterns running along the sides, and in waves around the sun-rays. This would clearly place them within Baudous type E1 (Mit reciher Linienbandverzierung). This group numbered 121 specimens and is dated through 19 assemblages to BA V, 2 assemblages indicating a transitional BA IV/V date, and one assemblage indicating a BA VI date (ibid: 42). The tweezers from BORE II have only preserved remnants of a group of lines on the upper section, but the date is likely to be BA V because of the large size and the strongly splayed edges.

3.4. Studs and buttons

There are 18 studs and buttons; 10 double-studs, 4 bar-studs and 4 simple round buttons with loops.

3.4.1. Double-studs
None of the ten double studs are of the early types, i.e. large with flat top-plates, but rather of Kerstens form 6 and 7 (1935: 22p). Four studs carry star-ornaments: L (nr. 46, bur. 16), GUNNARSHAUG I (nr. 47, bur.38), B (nr. 48, bur.1) and REHEIA III (nr. 49, bur. 42). The large stud from L has a complex motive of star-ornament, striations and decorative pits in-between the rays of the star. This decorative scheme seems more in line with BA III

49 studs (Kersten 1935: Taf. XXXIV), than with Randsborgs BA IV types (1972: 47pp.). The stud from GUNNARSHAUG I was central to Randsborg study of the BA III/IV transition, and dated to BA IV along with 2-3 other known specimens (ibid: Kubbhaug type, 51p.). The B stud carries a star-pattern, concentric circles, and an extremely long central boss. Kersten saw his Form 7b, with conical top-plate and central boss, as a diagnostic BA III form (1935: 24). On the other hand, Baudou mentions wenigen Dobbeltknpfen mit hohem Mitteldorn ohne Platte der periode IV, and argues that the border between these and the Periode III-Dobbeltknpfen mit niedrigen Mitteldorn ohne Platte, is unclear. He did not discern these as a separate type. This makes it largely an issue of the length of the central boss, and the extreme boss on the B stud is clearly more in line with BA IV specimens than with Kerstens BA III examples. In fact it is quite similar to the stud from from Sperrestrup, Fredriksborg C., and particularly the one from Ulbjerg, Viborg C., both clearly BA IV burials (Broholm 1946: 15, 61, grav nr. 42, 671). Although corroded, one of the studs from REHEIA III (nr. 49, bur. 42) seems to have a simple star-ornament around an insignificant central boss and to be of Kerstens main form 6, but can in light of Randsborgs study (1972) hardly be given anything but a BA III-IV date. The stud from VEST-HASSEL (nr. 50, bur. 99) is decorated with simple concentric circles. This stud was included by Baudou in his type A2a (scwach gewlbter Scheibe, mit Ritzverzierung and Strichverzierung) 1960: 88, 288, nr. 31a, grab 499). 30 assemblages date this type to BA IV (ibid: 88). The stud from REHEIA IV (nr. 51, bur. nr. 43) has a convex and stepped top-plate, a central boss of medium length with a disc at its termination. The relatively large disc at the undecorated boss points to an early date, BA III rather than BA IV (ibid: 87). The stud from VESPESTAD (nr. 52, bur. 31) has a domed convex and undecorated disc. Baudou did not make the undecorated studs a type of its own because of the uncertainty as to whether they really were undecorated or merely worn smooth. He listed a total of 210 specimens, 160 in Denmark, 40 in Sweden, and 10 in Schleswig-Holstein (ibid: 87). This means that the stud from Vespestad does not yield more than a vague date to BA IV-V. Finally there are three fragmented specimens, two more studs from REHEIA III (nr.53-54, bur. 42), and one from HANANGER II (nr. 55, bur. 96), as well as two lost specimens from JSUND (nr. 56-57, bur. 48). None of them carry typological information.

50

3.4.2. Bar-studs
There are 4 bar-studs from the area. Bar-studs (Stangenknpfe) are mainly categorized from two diagnostic traits: a bent versus a straight bar; and a loop placed parallel to the bar (Parallelse) versus one placed in an angular or crossed position (Crossse). According to Baudou, the early type, BA IV, has a short, bent bar most often with a parallel loop; the later type from BA V has a longer bar with grooves, most often with a crossed loop (1960: 89p.). The stud from LUNDE I (nr. 58, bur. 100) is a typical BA V type with long bar with grooves and cross-loop. This is the only specimen from our area included by Baudou (1960: 90, 297, nr. 190). The bar-studs from GUNNESYAN (nr.59, hoard 6) and T-H V (nr. 60, bur. 9) are quite similar, and at odds with Baudous schema. They have straight, undecorated bars with parallel loops and have additional parallel-loops at each end. The stud from GUNNESY is hollow and open at the back (it is not clear whether this feature is shared by the specimen from T-H V). Both are part of assemblages indicating a BA VI date, and ought to be seen as rare BA VI variants not included in Baudous study. The specimen from NJLSTAD (nr. 61, bur. 88) seems to fit best into Baudous category of Stangenknpfe mit gerader Stange, but it is in the shorter spectrum of length, and within a smaller sub-group with short bars and parallel-loops. There are c. 150 specimens from Denmark, but only about 10 of these are short, undecorated with parallel-loops. This sub-group seems to belong to assemblages both from BA IV and V, and it is seen as a transitional form between the buttons with bent bar and parallel-loop from BA IV and those with straight bar and cross-loop from BA V (ibid: 90). The transitional position of the NJLSTAD specimen, and its relationship to earlier variants, is supported by its slightly bent bar. The button from NJLSTAD is crucial since it is one out of two diagnostic bronze artefacts found in relation to face-urns in the area. A final bar-stud is known from BORE II (nr. 62, bur. 64), now lost. It was described as being like R 123 (R 123 being the stud from GUNNESYAN) with referance to Rygh (1885). The stud from GUNNESYAN was the only bar-stud included by Rygh, and it is therefore not clear whether this was meant as a reference to bar-studs in general or to this specific variant.

3.4.3. Buttons
There are four domed circular buttons with loop at the back, from T-H V (nr.63, bur. 9) and STORSANDAN (nr. 64-66, hoard 5). The specimens from STORSANDAN are decorated with a central pit. Comparable undecorated buttons are found both in BA IV and BA VI, the

51 late ones characterised by broader and larger loops (Baudou 1960: 90). The one from T-H V conforms well with the BA VI type. Gaustad saw the buttons from STORSANDAN as related to the BA IV type because of their smaller loops (1965: 73p., F.9, nr. 47). Johansen has made the most recent evaluation of the STORSANDAN hoard, but he mainly cites Bjrns arguments (Johansen 1988; cf. Bjrn 1935: 30pp.). While Bjrn used these arguments in favour of a late date at the very end of the BA, Johansen places the hoard in BA IV.

3.5. Bracelets and rings for arm and finger

There are 51 bracelets and rings for arm or finger including 16 gold specimens.

3.5.1. Ribbed bracelets

The category of ribbed bracelets, numbering a total of twelve specimens, is crucial since they are part of some of the richest assemblages of the EBA in NW Scandinavia. The bracelet from STEINE (nr. 67, hoard 16) is of child-like size, with five broad and rounded ribs and is distinguished from other Nordic bracelets with ribs through its pointed ends. Comparable bracelets are known from Skne, Sweden (with seven ribs, Old. 1359) and from Nitriansky Hradok, Slovakia (with four ribs, Mller-Karpe 1980: Taf.294). The stratigraphic position of the bracelet at the fortified settlement at Nitriansky Hradok, suggests a BA I date (middle Madarovce layer, cf. also Vandkilde 1996: 143). The other 11 ribbed bracelets are of the more common Nordic types, within Kerstens forms C2-C4 (Kersten 1935: 50pp.) and Randsborgs variants I-III (Randsborg 1968: 63). Variant I has undecorated ribs of equal width and height; variant II has more pronounced top and bottom ribs and narrow ribs in-between; and variant III has top and bottom ribs protruding into sharp ridges. Both variant II and III often carry a chess-board decoration of short transversal lines on the narrow ribs in-between the top and bottom ridges. What is important here is that Kersten, Broholm and Randsborg all saw these bracelets to be a diagnostic feature of BA III (Kersten 1935; Broholm 1944; Randsborg 1968). The bracelet from TJELTA (nr. 68, bur. 57) is broad, undecorated, with 13 ridges of equal height, and was included as a var. I by Randsborg (1968: note 204). One of the bracelets from ANDA II (nr. 69, bur.74) is broad with 13 ridges, including the somewhat protruding top and bottom ribs, and falls within Randsborgs var. II. There is partial decoration of dotted lines, but not in a chess-board pattern. Four specimens belong to var. III: the second bracelet from ANDA II (nr. 70, bur. 74), from SRHEIM (nr. 71-72, bur. 77) and from KJRREFJORD (nr. 73, bur. 101). The second bracelet from ANDA II and the

52 pair from SRHEIM are almost identical, with 9 ribs in between the sharp protruding top and bottom ribs. The pair from SRHEIM has every second rib decorated with transverse lines but not in a chess-board pattern. Neither Kersten nor Randsborg made a separate variant for bracelets narrower than the above specimens, but Randsborg mentioned such bracelets specifically in his notation (1968: note 206). These occupy a significant position in our area: a pair from REGE I (nr. 74-75, bur. 55), a pair from N-BRAUT (nr. 76-77, bur. 71) and a single fragmented specimen from VESTAD (nr. 78, bur. 93). Randsborg considered the narrow specimens from REGE I as a narrow derivative of var. I bracelets (1968: note 206). Our five specimens are all between 2.2 and 1.8 cm broad, and they have 6 (vestad), 7 (Rege, N-Braut) and 9 (N-Braut) ribs of equal height. The vestad and one of the Rege specimens had alternating ribs decorated with transverse lines. Accordingly, the ribbed bracelets from the area span the continuum of var. I-III, with a cluster on a narrow sub-group of Randsborg's var. I. Comparable narrow bracelets are relatively rare elsewhere and a further evaluation of this phenomenon will be crucial to the status of some of the richest burials in NW Scandinavia (cf. chapt. 3.12).

3.5.2. Spiral arm rings

There are 4 spiral arm rings made from coiled bronze wires (Drahtfrmige Armspiralen): a pair of well-preserved specimens from KVAMME (nr. 79-80, hoard 20), a small fragment from RYKKJA I (nr. 81, bur. 20), and a large fragment from Overgrd (nr. 82). While the specimens from KVAMME have flat-oval cross-section, the other two have flat insides and D-shaped cross-sections. Coiled arm rings exist in quite similar form from BA II to the early Iron Age. Especially in cases where the terminations are missing they can hardly be dated in themselves (Kersten 1935: form D2, 52; Baudou 1960: 59). The late candidate would be variants with flattened ends or with back-turned spirals. The most numerous group seems to be the variant with flattened ends, and these are dated through many southern hoards to BA IV (Baudou 1960: 59p.). Neither the fragments nor in fact the complete specimens from KVAMME yield significant chronological information.

3.5.3. Other arm and finger rings

From S-BRAUT (nr. 83-84, bur. 72) comes a pair of simple, undecorated, massive bronze rings with circular or lenticular cross-sections. These fit into Kerstens forms A2-3, both

53 forms being present in both BA II and III (1935: 46p.). Two rings have D or triangular crosssections. The first, a ring from REHEIA II (nr. 85, bur. 41) carries a rich metope-decoration, conventionally dated to BA III (ibid: form A4b, 47). The other, from MADLA II (nr. 86, bur. 47) was included in Baudous list of massive oath-rings with Halbstollen am Enden, dated through 12 Dnish and German burials to BA IV, and through 3 hoards to BA V (1960: 65p, type XIX D1a). The ring from STORSANDAN (nr. 87, hoard 5) is also fragmented, but with a more complex cross-section and decoration. It has a slightly concave inside, a ridged frontside marked by longitudinal lines and short, transverse lines. One end seems partly preserved, and there seems to have been a contraction before the termination. It has been notoriously difficult to date this ring, as well as the assemblage it is part of, and attempts range from BA IV to VI (cf. Bjrn 1935a: 31; Gaustad 1965: 59; Johansen 1988). Jensens study of the Bronze to Iron Age transition has demonstrated the large variation in arm rings in BA VI, and the Storsandan ring has a good parallel in the hoard from Antvorskov, Sor County (Jensen 1997: Pl. 56, Kat. 3:5). The fragmented ring from VELLE (nr. 88, bur. 103) is hollow with an open backside, decorated with transverse lines at the ends. It can be designated as a Vulstring dated to BA VI or early PRIA (Jensen 1997: 71pp.). The fragmented ring from AVLUND (nr. 89, hoard 13) has a flat back-side, with a concavity along the centre. The front has a central rounded ridge flanked by narrow ribs, and it seems clear that the ends originally contracted towards their ends. The ring can be designated as an oath-ring from BA VI, comparable to e.g. the rings from Hjortebjerg, Bornholm C. (Jensen 1997: 76, Kat. 3.8). Two complete and three fragmented bracelets made from thin, flat bands of bronze, with hooks for closure, come from STAV (nr. 90-94, hoard 7). These are known from 5 Danish findings, but STAV is the only Scandinavian assemblage in which they are combined with other types (Jensen 1997: 76). They are supposed to originate south of the Baltic Sea, and Jensen dates them through the STAV hoard to BA VI (ibid: 76, cf. bracelets in Polish hoards, 317pp.). From STAV (nr. 95, hoard 7) and SKJERDALEN (nr. 96, hoard 14) come thin, undecorated arm rings with square cross-sections. They carry few diagnostic traits but are safely dated through the rest of the assemblages to BA VI. The ring from VERE (nr. 97, bur. 98) is fragmented, undecorated and carries few typological traits other than its cross-section which is rounded with a flat inside. The final bronze arm ring is a miniature of the Wendel type neck rings from STAV (nr. 98, hoard 7).

54 There are 10 arm rings made of gold. Two of them, from HODNE I (nr. 99, bur. 65) and REHEIA V (nr. 100, bur. 44), are twisted from square bars with smooth ends, and are members of a characteristic BA III typological collective, clustering in Northwest Jutland (Broholm 1944: 168). Two arm rings from Hemnskjel (nr. 101) and Strand (nr. 102) are made from goldsheet with ends terminating in coiled-up double spirals. The one from Strand was included by Baudou (1960: 255). These rings are not securely dated. Baudous category includes rings both massive and made from sheet, and from both bronze and gold. Only 9 specimens, two from Sor and Maribo C. in Denmark, and seven from Skne, Blekinge, Kalmar, and Vstra Gtaland C. in Southern Sweden, are in fact comparable to our rings (Montelius 1916; Baudou 1960). Baudou placed them in BA V mainly because of their similarities with other gold-sheet arm rings. Two arm rings from Sandnesenget (nr. 103) and Hodne (nr. 104) are made from gold sheet and terminate in circular bowls ( schmale bandfrmige Eidringe mit runden Schalenenden). 13 specimens are known from 13 findings in Denmark, and 5 specimens from 3 findings in Skne C. in Sweden. They are dated through 3 assemblages to BA V (Baudou 1960: 67, 258). An arm ring from Langli (nr. 105) is of comparable form but made from massive gold. It was included by Baudou (massive Eidringe mit runden Schalenenden), and the type is dated through two assemblages to BA IV and through one assemblage to BA V. It is known in 27 specimens from Denmark and 7 from Sweden (bronze specimens excluded) (ibid: 66, 257). The rings from JULNES (nr. 106, hoard 9) and Berge (nr. 107) are massive with terminations decorated with short transversal lines. These were not included by Baudou, but they can be related to each other as well as to a ring from Besseberg, Idd, stfold C. through their metallurgical composition. The rings from JULNES and Besseberg are distinguished by their unusual low levels of copper. The ring from Berge had equally low levels of copper, but in addition showed unusual low levels of tin as well as presence of platinum (Marstrander 1977: 51). These three rings are at odds with the common practice of intentional gold-copper alloys, and I am inclined to see them as part of the same network, supported also by their morphological similarities. The Besseberg ring was found along with a second ring of a type comparable to the one from JULNES. This was later replaced with a fake guilded bronze ring. (cf. Johansen 1981: 81p.). These rings are most likely dated to BA VI (Broholm 1949: 118, Pl. 32.5-6). The simple fragmented ring with round cross-section

55 from Stange (nr. 108) was not included by Baudou nor by Marstrander. It carries few diagnostic traits and has not been analysed for composition. It is merely 2mm in cross section, and thus tempting to relate to the coiled BA III rings below. The ring from Vikse (nr. 109) is massive with rounded-oval cross-section and it terminates in single spirals, facing opposite directions. No parallel rings are known from Northern Europe. Rings with single spirals made from bronze are known from BA II-IV (Kersten 1935: 55; Baudou 1960: 64). The twisted gold rings were likely Nordic productions, and the twisted gold ring with single, opposing spirals from Gunslev demonstrate the production of comparable, unique pieces in Denmark in BA III (Broholm 1944: Pl.30.9, grav 1505). Two spiral arm rings made from coiled gold wire come from Lista (nr. 110) and Nord-Braut (nr. 111) (a possible third nr. 108 Stange, cf. above). Of similar form are two gold finger rings from SELE I (nr. 112-13, bur. 58) and two bronze finger rings from Hkonsdal (nr. 114) and RYKKJA I (nr. 115, bur. 20). Finally, there is the lost gold arm ring from JULNES (nr. 116, hoard 9), and a rather unique finger ring from VLEBRU (nr. 117, hoard 12). The latter had a flat inside and a twisted ornamental band on the front.

3.6. Neck collars and neck rings

3.6.1. Neck collars
There are 7 neck-collars from the area. The collars from REGE I (nr. 118, bur. 55) and SBRAUT (nr. 119, bur. 72) are of Kerstens A2 variant; with ribs and smooth panels at the ends decorated with spirals. While the REGE I collar has vertical line-bundles and wolftooth patterns on the side panels in addition to the spirals, the S-BRAUT-collar has a richer decoration with transverse lines across the ribs, and smooth sections above and below the ribs, decorated with wolf-tooth patterns. The collar from VIGRESTAD (nr. 120, bur. 92) is of the same basic design and heavily corroded, but somewhat narrower and with transversal lines across the ribs. Kersten argued, contra Mller, that collars of type A2 was not a diagnostic BA II type, but that they also occurred in a few BA III assemblages. He counted 15 BA II and 4 BA III assemblages (1935: 40). The fragmented neck collar from RYKKJA I (nr. 121, bur. 20) has been the object of dispute. Bjrn treated it as a band-shaped neck ring, partially decorated and part of an assemblage dating to the very end of the BA (1935a: 32). Gaustad argued that there in fact was decoration, including running spirals on the mid-section of the collar (1965: 52). This

56 narrows down the alternatives, and the RYKKJA I collar is most likely an un-ribbed collar with spiral decoration, either of Kerstens variants B1 (BA II) or B2 (BA II-III) (1935: 40p.). The two collars from TENNEVIK (nr. 122-23, hoard 3) and a third from TRONDENES (nr. 124, hoard 2) are rather exceptional. Two collars in a hoard from Torstorp, Kalmar C., Sweden, are similar except that these are decorated (Pl.55; berg 1915: 44, fig. 54; Montelius 1917: nr. 1274). While these were listed as parallels also by Bjrn (1935a: 37) and Munch (1966: 68), a second pair of nearly identical collars from a large hoard from Grnhult, Skne C., was overlooked (Pl.55; Hildebrand 1891: 177pp., fig. 63; cf. Montelius 1917: 54, nr. 1228). Both Swedish hoards date these collars to BA V (cf. Montelius 1917: 54, 55p, nr. 1228, 1274; Oldeberg 1933: 264). Since these collars now number seven specimens in Scandinavia, from TENNEVIK, TRONDENES, Torstorp and Grnhult, Munch was probably right when he suggested they were made in Scandinavia rather than in Continental Europe (1966: 68). Significant in this respect is a fragmented mould for such a collar from Vilsted in Northern Jutland (Jantzen 2008: 63, nr 37, note 46). This was for casting similar undecorated collars and potentially, these would be a closer analogy to those from TRONDENES and TENNEVIK than the Swedish specimens (Pl.55).

3.6.2. Neck rings

The wendel ring is a distinctive form with a flanged bar twisted variously in opposite directions. They can be divided into two main types: with sharp flanges and with broad (notsharp) flanges. Both types are dated to BA VI, although rare examples of related specimens are found in BA V and the PRIA (Jensen 1997: 65pp.). There are at least 17 rings with sharp flanges; from STAV (nr. 125-27, hoard 7), AVLUND (nr. 128-30, hoard 13), SKJERDALEN (nr. 131-34, hoard 14), ERDAL (nr. 134137, hoard 15), VIKEDAL (nr.138-40, hoard 21), and Vge (nr.141). There are 7 rings with broad flanges; from GYL (nr. 142-43, hoard 8), VRE (nr. 144-45, hoard 23), Rennstein (nr. 146) and a fragment from Salte (nr. 147). In addition, Lange reported one more ring of this type, from Buene (nr. 148). These are all characteristic and a very homogenous group dated to BA VI. Two neck rings from STAV (nr. 149, hoard 7) and GYL (nr. 150, hoard 8) belong to a small collective of flat, undecorated neck rings. These are known in 21 specimens from 17 findings, and belong to BA VI (Baudou 1960: 243). Two neck rings have uniform twists (i.e. twisted in a single direction), large oval discs and spiral-terminations, from Stle (nr. 151) and GUNNESYAN (nr. 152, hoard 6).

57 The Stle ring is complete, while the specimen from GUNNESYAN is broken and lacks both ovals, but the large spirals leave little doubt of its typological status. These belong to Jensen's type C 3 dated to BA VI (1997: 62p.). From GYL (nr. 153, hoard 6) comes a unique neck ring with uniform twist and a separate lock-piece. I have not been able to locate parallels to this ring. Finally, there is a neck ring with oval discs, a so-called Jutish ring, from Brudal (nr. 154). This type is known in 18 specimens from 15 findings, three from the Danish Islands (Fredriksborg, Maribo and Svendborg C.), the rest from Northern Jutland (ibid: 61). The rhomboid cross-section on the Brudal ring is paralleled in only a single Danish ring from Viborg C., and moreover on related specimens in Central Germany (ibid: 61p., catalog 4:174). These are rarely found in combination with other types, but two hoards suggest a BA VI date (one of them include a wendel ring) (ibid: 61).

3.7. Belt plates and tutuli

There are 9 belt plates altogether. Six of them are decorated with running spirals arranged in concentric zones: with three zones from VIGRESTAD (nr. 155, bur. 92) and REGE I (nr. 156, bur. 55), with two zones from SRHEIM (nr. 157, bur. 77), ORRE (nr. 158, bur. 78), and TJTTA (nr. 159, bur. 82), and with a single spiral zone from VIGRESTAD (nr.160, bur. 92). These are of Kerstens form B1 (single spiral zone), B2 (with two zones) and B3 (with three zones). Kersten listed 11 BA II and 2 BA III assemblages with B1 plates; 16 BA II and 2 BA III assemblages with B2 plates, and 11 BA II and 2 BA III assemblages with B3 plates. By this Kersten refused Mllers arguments of these being diagnostic BA II types (1935: 13). As will be shown below, this is a crucial point in our case (cf. chapt. 3.12). The smaller single zone plate from Vigrestad was most likely used as tutulus rather than as belt plate. The plates from RYKKJA I (nr. 161, bur. 20) and GJRV (nr. 162, bur. 4) have been a source of controversy. Bjrn considered them as undecorated tutuli from the very end of the Bronze Age. The original catalogue described the Gjrv plate as decorated, and Gaustad later confirmed that it carried a decoration of concentric circles and running arches (Bogenreihe) (Kersten 1935; form A2, taf. VIII:3; Gaustad 1965). It thus belongs to Kersten's form A2 dated to BA II (based on a single assemblage) (1935: 11). The plate from RYKKJA I is only 7.5 cm in diameter and it might in fact be considered as a tutulus along with nr. 160 from Vigrestad. Concerning decoration, it is possible to recognize only a single

58 line around its circumference and a second line around the low, insignificant central boss (Gaustad 1965: 64). The belt plate from KLEPPE II (nr.163, bur. 70) is decorated with raised circular bowls (herausgedrckten Buckeln), arranged in five concentric zones around a long, conical central boss with a raised collar at its base. Plates decorated in this technique (repouse-like) are rare in the Nordic Zone, and Lomborg considered them to be imported from Northern Germany (1969a: 131, 139). None of the plates in Schleswig-Holstein or in the Lneburg area seems to combine such a large diameter, long boss and the complexity of repouss ornaments in a comparable way (cf. AK IV-V, XVII-XIX; Laux 1971). I propose that the Kleppe plate design is a mix of elements characteristic to Northern Zealand and the Lneburg area (cf. chapt. 3.12). There are altogether 16 tutuli from the area. Three specimens are rather flat, with rather low central bosses: from POLLESTAD (nr. 164, bur. 81), one of the tutuli from NESE (nr. 165, bur. 67), and a heavily corroded specimen from HANANGER I (nr. 166, bur. 95). These come close to Kerstens early form A2, which he dated through 26 assemblages to BA II, and through 1 assemblage to BA III (1935: 15p.). The tutulus from N-BRAUT (nr. 167, bur. 71) is close to the one from NESE (nr. 165) but has a somewhat longer boss. The tutulus from REGE I (nr. 168, bur. 55) has a long, ribbed central boss, and more of a funnel-shape. The second tutulus from VIGRESTAD (nr. 169, bur. 92) also have marked ribs or grooves and a funnel-shape. These seem related to Kerstens forms A3-4, which he dated to BA II and possibly BA III (he knew only 2 datable assemblages; 1935: 16). The tutuli from T-H X (nr. 170, bur. 14) and Jren (nr. 171) are raised into wide funnel-shapes and do not conform well to any of Kerstens forms. The funnel-shape points to forms A5-6 of BA III (ibid: 16p.). There are furthermore five small tutuli with characteristic funnel-shapes: from S-BRAUT (nr. 172, bur. 72), the second tutulus from NESE (nr. 173, bur. 67), from VASSHUS (nr. 174, bur. 61), TJTTA (nr. 175, bur. 82), and BORE I (nr. 176, bur. 63). I have not been able to locate the tutulus from BORE I, but I rely on Aakviks classification as being similar to the above (nr. 172-175; cf. Aakvik 2000: 56p.). Finally, two specimens have bosses that terminate in small discs, from ERGA (nr. 177, bur. 79) and VERE (nr. 178, bur. 98). The added disc at the end of the boss is a diagnostic feature of BA III (Kersten 1935: 16p.). It is crucial to note that belt plates and tutuli are weak chronological indicators when it comes to distinguishing between early BA II, late BA II and BA III.

59

3.8. Single edged blades: razors, knives and sickles

There are five razors with more or less naturalistic horse-head terminations; from SOLA I (nr. 179, bur. 50), T-H VI (nr. 180, bur. 10), SKJEGGESNES (nr. 181, bur. 2), T-H VIII (nr.182, bur. 12) and GUNNARSHAUG I (nr. 183, bur. 38). A straight broad blade, a large, naturalistic horse-head on a thick neck and rich decoration are considered early features (BA II) (Kersten 1935: form D2, 87p.; Rnne 1987: Fig. 50-51). Curved narrow blades and smaller, less naturalistic heads are considered late features (BA III) (Kersten 1935: form D3, 88). The largest and more naturalistic heads are found on SKJEGGESNES, TH VI and SOLA, while those from T-H VIII and GUNNARSHAUG I are more stylized. All exept GUNNARSHAUG I are decorated. It is thus possible to discern late features on all specimens, and on the razor from GUNNARSHAUG I in particular. Accordingly, all five specimens point to BA III. From HYSSTAD (nr. 184, bur. 29) comes a razor with horse-head stylized into a trumpet, a distinct type dated to BA IV through 18 assemblages (Baudou 1960: 31). A Nordic style razor with missing termination was reported from Leirbekken (nr. 185). The razor was lost, but the finder provided a drawing of a razor with narrow blade and a termination bending forward (Simonsen 1963: 257; Gaustad 1965: nr 140). Simonsen proposed that it was of the same type as the one from HYSSTAD (1963:257), but it seems also to be quite similar to the one from GUNNARSHAUG I. Hence, I suspect that the blade from Leirbekken was actually a horse-headed razor of either BA III or BA IV type. The razor from GRINDHEIM (nr. 186, bur. 33) is a broad bladed razor terminating in a simple backward-coiled spiral. This feature makes it part of a small collective of 12 specimens, 5 of them from assemblages dated to BA IV. These are known from lborg, Viborg, Randers, Holbk, Kbenhavn and Odense C. (Baudou 1960: 33, type B1c). Six more razors are clearly of LBA types with broad blades, but they all lack the terminations. The razor from SOLA V (nr. 187, bur. 54) has either a zurckgebogenem Vogelkopf or a double-curved spiral-head; the one from SOLA IV (nr. 188, bur. 53) carries ornamentation, and the one from REGE II (nr. 189, bur. 56) has a blade with an up-turned end. None of these features give more than a general BA IV-V date, which goes for the specimens from VESPESTAD (nr. 190, bur. 31) and STORASUND (nr. 191, bur. 35) as well (cf. ibid: 29pp.). The final razor from B II (nr. 192, bur. 90) is lost and the description in the catalogue indicates a razor with asymmetric blade typical of BA IV-V.

60 There are 8 frame-hafted knives: from STORESUND I (nr. 193, bur. 36), SOLA III (nr. 194, bur. 52), SKREN (nr. 195, bur. 3), KLEPPE I (nr. 196, bur. 69), KJRREFJORD (nr. 197, bur. 101), RYEN (nr. 198, bur. 107) and DROMNES (nr. 199, bur. 23). These seem all to be of the conventional BA III type (Kersten 1935: form C3, 86), although the ones from STORESUND I in particular, but also RYEN and KJRREFJORD, have late features that might point to BA IV. The eighth specimen from Jren (nr. 200) is a knife of a different type with an oval frame. It is incomplete and might actually be a dagger, suggested by its symmetric haft-bow. Comparable knives are dated to BA III (cf. AK IV: 2440B, XI: 5051). There are two bronze-hilted knives; from T-H IV (nr. 201, bur. 8) and ANDA IV (nr. 202, bur. 76). With their small rhomboid pommels these are closely related to the dagger from NORDHUGLO (nr. 237, bur. 30, cf. below). They are of Kerstens form A2 and dated to BA III (Kersten 1935: 84). Two small tanged knives, from SOLA II (nr. 203, bur. 51) and SKADBERG (nr. 204, bur. 94), correspond to BA III knives listed by Kersten and Broholm (Kersten 1935: form B 2, 85, Taf. XXXVII, 108; Broholm 1944: 156, Pl. 29). A knife from TJORA (nr. 205, bur. 49) has a blade with a double-curve pointing to BA IV-V (cf. Broholm 1949: Pl.6 and 17). A knife with perforated tang from Nyheim (nr. 206) corresponds to a type common in BA IV (Broholm 1949: 38, Pl. 6.7). I also include a reported finding from Leirbukt (nr. 207). According to Gjessing who received the report, it was a bronze knife with a somewhat curved blade, and in the haft-end was a complete, small animal-figurine, - not just the head of the animal (1942: 257, my translation). Only 5 such figurine-hilted knives are known, three of them from the SeimaTurbino burial grounds at Seima, Turbino and Rostovka in Russia (Pl.60; Parzinger 1997: 230, abb.4, typ Seima-Turbino). In light of the moulds from JARFJORD (M 6-7, hoard 1, see below), I believe this is valuable information to keep in mind. There are also fragments of knife blades from BRINGSJORD (nr. 208, bur. 105), SKREN (nr. 209, bur. 3), MYR (nr. 210, bur. 17), T-H I (nr. 211, bur. 5), T-H V (nr. 212, bur. 9) and Vevelstad (nr. 213). These carry few if any diagnostic features. The sickle blade from SVENES (nr. 214, hoard 17) corresponds to Broholms type B with round boss, dated to BA II-III (Broholm 1944: 176). Finally, there are what seem to be two fragments of smaller sickles with a simpler, triangular cross-section, from HOLEN II (nr. 215, bur. 86) and RSLAND (nr. 216, bur. 91). These are most likely

61 Rckenzapfensicheln, a type known in c. 470 specimens, as well as from 15 moulds. The large majority of assemblages date them to BA IV, fewer to BA V (Baudou 1960: 47).

3.9. Double edged blades: swords, daggers and projectiles

Double edged blades are categorised by length and outline, but in particular by their crosssections, their haft-sections and accessories such as metal hilts or loose pommels. Complete or partial metal-hilts carry detailed information and are given priority in the presentation below.

3.9.1 Blades with complete or partial bronze hilts

The sword from BLINDHEIM (nr. 217, hoard 10) has a narrow ogival blade and a distinct socketed hilt with two rivets and four fake rivet-heads in between. Three types of socketed hilts have been discerned: an initial, mainly Italian type used on triangular blades; a second horizon with trapezoid rivet-section and short, ogival blades; and a third horizon with broader hilts on both short and long ogival blades (Engedal 2005). The Blindheim sword can be included in the third group, along with the specimens from Roum, Jutland and Rastorf and Nebra, Northern Germany (ibid; Meller 2002). The assemblages from Rastorf, Nebra as well as the possible hoard from BLINDHEIM all indicate a BA I date (cf. also chapter 10.2.2). The sword from Madla (nr. 218) is an octagon-hilted sword. Von Quillfeldt designates this sword as type Erback, variant Vggerlse Kirke, mainly because of the weak traces of rows of S-patterns on the hilt. It is thus part of an exclusive group of 6 swords: Vggerlse Kirke (AK III: 1616), Voldtofte (AK III: 1754), Limfjord, Denmark and Fldje, Sweden (1995: 65, Taf.115). The fragmented razor found with the sword from Vggerlse Kirke supports the conventional date of octagon-hilted swords in general to BA II (ibid: 80). The sword from Eia (nr. 219) is a Dreiwulstschwert, with three wide horizontal ribs on its hilt. Von Quillfeldt designates it as type Illertissen, numbering a total of 14 specimens. Except for the Eia sword, these are distributed in Southern Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Rumania and Poland, and date to the transition from early to late Urnfield (ibid: 162, 165, Taf 124 A). This transition corresponds to the transition from Ha A1 to Ha A2, and from Nordic BA III to BA IV (Randsborg 1972: fig. 17). Interestingly, the best parallels to the Eia sword come from the area of Milicz, Woj. Wroclav, Poland (in the central Oder area), and Konojady, Woj. Torun, Poland (in the lower Vistula area).

62 From Nrland (nr. 220) comes a loose pommel, pointed oval in outline and decorated with running arches. These features place it either in the Valsmagle horizon at the end of BA I or in the so-called Lve-horizon at the very beginning of BA II (cf. Randsborg 2006: 94pp.). The pommels from Strandved and Risskov, both from Svendborg C. are good parallels (AK III: 2144C, 2174, cf. Randsborg 2006: 94p.). The dagger from HOGNESTAD (nr. 221, bur. 87) has a broad ogival blade and a lenticular pommel with 10 running spirals. The pommel has also a distinct tang for mounting on a wooden hilt. This tang makes the Hognestad pommel member of a small collective of 6 pommels from Northern Germany and Southern Jutland, dated to BA II and perhaps early BA II (cf. below and App. V.2). The dagger from B (nr. 222, bur. 88) has a distinct waisted hilt with octagonal cross-section, straight transition to blade and a rounded pommel with running spirals. The hilt is extraordinary with its straight transition to the blade, its waisted mid-section and its rich decoration of wolf-tooth patterns. This dagger has for long been considered an anomaly and a likely result of local production (Mllerop 1963: 12; Johansen 2000: 110). An almost identical dagger, although with less decoration, comes from Albertsdorf burial C, in Ditmarschen C., Schleswig-Holstein (AK XVII: 9005C). It was associated with a roundheaded brooch and a lenticular ferrule, and both place the Albertsdorf dagger and thus the B dagger in early BA II (Pl. 56). The dagger from Pollestad (nr. 223) has a round pommel, and the dagger from HOLEN I (nr. 224, bur. 85) a rounded-oval pommel, and both are decorated with running spirals. These features are indicative of BA II (Ottenjann 1969: 12pp.). dagger, but it carries few diagnostic traits. The blade from VIK (nr. 226, bur. 80) is heavily corroded and fragmented but has the upper section of a bronze hilt preserved. The pommel relates to Ottenjanns broad-pointedoval (type C, broad variant) and rounded-rhomboid (type D) types, with both fake spirals (Pseudo-Spiralen) and grooves around its circumference in inlay-technique (Inkrustationstechnik) (ibid: 18p.). These pommels seem to be dated safely to BA II. The haft with grooves and spirals running horizontal, also in inlay-technique, relates to Ottenjanns type M4. He listed 8 specimens, of which those from Klelund, Ribe C. (AK VIII: 3945), Farre, rhus C., Egeslevmagle, Sor C., Denmark and Stade, Stade C. (Northern Germany) are close to the Vik hilt (ibid: 57, nr. 310-11, 313-14, 319). None of A round, undecorated pommel with convex top, from Sola (nr. 225) might very well stem from an EBA

63 these came from datable assemblages, and the date of the Vik sword has to rely on its general similarity to swords conventionally dated to BA II (cf. Ottenjann 1969: 59pp.). The sword from T-H I (nr. 227, bur. 5) has a blade with four rivets and a pommel, and the sword from HODNE I (nr. 228, bur. 65) has a complete haft. Both pommels relate to Ottenjanns broad-pointed-oval (type C, broad variant) and rounded-rhomboid (type D) types, with both spirals (Pseudo-Spiralen) and grooves around its circumference in inlaytechnique (Inkrustationstechnik) (cf. ibid: 18p.). On both swords the bundles of lines on the blade seem to end in the lowest pair of rivets. This is typical of Ottenjanns BA II types, while on his BA III types the line-bundles turn towards the edges before they reach the rivet. It is not clear to what degree this can be used a strict boundary between BA II and III. The combination of both vertical and horizontal grooves on the haft, typical of BA III swords, combined with line-bundles ending on the lower rivets, is paralleled on a dagger from Skyum, Thisted C. This was found in combination with BA II types such as hourglass shaped brooch, flat tutulus and lenticular ferrule (AK XI: 4993B). Both the sword from TH-I and HODNE I are thus potentially from late BA II, or at least early BA III. The riveted dagger from SOLA I (nr. 229, bur. 50) has a pommel with a rather strict rhomboid form, decorated with concentric circles and wolf-tooth patterns. This does not correspond to any of Ottenjanns types. The line-bundles on the blade end in the lower rivet-holes, typical of BA II blades. Six swords and three daggers are readily ascribed to BA III. The swords from JSUND (nr. 230, bur. 48) and MEBERG (nr. 231, bur. 102) both relate to Ottenjanns type B hafts. Type B swords are clustered in Northwest Jutland, and the groove at the side of the pommel on the Meberg sword has a single parallel on a sword from Harring, Thisted C. (Ottenjann 1969: nr. 439, Karte 30). The sword from REHEIA I (nr. 232, bur. 40) has a lamellar hilt of Ottenjanns type F2, with pommel of variant b. These are also clustered in Northwest Jutland (Ottenjann 1969: Karte 33, 36). The size of the pommel is larger than the Danish specimens, and resembles the one on the sword from Peckatel, Mecklenburg (ibid: 493). In only a single case, a sword not included by Ottenjann from Stagstrup, Thisted C., is a lamellar hilt of Ottenjanns type F2 combined with an open lower haft (AK XI: 5019D, possibly also 5332). Interestingly, the open haft is also seen on the bronze-hilted dagger from T-H II (nr. 233, bur. 6). This is of Ottenjanns type C1, with pommel of variant c, and has a close parallel in the sword from Lyrskovhede, Ribe C. (ibid: nr. 431).

64 A tanged sword with bronze guard and pommel of Ottenjanns variant b, from RIMBAREID (nr. 234, bur. 28); a tanged sword with pommel from REHEIA III (decoration not known, nr. 235, bur. 42); and a riveted sword with pommel of Ottenjanns variant c, from SOLA II (nr. 236, bur. 51); are all securely dated to BA III. Interestingly, the bronze guard on the Rimbareid sword is a rare feature and demonstrates along with the specimens from REHEIA I and T-H II, the use of open lower hafts. The bronze-hilted dagger from NORDHUGLO (nr. 237, bur. 30) is closely related to the bronze hilted knives such as the specimens from T-H IV (nr. 201, bur. 8) and ANDA IV (nr. 202, bur. 76), and belong most likely in BA III.

3.9.2 Flange and tongue-hilted blades

There are two flange-hilted swords of the conventional BA III type, from T-H VIII (nr. 238, bur. 12) and Hyland (nr. 239). The flange-hilted blade from STORESUND I (nr. 240, bur. 36) is somewhat atypical with a total length of no more than 35cm. The flange-hilted blade from Vinje (nr. 241) has a more typical haft-form, but is unusual with its row of six rivets along the mid-section of the haft and its short lenght. Sprockhoff considered more than three rivets in this section to be characteristic of later swords in Central Europe. He listed only three specimens with 6 rivets: Store Lyngby, Hjrring C., Bremen, Hannover and Pribbernow, Pommern (Sprockoff 1931: 40p; App. IV, Taf. 17.1, 18.1; cf. also Randsborg 1972: 11pp). This impression is confirmed by more recent studies of flange-hilted swords: Schauer lists no specimens with six rivets from Southern Germany, and only two with five rivets (1971: nr. 464,467); Peroni includes one from Italy (1970: nr.182); and Kemenczei includes one from Hungary (1988: nr. 393). There seems to be a clear tendency that 5 rivets are more common on later swords. It seems quite reasonable to link the Vinje sword to the few northern specimens with six rivets, and consider it as a feature of BA IV-V. Three more unusual blades have tendencies for flanged hilts, from GUNNARSHAUG I (nr. 242, bur. 38), GUNNARSHAUG II (nr. 243, bur.39), and from HODNE II (nr. 244, bur. 66). These carry few other diagnostic features, and it is difficult to find parallels for them. This might be an indication of the local production of variants of flange-hilted short swords and daggers in BA IV in Rogaland C. There are two tongue-hilted blades. The sword from Lekve (nr. 245) has been classified as an imported Central European type Mindelheim sword (Jensen 1997: 86). It is thus part of an exclusive collective numbering 9 specimen in Scandinavia. These are securely dated through the hoards from Hassle and Holbk Slots Ladegrd to BA VI (Jensen

65 1997: 85pp., 320p). The sword from Vg (nr. 246) is considered to be part of a group of swords strongly influenced by Central European Gndlingen type swords, but made within the Nordic zone. This is particularly clear in the case of Vg since it carries rich decoration in the characteristic Nordic BA V-style (Jensen 1997: 85). Jensen argues that the Gndlingen type is earlier than the Mindelheim type, and that they belong to an early phase of the Hallstatt-period, i.e. the transition Ha B3 and Ha C1 (HaC0, Gndlingen transition-phase), corresponding to the final century of the Nordic BA V (ibid: 17, fig. 3). This would enable the Nordic production of a Gndelheim type sword with BA V style decoration, as seen in the case of the Vg sword, as well as the combination of an imported Central European Gndelheim type sword and a BA V type tanged dagger at Rsunda, Uppsala C. in Sweden (ibid: 85).

3.9.3 Tanged blades

Tanged blades were popular from BA II through BA V, and there are few clear chronological indicators. The most important such indicators are outline and complexity of cross-section, but even these are vague. There are four tanged blades with complex cross-section: a sword from SndreHolme (nr. 247), a sword from Vanvik (nr. 248), a dagger from ANDA III (nr. 249, bur. 75), and a fragmented sword from SKEIE (nr. 250, bur. 34). The complexity relates to the rounded mid-ribs flanked by single or bundles of ribs or grooves. Although somewhat unusual in its haft-section, the sword from Sndre-Holme is clearly a BA II-III sword. It has four rivets and a short tang with a fifth rivet. The line-bundles on the blade end at the lower rivets, possibly indicating BA II. The sword from Vanvik is also unusual. The sharp shoulders are considered a late feature (BA V) while the low central rib flanked by narrow single ribs points rather towards BA IV. The dagger from ANDA III has an ogival blade, long tang and waisted transition between tang and shoulders, pointing towards BA III-IV. The fragmented sword from SKEIE has also an ogival outline and complex cross-section, clearly more typical of BA II-III, but a BA IV date can not be ruled out. There are 10 tanged blades with a simple ridged cross-section. The sword from FRIESTAD (nr. 251, bur. 68) combines tang with rivets and an ogival outline, features that are rare in the LBA. A comparable blade can be sited from Skyum, Thisted C., equipped with a decorative rib and a BA III pommel (AK XI: 4993A). The blades from Slottsvik (M 2 A-B), and Bore (nr. 252) might best be placed in BA IV because of their straight relatively broad blades, long tangs and rounded shoulders. The blades from

66 Ulstein (nr. 253), Sandnesenget (nr. 254), Tomsvik (nr. 255), Lista Fyr (nr. 256), Haugesund (nr. 257), and Aursjen (nr. 258) are best placed in BA V because of their narrow blades, shorter tangs and pointed shoulders (Baudou 1960: 10p.). Two small blades, from VEST-HASSEL (nr. 259, bur. 99) and SOLA V (nr. 260, bur. 54) were included by Baudou as small, undecorated lancets. These are common in BA IV, but present also in BA V (ibid: 15, nr. 100 and 409). A group of blades from the northern parts of Norway deserves somewhat closer examination since they have been given only superficial treatment in earlier accounts. The copper blade from Karlebotn (nr. 261) has a lenticular cross-section and a perforated tang. It was found in a house type Gressbakken, and the context and the more reliable radiocarbon sample (birch from fireplace, App. VII.26) suggest a date between 2000-1400 BC, (Schanche 1986; 1989). A smaller copper blade from Pitsusmurust (nr. 262) has a perforation in the blade. This might indicate that the Karlebotn blade is a harpoon-spear, rather than a dagger, and that these two specimens are in some way related to the perforated slate harpoons (cf. chapt. 2.5). They may also be related to 6 small blades with long, thin and pointed tangs, from Skotnes (nr. 263), Lebesby (nr. 264), GJEITE (nr. 265, bur. 18), Bogen (nr. 266), Kvesmesnes (nr. 267) and Bentsjord (nr. 268). Since their morphology resembles that of Iron Age arrowheads, these projectiles have been treated with some scepticism (Gjessing 1942: 254; Gaustad 1965: 25p.). The Skotnes specimen, with two decorative lines flanking the central ridge, has been interpreted as a reworked Nordic-style dagger from the EBA (Gjessing 1942: 254). Four of them, Skotnes, Geite, Bogen and Kvesmesnes, were all described as made of copper. Those from Lebesby, Geite and Bogen were also described as being hammered. A related specimen from Tierp, Uppsala C. was described as being of very primitive character, and one from Billsta, Vsternorrland C. with a somewhat different design, as a copper-harpoon (Ekholm 1921: fig. 10; Old 2915). The Lebesby blade was discovered in a house-ground later excavated by Gjessing. The excavation brought to light: 2 bifacial quartzite projectiles with straight base; 1 certain and one possible slate point of Sundery type made from red slate; more than 40 sherds of asbestos-tempered pottery decorated with rhomboid patterns; as well as much debris of slate, quartz, quartzite, flint and pumice (Gjessing 1942: 256). Gaustad and Bakka later argued that the blade was best linked to artefacts from the medieval period from the same site (Gaustad 1965: 25p., Bakka 1976: 21). The context of the Geite specimen is also interesting. According to its finder it was discovered in a large coffin 2m long and 1.5m wide, along with bones and pot-

67 sherds. Such large coffins are unusual from the Bronze and Iron Ages. A Late Neolithic collective coffin would be more in line with these measurements, as well as in line with the context of the Lebesby specimen. Copper arrowheads are found on the Kola Peninsula in the LN and Early Metal Age (Gurina 1987: 43; Huggert 1996: 72). I thus propose that the above northern blades are all projectiles from the Bronze Age, and that the perforated specimens are to be seen in light of the perforated slate points further south. The moulds from JARFJORD (M 6-7, hoard 1), and Vektarlia (M 8) are for blades with simple, un-ridged cross-sections and short, broad tangs. Particularly the largest Jarfjord blade has a diagnostic tang of a specific Seima type dagger found on the cemeteries of Seima, Turbino I-II, and Rostovka (Chernykh 1992: fig. 73.7,8; 74.9-12; 75.1). Metal hilts are often attached to large specimens, and the 34.5 and 20 cm blades cast in the Jarfjord moulds places them alongside the long Seima blades most often equipped with a bronze hilt (ibid: fig. 73.17). One of the moulds from Kolvika (M 10) is said to be similar to the smaller mould from JARFJORD. Most researchers have placed the main burials of the SeimaTurbino to the mid-second millennium 1600-1400 BC, while dates as late as 1100-700 BC have been suggested by a few (ibid: 217; Parzinger 1997). Recently arguments for an earlier date, 2000-1700 BC have been presented. Few relevant radiocarbon dates exists, and those that have been presented suggest that the Seima industry arose at least before 1700 BC in the Altai foothills (Koryakova & Epimakov 2007: 108p).

3.9.4 Riveted blades

Riveted blades seem to have been a feature mainly of the EBA, but there are few diagnostic features that separate BA II from BA III. The sword blade from LISTA (nr. 269, hoard 25) has an ogival outline, simple crosssection and six holes for rivets. It has traditionally been considered as a Sgel type blade from BA I (cf. Johansen 1986: 30p.). The blade seems at least related to the Sgel type blade, but since there are no rivets preserved this is in fact inconclusive (Hachmann 1957: 30pp.). The sword from ANDA I (nr. 270, bur. 73) have line-bundles ending at the lower rivets, possibly indicating a BA II date. The swords from Svoll (nr. 271) and Haugesund (nr. 272) have somewhat more complex cross-sections, but can hardly be given a narrower time frame than BA II-III (IV). From ri (nr. 273) comes a relatively long and slender dagger blade with two rivet holes, and a preserved rivet with separate rivet-heads (Ringniete). This blade has traditionally been placed in BA I, although it does not belong to a

68 clearly defined type (Bjrn 1936: 8; Mandt 1991: 401; Aakvik 2000: 40). The dagger from Stjernary (nr. 274) might also to be an early variant with broad haft and a narrow, waisted blade. The daggers from Eggesben (nr. 275) and LUNDE II (nr. 276, bur. 106) are very small blades, flat with trapezoid haft-ends and two rivets. Similar daggers are known from female burials within the Sgel zone, but they belong most likely to an early part of BA II rather than BA I (Hackmann 1957: 55pp.; cf. also Johansen 1986: 43p.). The dagger from REGE I (nr. 277, bur. 55) has lines that ends in the lower rivets, indicating BA II according to Ottenjann (cf. above). The remaining daggers are difficult to give more than a general BA II-III date: from UTNE (nr. 278, bur. 27) and Lura (nr. 279), the two similar specimens from T-H III (nr. 280, bur. 7) and SOLA I (nr. 281, bur. 50), and those from T-H-VII (nr. 283, bur. 11), MYR (nr. 284, bur. 17), N-SUNDE (nr. 285, bur. 45), and SRHEIM (nr. 286-7, bur. 32).

3.9.5 Blade fragments

Fragmented blades without haft-sections are relatively uninformative. The fragmented sword blades with complex cross-section from GRUDA (nr.288, bur. 62), Madland (nr. 289), Revheim (nr. 290), Olset (M 1) and Hogstad (nr. 291), are probably from BA II-III. Blade fragments with simple ridged cross-sections from MADLA (nr. 292, bur. 46), Brastadvatnet (nr. 293), RE (nr. 294, bur. 84), Undheim (nr. 295), Engvik (M 3), Ullensvang (M 4), and Skrivarhellaren (M 5) are difficult to date (cf. chapt. 5.6.3 for Skrivarhellaren).

3.10. Spearheads
There are a total of 36 spearheads and one mould for casting spearheads from the area under study. There is an inherent difficulty in classifying spearheads since they are throughout the Bronze Age of the same basic morphology: a double edged blade on a socket. JacobFriesens study from 1967 is the basic study of Nordic Bronze Age spearheads. Gaustad argued that the spearhead from Hol (nr. 296) had a cross-section with flat blade, characteristic of the earliest spearheads. It is thus to be considered a spearhead of type Bagterp dated to BA I (Gaustad 1965: 19p.; cf. Jacob-Friesen 1967: 90pp.). The spearheads from Vigrestad (nr. 297) and Kaldafjell (nr. 298) are both decorated and conform to Jacob-Friesens type Smrumovre. The Vigrestad spear has its closest parallels between River Eider and Elbe estuary (Jacob-Friesen 1967: Taf. 51.2-3, 49.7), in Northern Zealand (ibid: Taf. 40.7-10, 42.8-9) and from Denmark (ibid: Taf. 42.7). There is

69 moreover a peculiar group of three small fragmented spearheads with distinctive rhomboid cross-section on the upper section, all located in Rogaland C. These are the spearheads from Smme (nr. 299), Haugvaldstad (nr. 300) and Fosse (nr. 301). The rhomboid cross-section is rarely seen on the Bagterp type, and unknown on the Ullerslev type and most LBA types. Rhomboid sockets seem to be a rather common feature on types Valsmagle and Smrumovre (the distinction made between types Valsmagle and Smrumovre by JacobFriesen seems rather unclear in this respect). Although the decorated spearheads from Vigrestad and Kaldafjell did not have such rhomboid cross-sections, several specimens with a comparable decoration combined with a rhomboid cross-section can be listed (cf. JacobFriesen 1967: Taf. 29.7, 34.2, 34.3, 35.7-8, 36.5, 38.2). These seem to bridge the gap between Kaldafjell and Vigrestad on the one hand, and Smme, Fosse and Haugvaldstad on the other, and I tentatively classify also the latter as type Smrumovre. Smrumovre type spearheads are particularly common in Northern Germany (Lneburg, and SchleswigHolstein) and Northern Zealand. This type have features in common with type Valsmagle of late BA I, but is also found in combination with type Ullerslev spearheads, and is dated to both early and late BA II (ibid: 136, Karte 2). It should be noted that fragmented spearheads such as these have little typo-chronological value. The spearheads from SRNESJE (nr. 302, bur. 24), Utvik (nr. 303), SVENES (nr. 304-316, hoard 17; originally more than 20 specimens), and Fiskvik (nr. 317) are of JacobFriesens Ullerslev type and belong in BA II (ibid: 146pp.). Jacob-Friesen claimed that the long fragment from Orre (nr. 318) showed post-Ullerslev features (type Gundeslev at the earliest), i.e. a convex shape at the lower part of the edges. I find no such features, and I consider the fragment as stemming from a type Ullerslev spear, originally at least 38 cm long. The spearheads from Hiksdal (nr. 319), Nestb (nr. 320), Orre (nr. 321) and Skeime (nr. 322) correspond to Jacob-Friesens type Hulterstad. This type seems to be exclusive to BA III (ibid: 160pp.). The spearheads from Tjelflt (nr. 323), Selevatnet (nr. 324) and GUNNESYAN (nr. 325, hoard 6) are distinguished through their decorative horizontal lines on the side of the sockets. They belong to a small group of spearheads from Oskarshamn, Bjrnhofda and land from Kalmar C. and one from Zealand with similar decoration. The rest of the artefacts in the hoards from Oskarshamn and GUNNESYAN provide a clear BA VI date for these spearheads (Gaustad 1965: 23; Jacob-Friesen 1967: 277, Taf. 1-7).

70 The extremely large spearhead from Hoddy (nr. 326) is decorated in a distinctive BA V style (konzentrischen Halbkreis- und Manderverzierungen). Jacob-Friesen found no clear parallels to the distinctive ribs on its socket, except for spearheads in Switzerland, but he also pointed at similar ribs on the ceremonial socketed artefact from Svartarp in Vstergtland. He saw the rather unique spearhead from Hoddy, not as a Continental import, but as the result of a late Nordic production, along with the decorated blades from Vg (nr. 246, cf. above) and Sknsmoen, Medelpad C., Sweden (1967: 272). The spearhead from ygarden (nr. 327) has been classified both as an EBA type and as a LBA Phalbau type (cf. Baudou 1960; Gaustad: 1965: 21). Gaustad argued that it has a partly hollow-cast blade, which is clearly a LBA-feature, but that it holds none of the criteria for the Phalbau type (1965: 21). The spearheads from Giskeydgarden (nr. 328) and Reve (nr. 329) may be added to this problem. None of the latter has been examined, i.e. whether they have hollow-cast blades. The same basic shape is also found in the extraordinary soapstone mould from Gullvika (M 12). Only one more stone mould for socketed spearheads is known from the Nordic zone, from sterby, stergtland C. (Old. 2264). Oldeberg first considered it to be from the LBA, but in a later work he saw it as a mould for Bagterp type spearheads from BA I (Oldeberg 1943: b.II, Pl. IX, fig. 288; 1974: 290, nr. 2264). There is clearly a danger of confusing spearheads from BA I with spearheads from BA V-VI. The cross-section of the Gullvika mould does not give clear indications of LBA nor EBA. If we choose a BA I date, this would make this the earliest known soapstone moulds in the Nordic Zone. In light of the early date of the nearby Vektarlia mould of Seima type (cf. above, M 8), this is certainly an interresting scenario. Still, I find a late date more likely, and relate them to the popularity of spearheads in the northwest in BA V-VI (cf. chapter 6.8, 6.9). I thus consider the spearheads from ygarden, Giskeydgarden, Reve and the mould from Gullvik as being of the same type, dated to BA V-VI. The spearhead from Snsa (nr. 330) and a partly fragmented specimen from Jamkre (nr. 331), with insignificant blades relative to their sockets, seem best dated to BA V-VI (cf. the collar on the Snsa spearhead). The fragmented spearhead from Srheim (nr. 332) carries one very significant diagnostic feature: it has lenticular perforations through the blade on each side of the socket. This is in line with typological traditions in eastern Ukraine and the Don-basin from the Post-Seima horizons (cf. Chernykh 1992: Loboikovo-Zavadovka metalworking focus; Klocko 1995: types Zlatopol, Zavadovka), and it was later taken up in the Volga-Kama area

71 from the south in the Ananino horizon (Chernykh 1992: 262). Most likely, the Srheim spear should be seen in light of other links to the Volga-Kama area and the Ananino culture in particular (cf. Tallgren 1913). This present a significant challenge to my account, as there are no typological relatives between Srheim in the mountains of Luster M. in the west and Volga-Kama in the far east.

3.11. Miscellanea
48 metal artefacts and fragments can be added to the 332 artefacts within the 10 categories above. The pair of well preserved lurs from REVHEIM (nr. 333-34, hoard 24) clearly belongs to BA V, and they have their best parallels in a pair of lurs from Ulvkr, Hjrring C., Northern Jutland (Johansen 2000: 162p.; Lysdahl 1990; Jensen 2002: 458, note 47). The four-legged animal figurine from Re (nr. 335) has no anatomic features pointing to a specific animal, but the long cheeks and head resemble the horned animals from Frdal (Jensen 2002: 481p.), Vestby, Oppland C. (Johansen 2000: 238), and the heads from Svartarp, Vstra Gtaland C. from BA VI (Jacob-Friesen 1967: Taf. 181.5; Jensen 1997: nr. 7.22), rather than the horses from Trundholm and Tgaborg from the EBA (Jensen 2002: 285; Kaul 2004: 292). I am inclined to see the animal in relation to those from BA VI, and to those from the Vestby hoard from BA VI in particular. The peculiar haft from Tu (nr. 336) has no immediate parallels. The zig-zag pattern on the sides and the cross-pattern at the top both made in deep relief, probably intended for inlays, point to the EBA. Gaustad suggested that it belonged to a composite battle axe, related to the specimen from Ssdala in Sweden (Old. 542). He presented a reconstruction that combined the Tu artefact and the flanged axe from Vevang (nr. 395, cf. chapt. 4.1.5), in which the Tu artefact functioned as a neck-termination riveted on to a wooden socket (Gaustad 1966). Not entirely convinced by Gaustads reconstruction, I find it still likely that the Tu haft belongs in the EBA, and that a composite axe would be a plausible hypothesis. Rather than the Ssdala axe from BA I, I would link it to the various sockets and pommels seen on Valsmagle-Mgerkingen type axes from BA II (e.g. Old. 1584, also nr. 11, 302). The belt-hook from REVLAN (nr. 337, bur. 19) is of Kersten's form A2a with a round disc decorated with four running spirals, and with a medium-sized hook. These belong to BA II (Kersten 1935: 26). The ferrule from REHEIA III (nr. 338, bur. 42) seems to belong to the rhomboid forms B4 or C of Kersten, both dated to BA III (ibid: 71p.).

72 There are two small tubes made from bronze sheet from BORE I (nr. 339, bur. 63) and REGE I (nr. 340, bur. 55), and there are two small tubes made from coiled bronze wire from REGE I (nr. 341, bur. 55) and TJTTA (nr. 342, bur. 82). These were probably fitted at the end of the cords on a corded-skirt, but the coiled tubes might also have been used as beads on a necklace (cf. the use of spiral-tubes as beads in AK XI: 5115B). The unique ring from Tonnes (nr. 343) has been the object of dispute. Initially it was believed to be made from slate, and linked to a group of Finnish slate rings (Rygh in TVS 1911). As its true composition was acknowledged, the slate-link remained in the literature (Bjrn 1936: 4, 10; Gjessing 1942: 369p.), but was dismissed altogether by Gaustad (1965: 61pp.). No clear analogies have been located neither in slate nor in bronze. The fragmented ring with loops from STORSANDAN (nr. 344, hoard 5) might be a looped-ring (skenring) used for horse-harness, but could also be from some kind of larger, composite artefact from the final Bronze Age (cf. Bjrn 1936; Gaustad 1965: 61; Johansen 1988). It contributes little to the date and provenance of the artefacts in the hoard. There are two complete pendants made from bronze rods with square cross-section coiled into double spirals from STAV (nr. 345-46, hoard 7), as well as six fragmented specimens made from somewhat thinner wire with round cross-section from STORSANDAN (nr. 347-52, hoard 5), and one (with unknown cross-section) from VLEBRU (nr. 353, hoard 12). These nine specimens are all of the same basic type with an extra bend for suspension between the spirals (Gaustad 1965: 77p.; Johansen 1981: 77p.). The hoard from STAV clearly demonstrates that this type was present in BA VI. The fragmented spiral from MLA (nr. 354, bur. 22) might be a pendant of similar type (Gaustad 1965: 77p.). From STORSANDAN (nr. 355, hoard 5) comes also a small looped pendant of unique form. There are two small massive chisels, one complete from GUNNESYAN (nr. 356, hoard 6) and a fragment from Drpping Indre (nr. 357). From STAV (nr. 358, hoard 7) comes also a section of a chain, originally 40cm long. The spiral-pendants above might have been mounted on this chain as a necklace. From Dving (nr. 359) comes a complete awl, and possibly there is another from Urutlekri (nr. 361). From Lavik (nr. 362) comes what seems to be a miniature sword, possibly of LBA date. Parallels can be sited from Denmark (Broholm 1946: 34) but no exact matches have been found. The remaining findings (nr. 363-380) are fragments and debris with few typological characteristics. From Byberg (nr. 363) comes a small fragment of a tube or a socket, most

73 likely from a spearhead. From B II (nr. 364, bur. 90) comes a folded piece of sheet bronze, classified as a likely sheath for the razor in the same burial (cf. nr. 192). Fragments of bronze sheet were also found in LALAND (nr. 365, bur. 83) and GUNNESYAN (nr. 366, hoard 6), and gold foil was found in REHEIA IV and V (nr. 367-68, bur. 43-44). Rather uninformative fragments of bronze were also present in HANANGER III (nr. 369, bur. 97) and KJRREFJORD (nr. 370, bur. 101). The four bronze fragments from the rock-shelter Skrivarhellaren (nr. 371-374) will be given a more thorough treatment below in relation to the radiocarbon sequence of the layers on the site (cf. chapter 5.6.3) Finally, I have included the metal fragments from the Bronze Age layers of the rockshelter Ruskeneset (nr. 375), and casting debris, i.e. five lumps of copper-alloy that have congealed outside a mould: from rock-shelter Kirkhellaren (nr. 376), Lvsen (nr. 377), Karasjokk (nr. 378), Gansel (379), and Vik (nr. 380). These might be from more recent periods, but in the case of Lvsen the context and the metal-composition points to the Bronze Age.

3.12 Initial results: re-assessing the trajectory of burials

I contend that previous studies of the Bronze Age in NW Scandinava have been biased in regard to the maritime (boats and the North Way), the south (Jren, Lista, Jutland), the domestic (cereal/farmland) and assymetric social relations. Central to these issues is the position of Jren and Lista with the best farmlands at the southern gate to the North Way; and at heart of these issues lie also interpretations of the monumental burials with bronze. Burials with bronze have a significant position in the interpretation of social dynamics and the social structure of the Bronze Age in general. The idea of a hierarchical, competitive Bronze Age society is intimately linked to bronze and the phenomenon of depositing bronze in relation to individuals buried in large monuments. The historical dimension of the bronzein-burial phenomenon in previous research on the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia can be summarized as follows: there are few burials from the LBA and numerous from BA II-III. Particularly the south-western areas of Lista and Jren have a rich BA II-III with bronzes in monumental burial structures, and are intimately associated with Northern Jutland. This was the result of a gradual development from the LN situation (e.g. Mllerop 1963; Hagen 1967; Magnus & Myhre 1986; Johansen 2000). In addition a shift has been discerned in Rogaland, from rich female burials in the inner parts of Jren in BA II, towards rich male burials at the coast and at Karmy in BA III (Larsen 1996; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998; 2004).

74 In the following I will attempt to give a fresh evaluation of this phenomenon in particular, but also the chronological position of the hoards, in light of a total of 107 burials with metal artefacts (App. III). The results are presented in Figs. 1-2 (cf. Map 30 for a close up view of Jren).

3.12.1 BA II early
HOLEN I (bur. 85) with its round-headed brooch is the only obvious candidate for an early BA II burial. B I (bur. 89) with the atypical bronze-hilted dagger can also be linked to this phase, through burial C at Albersdorf, Ditmarschen C. (AK XVII: 9005C). This contained a nearly identical dagger, a round-headed brooch, a ferrule and a gold finger ring (Pl.56; App. V.1). HOGNESTAD (bur. 87) had a distinctive tanged pommel, and I have listed the 6 analogue pommels and their associate findings (App. V.2). The pommels from Dybbl and Ridders closely resemble pommels of early Valsmagle and Lve types, and one of the Dybbl pommels and the pommel from Skarrild Overby also carried the characteristic pattern of running arches. This indicates an early BA II date (cf. Lomborg 1969a: 110pp.; Randsborg 2006: 94pp.). The Ridders pommel, although a loose finding from the mound, was located immediately above a burial with a round-headed brooch and a burial with a type VI flint dagger. A burial from Langvad, Thisted C. (without tang, AK XI: 5542) combines pommel decoration comparable to Hognestad with a round-headed brooch and belt plate, and demonstrates the existence of analogue decoration in early BA II. An early BA II date of HOGNESTAD is also of interest since it contained a slab with cup-marks (cf. chapt. 5.3). These three early BA II candidates are all located in the southern part of Jren, south of Lake Frylandsvatn and in the vicinity of River Hna (cf. Map 30). B I and HOGNESTAD both contained rare artefacts that have their closest parallels in the area between Elbe estuary and Kiel Bay (from now on referred to as the Elbe-Kiel Bay area). These artefacts from Jren in the north also seem to be more luxurious variants than those found in the south. It is also of interest that both HOGNESTAD and HOLEN I contained pottery, otherwise a rare feature in EBA burials in Norway.

3.12.2. BA III
The ribbed bracelet is a crucial feature of rich female burials in Rogaland. App. V.3 lists 14 assemblages outside NW Scandinavia combining narrow, ribbed bracelets analogue to those from REGE I (bur. 55), N-BRAUT (bur. 71) and VESTAD (bur. 93), with artefacts of chronological relevance. These are all burials from Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein,

75 Northern Jutland in particular, and they have all conventionally been dated to BA III (Kersten 1935; Broholm 1943, 1944; Aner & Kersten 1973pp.). This is very much at odds with the practice in Norway, where they have been given a BA II date. The consequence of dating these bracelets exclusively to BA III, is that a number of the richest female burials traditionally counted as BA II (cf. e.g. Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996) must be moved into BA III. This also clearly demonstrate a point first made by Randsborg in his argumentation for the existence of a Sub-II period: SRHEIM (bur. 77), REGE I (bur. 55) and N-BRAUT (bur. 71) combine BA II type artefacts with BA III type artefacts in a way not paralleled elsewhere in the Nordic Zone. Belt plates like the one from REGE I, and particularly simple ones like the one from SRHEIM, are often treated as diagnostic BA II elements. It is fair to mention that Kersten did not see spiral decorated belt plates as diagnostic of BA II. Kersten in fact argued that Mller was wrong when postulating the following types as diagnostic for BA II: 1) the ribbed collar with spiral decorated side panels, 2) the belt plates with 2 spiral zones, as well as 3) the large belt plates with 3-4 spiral-zones. Kersten knew of 28 finds of such neck-collars; 15 could be placed within BA II and 4 within BA III (ibid: 40). The BA III findings were located in Prst, Fredriksborg, Kbenhavn and Skne C., i.e. in eastern South-Scandinavia. He knew of 48 B2-plates: 16 were dated to BA II, and 2 were dated to BA III. The latter came from Odense and Bornholm C. He knew of 19 belt plates of B3 type, 10 from BA II and 2 from BA III. The latter two were located in Fredriksborg and Kbenhavn C. (ibid: 110). This group of BA II types in BA III assemblages primarily from Zealand provides a context for the REGE I, SRHEIM, N-BRAUT as well as for TJTTA (bur. 82). A difference though, is that the BA II-III combinations on the Danish islands are mainly hoards rather than burials. Accordingly, there is a group of 7 burials securely dated to BA III through their ribbed bracelets (broad bracelets included). There is moreover a large group of 28 burials dated to BA III through cross-shaped brooches, frame-hafted knives, metal-hilted knives, razors, rhomboid pommels and double-studs. Furthermore, there is a group of 10 burials with tutulus as the only significant chronological indicator. Among these the tutuli from ERGA (bur. 79) and VERE (bur. 98) are definitely no earlier than BA III. TJTTA (bur. 82) combines a tutulus comparable to the one from ERGA (but with broken boss) with a belt plate with two spiral-zones and, as in the case of SRHEIM, this indicates the use of even simple belt plates in BA III. The tutuli from T-H X (bur. 14), NESE (bur. 67, one of them), BORE I (bur. 63), VASSHUS (bur. 61), S-BRAUT (bur. 72) are weaker chronological

76 indicators, but all seem to be developed variants most likely from BA III. The late date of SRHEIM and TJTTA might indicate that the third burial with a belt plate with two spiral-zones from ORRE (bur. 78) is also BA III. The late date of the brooches in REGE I and SOLA I indicate that the related brooch from LUNDE (bur. 60) is also BA III. From the large group of burials with blades as the only significant chronological indicator, FRIESTAD (bur. 68) seem to be late rather than early in light of its cross-section. T-H III contained a blade similar to the one from SOLA I and might be dated through this to BA III. The above considerations make BA III a period with a significant number of burials, 48 out of a total of 107. This number might be increased to 55 by moving a range of burials with blades of BA II-III status to BA III (cf. Fig. 1).

3.12.3 BA II late
There is a limited number of candidates for a late BA II date. The most convincing are REVLAN (bur. 19), SRNESJE (bur. 24), SVANY (bur. 26) and VIK (nr. 80) (VIK could actually also be from early BA II). From the group of burials with a tutulus as the only significant chronological indicator, HANANGER I (bur. 95) and POLLESTAD (bur. 81) have tutuli of early flat types that point to BA II in general. From the group of burials with blades as the only significant chronological indicator, LUNDE II (bur. 106) in particular, but also T-H IX (bur. 13) and SRHEIM (bur. 32) contained small daggers typical of BA II (Broholm 1944: 120; Johansen 1986: 43p.). This would place the start of the T-H burialground with the TH IX to BA II. ANDA I (bur. 73) contained a riveted sword with line-bundles ending at the lower rivets, conventionally considered BA II. Locally, the latter feature is paralleled only at the swords from Sr-Holme (nr.247), HODNE I and T-H I. HODNE I contained also a twisted gold arm ring, a type that has not been discovered in BA II assemblages (cf. Broholm 1944: 229pp.). This means that line-bundles ending at the lower rivets is not a clear-cut BA II indicator. The T-H I contained also a somewhat crude cross-headed brooch as well as a socketed-axe. It should be noted that the T-H I with a socketed axe have at least early BA III features if not BA II. In light of the above considerations there are few likely late BA II candidates, 3-4 north of Sognefjord, 2-3 at Jren and 2 at Lista.

77

3.12.4 The burials from Vigrestad, Kleppe II, Gjrv and Rykkja I
The brooch from VIGRESTAD, the belt plate from KLEPPE, the spiral-pins from GJRV and RYKKJA I are anomalies on the larger Northern European scene, made by highly complex technological procedures. In this they represent significant challenges to the interpretation of the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia, and it is crucial to this study that they are not left enigmatic and unaccounted for. One way to account for the artefacts in these burials, is to group them together chronologically and see them as indicative of hybridisation between Lneburgian and Nordic forms, involving the areas of Trondheimsfjord, Jren, Zealand and the southern border-area of the Nordic Zone at the end of BA II and the transition BA II/III (cf. Pl.54). The Rykkja pin could be seen as essentially a combination of Lneburgian full-size pins (with other shapes) and Lneburgian miniature spiral-headed pins (with similar shapes). The Vigrestad brooch could be seen as an enlarged Nordic type brooch combined with elements from the hair-knot brooches (double-spiral, round vase-head and large willow-shaped bow) and disc-headed pins (cast-on feature) on the Lneburg Heide. The Gjrv pin could be seen as the Vigrestad-innovation carried out on a pin rather than a brooch. The belt plate from KLEPPE II is a combination of Lneburgian decorative patterns (repouss-bowls) with Nordic outline, morphology, and dimensions; compared to Lneburgian plates the Kleppe plate is larger, with higher boss and multiple concentric zones of bowls. Hence, the above burials can all be linked specifically to the Lneburg area. But there seems also to be a third party involved: The Vigrestad brooch in particular, but also the Gjrv pin, can be linked specifically to the Tjrnemark pin from Northern Zealand. It is the only pin/brooch in Northern Europe in BA II-III with a comparable doublespiral theme. The Kleppe plate can be linked to a specific type of boss-collar found on the exclusive group of plates with four zones of spirals, from Langstrup, Fredriksborg C., Svrdborg, Prest C. and Asige, Halland C., as well as on three plates from Jgersborg Hegn, Kbenhavn C., Hjby and Eskebjergsgrd, Holbk C., all of them with 3 zones. Except for the plate from Halland, these are all located in Zealand (cf. App. V.5). The five bowl zones on the Kleppe plate are not paralleled on any other repouss-decorated belt plates in the Nordic Zone, nor in Northern Germany (these seem all to have one or two zones). This pattern of bowls within circles arranged in multiple zones is reminiscent of those found on the gold disc from Jgersborg Hegn, Kbenhavn C. (AK I: 17) and the bronze vessels from Gyldensgrd, Bornholm C. and Kivik, Skne C. (cf. Jensen 2002: 258), as well as the gold-

78 hats from Schifferstad, Germany (Menghin 1998: 172pp.). On this basis I believe that the third party involved in the KLEPPE-GJRV-VIGRESTAD-RYKKJA phenomenon, was people from Northern Zealand. That Kivik and Skne-Zealand had western links (in addition to their Mediterranean links) could be discerned through the following network: Stockhult (brimmed hat+axe+statue) Kivik (brimmed hat+axe) Schifferstad (brimmed gold-hat) Bernstorf (gold diadem for statue) (cf. chapt. 6.5, 9.2.3). It is not a straightforward task to reconcile the chronology of Lneburg Heide with the Nordic chronology, nor with the Central European chronology (Bergerbrandt 2007: 28pp.). Bavarian disc-headed pins with cast-on discs and spiral-coils are dated to the transition late Tumulus/early Urnfield, corresponding to the transition II/III in the Nordic system (ibid: 29). Laux places them in his stufe Bonstorf (late Tumulus) (1976). The group of five spiral-headed pins seems to date from the early Wardbmen-Kolkhagen female phase, except the largest one (and the best parallel) that belongs to the Fuhrop phase (combined with a double-wheeled pin) (Pl. 54; Laux 1971: nr. 44; 1976: nr. 225). This means that they belong to a late part of the Tumulus period bordering the Urnfield period. The Tjrnemark pin comes from a (presumably) female inhumation in a large coffin, and is dated through its basic design (nadel mit doppelkonischem Kopf) to BA III (Pl. 54; AK II: 988). A parallel development to the KLEPPE II-GJRV-VIGRESTAD-RYKKJA I is seen on Bornholm and Gotland: the development of the large Bornholm-brooch (cf. Oldeberg 1933), and a large spiral-headed pin exclusive to Gotland (associated with ribbed bracelets, cf. Old. 2180). It is important to keep in mind that the late BA II, defined by the start of flat-headed brooch, is merely 30-40 years long, 1340/30-1300 BC; while the early BA II defined as postValsmagle and pre-flat-headed brooches might be as long as 160-70 years, 1500-1340/30 BC. Placing the KLEPPE II-GJRV-VIGRESTAD-RYKKJA I in late BA II or at the transition BA II/III does not make much difference in historical time, and there is only a generation gap between early BA II style artefacts and BA III style artefacts. Summing up, the KLEPPE II-GJRV-VIGRESTAD-RYKKJA I phenomenon is linked to the issue of the transition BA II-III, and the debate on the date of Kivik, the formation of the Sub-II phenomenon on the Danish Islands, as well as the southward expansion of the Nordic Zone in Schleswig-Holstein in late BA II.

79

Fig. 1. Initial results of chrono-typological study regarding burials with bronze (numbers refer to bur. 1-107, App. III).

80

Fig. 2. Initial results of chrono-typological study regarding hoards with more than one bronze artefact.

3.12.4 BA IV-VI
The relative large number of clear-cut BA IV burials in the southern zone has received less attention in previous studies. There are 10 burials, B (bur. 1), HYSSTAD (bur. 29), VESPESTAD (bur. 31), GRINDHEIM (bur. 33), STORESUND II (bur. 37), SOLA V (bur. 54), REGE II (bur. 56), SELE II (bur. 59), ANDA IV (bur. 76), and VEST-HASSEL (bur. 99), containing either BA IV razors, early disc-headed pins, BA IV tweezers or BA IV type studs. Taking into account Randsborgs arguments for a late (BA IV) date of GUNNARSHAUG I (bur. 38), will also move GUNNARSHAUG II and HODNE II with similar blades into BA IV. The production of atypical short flange-hilted daggers and swords (cf. above) is an additional argument for a late date to those presented by Randsborg (1972). Among the 8 burials with a general BA IV-V date, those from MADLA II (bur. 47), HOLEN II (bur. 86), and RSLAND (bur. 91) all contain types that are known primarily from BA IV, and only in few cases from BA V. NJLSTAD is dated to the transition BA IV/V. This leaves us with a group of four burials with a general BA IV-V date, and only a single clear BA V burial from LUNDE I (bur. 100). BORE II contained a pair of tweezers most likely from BA V, but also a bar-stud now lost. The date depends on whether the reference in the catalogue was to bar-studs in general (BA V) or to the specific type known from the GUNNESYAN hoard (BA VI). The only clear cut BA VI burials are T-H V (bur. 9), VELLE (bur. 103) and STRE HAUGE (bur. 104). MLA is also a candidate, as well as a few loose BA VI findings in cairns or mounds (nr. 141, 146, 327, 467, 476).

81 This creates a less even trajectory through the LBA. There is a clear focus with 16 burials from BA IV, one from the IV-V transition, 1 from BA V, and 3 from BA VI. The remaining burials with a likely LBA date can of course be used to either reinforce or even out this curve. There are 63 or even 67 burials within the time-span 1300-900 BC. If we add the VIGRESTAD, GJRV, RYKKJA I, KLEPPE II at the beginning of this trajectory, the number is 71 within 400 years from a total of 107 within 1200 years. Still there are several more burials that could be from BA III-IV. I suspect that the rigid border set between EBA and LBA in previous studies has covered up the fact that a significant historical trajectory seems to cross this border, particularly in Rogaland, Vest-Agder and southern Hordaland C.: metal in burials.

82

Chapter 4. Second attempt: axes

There are altogether 143 axes and fragments of axes, and this is by far the largest single category. Their contribution is often limited by the fact that they are rarely found in association with other bronze types. For this reason it is necessary to give the axes a more thorough treatment.

4.1. Flanged axes

There are 22 flanged axes from the area, from the western coastal zone from Jren in the south to Trondheimsfjord in the north, and from the alpine plateau and valleys in between. The most recent typo-chronological study of Nordic flanged axes is Helle Vandkildes study of the early Danish metalwork. Flanged axes are grouped into four classes based on height of flanges: primitive low-flanged axes (class A); developed low-flanged axes (class B), high-flanged axes (class C) and nick-flanged axes (class D) (Vandkilde 1996: 26). Within these basic classes categories are defined according to outline: trapezoidal, parallelsided-curved, waisted and parallelsided. Finally, types are defined according to combinations of length, finish, origin, ornaments and shape of cutting edge. The basic classes A-B are supported by metallographic evidence and chronology. According to Vandkilde, Class A (primitive low-flanged axes) is dated to LN II, Class B (developed lowflanged axes) to BA BIa. Types C1-3 are dated to BA Ib, type C4 Mgerkingen-Valsmagle is dated to BAIb-II, and types C5 Extreme Oldendorf and C6 Smrumovre are exclusive to BA II (Vandkilde 1996: 107pp.). The nick-flanged axes and chisels of Class D cut across these chronological phases, but are less important in our case, since no axes of class D are found in NW Scandinavia. Metal analyses have also been conducted on flanged axes (and shaft-hole axes) from NW Scandinavia and these are shown in Fig. 3 along with some of the samples from the neighbouring areas in the eastern lowlands (Eastern Norway).

4.1.1. Types Oldendorf and Underre

Six axes, from Idse (nr. 381), Haugesund (nr. 382), Line (nr. 383), Thune (nr. 384), Hole (nr. 385) and Trland (nr. 386) have parallelsided or trapezoid sides, high flanges and rather straight and narrow edges. These axes fit into the continuum embraced by the types Underre and Oldendorf. While the Oldendorf type is a common European and Nordic axe type (Kibbert 1980: 137pp.), the Underre type is considered to be a regional Nordic derivative (Vandkilde 1996: 119). The difference lies in the shape of the upper of the

83 sides, somewhere in the continuum between the parallel sides of the Oldendorf type and the slightly more curved or trapezoid sides of the Underre type (cf. Vandkilde 1996: 107, 112). While Idse (nr. 381), Haugesund (nr. 382), Line (nr. 383), Thune (nr. 384) are clear Oldendorf types, Hole (nr. 385) and Trland (nr. 386) are slightly more curved and lean towards the Underre type. All six specimens lack transversal bevels (cf. Steglose Beile, Kibbert 1980: nr: 239-245). Such bevels are found on most Danish Underre axes, and on about half of the Danish Oldendorf axes (Vandkilde 1996: 112, 119). The lack of transverse bevels on our six axes is thus an additional argument for grouping them all as type Oldendorf (cf. Aakvik 2000: 19, tab. 4). Underre and Oldendorf types are contemporary and appear in combination in hoards. Both Oldendorf and Underre types are also associated with type Bagterp spearheads in the Bagterp hoard (ibid: no. 351; AK IV: 2367). Both types date to BA Ib and are distributed all over Denmark, except for Western Jutland. Their distribution in Sweden has not been studied. Interestingly, in Northern Jutland the Underre type dominates while there are only four Oldendorf axes (cf. ibid: fig. 93). The nearest cluster of Oldendorf type axes, comparable to the one in Rogaland, is south of Limfjorden, along the rivers running eastwards towards Randers Fjord.

4.1.2. Type Extreme Oldendorf

Four axes, Indergrd (nr. 387), Hegdalsvik (nr. 388), Gravh (nr.389) and Voll (nr. 390) have features diagnostic of type Extreme Oldendorf: a trapezoid, unflanged neck and high flanges. The axe from Voll has for long been referred to as a unique specimen and as evidence for links to the British Wessex Culture (Bjrn 1936: 12; Mllerop 1963: 9p.,115; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 56; Aakvik 2000: 97, 19). The crucial feature in this respect has been the splayed edge-corners. The rest of the axe, the shape, the height of flanges, the way the flanges end before reaching the neck, and the trapezoid shape of the neck, all correspond to the Extreme Oldendorf type. The edges of the Voll axe are moreover only slightly more splayed than those on the axe from Gravh, and Oldendorf type axes with equally splayed corners can be found in Sweden to the east (Old 184, 342, 1780, 1837) and in Germany to the south (cf. Kibbert 1980: nr. 203, 205). Hoards as well as burials, demonstrate a BA II date for these axes: the burial from Karlstrup, Kbenhavn C. (AK I: 518), with flint dagger, indistinct bronze dagger blade, and tweezers with thick lips and belt-hook; the burial from Skivarp, Skne C. (Old 701), with bronze dagger, brooch, belt-hook, tweezers with thick lips and simple belt plate, and the

84 large hoard from Smrumovre, Kbenhavn C. (AK I: 354). The axes from Udsholt, Kbenhavn C. (AK I: 29C) and Birket, Lolland (AK III: 1641), were also from burials. The extreme Oldendorf have a distinctly eastern distribution in Denmark. As for the 13 specimens from Denmark; a single specimen is known from Jutland, one from Lolland, one from Bornholm, one from southern Zealand and eight specimens clustered in northern Zealand (Vandkilde 1996: fig. 93). For Sweden, again, we are left with Oldebergs catalogue. Here, it seems clear that this is a Swedish rather than Danish type, with 12-13 clear specimens known from Uppsala C. alone (Oldeberg 1974). In Norway east of our area, the axe from Lien, Telemark C. (C 18795; Groseth 2001: 37, App. 4) would fall within the Extreme Oldendorf type. Three axes have been analyzed for metallographic composition: FB1 in Voll and Heggdalsvik (and Lien), and FA in the case of Gravh, and generally high tin-levels between 8.3 % and 10 % (cf. Fig. 3). Although the Extreme Oldendorf axes seem related to type Oldendorf proper, they are clearly younger and have a distinctly different distribution. So, while the distinction between types Underre and Oldendorf are of little consequence here, the distinction between Oldendorf and extreme Oldendorf is significant.

4.1.3. Type Hheim-Steine

Seven axes, STEINE (nr.391-2, hoard 16), Fevg (nr.393), Hheim (nr.394), Kvle (nr.395) and BLINDHEIM (nr. 396-97, hoard 10), have distinct outlines with wide and protruding edges. Although there is significant variation in size, and some variation in outline, these axes seem to be based on the same stylistic idea. The variation in outline may be the necessary result of varying size: while keeping the width of the hafting section constant, enabling the same functional hafting for the small Blindheim axes as well as the large Steine axes. This group does not in any way come near groups 1 or 2, neither in flange-height nor in edge curvature. Moreover, four out of seven axes are broken. This is a type of damage or intentional practice that is not seen in groups 1 and 2 (cf. chapt. 8.4.2). The following Danish axe types have comparable protruding edges and are potential parallels: the waisted types of Torsted-Tinsdal (B2) and Virring (B3), the imported Central European type Langquaid (B4) and the small type Hsby (C2) (Vandkilde 1996). It seems quite clear that at least in Denmark the protruding, semi-circled edge was a feature of developed-flanged axes (class B), and BA Ia. The types Torsted-Tinsdal and Virring are basically the same type only demarcated by length (7-15cm vs. 15-24 cm). Three features

85 make these a poor analogy for our group: the great majority of them carry a transverse bevel, they have waisted sides and the height-width ratio of the edge seems lower (less protruding) than our axes. While only two out of a total of 34 Danish Virring-axes lack a transverse bevel, none of our axes have such bevels. Four axes of type Langquaid are known from Denmark. None of these have transverse bevels, and they all have width-height ratios of edges comparable to our axes, or in fact lower (more protruding). One of them also carries the notched neck, characteristic of continental axes, and rarely seen on Nordic axes. The three Danish specimens with known provenance are found in Vejle, Sor and Bornholm C., thus only a single specimen from Jutland (Vandkilde 1996: 103pp., fig. 79). The Hsby type is a long, slender axe with a curved edge, distributed mainly in eastern Schleswig, with only three specimens known from Denmark. None of the Danish specimens are close to ours in outline (ibid: 113p.). In Sweden there are several analogue axes, and the transverse bevel seems to have been less popular here than in Denmark. Comparable axes can be listed from Uppsala C. (Old 2838), rebro C. (Old 2682, 2703), Vstre Gtaland C (former Vstergtland; Old 2483, 2492, 2542, 2569), Kalmar C. (land; Old 1947, 1987), Skne C. (Old 1127). The large specimen from unknown provenance in Skne C. (Old 1127) is a large decorated axe, with an outline very similar to the complete axe from STEINE (nr.391). The row of short vertical lines on the mid-section might also be a parallel to the row of depressions seen just below the fracture on the broken axe from STEINE (nr. 392). The shape of the neck, the facetted sides and the size (24.5 cm) resemble the complete Steine axe closely (Pl. 57). The third item from the Steine hoard, the rare ribbed bracelet (nr. 67), have only two parallels from Skne C. and Nitriansky Hradok, Slovakia (cf. chapt. 3.5.1). Broken flanged axes seem to be particularly common east of Lake Vnarn (Vstergtland). To the immediate east of our area the axes from Borge, stfold C. (C 11059) and Skalstad, Buskerud C. (C 13875) are closely related to the above axes (Aakvik 2000: 18). Considering the homogeneity of these axes and the fact that no other contemporary axes are found within the same spatial zone in the west, I find it likely that they are partly locally made. The link seems to have been eastwards into the area east of Lake Vnarn. Considering the height of flanges and their wide protruding edges, they ought to be from BA Ia rather than BA Ib.

86

Fig. 3. Metal analyses of early bronzes in NW Scandinavia, and some comparative data from Eastern Norway (marked with *). Compiled from data in Cullberg 1968; cf. also Liversage 2000.

4.1.4. The Bersagel Axe

The axe from Bersagel (nr. 398) is a long, thin and slender axe with a trapezoid, slightly waisted outline. The edge corners are indistinct and the edge rounded. The height of the flanges is 2-3 mm. Following Vandkilde, the flange-height would place it into class B, developed flanged axes. Vandkildes class B does not contain variants with such a trapezoid outline. This feature is in Denmark seemingly linked to high-flanged (type Underre) or lowflanged axes (types Emmen and Hjadstrup). Accordingly, it is somewhat awkward to

87 classify the Bersagel axe according to Vandkildes study of Danish axes. Three axes east of the mountains may be of relevance to this problem, from Berge, Telemark C. (C 7978), Rolighet, Vestfold C. (C25254) and verby, stfold C. (C 21614). These have similar lengths, 13.3 cm, 14 cm and 14 cm and have all been described as axes with insignificant flanges (Groseth 2001: 36; Oldt.VI; UO 1933-34). They show a gliding continuum from a slightly waisted shape on Bersagel via verby to a clearer waist on Berge. Berge has a crosssection comparable to Bersagel, or even less developed flanges (2-2.1 mm), and would thus fit best in the class of developed flanged-axes. The axes from Berge, Rolighet and verby have been analyzed for metal composition (cf. Fig. 3): Berge has FB1 and 7.2 % tin, Rolighet FA with 8.9 % tin and verby FB1 with 7.2 % tin. FB1 and FA are both very unusual among Class A axes in Denmark, in fact only 1 % (Vandkilde 1996: fig. 44). Hence, the suggested Late Neolithic dates for Bersagel (Aakvik 2000: 19p.) and Berge (Groseth 2001: 36), through a classification within Vandkildes class A, seem to be contested both by the flange-height and the metallographic evidence. It would seem that these axes were made in a class A outline, but with higher flanges, from different copper, with more tin, and at a later time. The solution to this problem might simply be that they were produced in Sweden or eastern Norway in BA Ia. To sum up the two main results: The first is that the Bersagel axe is most likely not a LN bronze find completely isolated from the early bronze horizon proper (BA I). On the basis of flange-height, tin-content and metallographic analyses, the Bersagel axe and its eastern parallels ought to be placed in BA Ia or transition BA Ia/b. The second is that the Bersagel-axe is an anomaly in the context of the other flanged axes from Rogaland C., but more important than a slightly earlier date (BA Ia versus Ib), is that it points quite clearly to eastern overland networks.

4.1.5. The Vevang axe

The axe from Vevang (nr. 399) is clearly a rarity, even in a Nordic context. While Bjrn pointed towards Swedish parallels (1936: 10), Gaustad looked to the peculiar object from Tu (nr. 336), and reconstructed a hypothetical battle axe in style with those from Ssdala, Skne C. and Gemeinlebarn, Austria (1965: 35; 1966). Our knowledge of the distribution and typology of flanged axes have improved significantly since these arguments were presented. The Vevang axe has developed flanges, a narrow long-stemmed body and a curved edge without edge corners, i.e. spoon-shaped, and an overall length of 20.5 cm. The long-

88 stemmed types with spoon-shaped blades seem to have originated in western Alps. Both the earliest type Lausanne I and the later type Rmlang, are found predominantly in western Schwitzerland (Abels 1972: 12, 95). The Lausanne I type belongs to the La Bourdonnette phase (early Langquaid phase, Br. A1b, equals Nordic LN II) (ibid: 19). The Rmlang type is dated to both the early and the late Langquaid phases (Langquaid-Renzenbhl, Br. A2, equals Nordic BA Ia). The typo-chronological development is from Lausanne I via Rmlang to Bevaix, although the Bevaix type seems very close chronologically to the Rmlang type. The type Clucy is the last step in this typological branch, dated to the (early) LochhamHabsheim phase (Br. B1, equals Nordic BA Ib); but these axes have few features in common with the Vevang axe. The spatial plot from the Lausanne and Rmlang types shows a dense cluster in Switzerland but with a distinct tail eastwards, unlike any of the contemporary axe types (ibid: 95). They also seem to cluster again at the lower Vistula River. This latter tendency has been strenghtened through Szpunars study of the Polish axes. In addition to the imported specimens of Lausanne and Rmlang types proper, he distinguished a closely related type, the Czeszewo type, also clustering at the lower Vistula. This type is dated on independent grounds to late A2 or the transition B1 (Szpunar 1987: 46). Two axes clearly in line with the Swiss types come from eastern Sweden, and these are the best analogies for the Vevang axe in the Nordic Zone. These are the axes from Olovsborg, Kalmar C. (berg 1915: 13, fig. 3, Abels 1972: 21; Old 1738), and Frommestad, rebro C. (Abels 1972: 21; Old 2679). Hence, the Vevang axe, along with the Swedish specimens, should be placed no later than BA Ia, and they can all be linked to the cluster of Swiss axes in the lower Vistula area across the Baltic Sea (Pl.57).

4.1.6 The axes from Veen, Stokke and Lomen

The axe from Veen (nr.400) is made from FA copper, with 6.6 % tin. It does not correspond with any of Vandkildes class B types, but might be close to the Underre type with its trapezoid-parallelsided-curved outline. But while the great majority of Danish Underre axes have a transversal bevel, the Veen axe lacks this feature. Again, this might best be considered an axe produced in eastern Norway or more likely, Sweden, in BA I. Gaustad saw the axe from Veen as part of a group in eastern Norway, along with Gjettemoen (C 29223), Tvete and Msserd (Gaustad 1965: 35). The axe from Stokke (nr. 401) is a fragment, now lost. The axe from Lomen (nr. 402) is an edge-fragment, and it is not entirely clear whether this is a flanged axe at all.

89

4.2. Paalstaves
There are 12 paalstaves from the area and these can without difficulty be placed into three categories: a group of Nordic type weapon-paalstaves, a group of paalstaves with plastic Y-ornament and a group of simple, unornated paalstaves.

4.2.1. Type Nordic weapon-paalstaves

Three axes from Lista (nr. 403), Hauge (nr. 404) and Hove (nr. 405) are of Kerstens type CI, paalstaves of Nordic type. They are all of the variants with simple ornamentation, none of them have spiral-ornaments. The weapon-paalstaves belong exclusively to BA II (cf. Kersten 1935: 74p.). In Norway these are confined to these three specimens in Southwestern Norway, and they are likely to have been derived via a maritime route across Skagerrak from Denmark.

4.2.2. Y-decorated paalstaves (Norddeutsche typ)

Five axes and one mould correspond to Kerstens type C II, paalstaves of Norddeutsche Typ, with a plastic Y-rib (1935: 78p.): from Jren (nr. 406), Orty (nr. 407), Helleve (nr. 408), Time (nr. 409), Skjrestad (nr. 410) and Voile (M 28) The axes from Jren, Orty and Voile are quite similar and represent the common long, slender paalstave with a plastic Y-ornamant on the broadsides. Helleve and Time represent shorter versions, probably a result of prolonged resharpening since their other dimensions are comparable to the other axes. The Skjrestad specimen also carries the Y-ornament, but is thinner and moreover quite irregular in its shape. In this case, the short length was clearly intentional from the beginning. In this, the Skjrestad axe is reminiscent of two axes from east of Oslofjord, from Smlenene (Johansen 1981: 16, Pl. IId) and from Molteberg Nordre (Vikshland & Sandvik 2007: 50p., fig. 6.11). Paalstaves comparable to nr. 406-409 are very common in both Sweden and Denmark, and generally in Northern Europe (Kibbert 1980; Laux 2000). They seem also to yield a rather wide time frame including both early and late BA II, and possibly also into BA III. For these reasons they are not suited for a detailed network study. The Voile mould on the other hand indicate intimate links to the two soapstone moulds for paalstaves found at Sllerd and Valby in Northern Zealand (Jantzen 2008: nr. 140-41).

90

4.2.3. Simple flat paalstaves

The axes from Tu (nr. 411), Randaberg (nr. 412), Vge (nr. 413) and Reinss (nr. 414) are smaller paalstaves with simpler cross-section and without a mid-rib. This type was not included by Kersten (1935), but they are clearly present in both Sweden (Old) and Denmark (AK), and Northern Germany (types Westhannover, Sdhannover and Hessische in Laux 2000). There seems to be a high ratio of these axes (4) considering the relatively low number of the more common Y-decorated type (6). This might indicate that they were made locally or that Rogaland had links to an area where such axes were particularly common.

4.3. Shaft hole axes

There are 11 shaft-hole axes from the area, all of them of EBA types.

4.3.1 Type Faardrup

There are six Faardrup type axes (nr. 415-420). Three of them have been considered to be local castings, based on their flawed appearance: Tjelta (nr. 415), rekol (nr. 416) and Kvanngardsnes (nr. 417). Lgsand (nr. 418) and Viset (nr. 419) are both decorated specimens, and Hofset (nr. 420) is a fragment. The Faardrup axes have traditionally been dated to BA Ia, but according to Vandkildes revision of BA I chronology they belong in BA Ib (Vandkilde 1996: 227). The Faardup axe from Tjelta at Jren has, along with the two northernmost specimens from Lgsand and Hofset, extraordinary high tin levels at 9.0, 10.0 and 10.0% respectively (cf. Fig. 3). Out of 61 sampled Faardup axes from Denmark, only two (and one without provenance) have tin levels of 9% or more, i.e. 9.1% and 9.8%, from eastern Zealand and Lolland (ibid: nr. 651A and 705A). Among the 11 sampled specimens from Skne C, on the other hand, no less than seven axes contain more than 9% tin, five of them 10% or more (Cullberg 1968: ref. no. 568-570, 592, 634, 652, 755). This is a strong indication that at least the axes from Tjelta, Lgsand and Hovdeset arrived from the east.

4.3.2 The ceremonial axes from Lunde and Rimbareid

The axes from LUNDE (nr. 421-23, hoard 22) and Rimbareid (nr. 424) are large and heavy ceremonial cult axes. The cult axes seem to be an eastern phenomenon from Northeastern Jutland eastwards (Jensen 1978; 2002: 288pp.). The hoard from Vester Hornum in Northern Jutland (Jacob-Friesen 1967: nr. 551) combines a large cult axe, an octagon-hilted sword, paalstaves, spearheads of types Ullerslev, Kirke Saaby and Smrumovre, a socketed axe, and

91 dates the cult axes to BA II. The Nordic cult axes seem to be individual stylistic creations, and there are no immediate parallels for the axes from Rimbareid and Lunde. They do not provide clear clues to the direction of the networks that brought them to NW Scandinavia. The four large axes from two findings within a small geographical area still represent an important challenge to my account the amount of metal invested and the technological complexity involved are significant.

4.3.2 The Raknes axe

The axe from Raknes (nr. 425) is 26.8 cm long and weighs 1.3 kg. It is narrow, with rather trapezoid sides and a straight edge. It is plain and undecorated except for the large and deep triangular depressions on the pommel. The narrow front-section, the overall simplicity and the lack of a collar around the shaft-hole set this axe apart from those from Rimbareid and Lunde, as well as from other Nordic axes in this category. The axe from mot, Akershus C., is 33.5cm long, 2.1 kg and has a comparable narrow outline, simple body, and also lack collar around the shaft-hole (Johansen 1984: 129, fig. 1). The main difference is that the axe from mot has a pommel more in line with those on the typical cult axes, like e.g. the one from Rimbareid. The Raknes axe is thus best linked to the axe from mot, and both are best seen as the result of a production north of the Danish production centres. For this reason, the Raknes axe points to eastern overland networks, and possibly also local production.

4.4. Socketed axes

There are 94 socketed axes and 17 moulds for such axes from the area. The quantity and the clear evidence for local production make the socketed axe a crucial category for an evaluation of displacement and transformation of bronze in the BA of NW Scandinavia in general. The most important studies of the Nordic socketed axe are those of Lindquist (1913), Sprockhoff (1937, 1956 I), Baudou (1953, 1956, 1960), and Aner (1962). Baudou calculated a total number of c. 1830 socketed axes from the Nordic zone in the LBA and merely 150 from the EBA (1960: 16). This high number has probably prevented in-depth studies of the socketed axe, and I find it necessary to redesign some of the typological groups made for Sweden and Denmark for the present purpose. The socketed axe is basically a tube with an edge. Four basic designs arise from the way the edge meets the socket; facets A-D (Fig. 4; cf. also Gaustad 1965: 40). Other

92 variables are presence and location of loops, ornamental patterns, size and internal haftsupport. On this basis I have discerned nine groups to be explored below.

Fig. 4. Facet types on socketed axes.

4.4.1. Group 1: medium and large axes with facet A

The point of departure for discerning group 1 is the two axes from burials T-H I (nr. 426, bur. 5) and T-H II (nr. 427, bur. 6). The latter is safely dated to BA III through the metalhilted dagger. T-H I contained several features that point to the transition BA II-III: the brooch, the pommel, and the line-bundles ending at the lower rivets on the blade. In light of this context, both the early date and the fact that socketed axes are extremely rare in burials, these axes are crucial data in a wider European context. The two axes are loopless, have facet A designs, slightly waisted sides and measures only 8 and 8.2 cm in length. The size in particular is at odds with the conventional trajectory suggested for Nordic axes: large socketed axes with plastic Y-ribs reminiscent of the contemporary paalstaves appear in BA II (cf. nr. 511), and they gradually diminish in size through BA III-IV to the small axes characteristic of BA V-VI. The T-H I burial in particular demonstrate that small LBAsized axes were present at least c. 1300-1250 BC in the Beitstad area. Single findings of similar design are Auran (nr. 428), Fisk (nr. 429), Austrtt (nr. 430), while Simones (nr. 431),Vedvika (nr. 432), Revheim (nr. 433), Grafts (nr. 434) and Eikrem (nr. 435) share the lack of loops and the A facet. Eikrem and Grafts are decorated specimens, and Grafts has a good parallel in Grefsen, Akershus (C 22743). The fragmented

93 mould from Foss (M 12) seems also intended for casting similar axes. Within this group there is variance in size; from the two large specimens (11.6 cm; Brdshaug, Revheim), to medium size specimens (8-9 cm; TH I-II, Auran) and small specimens (7 cm; Simones). It is first and foremost the medium-group that is dated through the T-H assemblages, while the large group conforms to common BA III sizes. Group 1 borders the later group 8, (small loopless axes) but only one of these has facet A (Bergen Museum, nr. 499). This axe has a distinctly waisted shape and an edge broader than the mouth, typical of younger axes. A good parallel to the axes from T-H, to the T-H I axe in particular, is the axe from Hesselby, Uppsala C. (Ekholm 1921: XXVI, fig. 138). This was originally designated a Piesalva type by Tallgren and included as an eastern Russian specimen by Ekholm (cf. Tallgren 1911: 184pp.; 1914: 15). It is merely 7 cm long and very similar to the one from TH I (Pl.60). Accordingly, the burial assemblages at Tonnes-Holan provide a very significant link between typical Nordic EBA types and alleged eastern Arctic types.

4.4.2. Group 2: medium and large axes with facet B

The point of departure in this case is the axe from T-H III (nr. 436, bur. 7). Although this assemblage did not provide as clear chronological indications as did T-H I-II, it is possible to place it in BA III in light of the similarity between the dagger (nr. 280) and the one from SOLA I (nr. 281) and the mass of other BA III burials at Tonnes Holan. This axe is loopless, with slightly waisted sides and a B facet, and 10.8 cm long. Single findings of the same basic design are: Movollen (nr. 437), Volden (nr. 438), Indre Oppedal (nr. 439), Orre (nr. 440), Knivsland (nr. 441), Svik (nr. 442), Smme (nr. 443) and Grude (nr. 444), and probably also the damaged and incomplete specimens from Nes (nr. 445) and Hagen (nr. 446). Clearly, Knivsland (nr. 441) and Grude (nr. 444) might have had loops. The most difficult demarcation in this case is group 2 proper from similar axes with loops. For this reason I include such axes here as a sub-group, including axes with loop and with rivet holes: Nyhamar A (M 16, with loop), Midtre Vere (nr. 447, with loop and possibly with an A facet), Syland (nr. 448, with loop), and B (nr. 449, hoard 18, with rivet hole). The B hoard contained a second axe clearly of BA III type (nr. 512). None of the above axes have internal haft supports. In light of the small size of the BA III axes from T-H I-III, I dare not date the rest of the axes in group 2 based on the criteria of size (i.e. larger ones in BA III, smaller ones in BA IV). Nor am I convinced that waisted (BA III) versus straight sides (BA IV) is a viable

94 demarcation. The most important lesson from these axes is the popularity of loopless axes in the northern part of the area.

4.4.3. Group 3: axes with thin ribbed Y-ornament

These are axes with facet C and a Y-ornament made from thin ribs: from Nypan (nr. 450), Bjrnes (nr. 451) and Seim (nr. 452). These fit well into Baudou's category of Y-ornated celts (1953) and Oldeberg's type C (1976). Both Baudou and Oldeberg included other facets (A) as well as axes with loops in their categories. The combination of Y-decoration and C-facet is found on 14 specimens outside our area, all of them in Sweden: Skne C. (Old 494, 550), Blekinge C. (Old 1530), Gotland C. (Old 2177), stergtland C. (Old 2277), Vstmanland C. (Old 2666), rebro C. (Old 2693, 2710), Sdermanland C. (Old 2714, 2720), Dalarne C. (Old 2873), Vrmland C. (Old 2629), Vsterbotten C. (Old 2939) and possibly also from Vstergtland C. (Old 2425). The hoard from Botkyrka, Sdermanland C. contained such an axe along with tutulus, sickle and a coiled spiral arm ring, and dates the Y-decorated socketed axe in general to BA III (Old. 2720). All three specimens from our area seem to lack loops but the one from Bjrnes might originally have had one. Interestingly, they have lengths corresponding to the axes from T-H I-III (8.1-10.6 cm). None of them have internal haft supports.

4.4.4. Group 4: axes with straight, rectangular depressions

These are small axes with facet A, loop and straight, rectangular depressions above a horizontal ridge, corresponding to Baudou's type A1: VERE (nr. 453, bur. 98), Fryland (nr. 454), Nesheim (nr. 455), Norway (nr. 456) and Skjeldestad (M 15). Midtre Vere, Norway and Skjeldestad have 4 vertical depressions, Fryland have 3 on one side and 4 on the other and Nesheim have 6 depressions. Only the axe from Midtre Vere has internal haftsupport. The general category is dated through a great many hoards to BA IV (Baudou 1960: 18). The VERE burial (bur. 98) combined such an axe with a massive arm ring and a late type tutulus (but note the weak context of these findings). There seems to be some regional variation regarding the number of depressions. In Sweden 2-3 depressions are more common than 4 depressions, and there are neither axes nor moulds with 5-6 depressions. In fact, all Swedish moulds have only 2 depressions. Axes with 4-6 depressions are more common in Denmark (cf. Baudou 1960: 168pp.). To the immediate east of our area there are two moulds from Kveim (4 depressions; Johansen 1986: fig. 50) and Mangelrd (5 depressions; C 51340; Risbl 1996), and two axes from Borge Vestre (4

95 depressions, C 39719) and Nordb (5 depressions, C19147). Skjeldestad and Kveim are the only known moulds with 4 depressions. The mould from Hjrring C. has 3 depressions, but is mistakenly noted with four in Boudous study (1960: 168; cf. Jantzen 2008: fig. 31). The dominance of 4 and more depressions on the Norwegian axes clearly points to Denmark rather than Sweden. In the case of the Skjeldestad mould the core-prints on the valve point rather clearly to interior Sweden (cf. chapt. 7.8.4).

4.4.5. Group 5: large looped axes with extended necks

These are relatively large axes with loops placed typically 1/3 from top. They fall under Baudou's type B (1960) and are also referred to as KAM axes. Variants are distinguished mainly by the patterns made by thin ribs. All variants have been notoriously difficult to date since there is only a single informative assemblage with such an axe in the Nordic Zone. This is the hoard from GYL (hoard 8) providing a clear BA VI date, but the Gyl axe does not belong to any of the major variants (cf. Meinander 1954: 29pp.; Baudou 1960: 21). Comparable axes are numerous on large burial grounds in the Volga-Kama area, and the nature of the relationship between the Nordic and Russian axes constitute a major theme in LBA research in Fennoscandia (e.g. Meinander 1985; Kuzminych 1996; Hjrtner-Holdar
1998).

The Norwegian variant This group was defined early on by Brgger (1909), and is distinguished by a characteristic pattern made of three vertical and three horizontal ribs crossing each other in height with the loop. To this decorative schema belong: Bjrgan (nr. 457), Vlan (nr. 458), Farstad (nr. 459), Ulla (nr. 460), Sln (nr. 461), Mlster (nr. 462), Rosendal (nr. 463), vre Berge (nr. 464), Kasset (nr. 465), and Tjesseim (M 22). Only the southernmost specimen from Rosendal has internal haft support. Outside our area, there are only three analogue specimens: from Ble, Telemark C. (C 21393, Brgger 1909; 1918; Baudou 1960: 175, nr. 2), one specimen in the large Balsmyr hoard, Bornholm C. (Baudou 1960: 175, nr. 1) and the mould from Luusuavaara, Rovaniemi, Finland (Pl. 62; Meinander 1969: 55; Bakka 1976: 12, Pl. 13, fig. 41). Thus, Tjesseim and Luusuavaara are the only known moulds for casting the Norwegian variant, located at each end of the Scandinavian Peninsula. None of the axes from Russia seem to correspond to the ornamental schema of the Norwegian variant.

96 Axes related to the Norwegian and Mlar variants The differences between Norwegian and the Mlar variants are that the latter has more than three horizontal ribs, and that the left and right vertical ribs either stop at the bottom horizontal rib or they are missing altogether (cf. Minnen 1054-55). Ystines (nr. 466) is closely related to the Norwegian variant, while the fragment from Vemestad (nr. 467) has a more compressed ornament and also two extra horizontal lines (in the negative). The axe from Hovde (nr. 468) is the only axe that conforms to the Mlar variant. The axes from Nyhus (nr. 469) and Sekkenes (nr. 470) have three horizontal ribs but no vertical ribs. The axe from Randaberg (M 25) is extraordinary with 6 vertical ribs arranged in three pairs on the upper section, three vertical ribs on the lower section, and three horizontal ribs. Its slender body and complex ornament relates it to the Norwegian and Mlar variants rather than to the Scanian variant. The fragment from Sylte (nr. 471) is likely to stem from one of these variants. The axe from GYL (nr. 472, hoard 8) has a broad horizontal rib and a less slender body in common with the Scanian variant, but has three extra vertical ribs added on the upper section. Internal haft-supports are found only on the axes from Vemestad, Hovde and GYL. Baudou considered the Gyl axe to be a hybrid between the Scanian and Norwegian variants, and used this and the fact that most Scanian axes have haft support, as an indication that the Mlar and Norwegian variants belong in BA IV/V and the Scanian variant in BA VI (1960: 22). To the immediate east the axe from Ljrdalen, Hedmark C. is designated as a Mlar variant by Johansen (1981: 21p., Pl. IVb), and the axes from Jale and Kallum in stfold as hybrids between Mlar and Norwegian variants (ibid: 23p., Pl. Va). The Scanian variant The following axes and moulds correspond to Baudous Scanian variant: Skatval (nr. 473), Frisvoll (nr. 474), Brve (nr. 475), Anda (nr. 476), and Eide (M 18), and possibly also the fragmented axe from Idse (nr. 477). Internal haft-supports are present on the axes from Frisvoll and Anda. According to Baudou this variant exists with both A (geraden Randleisten) and B (triangulrer Schneidenflachen) facets. While the B facet dominates in Skne C., the ratio is more balanced in Vstergtland C. (1960: 21). In light of this pattern, it is of interest that all our specimens have A facets and are thus more in line with the axes from Vstergtland than with those from Skne.

4.4.6. Group 6: small looped axes with extended necks

These are small looped axes with extended necks; from Mren (nr. 478), Sakstad (nr. 479), STAV (nr. 480-81, hoard 7), LOM (nr. 482, hoard 11), Srb (nr. 483), Forsand (M 21),

97 and possibly also Kvamsy (nr. 484) and Gar (M 20). One of the axes from STAV, and those from Mren and Gar have A-facets, while the rest have B-facets. Internal haftsupports are present on all specimens. The double loops on the Gar mould is probably a result of repair rather than a typological feature (one loop is actually damaged). Another solution to the problem of a ruined loop in the mould is seen on the mould from Visborg, lborg C. In this case a second loop was placed directly below the original, and the axecavity was worked into a shorter version (Jantzen 2008: 139, nr.155). A comparable case is seen on a mould from Gotland (Hansson 1927: Pl. 19.107). This group corresponds to Baudou's type C3 (1960), and three assemblages from Zealand, one from Bornholm, as well as the hoards from STAV and LOM, date these axes to BA VI (Jensen 1997: 82).

4.4.7. Group 7: small looped axes

These are small looped axes; from Trondheim Museum (nr. 485), Ingdalen (nr. 486), Hyland (nr. 487), Sola (nr. 488), Skeibrok (nr. 489), Hegreberg (nr. 490) and Grtavr (M 11). All axes have B facets and internal haft-support (cf. the related axe from Sunndalen nr. 516 with C facet below). This group is embraced by Baudous category C (simple axes with smooth sockets); and his variant C2a (axes without ribs below the top collar). These are dated through numerous assemblages both to BA V and VI. It is numerous in the Nordic Zone, except for Southwestern Sweden and Northern Jutland (Baudou 1960: 23).

4.4.8. Group 8: small loopless axes

There are 9 small axes without loops and without ornaments. These fit into Baudous type C2b (Westnordische typ) (1960: 24). Eight of them have B facets: Eggjan (nr. 491), Erstad (nr. 492), Sola (nr. 493), Myklabust (nr. 494), Hana (nr. 495), Hananger (nr. 496); Eide (M 14), Vestre Goa (M 26), and one of the axes from KROKAN (nr. 497, hoard 4). Only the axe from Bergen Museum (nr. 498) has an A-facet. The axe from Eggjan has an additional rib at mouth, a narrower edge, and is the only one without internal haft-support. Interrestingly, both moulds from Eide and Vestre Goa seem to be at odds with the rest concerning their width-height ratio and straight sides. Both these and the one from KROKAN are related to the next group.

98

4.4.9. Group 9: small decorated axes

13 axes and three moulds carry additional ornaments on their sockets. Volute-motives are found on the axes from GUNNESYAN (nr. 499-500, hoard 6), Rindary (nr. 501), Hustad (nr. 502), TRONDENES (nr. 503, hoard 2), Lundset (nr. 504), Liland (nr. 505), Stangeland (M 23) and Brualand (M 24). A fringe-motive (cf. Gaustad 1965: 50) is found on Lundset (nr. 504), Liland (nr. 505), KROKAN (nr. 506, hoard 4) and Tustervatn (nr. 507). There seems to be two variants of the volute-motive: a complex with multiple ribs (nr. 499-500, 505) and a simple with single ribs coiled into spirals (nr. 501-504, M 23-4). Both variants are found in combination with the fringe-motive. While GUNNESYAN indicates a BA VI date, the collar in TRONDENES point towards BA V. Comparable small axes with various ornaments come from: Litleb (M 13), STAV (nr. 508-9, hoard 7), and Noggva (nr. 510). The hoard from STAV also yields a BA VI date. Outside our area the axe from Paimio, Western Finland C. has a curved/waveornament in the style seen on the Stav-Gunnesy axes (Hackmann 1900: 60p, fig. 11); as do two axes from Gotland (Hansson 1927: 36, Pl. 19.102-3). These three axes all have loops while only one of the axes from STAV (nr. 508) had a loop (damaged). Still, these axes indicate links across the peninsula (cf. Meinander 1954: 24). A mould from Akonlahti, Karelia, has a volute-motive reminiscent of the above (cf. Pl.64). The axe from Tustervatn seems to be closely related to northeastern axes, suggested also by its flat cross-section. The moulds from Eide and Vestre Goa in the previous group, resemble these decorated axes, and the one from Vestre Goa has a flat cross-section uncommon to Nordic axes.

4.4.10. Other socketed axes

The large axe with facet C and a plastic Y-ornament from Bergen Museum (nr. 511) is clearly of the earliest Nordic type socketed axe from BA II (Aner 1962). Since it is deposited in Bergen Museum we might suspect that it has been found somewhere between Moldefjord and Lista. The axe from B (nr. 512) is reminiscent of the BA II type but has no Y-ornament, rather a broad indistinct rib instead. It has been seen as a BA III development of the BA II type (Johansen 1981: 18p.). It was found along with a second large axe, with facet B and holes for rivet, and together they are best seen as a hoard from BA III. The axe from vrebust (nr. 513) has a B facet but made in the negative. No clear parallels have been located, but a BA III date seems likely considering the plastic pattern.

99 The axe from Skorgen (nr. 514) has a C facet and a decorative schema related to those seen on Grafts (nr. 434) and Eikrem (nr. 435) but with softer, more curved lines. The basic morphology of the axe resembles those of group 2, and it is probably best dated to BA III. The best analogies are located in Sweden (e.g. from Bjurkrrseng, Lindquist 1913: fig. 4). The Gar (nr. 515) and Nyhamar B (M 17) fall under Baudou's type A2a, axes with curved vertical depressions (1960). He saw these as related to those with straight vertical depressions, and they both share the horizontal lower ridge. Within Baudou's type A2a there is variation in the number of depressions from 2 to 6 (1960: 18, 171p.). The Nyhamar B is for casting the rarest variant with 2 depressions, known merely in 13 specimens, one from Denmark and 12 from Sweden, clustering in Skne C. From Katteskalla, Vstergtland C. comes a one and only mould parallel to the one from Nyhamar B. The Gar axe with 4 depressions has parallels more evenly distributed in Sweden and Denmark. According to Baudou the main variant (with 2-6 depressions) is commonly 6-8 cm long. Our specimens are 12.4 cm (Gar) and 10.8 cm (Nyhamar B). They seem thus to be made in a width-length ratio common in BA III. This might indicate an early date at the transition BA III-IV, supported by the size of the other Nyhamar A mould. While the Nyhamar B mould has its only parallel in the mould from Katteskalla, the core-print design on the Katteskalla mould is only paralleled in the Skjeldestad mould (M 15; cf. chapter 7.8.4). The axe from Hiksdal has a facet B and a basic morphology reminiscent of group 1-2 axes, as well as the above from Gar (nr. 514) and Nyhamar B (M 17). It has the characteristic horizontal ridge on the lower section, like Gar and Nyhamar. In addition it has a unique textile pattern on the facet above the horizontal ridge, comparable to decorative patterns on northeastern so-called textile-ceramics. This axe too seems to carry a diagnostic BA IV trait, the horizontal ridge, combined with a size typical of BA III. Except for the BA II axe above (nr. 511), the small axe from Sunndalen (nr. 516) is the only looped axe with a C facet. In this it seems related to Baudous type D, and especially to his gotlndische variant. A comparable axe is e.g. the one from Martebomyr, Gotland (Hansson 1927: P. 18.86). This variant is common between lower Oder and Vistula rivers, and Gotland C., but four specimens are also known from Uppsala and Sdermanland C. (cf. Baudou 1960: Karte 16). The axe from Storfosen has a distinct trapezoid shape and seemingly an A facet. No parallels have been located for this axe.

100 The socketed chisel from rnes (nr. 519) carries few diagnostic features. Socketed chisels are known both from EBA and LBA. The smooth sides might suggest a casting in a closed mould and an early rather than late date. Finally, there are four edge-fragments from socketed axes: from Myklebust (nr. 520), Skorpen (nr. 521), sjorda (nr. 522) and Hannasvik (nr. 523). The Myklebust specimen is extremely thin-walled and narrow. Gjessing argued that the fragment from sjorda stemmed from a Norwegian/Mlar axe (1942: 254; Gaustad 1965: 44), but the narrow edge of 3.5 cm width is more in line with small axes of groups 7-8. These fragments are otherwise rather uninformative.

4.4.11. The socketed axe and the Taiga-connection

This review of the socketed axes indicates that the existing typo-chronological framework developed mainly on the basis of Swedish and Danish findings, i.e. Aner (1962) and Baudou (1954; 1960), is insufficient to an understanding of the axes in NW Scandinavia. Three phenomena in particular demonstrate this insufficiency: the dominance of loopless axes (groups 1-3, 8-9), large long-necked axes (groups 5) and small decorated axes (group 9). The early date and the burial contexts of the axes from T-H I-III at Beitstad, the general links between the Norwegian and Mlar variants and burial grounds in the Volga-Kama area, the ornamental links between group 9 and Arctic axes and the Hiksdal axe and Arctic textileceramics, all indicate that a second eastern axe tradition must be taken into account. That the only two bronze types exclusive to NW Scandinavia, the Norwegian variant and the volute decorated axes, both point to the Arctic is remarkable. A significant number of the southernmost moulds can be related to these styles. In southern Scandinavia socketed axes are most often equipped with a loop or with holes for rivets. Baudou highlighted one group of loopless axes, the westnordische type:
Eine schwer erklrbare Form ist der Westnordische Typ, dem das hr fehlt und der auch keine Nagellcher hat. Diese wie es scheint unpraktische Form kommt jedoch in mehr als 400 exemplaren for und ist ber ein ziemlich grosses Gebiet verbreitet (Baudou 1960: 17).

The massive occurrence of small, loopless axes in Northern and Central Jutland in BA V-VI (few datable assemblages), and the fact that moulds for such axes are found only in Northern Jutland (4 moulds, Jantzen 2008: nr. 147, 148, 150, 151), Sweden (6 moulds) and Norway, strengthens the impression that loopless axes is a phenomenon at odds with the stylistic development in Southern Scandinavia. The burials T-H I-III provide a crucial clue to the origin of loopless axes. Both group 1 and 2 are here represented in clear BA III assemblages,

101 and in the case of T-H I it is early rather than late within BA III. These axes are also at odds with the idea of a general development from large axes in BA II-III, via medium sized and small axes in BA IV, to a dominance of small axes in BA V-VI. In particular, burial T-H I suggest that square-like, 8cm long loopless axes were present at Beitstad c. 1300-1250 BC. In light of this, it seems clear that Baudou's Westnordische typ had a direct forerunner in NW Scandinavia in BA III. I suggest that this loopless trajectory did not originate from the Nordic BA II axes, but rather from the Taiga and the Seima tradition to the east. The significant number of locally produced large axes with extended necks and ribbed ornaments, as well as the development of a regional ornamental pattern within our study area, points to an eastern link of significant magnitude. Group 5 makes up 23 % (24 %, moulds included) of the total number of diagnostic axes, and groups 5 and 6 together as much as 31 %. The small decorated axes (group 9) are at odds with the general lack of ornaments on axes in Southern Scandinavia in both EBA and LBA. Gaustad saw the fringe-motive on Krokan and Lundset as related to Finnish and Russian axes of Seima and Ananino types (1965: 50). While the Lundset axe links the fringe-motive to the simple volute-motive, the axe from Liland links the fringe to the more elaborate volute-motive in the STAV hoard, and thus to BA VI. The recently discovered axe from Tustervatn strengthens Gaustad's view, since it links a double fringe-motive to a morphology reminiscent of eastern axes (cf. Pl. 61,64). The fringes on the axe from Tustervatn resemble also the decorative ladder-motive seen on Seima bronzes (Tallgren 1914: fig. 21-23; 1915a: kuva 19). A fringe-motive comparable to those seen on Krokan, Lundset, Liland and Tustervatn seems to be particularly common on western Ananino bronzes (Pl. 64): Norsj and Srbyn, Norrbotten C. (Lundholm 1970: 31, fig. 1) and Gamla Uppsala, Uppsala C. in Sweden; Maaria, Idensalmi and Valtimo in Western Finland C. and from Babja Guba in Karelia C., Russia (Edgren & Trnblom 1992: 145). It can also be seen on axes that conventionally are placed in between the Seima and Ananino stages, i.e. the axe from the Lusmasaari hoard, Lappi C., Finland (Pl. 61; Edgren & Trnblom 1992: 144). Together the above points demand an exploration into the chronological and typological situation to the northeast.

102 The Seima horizon The chronological and typological frameworks for socketed axes to the east suffer from a lack of combination-finds as well as a lack of radiocarbon dates. It seems clear that the socketed axe is first introduced in the Seima assemblages, and a range of single-found axes have been designated as Seima types on basis of their similarity to these specimens. The Seima axes proper, from burials at Seima, Turbino I-II, Rostovka, Sokolovka, are axes 9.414.5 cm long (at Seima), with a flat, almost rectangular cross-section and flanges on the lower 2/3, creating almost a C facet. Most of them are decorated with a horizontal ladderpattern, hanging triangles and rhombus. The majority are loopless, although there are specimens with double-loop from Seima, and single-loop from Rostovka (Tallgren 1915b: 76, fig. 21-23; Chernykh 1992: 73-76; Koryakova & Epimakhov 2007: Figs. 2.26). Several stray findings in the west have been linked to the Seima type. The axe from Laukaa in Finland has similar flanges and an identical ladder-motive (Pl. 61; Meinander 1954: nr. 78, Taf. 11a), and is very close to one of the axes from Seima. Its length of 10.5 cm also corresponds to the smaller Seima axes. Along with the moulds from Jarfjord (M 6-7, hoard 1), Vektarlia (M 8) and Lngudden, Arjeploug, Sweden (Lund 28496), the Laukaa axe make up the core evidence of Seima presence in the far west. A group of axes have been designated as being developed from the Seima type proper, i.e. the Pielavesi type from Hesselby, Uppsala C. (7.0 cm; Ekolm 1921: nr. 143, fig. 138); Noormarkku (9.2 cm; Tallgren 1911: 185, Abb. 110; Meinander 1954: nr. 59, Taf.11.b), Karis (11.3 cm; Meinander 1954: 66, Taf. 10e), and Pielavesi (10 cm; Tallgren 1911: Abb.88; Meinander 1954: Abb.25) from Finland. The axe from Hesselby is only 7 cm, and very similar to the one from T-H I (nr. 426). A date for this group is best provided by the T-H burials, and I assume that a smaller group 1 or Pielavesi had been developed from the Seima-axes proper by 1300-1250 BC. If we place the Seima horizon at 1800-1700 BC in line with recent arguments (Koryakova & Epimakhov 2007: 108pp.), this creates a gap of at least 400 years in the west between the Laukaa axe within the Seima horizon and the TH Iaxe within Nordic BA III. For this reason it is important to evaluate those few findings that might give further clues to the chronological relationship of the Seima horizon in the west. The two Jarfjord moulds are remarkable since moulds for Seima bronzes (axes, knives, daggers) are quite rare: 23 in the eastern zone (east of the Urals), mainly at Rostovka, and only 2 in the west, none of them associated with burials. Burial 21 at Rostovka for instance contained both combination-moulds and ordinary moulds, e.g. for socketed axes,

103 knives and daggers (Chernykh 1992: Fig. 76). The largest mould from Jarfjord was for casting a 34.5 cm long blade, basically a short sword. This is larger than all Seima blades that I have been able to find in the literature. The unhafted blades with short or insignificant tang in Seima assemblages were probably intended for a cast-on bronze hilt as seen on Parzingers Galich type. Although damaged, the dagger from the Galich hoard has a width comparable to Jarfjord, and has been assigned to the Seima horizon by both Chernykh and Parzinger (Tallgren 1911: 25pp.; Chernykh 1992: 203, pl. 20; Parzinger 2003: 232p.; Abb. 5). I propose that the Galich hoard also contained an element that suggests a late date of this hoard, and potentially of the Seima-Turbino horizon. This is one of the copper figurines, i.e. its legs in particular. These are legs with enlarged calves very similar in form to those seen on the figurines from the Stockhult hoard from Skne C. (Pl. 63; Montelius 1917: nr. 981; Old. 463). Figurines are extremely rare during the EBA north of the East Mediterranean, and I find it unlikely that these two findings with identical legs should represent independent networks and trajectories. A figurine is also known from Scheren, Poland. This has normal legs and a posture that clearly links it to Near Eastern specimens (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 274, 314). If we accept the link between the legs in the Galich and Stockhult hoards, we get a date 1500-1300 BC, probably 1400-1300 BC for the Galich hoard and Seima bronzes in the west (Pl.63). The second finding in which the Seima-Turbino horizon might be linked to western trajectories, is Borodino, Ukraine. Here, two characteristic Seima type spearheads were combined with a fragmented third spearhead, a decorated dagger-blade, a decorated pin and axes and stone marbles (Hachmann 1957: nr.688, 170pp., Taf. 67.2-16). These findings provided only vague links to the Carpathian Apa horizon and Mycenae, e.g. one of the marbles to the pommel of one of the Apa swords. The third spearhead on the other hand was not mentioned by Hachmann. Although the socket has a shape close to the other two it has a decoration not found on Seima spears or other eastern spears, spearheads from Mycenae, Central Europe or the Carpathians (Pl.63). It is decorated with running spirals and hatched triangles very similar to those found on specimens of Nordic types Valsmagle, Smrumovre, Kirke Sby and in rare cases on types Ullerslev and Gundeslev (e.g. JacobFriesen 1967: Taf. 37.1, 41.3, 67.6, 75.10). Accepting this link as well, we get another late date for Seima bronzes in the west, i.e. (late) BA Ib and BA II, c. 1550-1300 BC. The above considerations throw doubts upon a pre-1600 BC date for Seima type bronzes, and suggest instead that they belong in the time span 1500-1400 BC.

104 Between Seima and Ananino-Akozino In a recent review of the Uralian and Western Siberian Bronze Age, Koryakova & Epimakov refer to the earliest Ananino sites as belonging in the ninth/eighth-sixth century BC (2007: 194). To the east, in the Volga-Kama area, there would be a significant hiatus between an early Seima horizon, i.e. before 1700 BC and an Ananino horizon starting at 900 or 800 BC. Placing the Seima at 1500-1400 BC would shrink the hiatus to 500 years corresponding to Nordic late BA II-IV. But which axe types were used in this area during this time span? Where are the axes that demonstrate a development from the first socketed axes of Seima type to the small Ananino type with lenticular cross-section and to the large KAM type (collective term for long-necked axes in Fennoscandia and Russia, cf. Kuzminych 1996)? A valuable finding in this respect is the hoard from Lusmasaari, Finland, and a review of its findings is of interest to this issue. The Lusmasaari hoard combined an eastern style axe with Nordic type neck rings, bracelets and a razor (Pl.61; Tallgren 1926; 1937b: 26; Meinander 1954: nr. 93; Bakka 1976: Pl. 15). Both Tallgren and Meinander argued that these artefacts most likely came from Western Norway, except for the axe (Tallgren 1926: 6; 1937b: 26; Meinander 1954: 52). For the neck rings they pointed at the many thin wendel rings from Norwegian hoards, and for the arm ring they pointed at the arm ring from MADLA II (nr. 86, bur. 47), and dated the hoard to BA V (ibid). Later Edgren & Trnblom placed the hoard in BA VI (1992: 144). But as became clear through the first attempt, no neck rings of the type represented in the Lusmasaari hoard, twisted in a single direction, are actually known from Norway (they all have complex twists, cf. chapt. 3.6.2). The Sylstorphoard from Skne C. on the other hand contained three comparable neck rings, with simple twists and hooked terminations, as well as 7 more neck rings, 2 spiral arm rings and 3 kupa. Both Montelius and Baudou dated the Sylstorp hoard to BA IV (Minnen 1131,115556,1224; Baudou 1960: hoard nr. 20). Arm rings of the type found at Lusmasaari are numerous in Denmark, but are also known from 6 findings in Skne C., two from Kalmar C., in addition to the one from Madla (Baudou 1960: type D1a, 65p.). The Lusmasaari specimens had characteristic decorative ribs that are not found on the majority of these rings. This decoration is paralleled on the Madla ring (nr. 86, Meinander 1954: 52), but also on at least one of the Swedish specimens from Ramsj, Skne C. (Minnen 1281; Baudou 1960: 256). These arm rings are dated through 12 burials to BA IV and through 3 hoards to BA V. Among the BA V specimens two were fragmented and the third was atypical (Baudou 1960: 66). Finally, the razor from Lusmassari does not give more than a general BA IV-V date.

105 The Nordic bronzes in the Lusmasaari hoard all seem to point rather clearly towards eastern Sweden, rather than western Norway, and to BA IV, rather than BA V or VI. The axe has vertical ribs making a facet A, as well as two horizontal ribs with fringes, and is 8.8 cm long. It might be considered as a forerunner to the Tustervatn axe and the Ananino axes, and it dates the fringe-motive to before 900 BC. At the large burial-grounds of Achmylovo and Akozino in the Volga-Kama area there are both KAM type axes and Ananino type axes. These types are with certainty combined in only two instances, burials 29 and 930 at Achmylovo (Meinander 1985: 25, Fig. 10-11). We are thus faced with the challenge of sketching two parallel lines of development from the Seima axe in the east. The crucial question is whether the large type owed something to Nordic axe types? There has been a long debate on the date of the KAM axes with arguments spanning from BA IV to VI, and mainly between an early date (IV-V) (Baudou 1960: 20) and a late date (V-VI) (Meinander 1985). It was the almost total lack of internal haft-supports in the Norwegian and Mlar variants, and the presence of such in 80 percent of the Scanian variant, that laid at heart of Baudou's argument. On other standard Nordic style axes such haft supports came into use in BA IV, and became standard in BA V and VI. On the other hand, if the axes with extended necks represent a different tradition of casting it would be awkward to date eastern style axes in the west by a southern criterion. The few instances of southern style internal haft-supports need not indicate an early date, but rather the merging of eastern and western casting practices. It is worth noticing that they are present on only the southernmost specimen of the Norwegian variant, Rosendal (nr. 463), on the Mlar variant from Hovde (nr. 468), on the related specimens from Vemestad (nr. 467) and Gyl (nr. 472), and on three out of five axes of the Scanian variants (nr. 474, 476-77). I believe there are two arguments in favour of a western contribution to the KAM axes as well as an early BA IV-V date. The first is that numerous axes with multiple horizontal ribs and a single vertical rib, characteristic of KAM axes, are found in Central Sweden in BA III (Lindquist 1913). One of the axes presented by Tallgren as a Scandinavian axe found in Eastern Russia, does seem very much like a Central Swedish axe with single vertical rib without extended neck, dated to BA III through the hoard from Bjurkrrseng, Sdermanland C. (Tallgren 1937b: fig. 55 top right; Old 2711). The hoard from Tullinge, Sdermanland C. links a similar axe with an extra Y-motive even stronger to Nordic BA III types (Old 2720). The second is that although moulds from Nordic BA III are rare, they

106 demonstrate a specific practice of having extra space above the axe-cavity intended for steering a core. Eastern moulds for Seima bronzes (and later) do not have this feature (Chernykh 1992: fig. 76.2-3). The first axes with extended neck might thus have occurred when applying eastern core techniques on a western mould (cf. chapt. 7.8.5; Baudou 1960: 22). There seem to be neither comparable precursors to the decorative rib patterns nor moulds that enabled such a mishap, east of the Nordic Zone. Soapstone moulding Local soapstone exchanged for bronze has been a recurrent feature in studies of the BA of NW Scandinavia (e.g. Magnus & Myhre 1976: 190p.; Rnne 1996a; Johansen 2000: 131p.). In light of the above considerations, this idea is at odds particularly with another recurrent feature of these studies: an intimate link between southwest Norway and northern Jutland. There are no clear indications of soapstone moulds in Jutland before BA IV: the sickle moulds are difficult to give a precise date, and the earliest axe mould seems to be for axes with straight vertical depressions (Jantzen 2008: nr. 156). There are no indications of soapstone moulding in Jren before BA V-VI, and thus no indications of trade in soapstone between Jren and Limfjord during BA I-IV. The moulds from Jren make up a quite extraordinary group: two moulds for group 5 axes with extended necks with their only parallels in Northern Finland, two moulds for small decorated loopless axes with simple volute-motives and one for a loopless axe with an unusual flat cross-section reminiscent of eastern Ananino axes. The final mould is an indistinctive fragmented valve. Not only do these moulds point to a late date (BA V-VI) but 5 out of 5 preserved moulds indicate northeastern inspirations. The advent of Jutish soapstone moulding in BA IV seems rather linked to the central position of Aust-Agder, Telemark and Vestfold C. in BA IV with no less than three moulds for Danish style axes. The beginning of soapstone moulding in the Nordic Zone seems to be linked to the three moulds for paalstaves from Northern Zealand and Voile (M 28). This indicates a BA II (or potentially a BA III) date and it indicates that the first soapstone in Southern Scandinavia did come from southwestern Norway. The question is whether this innovation was in any way linked to the presence of Seima type soapstone moulds north of Beitstad? I believe that the GJRV-VIGRESTAD-RYKKJA I-KLEPPE II phenomenon signals a network capable of transmitting the idea of soapstone moulding from the area north of Beitstad to Zealand in late BA II (cf. chapt. 3.12).

107 I have attempted to sketch the main trajectory of socketed axes between Volga and Scandinavia from Seima to Ananino. This has in no way contributed to a simple solution to the KAM-problem. I would suggest that the solution to the enigma lies in our ability to embrace Nordic-Arctic relations from the very beginning of the Nordic Bronze Age to the end of it. What seems clear is that the Volga-Kama area was a highly relevant agent for NW Scandinavia in the period 1500-500 BC, and the Taiga-Connection seems to be seriously underestimated in the study of the Nordic BA in general. It is also tempting to relate the origin of the Seima metalwork to the Nordic transition BA I/II in Southeastern Scandinavia: both parties put sockets on their flanged axes (e.g. Old. 11, 67, 358), both started to use high tin-alloys and both developed long slender spearheads with cast sockets (Valsmagle and Seima) (cf. Pl.63). We might even speculate whether some of the extraordinary high tin levels in the Nordic BA II were derived via these links, and whether tin from the Altai might have been exchanged via the Taiga and the Nordic Zone southwards. A large number of moulds and mould-fragments both of clay and soapstone, as well as crucibles, make it clear that the Arctic zone is heavily underrepresented when it comes to bronzes. The presence of soapstone moulds for casting both Norwegian and Mlar variants of the KAM axes at Kemi and Luusuavaara in northern Finland makes this a crucial zone in the riddle of the KAM (Pl.62).

108

Chapter 5. Third attempt: selected non-bronze data

Before completing the first step I will add some insights from the non-bronze data: rock art, pottery, aspects of burial technologies and architecture.

5.1 Boat 1a-c: rectangular hulls without keel-extensions

The first rock art boat motives to be considered are those considered to be the earliest on the coast south of Finnmark C. These are characterized by a low length-height ratio, i.e. short vessels, often with a marked asymmetric outline, i.e. a high stem and low stern, and without extensions from the keel. A northern group, from now on termed type 1a, is conventionally dated to the Stone Age: Forselv and Rdy in Nordland C, and Hammer, and Evenhus in Trondheimsfjord (Gjessing 1936; Bakka & Gaustad 1974; Bakka 1975). These boats are associated with single humans, halibuts, whales, birds and moose, and have in some cases a patterned hull. These patterns have been interpreted as sowing-patterns for skin-covers (Engedal 2006: 176, fig. 2). Another boat with similar proportions and without keel-extensions, but with a more rectangular shape are many of those designated type E and Rkke by Sognnes (1987: 76pp.; 1993: 164), type A1 by Mandt (1991: 273pp.) and type K by Fett & Fett (1941), here termed type 1b boats. These are characterized by hulls with dense vertical lines, sometimes added a horizontal line on top. A third boat closely related to type 1b is the variant with horizontal lines on the hull. These are all located from Boknafjord southwards (Fett & Fett 1941: type J). There has been a general agreement that types 1b and c are in some way related to northern boats, but their date is controversial (cf. Linge 2007: 83pp., for an overview). That the northern and southern variants b and c are related is indicated by the presence of type 1b, (Rkke-proper) boats at my. That rock art in Boknafjord was initiated by northerners is also indicated by a few boats closely related to northern boats with asymmetric hull, naturalistic animal-heads and tail (Pl.59). The naturalistic heads and tails are reminiscent of boats at Alta and Nmforsen. Finally, this scenario is supported by the large halibut motives at my, since these are without parallels south of Trondheimsfjord (cf. 2.5, Map 7). Developed variants of boat 1b are also found, i.e. longer and with a steering-ore. These are known from the slabs within the Mjeltehaugen burial as well as from Krabbestig (Mandt 1991: fig. 7.3-4, 12.42; Linge 2007: fig. 43). Boats 1a and 1b overlap in Trondheimsfjord, while 1b and 1c overlap in Boknafjord. A likely scenario is that groups involved in the

109

development from boat 1a (Evenhus) to boat 1b (Rkke) made voyages to Boknafjord, thus allowing the pre-Rkke forms at my. It seems also that boats 1a-b owed as much to boat images at Notn in Nmforsen in the interior as they did to boats at Alta in Finnmark (Hallstrm 1960; Lindqvist 1994). The date of boats 1b and 1c seems to hinge mainly on five points. The first is the link to the phenomenon of incorporating rock art in monumental burials, provided by Mjeltehaugen. The Mjeltehaugen burial seems also to have contained cremated bones and no less than eight coffins, each of a reduced size (smaller than a human body) (Linge 2007: 89). Accordingly, the second hinge is a link to cremation and small coffins. The chronological frameworks for both rock art in burial and cremation are considered below. These first hinges are both linked to a developed and potentially late variant of boat 1b (longer and with steering ore). Kalle Sogness has explored the date of group 1a boats at Evenhus through shore-line displacement. He argues that the panels at Evenhus only became available in LN (Sognnes 2003: 197). The third hinge would thus be that the southernmost boat 1a was carved in LN or later at Evenhus in Trondheimsfjord. Lise Nordenborg Myhre argues that in Rogaland the best opportunities for a shoreline dating of both my boats 1b-c and 2 (cf. below), are the panels of Nag I and my I. She constructs three alternative scenarios all within the frame of uncertainty of the C 14-datings (only two datings) on which the shore-line displacements rest: 1) based on the calculated middle value, the lower type 2 boats at Nag were carved in BA II or later, at my I in BA III or later; 2) if one date is pushed to the maximum, the other to the minimum, the lower type 2 boats at Nag I were carved in BA III or later, at my at the transition III/IV or later; 3) based on both datings pushed to maximum, the lower type 2 boats at Nag I were carved in BA I or later, and those at my I at the transition I/II (Nordenborg Myhre 2004: 195). The fourth hinge would be that type 1c boats located immediately above the type 2 boats at Nag I were carved after c. 1600 (c.70 years +1530) BC, if C-14 dates are pushed to the extreme, after c. 1370 BC if the middle value is chosen, and after c. 1200 BC (70+1130 BC) if the other extreme is chosen. This at least indicates that group 1c boats are from BA Ib or later. A fifth hinge should also be added; a boat related to the type Ib boat is placed immediately in front of a chariot at Unneset V, potentially intended as a single scene (Pl. 59; Mandt 1991: Fig. 12.29). This suggests a link to the chariot as rock art motive (see below). Summing up, boats types 1b-c were probably carved in late BA I and/or BA II.

110 Mandt 1991: Fig. 12.29). This suggests a link to the chariot as rock art motive (see below). Summing up, boats types 1b-c were probably carved in late BA I and/or BA II.

5.2. Boat 2: in-turned prows, keel-extensions, and steering ore

Boat type 2 relates to the well known Rrby boat, and here it is defined as a boat with inturned prows and keel extensions. Many of them also have what seems to be a steering ore. The date of type 2 boats seems to hinge on five points. The date of boat 2 is intimately linked to the curved-swords from Rrby and the first hinge in this case is the Rrby sword conventionally dated to BA Ib, 1600-1500 BC (Engedal 2002 with references) A slab from a burial mound at Truehj carried the image of a type 2 boat (Glob 1969: 30, 232p., fig. 18). The second hinge is therefore a link to monumental burial mounds with rock art in general. One of the slabs in the famous burial cairn at Kivik had a boat with in-turned prows. Although this image is somewhat atypical, carved in the same strictly symmetrical style as the rest of the images in the coffin, I include it because the main criteria of my boat type 2 are the in-turned prows and keel-extensions. The date of Kivik has been much debated (for an overview cf. Goldhahn 2005: 223). The fragmented bronze vessel from the burial, the axes and lurs depicted, as well as the recent radiocarbon dates, makes a date from BA II the most convincing. The series of radiocarbon dates presented by Goldhahn demonstrate at least three phases: two individuals dated (one sigma) to c. 1420-1300BC and 1410-1260BC; two bones, possibly from the same person 1200-1000BC, and finally an individual from 900800 BC. A likely scenario would be that the coffin and the images were made in the first phase, and it is quite easy to reconcile these results with the date proposed by Thrane and Randsborg: at the transition II/III at 1300 BC or late in late BA II (cf. Thrane 1962: 112pp., 131pp.; Randsborg 1993: 53pp.). The third hinge is thus Kivik at 1330-1300 BC. Johan Ling has made a re-evaluation of the rock art of Bohusln based on updated curves of shore-displacement (Ling 2008). Although he sticks to the traditional early date of the type 2 boats, the shore-displacements clearly demonstrate that boats with in-turned prows were still made 1200-1100 BC, and that in-turned prows dominate before BA IV. Whether they in fact were made in BA I at all, rest upon the argument that they were originally made close to the shore. The Solberga 50 site (ibid: 65pp.) is of particular interest since it must have been carved from boat or standing on frozen sea. Taking the presented curve at face

111

sea) at a higher sea level c 1720 BC. Below 10.8 m.a.s.l. and after 1500 BC, it was no longer possible to reach the upper part of the panel. This is clearly hazardous, but it still gives an impression of the kind of data rock art chronology relies on. The fourth hinge is thus that type 2 boats were made from either 1720 BC or 1500 BC until 1100 BC. Lings results put Nordenborg Myhres results (see above) in a new light. Although resting on a weak foundation, the existing curves of shore-displacement pointed to a rather late date of type 2 boats at Nag I and my I. The fifth hinge is that type 2 boats at Nag I were carved 1) in BA Ib or later if C-14 dates are pushed to the extreme, 2) after c. 1370 BC if the middle value is chosen, and 3) after 1130 BC if the other extreme is chosen. The type 2 boats at my I are according to all three alternatives carved at or after 1500 BC. A consideration of the above hinges convinces me of the following: the type 2 or Rrby boat represent a point cero in most rock art chronologies and these have all tried too hard to fit the overall rock art boat chronology to the overall Bronze Age chronology. The above hinges demonstrate quite clearly that it is possible to choose a late chronology for the type 2/Rrby boat: starting shortly before 1500 BC and lasting beyond 1300 BC. A plotting of type 2 boats in NW Scandinavia gives an interesting pattern. These boats are distributed from Bardal at Beitstadfjord in the north (Gjessing 2007: Abb. 8.1), to Lunde I at Lista in the south (Fett & Fett 1941: Pl. 46.D,1-2). In between they are found at Husab, Egersund; Revheim 8, Haga (slab blown of larger rock, S 646), my I 3,8; III 17; VI 5, 7-8; XV, Hodnafjell and Nag I in Rogaland C. (Fett & Fett 1941: Pl. 3A; 4.D; 34.D,4; 35.3,12; 38.A; 41.C,1-2); at Haustveit B, Bakke I-II and Hamarhaug in Hordaland C. (Mandt 1972: Pl.20, 30, 32a, 53a); at Leirvg IV in Sogn & Fjordane C. (Mandt 1991: Fig. 12.13), and at Hegre VI-VIII and Bremset II in Stjrdal, N.-Trndelag C. (Sognnes 2001: fig. 74, 119-21) (cf. Map 13). In her recent assessment of the rock art in Rogaland, Nordenborg Myhre concludes that BA III-IV was the peak of rock-carving activity. Few boats are comparable to early types such as Rrby or Kivik (my boat type 2), and few boats have prows with spiral termination, indicative of BA V (2004: 203). This is very much in line with my own reassessment of burial chronology (cf. chapt. 3.12).

5.3. Selected rock art motives and rock art in burials

There are some rock art images that seem particularly suited for network analysis: they are rather complex, distinct and rare but not unique.

112

5.3. Selected rock art motives and rock art in burials

There are some rock art images that seem particularly suited for network analysis: they are rather complex, distinct and rare but not unique. The chariot-rider at Unneset V, Sogn & Fjordane C. is the only image of a twowheeled chariot in NW Scandinavia and the northernmost chariot-image known (Mandt 1991: 332; Fig. 12.29). The perspective chosen by the artist is the same three-dimensional as used on five chariots on the Swedish east-coast (Pl.59): Kivik and Villfara in eastern Skne C. (Marstrander 1963: fig. 45.9-10); Fiskeby and Herrebro in stergtland C. (Norden 1925: FM 18, Hb3, Pl. XCII, CXXII) and Hmsta A in Uppsala C. (Coles 1994: fig. 18b). In the Gta-Glomma area they seem as a rule to be depicted in a flattened two-dimensional perspective (Marstrander 1963: 167pp; Kaul 2004: 293pp.). The Unneset charioteer drives towards the right and in this he resembles the charioteers at Fiskeby and Hrrebro. The lack of spokes in the wheels resembles the specimen from Hmsta. Again, the date of all chariotimages hinges on the date of Kivik, in late BA II or transition II/III (cf. above). This leads me to the conclusion that the Unneset-chariot was the results of relations with Uppsala or stergtland C. in the period 1330-1300 BC. The imagery on the slab from Kyrkje-Eide, Sogn & Fjordane C. seems to be a rare example of naturalistic, full scale depiction of artefacts. Several attempts have been made to interpret the depicted artefacts, for the purpose of dating in particular. The more readily identifiable objects seem to be a sickle (flint or bronze), a dagger (flint or bronze), a comb (bone or bronze), a hooked haft, and a snake (Mandt 1991: 346pp., fig. 12.40). I propose that the composition depicts female accessories: sickle, dagger, comb, a haft and an axe-tool, a woven belt with a fringed termination, a belt plate, and a short, Egtved type corded skirt , depicted in a flattened perspective (Fig. 13). The practice of depicting both bronze artefacts and textiles such as cloaks and tunica are known primarily from stergtland and Uppsala C. (Almgren 1960; Coles 1994: 33p.). The difference would mainly be that in our case it has been executed on a slab, and that it involves female rather than male dress and artefacts. The motive found on a slab from Urnes, Luster M., Sogn & Fjordane C., is a complex spiral-motive with its best parallel at Fiskeby, stergtland C. (Pl. 59; Norden 1925: 328, Pl. LXXXIII, FE 1). Finally, there are four cases further north, from Mjeltehaugen, Rishaug, Steine and Skjervoll (Marstrander & Sognnes 1999: fig. 4, 14, 96; Linge 2007). Linge has recently

113 made a thorough re-evaluation of the structure inside the Mjeltehaugen monument, and concluded in favour of eight coffins, with two decorated large slabs, each functioning as capstone for four coffins (Linge 2007: 64pp., fig. 32). Each slab is decorated with four boats related to my boat type 1b, fringes and with horizontal zones filled with various geometric patterns. There were also carvings on the top-side of the coffin; another boat and a complex circle-motive. The fringe-motive is paralleled on one of the fragments from Steine, and the circle-motive is paralleled on both Steine and Rishaug. The boat on the Skjervoll slab also seems close to the Mjeltehaugen boats. The petrography of the Mjeltehaugen slabs indicates that they were either quarried in the vicinity of Stavfjord and Atly to the south, or in the Trondheimsfjord-area to the north (Askvik 1983; Mandt 1983; Linge 2007: 98pp.). Based on the similarities in the imagery, they were most likely brought from Trndelag. Decorated burial slabs are more numerous in Rogaland, but there are few direct ornamental links between these slabs and the above series (Fett & Fett 1941; Syvertsen 2003). The origin and date of the phenomenon of rock art in burials hinges largely on the date of Kivik and Sagaholm in Sweden and Mjeltehaugen, and on ship-chronology in general. As there now seems to be a general consensus on a late BA II or transitional II/III date of both Kivik and Sagaholm, the isolated occurrence of a slab in a burial-coffin at Anderlingen, Niedersachsen C., becomes all the more interesting. This coffin contained a riveted dagger, a Nordic style weapon-paalstave and a round-headed brooch (Pl.58; Laux 1974: nr. 136; Wegner 1996: 411p.; cf. Kaul 2004: 141pp.). The round-headed brooch, comparable to the one from HOLEN I (nr. 1, bur. 85), makes this the earliest dated instance of rock art in a burial (early BA II). It is only rivalled by the slab with cup-marks from HOGNESTAD (bur. 87). The scenery on the Anderlingen slab involves four human figures, one of them with an axe in its hand. It has been compared with scenes at the open panels at Bohusln, as well as with some of the scenes from Kivik. In light of the links between NW Scandinavia and Northern Germany in early BA II (cf. chapt. 3.12.1), the burial from Anderlingen might also be explored in light of these relations. It is in fact comparable to the slab from Rishaug. Two humans are depicted on the Rishaug slab, one of them holding an axe-like figure in his hand, but with the edge facing towards him (Pl.58). This might indicate that rock art on burial-coffins did not originate in Sweden to the east, but rather along the coastal North Way between Trndelag and Elben during early BA II. The slabs between Sognefjord and Trndelag, from Urnes, Kyrkje-Eide, Mjeltehaugen, Rishaug, Steine and Skjervoll might be interpreted as an autonomous

114 phenomenon, but with links both to the lower Elbe area and to eastern open-air rock art panels in stergtland, Fiskeby in particular. Boat type 1b also has parallels in this area, although rarely with a comparable hull-filling. Square boats without keel-extension are seen at e.g. Fiskeby. At Leonardsberg there seems to be boats closely related to boat type 1b and what seems to be a whale (Pl.59; Norden 1925: 312, Pl. LXV, LB 22).

5.4. Asbestos tempered pottery

Asbestos tempered ceramics in NW Scandinavia south of Troms C. (Nordvestnorsk type) is a phenomenon conventionally dated from BA I into the PRIA. Typology is poorly developed, and although it might be possible to discern an early and a late variant, the typological and chronological boundary between them is blurred (cf. gotnes 1986: 111pp; Andreassen 2002). If we accept the idea of asbestos temper as a phenomenon historically related to the early use of asbestos in Finland (cf. Lavento 2001), the following scenario can be sketched: asbestos temper is first introduced c. 2100-2000 BC through the Pasvik Valley in Finnmark C. associated with Lovozero ceramics, and probably both through Pasvik and Alta Valleys associated with Pasvik ceramics at the same date. Asbestos temper is brought further south in association with Textile ceramics, c. 1800 BC (Jrgensen & Olsen 1988; Olsen 1994: 104). The southern type (Nordvestnorsk) is thus likely to be related to these northern types. The earliest indications for this southern type come from Stokkset, Skrivarhellaren, Ulvik and stre Hauge. Bakka claimed that sherds of asbestos tempered ceramics found in relation to a series of two-isled long-houses at Stokkset, Mre & Romsdal C., were contemporary to the houses from the LN (Johnson & Prescott 1993). This assumption was later criticized by Prescott & Johnson (ibid). A house very similar to those at Stokkset has later been excavated at se Vest, Mre & Romsdal C., and dated to early LN II (cf. Diinhoff 2005: fig. 4; T.B. Olsen 2004: tab.61, nr. 2). At Skrivarhellaren, Sogn & Fjordane C., asbestos tempered sherds appeared in a layer with a likely date to BA Ib (cf. below). At Ulvik, Hyllestad M., Sogn & Fjordane C., sherds were picked up as stray findings along with a type V flint dagger reworked into a chisel (B 13401; HMT 1982-86). Finally, at stre Hauge, Vest Agder C., sherds were associated with a type VI flint dagger (C 25825a-d; Johansen 1986: 88; cf. Prescott 1994: 97). Beside these early indications, asbestos tempered ceramics are found in burials RYKKJA I (bur. 20) and SKJEGGESNES (bur. 2), as well as in settlements and

115 field-layers dated to BA II-VI, and PRIA (cf. Hgestl et al. 1995: 134pp.; Kutschera 1996: 14, 28, Handeland & Engedal 2004: 15pp.). This means that the appearance of textile ceramics must have spurred the development of the Risvik/Nordvestnorsk type rather immediately. In fact, Bakkas claim for a LN date at Stokkset is not impossible within this scenario, i.e. that asbestos ceramics reached Sunnmre 1800-1700 BC. Interestingly, there seems also to be a clear cut border between type VI daggers and textile ceramics at Ranafjord. It is tempting to relate the early occurrence of asbestos-tempered ceramics in the far south at stre Hauge, Lista to the horizons of boat type 1c and the slate pendants (see below). One final note is to be made: there were no asbestos ceramics in the burials neither from Tonnes-Holan nor from Gjrv. In particular, the 47 coffins from 24 cairns at TonnesHolen, excavated by archaeologist K. Rygh, is valuable negative evidence (Grnnesby 2009: 68).

5.5. Slate pendants

A particular type of slate pendants is exclusive to NW Scandinavia from Vega in the north to Hananger at Lista in the south, and with a single specimen east of the mountains at Bjrkebakken, Buskerud C. These have a wide and curved edge, some times with rounded edge-corners, with a horizontal bar at the top (type 4) (Mllenhus 1959: 41pp.; Kleiva 1996: type 4, 77). From a total of 15 specimens, 7 are found along the coast from Vega to the Fosen peninsula13. There are 5 examples of a related type without the top bar and with narrower edge (type 3): from Buholmvika, Mre & Romsdal C. and four specimens from Jren (Kleiva 1996: 75) 14. There are few chronological indications, and they are conventionally dated to LN-EBA I/II based on their assumed relationship with southern plain pendants (cf. ibid: 73pp.). These pendants have been linked to bronze axes (Kleiva 1996) and to hafted flintscrapers (Engedal 2006: 179). A unique axe-shaped bronze pendant was found along with a flanged axe in a cairn at Grumstad, Oppland C. Originally, it had a perforated neck for suspension (C 14104; Johansen 1981: 78, 195). All of the above indications taken together would place the slate pendants in BA I.

116

5.6. Radiocarbon dating

5.6.1 The introduction of cremation
A series of burials without bronze artefacts have been dated by radiocarbon dating. These results indicate a high number of early cremations relative to the total amount of burials in the area, and relative to the low number of early cremations in the Nordic Zone in general. By early is meant cremations dated to BA I or BA II. The most recent case is the excavation in 2002-2003 of three cairns at Frset, just north of Tonnes-Holan, Nord-Trndelag C. (Grnnesby 2009: 70pp). Cairn nr. 3 contained three coffins with cremated bones, dated to 1430-1210 BC, 1420-1250 BC, and 1420-1250 BC cal. 2 Sigma (App. VII: nr. 18-20). These results could be fitted within the conventional trajectory, i.e. after 1300 BC and within BA III. Cairn nr. 6 contained a central coffin with animal bones and three possible human bones, all of them burned. These gave the date 15001370 BC cal. 2 Sigma (App. VII: nr. 22), and thus early BA II. Cairn nr. 4 contained a small central chamber with burned human and animal bones. These gave the date 1540-1370 BC cal. 2 Sigma, also within early BA II (App. VII: nr. 21). The result from Cairn nr. 4 in particular is a strong indication of an early BA II cremation in a small coffin. SRHEIM, i.e. a large earthen mound Garahaugen in Etne, Hordaland C., was excavated in 1969 (bur. 32). It contained an internal stone cairn, and three, possibly four, burials. The central burial contained burned bones, and a sample from these gave the date 1780-1430 BC cal. 2 Sigma (App. VII: nr. 8). Early practice of radiocarbon dating such as this must be viewed with scepticism. A secondary burial, though, gave a consistent date at 1440-1050 BC cal. 2 Sigma (App. VII: nr. 10). The dagger from SRHEIM was probably found in the central coffin 70 years earlier (nr. 288/89, bur. 32). Bjrn argued on the basis of the dagger alone that this was a BA II cremation (1935b: 5). LUNDE II contained a small, riveted dagger (nr. 276, bur. 106) and burned bones in a large coffin. Johansen saw this as a dagger of the type that Hachmann found to be characteristic of early female burials of the Sgel phase (Hachmann 1957: 55pp.; Johansen 1986: 43). Hachmanns date of these burials as well as their status as female, have weak foundations (Bergerbrandt 2007: 35p.). Still, the SRHEIM case strengthens Johansens argument for an early date for small daggers and LUNDE II, but indicate early BA II rather than BA I.

117 The early cremations above are quite at odds with the situation in Southern Scandinavia. Bergerbrandts review of BA Ib burials in the Nordic Zone, lists only two cremations, both of them in Schleswig-Holstein (2007). Zimmermanns study indicates that even BA II cremations are rare (1988). Within his defined burial zones, Bornholm had one (ibid: 154, DKI 391a; his other Bornholm example, DKI 351/AK III: 1537, Melsted, is clearly a BA IIIIV assemblage, as stated also by Aner & Kersten in their catalogue); the Haderslev-benr group had one (ibid: DK 89; AK VII: 3390); the Limfjord group had one (ibid: DKN 253; AK 5085); the Schleswig-Flensburg group had two (ibid: DKI 507 Rumohrsgrd, DKI 513 Stenholt; AK VI: 3242, 3266); and finally the Ditmarschen-group stands out with three: Albertsdorf (ibid: DSH 151c; AK XVII: 9005), Schafstedt (ibid: DSH 481a; AK XVII: 9226 A) and Hochenlockstedt (Hachmann 1957: nr. 201, Taf 14, 60-61; Zimmermann 1988: DSH 337d). To this southern group can be added the burial from Utersum, Frn, SchleswigHolstein (with a pommel with running arches in Valsmagle-Lve style) (Zimmermann 1988: DKS 138; AK V: 2652A; Bergerbrandt 2007: app. 1, 170p.). Clearly, cremations predating BA III cluster in Northern Germany. Interestingly, two of these are likely to be BA Ib burials: Utersum with a pommel decorated with running arches in Valsmagle-Lve style, and Schafsted with a Wohlde blade. The early BA II cremation from Albertsdorf contained a round-headed fibula and the only known parallel to the metal hilted dagger from B I (nr. 222, bur. 89, cf. App. V.1; Pl. 56). The recent AMS datings from Frset are in my view the strongest indication of preBA III cremations in NW Scandinavia, and they strengthen the other indications of early cremation along the western coast, SRHEIM and LUNDE II. In light of the early BA II bronzes from Jren, pointing rather clearly towards Northern Germany, I find these indications particularly interesting. Although none of the early BA II burials at Jren, HOLEN I, HOGNESTAD or B I contained cremations, it should be noted that B I did not have a coffin nor evidence of inhumation. B I might thus have been a cremation as its twin-burial in Albertsdorf was.

5.6.2 The introduction of the three-isled long house

Houses have also been dated by radiocarbon, and the houses from Kvlehodlen, Time M., Rogaland C. are of particular interest. These are also reliable in that they are the result of a large-scale recent excavation, dated by multiple AMS datings, and that the samples seem to stem from solid contexts (Soltvedt et al. 2007).

118 House 3, on lok. A, Kvlehodlen was a three-isled long-house following a sequence of two earlier two-isled houses. Three dates were made from cereals discovered in holes for both roof-posts (two) and door-posts (one). Calibrated with 2 sigma and more than 90% probability, two of the dates can be pushed as late as 1600 BC, while the third sample cannot be later than 1620 BC (App. VII: nr. 13-15). Brsheim makes a convincing argument for a BA IA date of the three-isled house (Soltvedt et al. 2007: 59p.). Ethelberg has argued that the earliest three-isled long-houses have been found in Southern Jutland, one in late BA I and several at the transition I/II. From this centre the new construction is supposed to have spread to the rest of the Nordic Zone. The initial stages of the transition from two to three-isled architecture are best seen in a large house from Hesel, Ost-Friesland, Niedersachsen C. Here the west-end is two-isled and the east-end is threeisled (Schwartz 1996: Abb 5; Willroth 1996: 44; Jensen 2002: 25). These innovations seem to have occurred already c. 2000 BC. Although it is difficult to claim the earliest known three-isled house proper in the far north, the following scenario is a possibility: the centre of innovation in house construction (from two to three isles) was not southern Jutland, but, like in the case of many bronze designs, the areas to the immediate south in Northern Germany. This was to become the area of the burial groups of Schleswig-Flensburg, Ditmarschen and Segeberg-Plner (cf. Zimmermann 1988); the same area that yielded early cremations and that yielded several parallels to our early BA II horizon. I suggest that the earliest three-isled houses, hypothetically, would be the houses of the elites buried at Rastorf, Neu-Ratjendorf, Hochenlockstedt; or rather the emergent core of the Sgel-Kreis. Thus, the Rastorf-RoumBlindheim link on the one hand (cf. chapt. 3.9.1), and a hypothetical link between house 3 at Kvlehodlen and three-isled houses in Northern Germany, could be welded together to the initial establishment of the North Way c. 1600 BC.

5.6.3 The radiocarbon sequence from Skrivarhellaren

There are four bronze findings from the early layers at the rock-shelter Skrivarhellaren (nr. 371-74; Prescott 1988; 1991ab; 1995a; 2006). The relevant strata, layers VIII, VI and V, are dated through five radiocarbon dates. Fig. 5 gives a simplified overview of the relations between layers, bronzes and radiocarbon samples (based on information in Prescott 1991a: 36p., cf. also 2006: fig. tab.1; cf. App. VII: nr. 1-7), and a suggested scenario for absolute chronology. There seems to be a problem with fitting the top-sample of layer VIII with the bottom sample from the same layer, even at 2 Sigma calibrations (cf. Prescott 1991a: 37). Since the three lower samples are all from pine, it is possible to suggest that the top-sample

119 comes from hearth-wood from old timber, i.e. more than 90 years old (cf. Schwenzer 2002 for a comparable case). In this way all radiocarbon dates with more than 90 % probability are taken into account. This indicates a rapid formation of layer VIII from c. 1780 BC onwards. The date from layer V yielded 2040-1630 BC cal. 2 Sigma. Prescott stresses that layer V was heterogeneous and that this sample was taken from underneath a lens of ashes which probably belonged to layer VI (1991a: 37). Considering this date as essentially from the top of layer VI, this layer in its entirety is to be dated before 1630 BC. To the right on Fig. 5 is shown what I consider to be a likely trajectory for the formation of the relevant layers: a rapid formation of layers VIII and VI in between 1780-1630 BC, then a hiatus, then the formation of the thinner layer XV during BA II-III, a new hiatus, followed by the formation of layer IV from BA V into the beginning of the Iron Age. I suggest that is mainly the transition LN II/BA Ia and BA Ia that is represented in the lower strata, and that the bronzes are linked to the first century of the Bronze Age (compare Prescott 2006: table 1). The fragment from the higher extremes of layer VIII (nr. 371), is a rivet-head, 6.9 mm in diameter and with remnants of asymmetric casting-seams and a central pin preserved. The casting-seams indicate that the rivet was cast in a bi-valve mould built around a modelrivet, probably from wax, which was lost. The most common rivets in LN and BA I seems to have been rivets that was either one-piece, hammered into shape at each end, making rivet-heads with only slightly larger diameter than the pin (Pflockniete) (cf. Lomborg 1969b: fig. 6; Vandkilde 1996: fig. 193), or three-piece in which a simple pin is added loose heads of diverse shapes (e.g. Ringniete, Hutniete). It is difficult to assert how common rivets with one integrated head, i.e. two-piece rivets, were at different times in the Bronze Age. At least one good analogy from early BA II can be given (AK IX: 4493C), and a comparable, but larger, cast rivet was used on the pommel of the BA I sword from Torupgrde, Maribo C. (AK III: 1680). Rivets at this time, LN II-BA Ia, are found mainly on metal-hilted daggers and halberds. Although there are no studies of rivet types available, I suggest that cast rivets of this type were extremely rare at this time. The second finding (nr. 372) is a 5.5mm long fragment with angular cross-section, presumably from some kind of hollow artefact. It might be a fragment of a spearhead with a rhomboid cross-section, like two of the spearheads in the Virring hoard from BA Ia (JacobFriesen 1967, taf.12). It might also stem from a dagger/sword-hilt with a pointed oval crosssection, or from the lower section of a hilt. It could also be that the rivet and this fragment stem from the same artefact, and this would most likely be a metal-hilted dagger or sword.

120

Fig. 5. Suggested chronology of the bronze deposits in the rock-shelter Skrivarhellaren.

The third finding (Prescotts nr. 190) is a square piece with rectangular cross-section. It has a single ornamental dot and deep lines, possibly marks from chopping. The relative thick massive fragment must stem from a quite large artefact, possibly a shaft-hole axe or perhaps a very large flanged axe, but it is distorted beyond recognition through secondary treatment. The broken axe in the Steine hoard had comparable lines or cut-marks. Interrestingly, an axe from unknown provenance in Scania, a close parallel to the Steine axes, had both these features as ornaments: relative large deep dots and short, vertical, well marked lines (Pl. 57; Old 1127). From the same level as the square fragment, came two microscopic fragments (nr. 374). These were discovered within samples from what was thought to be ochre. Analysis indicated that the ochre had been heated to 1100-1200 & (Prescott 1991a, 78p., 81). This might be vitrified sands or slag from a furnace, and is in any case a sure indication of temperatures exclusive to metallurgical activities (Prescott 2006: 186). Summing up, the bronze fragments from Skrivarhellaren indicate that complex and rare artefacts such as metal-hilted blades and large, decorated objects were broken for the purpose of casting in BA Ia.

121

5.6.4. The introduction of face-urns

Face-urns are known from at least two burials, NJLSTAD (bur. 88) and from a burial in the mound Skattehaugen at B, both in H M. in Southern Jren. To the east of our area, a burial from Bringsvrmoen contained two face-urns and a burial from Viksmoen contained one face-urn, both in Fjre in Aust-Agder C. (Johansen 1986: 81p.; Aasb 2006: 44pp.; 2008). To these specimens might be added a fragmented urn with a pair of eyes and lid from B II (bur. 90). A fragment from a burial from Pollestad is less convincing (cf. Aasb 2006: 48). Clearly, the face-urn phenomenon is linked to two circumscribed areas in Norway: H at southern Jren and at the bottom of fjord Vikkilen in Aust-Agder C. The date of the introduction of the face-urn tradition in Norway has rested mainly on the bar-stud from Njlstad, the tanged knife from Bringsvrmoen and typological links of the vessels (cf. Johansen 1986: 82, Aasb 2008: 105pp.). I consider the bar-stud from Njlstad as a transitional form between BA IV and BA V types, c. 900 BC (nr. 61, bur. 88; cf. chapt. 3.4.2). Recently two radiocarbon dates from the NJLSTAD burial have been presented (Goldhahn in Aasb 2006: 8; 2008: 107): one calibrated to 930-830 BC at 1 Sigma and 1000-820 BC at 2 sigma; and another calibrated to 1050-900 BC at 1 Sigma and 1130-830 BC at 2 Sigma (App. VII nr. 16-17). These dates correspond quite well with a typological date to the BA IV/V transition at 900 BC. The bronzes from B II (bur. 90) are extraordinary, but less informative in terms of chronology, and so is the tanged knife from Bringsvrsmoen (Johansen 1986: 48, fig. 29). Hence, the only two chronological indications are in agreement and suggest that face-urns were introduced to Jren c. 900 BC.

5.6.5 Radiocarbon dates from monuments on Karmy

A sample of a wooden sword-scabbard from REHEIA III (bur. 42), has been radiocarbon dated. The sample yielded a calibrated result of 1500-1370 at 1 Sigma, and 1540-1260 BC at 2 sigma and 95.4% probability (App. VII: nr. 11). The bronzes, i.e. the rhomboid pommel and rhomboid ferrule as well as the star-decorated double-stud, clearly indicate a BA III date. Accordingly, there is a clear discrepancy between the early BA II date indicated by the 1 sigma calibration and the typological date to BA III. The 2 Sigma calibration along with the typological date narrow down the time-span to initial BA III and 1300-1260 BC. On the other hand, the structure of the wood was too decomposed to indicate the wood-species, and the age of the tree can not be evaluated (cf. Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 168pp.). If the sheath was made from the heartwood from an old pine or oak, this might push the date further into

122 BA III (cf. Schwenzer 2002 for a comparable case). REHEIA III was excavated in 1831, and the wooden sheath might have been through some kind of chemical conservation procedure, and this might have distorted radiocarbon results. Klavs Randsborg sites a radiocarbon date from a wooden sheath from a BA II/III burial at ster Torsted, yielding a date at c. 1700 cal.BC. He believes this to be the result of a contamination from the conservation of the sheath (2006: 22). The above cases are included because they clearly demonstrate the weaknesses of radiocarbon dating and 1 Sigma calibration, and in order to stress one more time that our chronological framework is fundamentally dependant on typo-chronological studies of bronzes (cf. chapt. 1.3.1). A large cairn Kongshaugen at Ringen, Karmy, Rogaland C. was excavated in 1963 (Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 153pp.; 2004: 159p.). It contained three concentric stonewalls, a pointed-oval stone setting (boat-setting) and five burials. Burial A was located in a central cairn within the larger monument. This was a full-size coffin with an inhumation and a bronze ring/socket (lost). Burial B was related to the boat-setting, Burial C just northeast of the central cairn with Burial A, while grave D was related to the innermost circular stonewall. Burial E was related to the periphery of the cairn, and contained potsherds from the Migration Period. In relation to a re-excavation and reconstruction in 2001 a sample from the unburned bones from the central coffin, Burial A, was radiocarbon dated. It yielded a calibrated date to 1120-970 BC at 1 sigma, and 1200-920 BC at 2 sigma and 95.4 % probability (App. VII: 12). This is a clear indication that monuments of significant size and complexity was built after mid-BA III, as well as the continued use of full-size coffins and inhumation.

5.6.6 The massacre at Sund

In 1968 what seems to be a mass-burial was excavated at Sund, Nord-Trndelag C. (Farbregd et al. 1975). Hilde Fyllingen has re-evaluated the osteological data, and arrived at the following results: at least 22 individuals, maybe as many as 30; one individual less than 1 month, one individual 8-12 months, one individual 2-5 years, one individual 5-6 years, four individuals 8-10 years, 3 individuals 10-12 years, four individuals 15-25 years, one of them female, two individuals 25-35 years, two males 35+ years, and one male individual 45+ years. Seven of the adults seem to have injuries inflicted by blades or spears: a cut from a blade on a forehead, a cut on the inside of an elbow, a spine hit by a blade slicing through the abdomen, a cut from a blade on a big toe and a spear-thrust through the lower abdomen (Fyllingen 2002: 31pp., 72pp.; 2003: 34pp.; 2006: 322pp.). The date of this unique case

123 hinges on three radiocarbon dates (App. VII nr. 23-25). Fyllingen argues that because of changes in C-14 methodology around 1970, the more recent dating T-881 is the more accurate (S. Gulliksen sited in Fyllingen 2003: 38, tab. 4; cf. App. VII nr.24). This sample was taken from a thigh bone and gives a calibrated date of 1220-970 BC at 1 Sigma and 1400-800 BC at 2 Sigma, i.e. a wide early BA II to BA IV time frame. If we were to take into account all three dates these overlap only at 2 Sigma calibrations in the decade 14101390 BC within early BA II. If we were to link this event to any of the other events and changes discerned so far, we might link it to the establishment of a burial ground at Frset (early BA II, see above), the burial at GJRV (bur. 4, late BA II), the establishment of the T-H burial ground (bur. 5-15, transition BA II/III) (cf. chapt. 3.12). It might also be linked up to the peak of the T-H in mid-BA III, to the sudden disappearance of bronzes at T-H at the BA III/IV transition, or to the peculiar void in findings in all of Trndelag throughout BA IV. New radiocarbon dates are clearly needed in this case.

124

Chapter 6. Making the first step: networking the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia
The time has come to complete the first step, and piece together networks in light of the considerations made in the preceding three attempts. In this specific NW Scandinavian context I believe it is possible to discern a historical trajectory with 9 steps all involving distinct metal artefacts. Below each of these steps will be explored and the text is best read in close consultation with Maps 9-17, and with Map 30 for a close up view of Jren.

6.1. 2000-1700 BC, northern prelude (Map 9)

The earliest metal artefacts seem to be tanged copper projectiles; one type with long and narrow tang and another with perforations in tang or blade. The first type might be linked to fluted slate projectiles at a settlement site and to a large coffin of LN type in a burial (cf. chapt. 3.9.3).15 The copper-arrow from Geite was found along with bones, charcoal and potsherd, in a 2m x 1.5m coffin built of stone-slabs and boulders. A coffin this wide would point towards the large communal coffins of the LN rather than those from the EBA. This makes the reported finding of two large tanged, slate spearheads in a coffin from Hitra relevant (T 16302 Hanekamvik; Gaustad 1965: p.F.5). These findings indicate the presence of slate and copper projectiles in LN and both are marked on Map 9. The other type was found in layers dated through radiocarbon dating to 1780-1530 BC at 1 Sigma, and 20001400 BC at 2 Sigma (fireplace), and might be linked through typological and functional similarity to the perforated slate harpoons (cf. chapt. 2.5). In an attempt to do justice to these northern findings I have tried to look across the southern chronological brackets (LN I, II, BA Ia,b) and included a series of types which are difficult to give an exact date. The copper projectiles, including specimens outside the area from Tierp, Billsta, and Lils (cf. chapt. 3.9.3, note 15), as well as other early copper findings in Northern Sweden and Finland (some probably earlier, cf. Huggert 1996) are mapped. To these are added various perforated slate projectiles (cf. chapt. 2.5, note 8), fluted slate projectiles (cf. note 9), boats type 1a (cf. chapt. 5.1), and the rock art halibut motive. Comparing Map 9 with Map 7 and 8 of the LN situation, there seems to be a correspondance in the distribution of coppers, fluted slate projectiles, and also LN II flint daggers and Sandshamn axes, particularly in Lofoten. These early coppers are likely to have been procured either from copper deposits in Onega or from the Ural (Huggert 1996: fig. 1), and the Torne river system seems to have been the crucial channel to the coast. Perforated

125 slate harpoons are found only south of Trna-Rana, exept for the single specimen from Northern Finland. Further south there is an interesting border along Tingvollfjord north of Hustad, between slate harpoons with single perforation distributed north to Rana and harpoons with double perforations distributed down to immediately south of Stadt. In light of this zonal division the southernmost specimens are particularly interresting: the harpoon from Mykletun mid-way between Stadt and Jren is a large fluted spearhead (type Sandtorg), with no parallels south of Sr-Trndelag, and it has double perforations with no parallels north of Tingvollfjord. It appears to be a hybrid between elements from the two zones. Further south, in Rogaland, all three of the defined slate harpoon types are represented. This suggests that hunters from the different zones in the north visited Boknafjord, rather than a down-the-line network. The presence of hunters from the north is suggested also by the two large halibuts carved on my. I propose that what was to become one of the largest rock art centra in Scandinavia, my, was initiated by these hunters and halibut-fishers at the end of the Stone Age. It is crucial also to grasp the contemporary overland networks at work. Like I suggested for the Mesolithic, Early and Middle Neolithic (cf. Maps 4-6), I believe hunters from the coasts around Hustad engaged in hunting expeditions southwards along the alpine plateu. Both the Mesolithic Hespriholmen axes and the Late Neolithic Sandshamn axes suggest that such expeditions went via the alpines down into Hardangerfjord (cf. Map 4, 7). Overland networks also went from the coast north of Stadt across the alpines and into Oslofjord, or into the Swedish lake systems. The copper projectile from Tierp suggests a link to Geite in Trondheimsfjord. The large perforated slate projectile from stergtland points to the coast between Hustad and Rana, and the double perforated harpoon at Glomma in between points to the Stadt-Hustad zone. Summing up, my main argument is that immediately before the advent of the Nordic BA, NW Scandinavia was networked in a much more complex way than we are able to read from the distribution of Jutish flints only. These networks and routes provide a crucial background to an alternative understanding of the Bronze Age.

6.2 1700-1600 BC, Nordic BA Ia (Map 10)

From the second attempt aimed at bronze axes, it became clear that flanged axes of type Hheim-Steine fit best within the BA Ia, although the Steine hoard itself might date to the transition Ia/Ib. In addition the axes from Vevang and Bersagel, and the bronzes from

126 Skrivarhellaren belong to BA Ia (cf. chapt. 4.1.3-6, 5.6.3). The dagger from ri is tentatively included as well. Together these bronzes indicate eastern overland networks embracing the area from Fevg in the north to Bersagel in the south. The Blindheim sword is the final bronze mapped, probably from the transition Ia/Ib, and it is the only early bronze that points southwards to the Roum dagger in Limfjord and the Rastorf sword in Schleswig-Holstein. Although there are no bronzes at Jren that fits into, or confirm such a network, the early three-isled house at Kvle shortly before 1600 BC is also an indication of exclusive links to Northern Germany (cf. 5.6.2). At the beginning of the Bronze Age it is thus possible to discern three distinct networks: the southern overland network (Bersagel); a central overland network (FevgSteine) and a maritime, north-south network (Blindheim-Rastorf). Axe-shaped slate pendants types 3 and 4 are tentatively added to the map, as well as flint daggers type VI (mapped only north of Trondheimsund-Dala River). Together, they indicate that the Fosen-Rana area, even though there are no bronzes, was in some way or another part of southern Nordic networks. This area contains both the densest cluster of type 4 pendants and represents the northern end of the dagger type VI network. There is an absolute fall-off in type VI flint daggers at Rana and a large hoard with type VI daggers from the interior just south of Storsjn might indicate that it was the interior of Sweden, rather than the coasts north of Rana, that was the end of the Nordic network at this time. The two pendant types seem to reflect the two different axe types represented: type 4 copies the wide curved edges of the Hheim-Steine type, while type 3 has a narrower edge more in line with axes such as the one from Bersagel. The largest concentration of type 4 pendants lays emedeately north of the Hheim-Steine axes. On the basis of this map I define the coast from Fosen/Beitstad to Rana as a Northern Zone, from Fosen/Beitstad to Sognefjord/Hardangerfjord as a Central Zone, and Rogaland southwards is tentatively defined as a Southern Zone. These zones might seem vague but they will be useful tools in the preceding analysis. The Central Zone is linked on the one hand to Jren in the southwest and to the area east of Lake Vttern in the southeast on the other hand, and possibly also to the Northern Zone. It would seem that the features entering through both these networks are extraordinary. The Blindheim sword and the innovative architecture at Kvlehodlene are not convincingly explained by multi-linked down-the-line type networks. Neither are the Hheim-Steine axes, the rare Vevang axe, the Steine bracelet, the ri dagger and the evidence from Skrivarhellaren. I propose that the Central Zone had

127 something valuable and they were able to bring it to Boknafjord and to Lake Vttern. The novel architecture at Kvlehodlen signals the establishment of a node in order to access these networks, by groups in Northern Germany. That these arrived mainly in order to trade with northerners coming south to Boknafjord would explain why the exclusive Blindheim sword ended up north of Stadt rather than at Jren. In a similar fashion it is possible to account for the eastern routes: no one is able to establish themselves as middle-men between the Central Zone and the Lake Vttern area. The long-distance mobility discerned for the Central Zone from the Mesolithic onwards is an important background to such a hypothesis. The importance of the Central Zone to southern Bronze Age groups might be explained partly by their northern networks both along the northern coast and into the interior north of Beitstad. The networks displayed on Map 9 might very well have existed still, meaning that the Stadt-Beitstad area had links extending along the cost to Lofoten, beyond to the coast of Finnmark and overland into Finland. Summing up, I propose that the extraordinary data of the initial Bronze Age in NW Scandinavia was due to the succsessfull channelling of resources by groups in the Central Zone into the hands of groups in Northern Germany and on the Swedish east-coast, groups that played significant parts in the formation of a Nordic Bronze Age.

6.3. 1600-1500 BC, Nordic BA Ib (Map 11)

To BA Ib can be assigned a group of six heavy Faardrup axes (cf. chapt. 4.3.1). The high tinlevels in the axes point away from Denmark, and rather clearly to Skne C. in Southern Sweden (or the Central Swedish group that has not been analysed). Interrestingly, the southernmost specimen from Tjelta belongs to the group with high tin-levels, and is thus likely to have been procured via the overland networks of the Central Zone. This seems like a peculiar case in which the densely populated central area of Jren, procures bronze from Trndelag in the north, a case made conceivable only on the background displayed in previous maps. To this horizon also belong the six Oldendorf axes in Rogaland as well as the Underre type axe from Veen and the Bagterp spear from Hol. While the Faardrup axes can be seen as a direct continuation of the Hheim-Steine network of BA Ia, the Oldendorf axes in the south represent the first bronzes on Jren proper. These were probably procured both via the eastern routes across the highlands to Telemark (the Bersagel-network of BA Ia) as well as a continuation of the Kvlehodlen-Limfjord/Northern Germany maritime route. Still,

128 there are only three rather mundane flanged axes from the previous flint dagger centra of Jren proper. In light of the interior networks it is of particular interrest to explore the situation in the eastern lowlands. Interrestingly, there are 4 spearheads of type Bagterp, or 6 if we include two related specimens from se, Telemark (C 12297-98). In addition, there is a Wohlde blade of swords length, and a number of axes seemingly of Underre and Oldendorf types (cf. Johansen 1981). Wohlde swords are rare in Denmark and unknown in Sweden. The Wohlde blade and the three Bagterp spearheads clustering around Lake Mjsa are very much in line with Vandkildes argument that the Bagterp type is associated with Sgel-Wohlde types in Denmark (ibid: 230p.). A likely place of origin for the Mjsa cluster of Bagterp spears and Wohlde sword would be rhus Bay in Jutland, having both Bagterp spears as well as long Wohlde blades. I suggest that we here see the establishment of a novel network from rhus Bay, via Skagen and Oslofjord to Mjsa and Hol at the northern end. The chain of axes of Underre and Oldendorf type axes through the eastern lowlands might be included in this network. Thus, both Hol and Veen could be seen as part of a novel southern network centred on rhus Bay; and so could some of the western Oldendorf axes, e.g. from Idse and Line. To summarize, there seems to be a much clearer link to Jutland in BA Ib, and this seems to have went via Skagen and Oslofjord, towards Telemark but particularly towards Mjsa and the Glomma-Orkla channel. Despite this Jutish link for the eastern lowlands, there are strong indications that the Central Zone procured high tin-alloy Faardrup axes from Southern Sweden probably via Central Sweden. Jren seems to be located at the far end of both these networks, as there are only weak indications of an independant maritime link to Jutland. The cluster of type Oldendorf axes in Rogaland seems to be too large to be accounted for merely by a link to Limfjorden. This cluster could be accounted for by supplies from two networks, one across the southern highlands and the other across Skagerrak. The distribution of boats type 1b corresponds rather well to the Faardrup axes from Trondheimsfjord in the north to Tjelta and my in the south, and into Hardangerfjord. If we exclude the probably younger boats on the burial slabs from Mjeltehaugen it is clear that rock art boats type 1b must have been introduced to Sunnfjord, Hardanger and Boknafjord directly from the Tingvollfjord-Beistad area. It is also likely that the development from type 1a to 1b was made in the vicinity of Evenhus and Rykkja in Trondheimsfjord. Type 1c on

129 the other hand is likely to have been developed in Boknafjord. The precence of boats type 1c at Hananger, Lista, might be seen in light of the presence of asbestos-tempered pottery associated with a dagger type VI in the vicinity, both pointing towards northern networks. Summing up, it is possible to recognize two distinct networks at play in BA Ib: a Faardrup axe network between the area east of Lake Vttern and the Central Zone, and a Bagterp-Wohlde network linking Telemark, Lake Mjsa and Orkla valley to rhus Bay in northeastern Jutland. It is in this context that two new innovations are made within the Central Zone: the reinvention of rock art, involving the development of boat types 1b-c from type Ia; and the invention of Nordvestnorsk type ceramics with asbestos-temper from Textile-ceramics. Both innovations involved links to the area emediately north of the Central Zone, Rana.

6.4. 1500-1340 BC, Nordic BA II, early (Map 12)

The basis for establishing an early BA II horizon in NW Scandinavia is the early burials of southern Jren, B I, Holen I and Hognestad, the hoard from Lista with a blade related to the Sgel type (BA I) and a weapon paalstave (BA II), and the Valsmagle-Lve style pommel from Nrland (cf. chapt. 3.9.1). The daggers from B, Hognestad and the Sgel sword all indicate an exclusive relationship with the area between Elbe estuary and Kiel Bay. Neither the Nrland pommel nor the paalstave from Lista contradict such a link. Tentatively I have added also the plain undecorated paalstaves to the map (cf. chapt. 4.2.3). A series of early cremations, from Frset, Srheim and Lunde II are also added, and they point again to Schleswig-Holstein were the largest cluster of six BA I-II cremations can be found (cf. chapt. 5.6.1). One of them is the Albertsdorf burial containing the twin-dagger to the one from B I (App. V.1). The early cremations at Frset and the axe from Reins extend this network from southern Jren north to Beitstad before c. 1370 BC. These early BA II bronzes confirm the tendency hinted at by the Kvle house in BA Ia and the Oldendorf axes in BA Ib: they cluster in the southern interior of Jren (Time and H Municipalities). Particularly the cluster between upper H River and Lake Frylandsvatn is at odds with the distribution of flint daggers type I-VI. Partly for this reason, I doubt that these bronzes were a result of the Jren-Limfjord dagger network gradually including bronzes as well as flint. The localisation, as well as the morphology of these bronzes, indicates a separate network, not towards Northern Jutland but rather towards the Elbe-Kiel Bay area. In light of the above, the early BA II burial from Anderlingen, with four humans carved on one of the slabs

130 in the coffin, can be related to the carved slabs of the Central Zone, and to the one from Rishaug in particular (Pl.58; cf. chapt. 5.3). I thus suggest that the tradition of incorporating rock art in burials arose in the meating of the Central Zone networks and the North Way network in Trondheimsfjord. Also Hognestad incorporated a slab with cup-marks. The 4 flanged axes of type Extreme Oldendorf are also tentatively plotted on this map, since they represent a direct development from the Oldendorf axes of BA Ib. These were definately not procured from Jutland, but either from eastern Zealand or Sweden (cf. chapt. 4.1.2). I find it likely that these came via the same general networks that brought Hheim-Steine and Faardrup axes to the west in BA I. A fifth specimen from Lien, Telemark C., is located just east of the southern plateu. The axes from Lien and Voll thus replicate the link across the interior seen between Line and Engrav in BA Ib and Bersagel and Berge in BA Ia. Boats type 1b-c are plotted on this map as well, indicating continued maritime journeys from the north into the southern zone. A series of Seima type soapstone moulds are tentatively added to this map (as well as to the next), and an Arctic Zone might be discerned on the basis of moulds for Seima style daggers from Jarfjord, Vektarlia and Kolvika and a similar mould from Lngudden across the Swedish border, as well as the reported Seima style figurine hilt from Leirbukt (cf. chapt. 4.4.11). These findings indicate that Frset was located at the northern end of a Nordic network, and at the southwestern fringe of an Arctic network using metal from the Urals. It is worth mentioning that when all C-14 dates from the Sund-massacre are taken into account, they overlap in the decade 1410-1400 BC. Summing up, three networks are recognized: 1) the overland network still linking the Central Zone to Central and Eastern Sweden; 2) an Arctic network linking the Arctic Zone to eastern metal supplies; and 3) the extended North Way linking Beitstad to Jren and Jren to the Elbe-Kiel Bay area. The North Way seems to be a two-way street of transmission, and metal and ideas flow in both directions, southwards (rock art, Extreme Oldendorf axes) and northwards (plain paalstaves, cremation).

6.5. 1340-1300 BC, Nordic BA II, late (Map 13)

The extraordinary assemblages from Vigrestad, Kleppe II, Gjrv and Rykkja I are plotted on this map. These assemblages points to an innovative network involving persons from Zealand with intimate relations to Schleswig-Holstein and the Lneburg area. The shaft-hole axes from Lunde and Rimbareid can be seen as a result of the same network. It is difficult to

131 decide whether spears of types Smrumovre, Ullerslev, and Nord-deutsche paalstaves came via eastern or southern networks. Smrumovre spears are characteristic for SchleswigHolstein and for Northern Zealand. I suggest that the Smrumovre spearheads were procured via the maritime links to Zealand, dotting a route from Jren through Hardanger-fjord to Kaldafjell on the southern plateu. The largest known finding of Ullerslev spearheads from Svenes (20-30 specimens) in the highlands is challenging to network. Ullerslev spearheads are not particularly common on Northern Zealand (6 specimens) and only one fragment are known from Jren. I thus suggest that the Svenes hoard is best linked intimately to what seems to be a central production-area at southern Funen, with two hoards with seven specimens each. This network went via River Gta and Lake Vnarn, and the extremely large specimen from stebosjn in Lake Vnarn might designate a place of exchange. The Ullerslev spears from Svenes, as well as from Nesjeskaget and Fiskvik are thus seen as procured through a continued use of eastern networks, but with a new partner at the eastern end. The southern specimens from Karmy and Orre might be derived from either one of the networks. The cult-axe from Hole probably represents local manufacture, but it has a parallel to the east, at mot, demonstrating the continued use of inland networks. Paalstaves of the Norddeutche type were common both in Sweden and Denmark as well as in Northern Germany. The paalstave from Skjrestad along the inner Gandsfjordroute, interrestingly has its closest parallels among two other misfigured paalstaves from Smlenene and Svinesund, stfold C. This might support the suspicion brought on by the Bersagel axe from BA Ia, Idse and Line from BA Ib, and Voll from IIa, that bronzes arrived also through a Lysefjord channel across the alpines from the east. The mould from Lista, though, can readily be linked to Northern Zealand. Here we see another interresting innovation being made along the North Way. Since the maritime network extended north to Gjrv at Beitstadfjord, it is possible that the use of soapstone for moulds in the south was due to interaction with people casting Seima types in soapstone moulds to the immediate north of Beitstad. On the other hand, the idea of stabile re-usable moulds was also due to interaction with persons using bronze moulds in Northern Germany. Zealand is the only area with both soapstone and bronze moulds at this time, and I take this as a confirmation that Zealand intersected the Kiel/Elbe-Jren network in late BA II. The distribution of boats type 2 (the Rrby boat), makes an interesting addition to this map. Firstly, it would fit a link to Zealand, with the eponymous Rrby scimitars. Secondly, it seems to copy the the trail of Smrumovre spears from Jren into

132 Hardangerfjord. It is important to note that the boat type 2 became an all-Nordic motive from Trndelag to Lista, from Mlardalen to Zealand and Northern Jutland. At least southern Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein can be ruled out. North of Hardangerfjord, boats type 2 reappear at Leirvg, Askvoll, and at Hegre, Rykkja and Bardal in Trondheimsfjord; largely corresponding to the burials from Svany, Rykkja I and Gjrv. On the other hand, the northern boats are in two instances related to human figures of Swedish type, not found in the south nor in Zealand. Accordingly, the distribution of type 2 boats, while having a rather poor fit with the networks at work in BA I and early BA II, corresponds rather well to this scenario: two networks extending northwards from Jren, one into the Hardangerfjord (the Smrumovre spear-route) and the other to the inner Trondheimsfjord (the spiral pin-route). The pin from Frna and the type 2 boats at Leirvg are the only clear traces in between. I believe the indications of a late date of type 2 boats based on shore-displacements at Nag and my to be correct, and moreover that similar boats continued to be made into BA III (cf. chapt. 5.2). In light of the Rishaug-Hognestad-Anderlingen links involving rock art on slabs in burials in early BA II, I suspect that burial rock art flourished in late BA II. The long boats on the Mjeltehaugen slabs, and presumably on the Skatval slab, might represent a reaction to encounters with the long boats type 2, and with the Zealand-network in general. Decorated slabs were still primarily a Central Zone phenomenon, and now related to the burials from Sagaholm and Kivik via inland routes to Lake Vttern. The Zealand intervention seems to have brought more bronze, but also more confrontation, interaction and entanglement with the Central Zone. Again it seems clear that the southern intervention was aimed primarily at Jren and Beitstad. It might be that Central and Eastern Sweden witnessed a decline at this time, potentially a result of the strenghtening of the maritime North Way in the west. Valuables from the Northern and Central Zones might to a larger degree have entered the North Way rather than into east bound expeditions across the highlands.

6.6. 1300-1100 BC, Nordic BA III (Map 14)

In BA III monumental burials appear on Jren north of the Orrena-Roslandsna waterway; along the Srheim-ridge (Anda and Srheim), Kleppe-Braut hill (Kleppe II, Braut), Friestad hill and Nese hill between Lake Frylandsvatn and Lake Orre, north of Orrevatn at Hodne, at Bore and Grude hills, west of Lake Skassvatn at Sele, Rege and Tjelta, at Sola, Tjora and Jsund at the Tananger Peninsula, and north of Hafrsfjord at Sunde and Madla (cf. also Map

133 30). Parts of these assemblages point clearly towards the new centra of Thy in Limfjord, i.e. the ribbed bracelets and the sword/dagger pommels, but as became clear above, in combinations with types characteristic of late BA II. To the emediate north of Boknafjord lies a zone dominated by male weaponry, in burials (Reheia I-III, Storesund I, Rimbareid) and as loose findings (Srvoll, Skeie, Hiksdal, Nestb). South of Jren there is a significant increase in burials at Lista (Hananger, Kjrrefjord and Meberg). The Southern Zone between Stord and Lista is now defined through the Hulterstad type spearheads (Nestb, Orre, Skeime), and through gold (Reheia, Hodne, Sele, Lista). The gold findings, as well as the swords from Meberg and Jsund, point to a strong link to the Thy center. Between Stord and Beitstad there is a large area without burials, with the possible exception of Rykkja II and Ristesund. This void corresponds to the Central Zone, the area of boats type 1b and burial rock art on the previous map. This area is defined also by group 3 axes, loopless axes with facet C and Y-ornament. These indicate continued relations with the area east of Lake Vnarn, rebro and Sdermanland C. in particular. The axes from Grafts and Eikrem also point to the east. The B hoard indicates a continued central position of Valdres in the eastern highlands. Two soapstone moulds are found in the Central Zone. The mould from Foss is best linked to the moulds from Mellem Bodal east of Glomma estuary and Lugns at the eastern shores of Lake Vttern, and moreover to Sllerd, Northern Zealand (cf. chapt. 7.8.1; Jantzen 2008: E 179, E 108, nr. 142). The mould from Olset is for making large daggers or swords with complex cross-sections. Although there are no other bronzes exept for socketed axes from the Central Zone in BA III, the moulds indicate innovations in casting practices and imply metal supplies. North of the Central Zone there is a significant rise in burials in the Beitstad area, i.e. at Tonnes-Holan, as well as burials at Skren and Skjeggesnes further north. One of the crucial challenges concerning BA III, is the networks that supplied the people buried at Tonnes-Holan. They clearly represent a hybridization of Nordic traditions with no less than three burials with socketed axes. But from where came the Nordic bronzes deposited at Tonnes-Holan, Skjeggesnes and Skren? The dominance of male assemblages at Beitstad makes a comparison difficult with the mainly female burials of Jren. I can see no significant stylistic differences between the sword/dagger pommels of Tonnes-Holan and those from the south. The pommel from TH-I resembles closely the one from Hodne. The

134 haft on the dagger from TH-II is a rare variant, and closely related to a haft from Ribe-C. in Jutland. The flanged sword from TH VIII could be related to the sword from Hyland in Jren, and the dagger blade from TH III (nr. 280) closely resembles the one from Sola I (nr. 281), as well as the mould from Olset. I would suggest that the Tonnes-Holan burials represented a strengthened node in a North Way network, and a continuation of the burials at Frset and Gjrv. The popularity of socketed axes already in the first TH burials at the transition BA II-III was due to intimate interaction with the northern interior and the Seima tradition. Neither the burials from Skjeggesnes and Skren need represent something fundamentally new. As seen in Map 10-11, the zone between Rana and Fosen was part of the type VI flint dagger network. These burials might be merely a signal of the increased level of deposition all along the North Way in BA III. In BA III we see the first strong metal link between Lista, Jren and Northern Jutland; and a signficant increase in burials at Thy and Jren in particular. This relationship seems to have worked in combination with an inland overland route along the Jutish mainland to Schleswig-Holstein, indicated by the twisted gold rings. The distribution of the first soapstone moulds for socketed axes might be taken as an indication that Northern Zealand now turned its attention towards the Glomma-Gta area, and the establishment of the Thy-Jren link might have excluded Zealand as an agent on the North Way. Such a scenario provides a glimpse of a possible explanation to the unusual combinations of female burials at Jren (e.g. Rege, Srheim): these were women intimately related to those from Vigrestad and Kleppe involved in the Jren-Zealand network in late BA II. They continued to use or make such belt plates while they procured new bracelets and brooches from Jutish foundries. Importantly, none were equipped with the contemporary Jutish belt plates probably made in the very same foundries that made their bracelets, and the swords from Jsund, Meberg, Sola and Rimbareid. Rock art in burials is also popular in the south at this time, i.e. Hodne and Rege I, but they seem to use motives different from those found further north. To summarize, the most significant feature of BA III was a strenghtening of the North Way involving the nodes of Beitstad, Stord-Bmlo-Karmsund, Jren, Lista, Thy and Schleswig-Holstein. This network seems now directed exclusively towards the zone north of Beitstad rather than towards the southern highlands and Hardangerfjord. Axes and moulds provide clear indications of continued links between the Central Zone and Central Sweden across the interior.

135

6.7. 1100-900 BC, Nordic BA IV (Map 15)

Probably the most significant change from the BA III map is the complete void of clear BA IV findings between Lofoten and Tingvollfjord. No clear burial assemblages with tweezers, razors or studs, and none of the axes characteristic of Nordic BA IV. Thus, if we stick with a late date, i.e. BA V-VI, for the socketed axes with extended neck, one of the consequences is this large void in metal findings. The area between Sunnhordaland and Tingvollfjord is just as empty in metal but there are three, possibly five (if we include Olset and Bremnes) highly complex soapstone moulds for socketed axes (Nyhamar) and swords (Slottsvik and Bremnes, Olset). Further south there are no less than 9 burials in Sunnhordaland-Rogaland and one at Lista. There are five more burials from Sunnhordaland-Rogaland that are likely BA IV. Although this is also a significant reduction compared to BA III, the development in the south is in sharp contrast to the one further north. The two findings from B and Vinje in Lofoten and the one from Leirbekken in Varanger are crucial indications to what went on 1300-1100 BC along the North Way. The rare flange-hilted sword from Vinje with six rivetholes has only two parallels, both with a western location: Northern Jutland and south of Elben estuary. I also found that the distinct double-stud with extremely long central boss from B had its closest parallel in Northern Jutland (Broholm 1946: 61, grav nr. 671). The reported razor from Leirbekken, although known only from a drawing, seems to indicate that it was similar to the one from Gunnarshaug I or the one from Hysstad. The type represented at Hysstad is rare in Sweden but common in Denmark and with a marked cluster in Northern Jutland (Baudou 1960: Karte 19). Taken together these three findings point to Northern Jutland rather than to Sweden, but how could these end up north of the large void between Lofoten and Sunnhordaland? The crucial question is whether the maritime North Way network seen earlier broke down or whether it expanded? I propose that the North Way expanded to the extreme in both its northern and its southern ends. Those buried at Gunnarshaug I, Storesund, Hysstad, Vespestad and Grindheim engaged in extreme maritime journeys that bypassed previous middle-men and explored the coasts of Lofoten and beyond. People from Jren as well as Karmy engaged in extreme maritime journeys with Skagen in Northern Jutland as an important node, but their relations seem also to have extended to the southern Baltic. Choosing the maximum alternative in this case has some significant advantages. Such extreme northern expedition launched from Sunnhordaland would make it easier to account for the textile-decorated axe from Hiksdal, and to explain why the Arctic was drawn into the south to such a significant degree in the centuries to come (BA V-VI). In

136 a similar fashion, by engaging groups in the Southern Zone heavily in maritime expeditions to the southern shores of the Baltic, it becomes possible to account for the strange similarity of the face-urns in Norway and Legnica on the Oder, as well as for the rare metal-hilted sword from Eia. In short, the Southern Zone that lay outside the main metal-networks of BA I, is now consolidated and has bypassed both the Central Zone and the Northern Zone, and gained direct access to the Arctic Zone (cf. Map 9). The situation in the Sogn-Hustad area is reveiled by the types cast in the moulds. The double-mould for tanged swords from Slottsvik could be linked to the contemporary mould from Blia, along the Klarlv north of Lake Vnarn. The Blia mould is for casting both tanged daggers and sickles (Old 2628). The Nyhamar B mould is for a distinctly Swedish type axe, and a comparable mould is found at Kinneved, Vstergtland (Minnen 1067). The Skjeldestad mould, although for casting a Danish style axe, has a core-print design only paralleled at the very same Kinneved mould (cf. chapt. 7.8). Accordingly, these two moulds from the Sognefjord make a strong link to the area east of Vnarn, and indicate that the Central Zone kept up its eastern overland networks. This development is in sharp contrast to the southern zone where there are still no soapstone moulds. The most interresting non-bronze data in the context of this horizon, is the Sundmassacre. It is tempting to link this event to the sudden disappearance of burials in the Beitstad area, i.e. the fall of the T-H dynasties. One scenario would be a war-party organized from Mlardalen, hitting the Tonnes-Holan group c. 1100 BC. This would account for the combination of 1) disappearance of bronze-carrying burials after 1100 BC at TH, as well as 2) the sudden rise in Mlardalen at the Hga centre, and 3) the occurance of specific Swedish figures at Beitstad (cubic human bodies). A related alternative would be a warparty from Stjrdal in close alliance with Mlardalen. A different scenario would be a warparty from the Southern Zone attacking T-H in a conflict over access to the northern coasts. Still a different alternative is a war-party from the interior north of Beitstad, inflicting the leisures on the skeletons not with swords but with shorter blades such as those cast at Lappvallen. Summing up; crucial to an understanding of the rather meagre data from BA IV is to account for the introduction of Nordic bronzes in the Arctic Zone at the same time as Nordic bronzes disappear from both the Northern Zone and Beitstad. I propose that this was a result of direct links between the Southern Zone and the Arctic.

137

6.8. 900-700 BC, Nordic BA V (Map 16)

Perhaps the most challenging task in networking Northwestern Scandinavia in BA V, is to discern the provenance of the numerous bronzes north of Beitstad. The decorated sword from Vg and the large decorated spearhead from Hoddy point rather clearly to the southeast, probably to a route along ngerman River to the coast and from here south to Mlardalen. Decorated blades are found both along the ngerman route and at Petkula in the high Arctic (Tallgren 1937b: 24p.; Bakka 1976: 39, Pl. 12, 14). The gold rings from Sandnesenget and Langli on the other hand, point southwards to Jren and Denmark. The three distinct neck-collars from Tennevik and Trondenes have their closest parallels in four collars from two findings in southeastern Sweden. The Swedish specimens are all decorated. I am inclined to instead highlight a ceramic mould for casting similar collars (undecorated) from Vilsted in Northern Jutland. The likely hoard from Trondenes also included a socketed axe with volut-ornament, a distinct NW Scandinavian type. I have argued that this ornament was linked to the fringe ornament, and that both motives were linked to western Ananinoaxes. If the link between the collar and axe from Trondenes is trusted, this indicates that such collars were still in use in BA VI, or that Ananino-like axes such as the one from Akonlahti (Pl. 64) appeared before BA VI. I lean towards the latter, and recommend that Map 16 is considered in light of the Ananino-network plotted on Map 17. The tanged swords are less informative, but it is worth noting that they are numerous in both Sweden and Denmark as well as Eastern Norway, that they are lacking from Southwestern Norway (exept the poor specimen from Lista Fyr), that they are relatively well represented north of Stadt, and finally that moulds for comparable swords were cast in the Central Zone in the previous period. Thus, the area north of Beitstad contained bronzes procured both from Jutland along the North Way and from Eastern Sweden across the interior. The situation in the Central Zone in BA V is neither emediately clear. The gold rings from Hemnskjel and Strand, although deposited central to the maritime North Way, point rather clearly to the east. They thus demonstrate continuity in the networks linking the Central Zone to eastern Sweden. Except for these and the tanged blades from Ulstein and Aursjen, the Central Zone is lacking clear BA V findings. One candidate is the long-necked axes (cf. chapt. 4.4.5, 4.4.11). I believe that the expansion of the North Way and the establishment of the node in the Tjeldsund area are important pieces in the puzzle of the long-necked axes. The Tjeldsund node might have been the significant link between the North Way and the high Arctic via Torne River.

138 In the south the zone of burials with bronze has shrunk, and do no longer include the area emediately north of Jren (Karmy, Sunnhordaland). The contents of the burials, razors, tweezers, are not very informative in terms of networks. The lurs from Revheim though can be linked to Northern Jutland, and I assume that the bronzes in the burials were procured via the same routes. The most important feature discerned here about BA V is that the Arctic interior is drawn into Nordic networks. The maritime North Way in the west was paralleled by a comparable North Way along the eastern coast. This is even more convincing if we consider the axe types plotted on the next map to have arisen within BA V. It is clearly a possibility that both Ananino and KAM styles appeared in the west from mid BA V, c. 800 BC. As will become clear through a closer examination of casting and moulding procedures in chapter 7, the Arctic-Nordic dynamics seem to have been of a different nature in the west than in the east. Moulds for Arctic types at Jren in the far south, strenghten the suspicion brought on by the Hiksdal axe in BA IV: there was a movement of styles, procedures, ideas and people from the Arctic into the Southern Zone.

6.9. 700-500 BC, Nordic BA VI (Map 17)

The mapping of BA VI features demonstrates with more clarity than any of the earlier maps that Nordic bronzes entered NW Scandinavia from Sweden across the highlands. The sharpbladed Wendelring is a dominant feature of BA VI, but it is the other findings that specify the direction of the networks. Spearheads, Central European swords, gold arm rings, discheaded pins, brooches and rare neck ring types indicate an eastern network sometimes involving Lakes Randsfjord and Mjsa, but mainly Mlaren and the area east of Lake Vnarn. Jren seems to represent the far southwestern end of this network. The fortified settlement at Vistad in stergtland C., Sweden, might have been a significant node in this network. This unique site seems to have been the settlement of foreigners from the area south of the Baltic; using foreign pottery types and foreign architecture (cf. Larsson 1993; Larsson & Hulthen 2004). The only known Mindelheim sword made from iron in Scandinavia is the one from Sjgestad in the vicinity of Vistad (Jensen 1997: 320, nr. 13). The hoard from Hassle just north of Lake Vttern contained two Mindelheim swords and a range of other imports from the continent and from the Mediterranean. The rare ribbed bronze bucket from Hassle lies 1000 km north of the other specimens in Eastern Central Europe (Jensen 1997: 93, 180). The dwellers within the Vistad establishment are likely to

139 have had effective communication with their home area, and they might have been the distributors of commoditites such as those seen in the Hassle hoard, but also bronze and iron in general. The small loopless ornated axes (group 9), add significantly to this situation. In several cases, moulds are found at Jren while actual castings corresponding to the moulds are found only further north. This is the case for the two moulds for volute-ornated axes from Brualand and Stangeland. The Vestre Goa mould is for casting an axe with an unusual flat cross-section, typical of Arctic axes, and the mould has a close parallel from Vretakloster in stergtland (chapt. 4.4.8; Nordn 1925: Pl. XI.6). Axes corresponding to the Tjesseim mould are found only north of Jren, and the mould has its only parallel in Northern Finland. As will become clear in chapter 7 on moulding practices, the lack of facilities for core-suspension on Brualand, Vestre Goa, Tjesseim and Randaberg is an additional indication that these moulds represent an intimate link to the Arctic. This is also interresting, as Jren is often sited as a having the largest cluster of soapstone moulds in Norway. The 5 moulds from Jren can actually all be placed c. 800-500 BC, and all of them are at odds with the conventions of Nordic soapstone moulding practices and designs developed from BA III onwards. The two other moulds from Rogaland C., from Forsand and Talgje, are more in line with conventional Nordic moulds, but they might both belong to BA V rather than VI. The Forsand mould was found in a post-hole for a house, dated to BA V. Accordingly, there are clear indications of a rather direct maritime relationship between Jren and Trndelag, and thus of a still existing North Way. But there are no indications that this North Way was linked to southern areas, i.e. that bronzes entered via Jren from the south. Summing up, I believe there are four significant changes on this map. The first is the resurrection and bolstering of the cross-peninsular network between the Central Zone and eastern Central Sweden, much similar to the situation in BA I. The second is that rather than Nordic style bronzes north of the Beitstad-Dala river line there are now only Arctic style bronzes and moulds, i.e. type Ananino and related. The third is the trail of socketed axes with links to Arctic bronzes from Rana to Jren, and the appearance of moulds for such axes at Jren in the south. The fourth is a collapse in the networks that linked Jren and the North Way to metal supplies south of Skagerrak.

140

6.10 Towards Bronze Age history

I suggest that there were three major sources of valuables in Northern Scandinavia, and that attempts to access these shaped the history of NW Scandinavia in the Bronze Age. These valuables were mainly pelts from fur bearing animals dwelling along the arctic coasts north of Rana, in the interior north of Beitstad and on the southern alpine plateu. I have discerned two major trajectories and networks. The first was a remarkably stable overland/riverine network at work at least from BA Ia to BA VI, one that linked the western Central Zone to Central Sweden. The second was the more unstable maritime North Way, with shifting participants in the far south, and variously aimed at the southern highlands, the interior north of Beitstad and the Arctic coasts. Interestingly, the end of the Bronze Age replicate the beginning of the Bronze Age: Nordic bronzes are restricted to the area south of Beitstad, there is a prosperous Central Zone with bronzes derived from the area east of Lake Vnarn, and Jren seems to procure metal from the northeast rather than from Denmark. The North Way in particular, along with a parallel North Way along the Swedish coast, brought the Nordic and the Arctic Bronze Ages into increasing interaction from at least 1500 BC. This process ultimately led to the introduction of significant Arctic styles and technologies down to Jren. The Ananino-KAM features introduced from BA V onwards represent, in my opinion, the most likely candidate for a larger scale migration in the Bronze Age. One scenario that would account for the above would be that the links between Jren and Jutland were broken and that the full extended North Way collapsed c. 700 BC. Jren now went from a position as prosperous middle-man to a position mainly at the receiving southwestern end of both Arctic and Nordic networks running across the interior of the central and northern parts of the Scandinavian Peninsula.

141

Part II Exploring Dense Webs

Through the first strategy aimed at the wide webs of bronze I attempted to have a thorough archaeological look at the bronze data from NW Scandinavia, and wielded the tools of typology, cross-dating and map-making. On this basis I have organized bronzes in time and space, and I have been particularly concerned with issues of the directions and routes through which NW Scandinavia was linked to the outside world. The main results of part I and the first strategy was a chronological trajectory involving nine historical horizons, each with distinct sets of networks. It seems that bronze entered into NW Scandinavia via three major channels: 1) across the Arctic interior to the coast between Rana and Varanger; 2) across the southern interior and alpines to the fjords, and 3) across Skagerrak and the sea to Jren and Lista. A central claim of the introductory chapter is that transformation and displacement of matter discerned through basic archaeological analysis, is at heart of archaeological knowledge. I have also stated that specific explanations and constructions in archaeology should be evaluated along the lines of: are these explanations and constructions able to transform and displace matter in accordance with the initial analysis of data? Part I has brought a foundation for an in depth exploration of the transformation and displacement of metal; we have gotten an impression of which artefacts and what kind of artefacts that most likely were made within the study area, and we have also gotten a clearer view of the general routes through which metal was displaced. It is now time to shift to the second strategy and dive into the dense webs that surrounded metal as it was transformed and displaced (cf. chapt. 1).

142

Chapter 7: Transformation
This will not be an attempt to probe deeply into the metallurgical insides of copper alloys or the chemical processes of metallurgy. I want to get closer to copper alloys in order to frame the multitude of ways these present themselves to human sensory systems. What is important here is how bronze reacts, behaves and changes under circumstances induced by human operations in general, and in particular the operations performed within our area. In this chapter, I will first focus on how to get bronze into a molten state and ready to pour, and then focus on the issue of what to pour into, i.e. moulds and moulding procedures.

7.1. Qualities of copper and bronze

The term bronze is commonly used to designate metals made from copper mixed with more than 2 % tin. Since the majority of the artefacts studied here have not been analyzed for metal composition, bronze will be used as a loose term for copper alloys in general (cf. Jantzen 2008: 7). Copper exists in nature in pure metallic state and such occurrences were probably those first exploited. These could be hammered and beaten into shape and treated much like a soft, malleable stone. The copper industry around Lake Onega was most likely based on such ores, but these were most likely oxidised to such a degree that they had to be melted and cast in moulds in order to release and remove the oxygen embedded in the metal (cf. Tylecote 1987: 179; Chernykh 1992: 180p.). Hence, the first metal artefacts in the Arctic Zone (cf. Map 9) were most likely the result of proper melting and casting procedures. In due course, coppers bound with other minerals were extracted through more complex pyrotechnological procedures. These coppers contained more or less impurities, and high impurity levels changed the quality of the metal and the finished artefact. Intentional alloying, with arsenic or tin, is likely to have been a result of a desire towards some of the qualities of these impure coppers. Both arsenic and tin bring certain qualities to the alloyed metal; in terms of hardness, ductility, colour, and in terms of how it behaves during melting. Significant is the increased hardness of bronze, its lower melting point, and its higher fluidity. The finished product as-cast becomes harder, and the redness of pure copper yields to a more golden finish. In addition, bronze gets harder by compression through coldworking, much more so than copper. In theory, this means that if the edge of a bronze axe is hammered from a thickness of 1mm to 0.5mm its hardness is increased with more than 150% (cf. Tylecote 1987: Fig. 7.4). The brittleness of bronze was useful when it came to hardening edges, but challenging when it came to shaping. No extra measures may be

143 needed in order to coil up a thin rod made from pure copper. But in order to coil a similar rod made of a high tin-bronze alloy, one has to proceed step-wise and heat the rod to more than 500 & several times in order to reset the hardening that takes place inside the rod as it is bent. If not it is likely to break. This reseting of the internal structure through heating is called anealing (Tylecote 1987: 247). Not only does bronze melt at a lower temperature than copper, it also becomes more fluid than copper. In short, these were qualities that facilitated casting, but made mechanical treatment more difficult: bronze can be cast in more complex moulds than copper, while copper are more easily hammered into complex shapes than bronze (cf. Jantzen 2008: 8). Bronze (copper with 10% tin) melts at about 986 &. But it is necessary to have a surplus temperature, or overheat, otherwise the bronze will solidify once it is removed from the source of heat. The recommended casting temperatures for tin-bronze in modern foundries are 1150-1250 & for thin castings and 1048-1150 & for heavy castings (Ammen 2000: 408). This means that in a modern foundry, in cases of thin, difficult castings, bronze might be heated to over 1300 & allowing some time to pass before casting at 1250 &. Copper and bronze are relatively difficult metals to melt and cast successfully. They are both prone to oxidization, copper much more so than bronze. Oxidization refers to the process in which metals attract oxygen and together they form oxides (Ammen 2000: 261). In this respect too bronze was advantageous since it is less attracted to oxygen than copper. It is thus easier to achieve a crucible full of gas-free metal ready to pour when using bronze. In a modern foundry copper and copper-alloys are melted in a slightly oxidised atmosphere with a floating cover to protect the metal from oxygen. As the metal reaches 550 & and turns dull red, it starts to attract oxygen and other impurities if they are available in the atmosphere. At this stage the founder will open the furnace and sprincle a powdery substance that will stick to the metal scrap in the crucible and protect its surface. This is a compound that consists of materials for adherance and materials for burning oxygen (e.g. silica and charcoal). As the metal melts, more powder it added in order to form a tight cover floating on top of the melt. When the crucible is retreaved from the furnace, the cover and slag is removed from the surface of the molten metal. At this stage the founder might also stir additives into the melt, additives that facilitate the release of any gases and impurities that were already in the scrap metal from the start or that entered during melting. This operation is referred to as degassing or deoxidizing.

144

Fig. 6: Temperatures, colours (in the dark) and melting points.

By stirring in a substance that is even more attracted to oxygen than copper is, any metaloxyds in the melt will be deprived of their oxygen and return to a metallic state. Lithium or phosphorous are the most used such additives today (Ammen 2000: 260p.). Charcoal is also a good protector against oxygen since it burns oxygen before it enters the melt. Melting in a charcoal fired pit in the ground might be a dirty business compared to modern procedures, but it has positive effects on the melt in terms of unwanted gasses being burned by charcoal. Even in modern traditional foundries cheap alternatives and precausions are made. Ammen states that in his early days in a foundry in southern USA, pure copper was usually melted with a generous cover of charcoal but never on a rainy day (ibid: 244). There is no simple universal rule as to what will work and what will not. We

145 here arrive at two important lessons: the first is that bronze casting is a complex interrelated web and casting a flat axe that is to be hammered and ground into shape, and casting a large thin belt plate with intricate spiral ornaments, are entirely different projects. The other is related to the critiques against the sciences of nature presented in the first chapter: it is only in a laboratory, and barely there, that it is possible to control, measure and take into account all relevant agents in melting and casting bronze. What is needed in terms of precausions like crucible covers and degassing depends on the kind of furnace, the kind of fuel, the amount and speed of draft, types of moulding material, the shape of artefact being made and attitudes towards what is a satisfactory casting and what is not. Some of the terms and definitions used in modern bronze casting indicate some of the crucial challenges of melting and pouring. Blowy metal refers to a situation:
[...] when a metal is gassed in melting to the point that it kicks and churns in the furnace or ladle, it [...] should not be poured unless it can be saved by degassing or deoxidizing. With most metals simply re-melting again under the correct conditions will correct the problem. Metal poured into a wet or incompletely dried ladle will kick and blow. (ibid: 219).

Blows are:
[...] round to elongated holes caused by the generation or accumulation of entrapped gas or air (ibid: 218).

A cold shut is when:

[...] two streams of metal in a mold fail to weld together. This defect is usually caused by a metal too cold poured too slowly or a gating system improperly designed so that the mold cannot be filled fast enough (ibid: 241).

A bubble creates a casting that:

[...] will resemble a cold shut or look like it was poured short. The problem was a slacked or interrupted pour. When pouring a casting, the metal must be poured at a constant choked velocity. If you slack off or reduce the velocity, you can cause this defect. If you interrupt the pour, start-stop-and-start, only for a second you may cause a bubble. A great percentage of lost castings is caused by pouring improperly (ibid: 219).

I quote Ammen on these matters for two reasons: 1) it is likely that these problems were relevant in the Bronze Age and that these same flaws can be seen on bronze artefacts from the Bronze Age; 2) as precautions in a casting handbook from 2000 AD they demonstrate that bronze casting has never been and is still not an activity in which the outcome can be guarantied.

146 That bronze in given circumstances might kick, churn and blow, brings us to the importance of sensory experience and sound and vision in particular. There are rhythmic sounds of cold forced air meating the heat-centre of the fire. And more important than heat and states of heates in an age without measuring devices for temperature, was the colour spectre from the faintest red, through a full blood red, a full cherry red, a deep orange, and finally the yellow and the light yellow associated with bronze shifting from solid to liquid state and a proper overheat (Fig. 6). It is important to keep these qualities of copper and bronze in mind when evaluating indications of how copper and bronze were transformed in the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia. The process from scrap to finished artefact is focused on a number of phenomena that might best be recognized as containers with contents. Casting is about containers, the qualities of their skins, the qualities of their contents and aspects of the emptying and filling of them: the furnace and its fuel; the crucible and the mould and their metallic contents about to melt or solidify; the bellows with their flexible walls and the air that enters and leaves. I believe this is a fertile framework for exploring and illuminating the dense webs of bronze casting.

7.2. The melting of bronze

Although making a bronze artefact is an integrated whole, let us for a while forget about the vessel that we are going to pour bronze into (the mould), and focus on the melting and pouring. It is quite possible to frame the melting projects made within NW Scandinavia. The heaviest objects that we have reason to believe were cast within the area under study, are: the swords made in the Slottsvik mould (M 2) which would probably range somewere between 700 to 800g; some of the Faardrup axes ranging from Tjelta (nr. 415) at 885g, rekol (nr. 416) at 1250g and Viset (nr. 419) at 1731g, and the younger shaft-hole axe from Raknes (nr. 425) with its provincial ornaments at 1300g. The heaviest artefact from the area is the axe from Rimbareid (nr.424) at 2248g, but this is perhaps less likely to have been a local casting. The Faardrup axe from Kvanngardsnes (nr. 417), clearly a flawed casting with pitted surface, weighs 980g and, along with the axe from Raknes and the Slottsvik mould, these are the most convincing indications that bronze loads above 1000g were being melted 16001500BC, 1340-1300BC and 1100-900BC in the Central Zone. Some of the flanged axes of Hheim-Steine type are also likely to have been made within the Central Zone, ranging from Blindheim (nr. 396) at 57g, Hheim (nr. 394) at 281g

147 and Steine (nr. 391) at 550g. The flanged axes type Oldendorf from Rogaland ranges from Line (nr.383) at 160g, Trland (nr. 386) at 173g, Idse (nr.381) at 203g, and Haugesund (nr. 382) at 351g (Thune and Holen have not been weighed). The full-size paalstaves of Norddeutsche type make up a tight group: Jren (nr. 406) at 303g, Helleve (nr. 408) at 309g and Orty (nr. 407) at 318g, and the mould from Voile (M 28) is likely to have contained similar amounts. The socketed axes from BA III do not exeed 250g. In a Southern Scandinavian perspective, axes from the LBA are socketed and generally small and light weight. In this respect it is interresting to note that the axe from BA IV from Gar (nr. 515) weighs 279g, and that also those cast in the moulds from Nyhamar (M 16-17) seem to be heavier than BA IV axes in general, and in fact heavier than all the BA III axes that have been weighed (the axes from the B hoard is likely to be in the same range). In light of the general decrease in size and weight of axes through the Nordic LBA, it is also clear that the long-necked axes are at odds. The heaviest specimen is the axe of the Norwegian variant from Sln in Voss (nr. 461) at 374g. The small axes from BA V-VI often weighes no more than 50g. The great majority of artefacts are less than 200g: tweezers, double-studs and razors typically 5-15g; a medium sized belt plate with spirals in two zones typically 110-140g (the Rege plate weighs 420g); ribbed bracelets typically 40-110g; and large EBA neck-collars typically 140-180g. The burial assemblages are thus rarely impressive in the amounts of metal, nor by the melting procedures used, but by the complex moulding procedures used. Hence, we may focus on the melting of loads of bronze between 100-1350g. As bronze weighs 8.8-8.9g pr. ml (Kock 2001: 23), this correspond to volumes 11-113 ml. Jantzen has grouped crucibles in three sizes, GK I, 25-40 cm/225-350g, GK II, 40120cm/350-1070g, GK III, more than 120cm/1070g (Jantzen 2008: 197). A GK I crucible would have been capable of melting loads for the majority of the functional axes, jewellery, daggers and knives in our area. But importantly, the shaft-hole axes and the Slottsvik mould indicate that GK II and III crucibles were handled within the Stadt-Tingvollfjord area.

7.2.1. Crucible
The crucible, the cup that holds the load of bronze during melting, has always been at the nexus of the web that transforms bronze. This is the entity that is exposed to the harshest treatment, the most extreme temperatures, the most extreme shifts in temperature and to the strain of being moved while hot. A crucible might be explored in terms of its qualities for: 1) withstanding high and shifting temperatures, 2) handling, 3) pouring and 4) protecting its

148 metal content against gasses and impurities. A crucible must be made of materials that can stand the high temperatures without smelting. As important is that the crucible must withstand swift shifts in temperature. These concerns are central to the subject of refractory mixtures. Such a mixture must contain some kind of binder that holds the cup together, at least until it has been burned at high temperatures. Clay has been the most suitable binder until recently. Next, there has to be a mineral component, being more refractory than the clay, a kind of sand. In addition there might be added some organic elements which are transformed to pores and holes as the crucible is heated, making a porous crucible-wall. Experiments and data makes clear that medium quality earthern ware clay mixed with 50 percent of quality sands can do the job, at least once. Quartz grains in particular increase the performance of crucibles (Martinn-Torres et. al. 2006: 437). In reality the clay ought to be a stoneware clay with smelting temperatures above 1200 &, and these are generally not available in Scandinavia. Tylecote sees the natural availability of proper clays as a cause of divergent courses when it comes to innovations in crucible technology in Medieval Europe. Those areas that lacked proper clays show greater innovations towards true, complex refractory mixtures. Other areas in which clay with sufficient contents of sand could be dug right out from the ground, do not show comparable innovations (1987: 189p.). Hence, while it is relatively easy to make a crucible that can do the task once or twice, crucibles withstanding 20 ordeals were something else - and true refractory crucibles withstanding hundreds of meltings were probably not made until the Middle Ages. From the 15th century AD crucibles from Hessen, Germany, became reknown for their stability and endurance, and their secret, a content of mullit, have only recently been revealed (Martinn-Torres et. al. 2006) The shape of a crucible might be a compromise that facilitates handling, pouring and protection of the metal. The crucible must be retreaved, carried and poured while its skin is a burning 1100 &. This is done by thongs, ranging from a pair of simple wooden sticks to specially fitted iron thongs. Iron thongs were a noticible innovation as they gave a stable and secure grip. The wooden variants most likely used in the Bronze Age, on the other hand, will burn and can never give a stable grip since its surface constantly changes. Thus, crucibles must be designed so that they can be handled with confidence with the thongs and tools at hand. Then, there is the rim, potentially equipped with a pouring spout that facilitates control of direction and size of the stream. In addition the overall shape of crucibles might to a larger or lesser extent work as a protector between the metal and the outside. Tall narrow crucibles

149 like medieval and modern crucibles expose only a relatively small surface of the metal to the outside. Crucibles may also be constructed as closed, disposable containers, for total protection of the metal. Scandinavian Migration and Merovingian Period crucibles were made in this way (Sderberg 2002: 255). Quite on the contrary, the Bronze Age variants are low and wide and expose a relatively large surface of metal.

Fig. 7: Bronze Age melting procedure

From the crucibles, moulds and from the artefacts themselves, we get some hints as to how much bronze was melted and cast. Beyond this information, the crucibles carry quite a bit of information as to how melting was conducted. They are, compared to more recent crucibles, low and wide. They also show a disproportionate degree of heat-damage on the rims compared to the sides and bottom (cf. Jantzen 2008: Abb. 71-72). These two features indicate that melting in the Bronze Age was done by heating crucible and metal from above, i.e. that forced air was directed towards fuel resting on top of the loaded crucible (Fig. 7;

150 Zimmer 1990: 150p.; Jantzen 2008: 194). Summing up, it seems that the same basic type of crucible was used throughout the Bronze Age, for small and large meltings, and probably for casting both simple and complex moulds. This might indicate that despite the heterogenous body of artefacts made in the Bronze Age, the melting procedure was basically the same. From the simulations and trials (cf. App. VI) I gained some insights into the making and use of crucibles. Authentic crucibles generally show a high level of quartz, so high that it is likely to have been added intentionally. The sharp grains support this idea, and indicate that quartz was burned and crushed for this purpose (cf. Jantzen 2008: 193; Goldhahn 2007: 124). Quartz burned at high temperatures is quite easy to crush and grind into sand, but this demands quite a bit of fuel. It is difficult and time consuming to add a large amount of dry sand into plastic wet clay by hand. It is therefore likely that clay to was dried and crushed, and that particles of dry clay and quartz, and possibly from some organic substance, were mixed in proper proportions before adding moisture. The clay used for my simulations was industrially processed clay imported from Denmark. It is of the same general earthenware clay found throughout Scandinavia resistant to temperatures up to c. 1030 &. My clay has been industrially cleansed for impurities, and is thus not quite comparable to clays found in the ground. The measure of temper, how much to add, is likely to have been as much as possible without loosing the plasticity needed to shape the mix into a crucible. Quartz can stand temperatures up to 1700 & and it serves the purpose both of making the clay-mix more robust against temperature-shifts (thermal shock), more robust against high temperatures, and against direct blows (Martinn-Torres et. al. 2006: 437). The crucible is not a complex form compared to other ceramic vessels, and it is unlikely that e.g. a coil-procedure was used in their manufacture. Such a crucible is easily made with a thumb-ball method in the palm of ones hand. But the extremely low plasticity from high quartz contents makes small cracks occur, particularly at the rim. These are not a big problem, as these refractory mixes never blow up during firing in the way that an ordinary ceramic vessel would. It is very stabile, there is insignificant shrinkage, and moist escapes easily and rapid. On the other hand, such cracks could develop into larger cracks; bronze might penetrate, solidify, shrink and expand again and these cracks could turn out to become the end of the crucible. One way to shape a crucible from maximum tempered clays would be to use a template of wood with the internal shape of the crucible. In this way, clay could be beaten and fused together more confidently. On the other hand, there seems to

151 be great variation in details on crucible-sherds from one and the same site, an indication that they were made by hand without such facilities. The crucible is placed on the bottom of the furnace, and remains there until it is time to cast. What becomes clear when attempting to get hold of and move a red hot brimful BA type crucible with simple wooden thongs, is that the shape of the crucible makes lifting from a vertical position very difficult. The thongs are burning and there is low friction between the crucible and the thong. This could easily fail in two ways: the crucible slips half way up, breaking or at least spilling all bronze on the ground; or, in order to keep high friction the caster squeezes the thongs to hard around the crucible, crushing the crucible and making an even more uncontrolled spillage of bronze. This is more challenging the heavier the crucible, and since it was a problem for me with loads of 300g, I suspect that it was not done with loads more than 1000g. On the other hand, grabbing the crucible horizontally, one stick against the flat bottom and the other resting on two sections of the rim, gives much more control. In this way the coldest part of the crucible, the bottom, rests on the lower thong, while the upper thong keeps it from capsizing. The flattened rim on some preserved crucibles could very well be the result of the upper thong pressing down on the soft, yellow rim at 1100 &. A problem with the horizontal grip is to get one stick underneath the crucible in the first place. If molten bronze levelles to about 10mm underneat the rim, only a small tilting of the crucible would lead to spillage. This means that if one forces a stick between the crucible and the floor of the furnace, this would be enough for a spillage. Through the simulations I found that a horseshoe shaped furnace with a simple groove in its floor for a thong to slide underneath the crucible, made it easier to get hold of the crucible without tilting it. This could also be achieved by placing the crucible on two stones or blocks of clay with some space between them. A furnace with one open side has advantages: it is easier to get the horizontal grip on the crucible and it is easier to shovel charcoal in and out of the furnace. To prevent loss of heat through this opening and to make it easier to keep charcoal in place, a large piece of wood or a suitable stone could be placed in the opening. The topdown melting procedure does not lend itself to domed furnaces. But heat loss upwards could also be prevented by covering the furnace with blocks of refractory clay, stone slabs or even solid pieces of wood during melting. In this way the advantages of complex furnaces are gained simply by separate disposable pieces that are shifted around during melting. A crucible ends its trajectory sooner or later for a variety of reasons: 1) a crucible melts from too direct and too high temperatures relative to the quality of the clay. This is

152 either a result of an excessive heat development, combined with misplacing the crucible relative to the tuyere and the air-stream; or it is the result of bad crucible material, clay containing low-melting minerals, too little quartz etc. This melting will occur on the rim and reduce the height of the crucible walls. It will to a certain degree occur also with careful use and proper materials, and in the end the rim of the crucible will have been reduced, and thus the volume of the crucible, to such a degree that it is discarded. 2) Although a high quality refractory crucible is very robust against extreme shifts in temperature, it is not very robust against direct blows. Many a crucible might also have ended its trajectory by simply being dropped. 3) Clearing the crucible after use for slags and impurites around the rim, is best done while the crucible is still hot and the slags still plastic. If this is not done, slags will grow and choke the crucible and reduce its volume. The removal of slags before they solidify might also be hazardous, and if slags are too solid and too much force is used, one might tear the crucible apart. Typically, the founder is for some reason delayed emediately after pouring and slags are already sticking to the rim and getting solid when he is ready to clear the crucible. Hence, maintainace is likely to sometimes have ended in failure. The signs of repair on many crucibles clearly indicate that many of them had a lifespan well beyond a single casting. It seems that these repairs were largely about restoring a smooth inside of the crucible, possibly preventing liquid bronze from entering into tiny cracks.

7.2.2. Fuel
Fuel in Bronze Age casting technology is an interresting question: plain firewood or charcoal, any woods or dense hardwoods only? What are the prerequisites of the laws of nature? Charcoal made from medium quality species, even low quality species, and even uncarbonized firewood (Hirsch & Trachsel 2001) can melt bronze; but it takes longer, it is less predictable, more heat is spilled on the surroundings, and it takes more in volume. This means that if using firewood or low quality charcoal, more trees have to felled and split. During melting the founder will have to be more active, to keep constant watch on the furnace, constantly refilling cold fuel into the perimeter of the fire, and constantly moving pieces of fuel from the perimeter to the center of the furnace. When using low quality fuels the founder runs a higher risk that he do no reach the necessary temperatures or that the metal is left unprotected against the airstream from the tuyere. Quality made charcoal is almost pure carbon while wood contains, in this context, a lot of waste products (Belbo & Gjlst 2008: fig.5). For this reason charcoal also creates a more carbon rich, reducing or oxygen-starved athmosphere, important for the protection of bronze against oxygen (cf.

153 Harding 2000: 217). My general impression of BA melting practices is in line with that of most experimental founders: that of small fuel-effective, charcoal fired heat-chambers, a small intence heat encapsulating little more than the crucible, rather than a large and fierce fire. The latter is simply more difficult to work in and around. Beech (Fagus and Nothofagus), ash (Fraxinus), oak (Quercus), maple (Acer), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) and birch (Betula) are high quality fuels as a result of their high density, beech on top with 3000 kwh and birch at the bottom with 2650 kwh pr. 1000l16. Then there are species of medium quality such as pine (Pinus), European alder (Alnus glutinosa) and willow (Salix) between 2350 and 2290 kwh, and low quality species such as spruce (Picea), aspen (Populus tremula) and grey alder (Alnus incana) between 2000-1900 kwh. There is thus a 50 % potential gain to be made by using beech in stead of spruce. The calorific value is moreover almost doubled when wood is made into charcoal. From the iron smelting sites of later prehistory, as well as historical copper and iron smelting industry from this area we learn that pine dominated for charcoal fuels (Leirfall 1968: 345pp). Charcoal for forging and welding, though, was made from broad-leaved trees, often birch (ibid: 346, 374). It is important to recognice that the later iron smelters operated on an entirely different scale, they had different logistical factors to concider, they had a colder climate, and they operated after an agricultural expansion in the BA/IA transition which exhausted forested areas. Around the lowland agricultural settlements in the Bronze Age there would still have been a variety of high quality species in the BA, and birch and rowan are likely to have been available almost everywhere. The low scale of bronze casting in the Bronze Age would have made it possible to prefer high quality species such as beech, ash or oak. My own simulations are all made with charcoal made from birch and in my experience birch works fine for castings of medium size and complexity. While charcoal from birch would have a calorific value c. 5200kwh, beech would approach 6000kwh. The founder that cast the paper-thin large diametered belt plate from Vigrestad (nr. 155) might have preferred this extra energy in order to bring bronze confidently to its extreme fluidity above 1200 &. The technology of dry-distillation or charcoal burning in its ideal form has four phases: 1) a phase of combustion with ample access to oxygen, 2) a phase of dehydration with reduced access to oxygen, in which moisture is released, 3) an eksoterm phase in which there are no oxygen, the structure of the wood changes and the heat rises, and finally 4) a phase of cooling, in which there must be absolutely no oxygen available. The purpose of this is simply to remove as much as possible of the contents exept for carbon. A variety of

154 technologies for making charcoal are known from etnographic and historical sources. A lot of these technologies are or were related to large scale iron smelting, and were adjusted to this purpose. Most common is the carburization of wood in a pit in the ground in which fire is deprived of oxygen by a layer of turf. These pits could be round, probably getting the more balanced and effective burning, but logs have to be processed into relatively smaller pieces. Pits could also be rectangular or elongated, facilitating the direct burning of longer pieces of wood. If operating on a small scale (e.g. two trees at the time), the round pit would need pieces cut down into lenghts of c. 80 cm or smaller; while an elongated pit could burn split logs of 1.5-2m length. It is important to acknowledge that each cut is comparable to felling a three, i.e. chopping a 4m tall tree down and into 80 cm lengths equals the felling of 6 trees. If operating at a larger scale the round pit could again become the more effective when there are enough long pieces to stack in a circle. The challenge of the long pit is to get a balanced fire burning in the entire length of the pit. Such a pit need not necessarily be cut into sterile underground, and it need not be very deep. If turf was plenty at the location, charcoal could be burned in a shallow pit in the top soil. This alternative would leave traces easily distorted by plowing or hard to recognice in the forests of today, explaining why we have not found them. The first step in a trajectory from tree to fuel was getting the tree down. It had to be felled either by axe, fire or a prolonged killing-and-waiting process. The founder needed quality fuel for the furnace from the log since the heating effect of grown trees is much higher than from branches or younger trees. The process from standing tree to charcoal is a process of fragmentation and removal of moisture. A freshly cut log containes 50 % moisture in summer, and what we conventionally concider as dry firing wood contains about 20 % moisture. Chain saws have made it common-sence to fell trees in the winter season before sap has risen. Early prehistoric tools, though, made it much more rewarding to work in the green. If a tree cut down during summer is left lying on the ground with its branches intact the level of moisture sinks drastically within hours and days. Within 6 days the level of moisture sinks from 50 % to 35 % (cf. note 16). Still, the Bronze Age charcoal maker would need a certain level of moisture in order to cleave the log using only tools of stone, bone and antler, and for cutting the log into suitable lenghts. It is thus likely that the founder preferred to do all splitting and cutting while the wood was green, and rather wait longer for the wood to dry. If so, the wood could now be placed for drying until the final removal of moisture in a prosess of dry-distillation.

155 I made a trial in order to simulate the process from standing tree to charcoal in furnace. The equipment was a hafted paalstave, a birch mallet and oak wedges. I calculated that a birch trunk 20 cm in diameter at the ground contained c. 95 l wood (branches excluded). It was felled in 13 minutes and within a total of 2 hours intensive labour the tree had been felled, branches removed, trunk chopped into lengths of 1.5m and split into halves and the larger pieces into quarters (5 splittings in total). The 95 l processed wood was dried and later distilled into c.40 l charcoal in a steel-barrel. In theory, the same result could have been achieved in a rectangular pit in the ground. These 40l of charcoal would be enough for 4 castings with a large GK II crucible containing 300-400g metal, e.g. enough to make four of the heaviest paalstaves or socketed axes. If each casting session takes 30 minutes the 2 hours spent on processing wood (chopping not distillation) would equal the time spent on casting. Importantly, there ought to be a significant delay between processing wood (while wet/green) and distillation (while dry). A likely scenario would be that trees were processed in summer with maximum sap and left in a dry place until winter, or better, until next summer. An efficient method would be to store the processed wood and distil it in the vicinity of where the trees grew, i.e. outside the settlement. The distilled charcoal would have minimized volume and weight compared to whole trunks or processed wood, and could be carried to the foundry with more ease (50% reduction in volume, 70% reduction in weight, cf. Harding 2000: 217). A household with an adult woman, children and two males using two heavy bronze axes and a kit of mallets and wedges could probably in two good summer days work have 800 l, more than 1.5 tons, of cut and split birch wood as well as branches and large amounts of birch-bark ready in a dry place. Next summer this could be distilled through 3-4 full diurnal sessions to charcoal in a single pit. Finally, the result would be 6 loads of 40kg each that could be carried on back to the foundry. They would now have fuel for at least 80, probably as many as 100 castings, and potentially enough fuel to transform more than 32kg of bronze into artefacts. Charcoal might of course also have been used for other purposes, e.g. for burning clay moulds in separate furnaces. Still, I believe the above indicates that charcoal was not a limiting factor to bronze casting in the Bronze Age. It was a factor that demanded a certain degree of planning but it could easily have been linked up to other cycluses of gathering, processing and drying: bark for vessels, roof thatching and pitch, and wood for a range of other purposes such as bows, arrow-shafts, hafts, posts, fences etc.

156

7.2.3. Tuyere
A tuyere is a refractory tube that leads the air stream into the furnace. A number of tuyeres with a bent front section have come to light within the Nordic Zone (cf. Jantzen 2008; Melheim 2008). Such angular tuyeres used in combination with low and wide crucibles strenghten the idea of a top-down melting procedure in the Bronze Age. A similar effect might have been achieved by a straight tuyere tilted down towards the crucible, but this would definately lead to increased strain on the rim of the crucible. A straight tuyere would have to be tilted at least 40 in order to produce sufficient heat (Zimmer 1990: 150). A refractory quality comparable to the crucible-mix is not needed for the tuyere. Cool air flows through the pipe continuously, and there is still some space between the fuel and the mouth, another advantage of a top-down method of melting. Jantzen argues that an tuyere with an angle c. 70 LV DGYDQWDJHRXV LQ WKDW WKH PRXWK RI WKH WX\HUH LV QRW SODFHG straight above the crucible and the heat centre (2008: 32). This means that such a tuyere could be made from a mixture comparable e.g. to that of the roughest of household wares or for the furnace: heavily tempered with straw, dung and coarse sands. I have found that grass or straws are useful also as armament during the making of the tuyere. An angular tuyere could be made most easily and safe by using a disposable template of wood or wax shaped like the insides of the tuyere. The angle prevents this templete from being removed and used anew; rather it would have to be burned away. A wooden template would in this case be ruined, while the wax at least could be collected in a vessel. The latter would have demanded quite a large amount of wax/pitch. On the other hand, with some experience such a tuyere can also be made on a straight, smooth and tapering wooden template, such as those well known from ethnography for making straight tuyeres. When the clay has set but still not lost its plasticity, the template is carefully released, and the front piece of the tuyere is carefully bent into shape. The challenge here is to work within the right stage as the clay goes from plastic to hard, and to not distort the entire tuyere. If the front section of the straight tuyere is kept under a moist cloth, the rear section will dry faster and give better support when working with the front. The markings on the insides of original tuyeres indicate that they were made on a straight, rotating and retrievable template (ibid: 32). The decorative attributes seen on several original tuyeres also had to be added before the clay lost its ability to be fused. Although the making of pottery involved quite different procedures, experience with the plasticity and workability of clay would clearly be useful.

157 The nozzle of the tuyere, together with the size of the bellows, is a crucial component in the air-supply system. A large nozzle makes it easy to deliver the full air-volume of the bellows into the furnace, but gives the air stream less speed or pressure. High speed and pressure is advantagous in order for air to penetrate the pile of charcoal on top of the crucible, i.e. to heat properly in the vertical direction. On the other hand, a wide opening brings a larger volume of air, but heat more superficially in the horizontal. There is thus the choice between a deep and narrow heat from the small nozzle, versus a shallow and wider heat from the large nozzle. Jantzens experiments with a copy of the tuyere from Store Heddinge, with an angle of 70 DQG D nozzle of merely 14mm, demonstrated that it was both highly robust and effective. The increase in nozzle size from 14mm to 20mm, using two bellows with 80 l volume each, led to a significant reduction in speed of air from 163km/h to 80km/h (2008: 32p., notes 20-21). It must be noted that the majority of tuyeres are fragmented without nozzles preserved (cf. ibid: nr. 258-264). It is also possible to complicate matters of ideal nozzle sizes: a large nozzle working poorly with a large pile of low-quality fuel on top of crucible, might have worked well with a smaller pile of top-quality fuel on top of crucible. Again, bronze casting is a highly complex web of interrelated enteties.

7.2.4. Bellows
Constructions to produce an air stream come in a wide variety, but they are generally either of a piston prinsiple or a bellow prinsiple. The first is a movable piston that forces air out of a stable tube fitted around the piston. This seems to be popular in areas where proper tubes are easily available, e.g. in the shape of bamboo. The bellow on the other hand forces the air within a flexible container by the collapse of the actual container walls. Both principles can be worked in pairs to obtain a more continous stream of air. Both also have to make sure that fresh air is sucked in, rather than hot low-oxygen air from the furnace. It is assumed that the method of air-supply in the European Bronze Age was some kind of bellows. The simplest variant is a bag that, with some exercise, can be emptied and filled with air. This variant could be improved by making tops and bottoms for the bag from harder materials, in order to get a more efficient filling and emptying of the bag. One version is the pot-bellow popular in the Near East, in which a bag is tied around the rim of a vessel. Another are the so-called mandolin or concertina bellows with wooden plates mounted in the bottom and the top, known from medieval Europe and Scandinavia (Tylecote 1987: 115). All bellows seem to be based on the flexible, airtight, mid-section made from skin. Bellows would also have to be sized in proportion to the size of the furnace and the crucible.

158 For large bellows one would have to use skins from larger animals (cattle, horse, deer), or make an airtight joining of several smaller skins, and one would have to join together two or more boards for the top and bottom sections. In my trials I explored a minimum alternative in terms of size in an attempt to avoid some of these time consuming tasks. A pair of conventional mandolin bellows was made from a pair of sheep skins, and two pine boards 35cm broad and 1.2m long. Such boards could have been made by splitting a large trunk. Each board was cut in half, and the four pieces were cut into a mandolin shape with a hafted paalstave. Holes were made with a red-hot awl (like the one from Dvingen, nr. 359) heated in the furnace, around the perimeter of the plates for the skin and for the handle as well as for fastening a piece of skin working as a valve in the bottom. This burning of holes with a bronze awl, or in fact any small rod of bronze, worked quite well, but it was still a time consuming task to make this many holes. The holes for the valves were cut with a socketed chisel (like the one from rnes, nr. 519). In order to gain maximum volume from each skin, the skins were cut into several pieces and sewn together again. Then each bellow was assembled and the skin sewed on with modern treads with pitch on. This was also a time consuming task, because of the type of stitching chosen relative to the size of the holes made. Between the insides of the skin-walls I fastened a skin strap in order to keep the distance and make sure that all air would leave the bellows. Trials indicated to me that an internal floor-valve was both easier to make and more efficient than an internal top-valve: simply a skin-flap raized by the vacuum and pressed down by the pressure. I calculated the volume in these bellows to 20-23l each, thus only of those used by Jantzen in his experiments (2008: 32p., notes 20-21). This indicates that simple bellows made from the skin of a single sheep or goat (without top and bottom boards) would have even less capazity, possibly around 15 l. These trials seem to me an indication that large mandolin bellows with a capacity more than 30l were quite significant projects of wood and skin working, much more so than making highly functional tuyeres, crucibles, furnaces or fuel. Smaller bellows certainly work but they demand more of the person handling the bellows, and they also make the quality of the fuel more critical. To avoid making a mandolin-bellow, and avoid sowing together a bag from a skin skinned with conventional procedures; the skin could be taken off the animal with a procedure particularly suited for getting a ready made bag. Such skinning procedures are known from many areas, including Northern Europe. In Norway such a skinning procedure were used until recently for the purpose of making floaters to be used at sea. Interestingly,

159 the procedure is termed belgfling, literally meaning bellow-skinning (Lightfoot 2007). This is seemingly at odds with depictions indicating that mandolin-bellows were used at least in the early Medieval Period (Tylecote 1987: 115). But an evolutionary trajectory from simple skin-bags to mandolin-bellows is likely to have involved a phase in which mandolinplates were simply fasten onto the skin-bag. This would make an airtight joining of skin and wood less critical, but the boards would add nothing to the volume of the bellows. It might have been bellows of this type that were used in the Medieval Period, and this procedure might have kept the term bellow-skinning alive in the Norwegian language.

7.2.5. Furnace
There are some universal demands on a charcoal fired bronze-casting furnace: access to refill charcoal, access to the crucible, keeping the charcoal in place, and preventing heat loss. If we combine these features with the assumed top-down melting procedure, an angular tuyere and a low and wide crucible, we get a rather clear image of Bronze Age furnaces. That we have trouble finding them is not a mystery since a highly functional furnace according to the above, might be a very small and rather indistinct structure (cf. Sderberg 1992: 255pp.). In terms of insulation we could choose between thick walls above ground, or more careless walls in the ground. A pit made in sandy soils would satisfy the demands for insulation. The problem with sand is that without any clay binding it would dry from heat, and the walls would collapse. Mixing in some clay for binding the sand, or lining the pit with stone, would keep its walls vertical. Stone, depending on its quality, is prone to crack from thermal shock. But careful warming and a careful selection of stones would in fact be sufficient. The accessibility, particularly for reaching the crucible, is significantly improved by making the pit open ended, i.e. horse-shoe shaped. It is important to acknowledge that the furnace, its walls and its floor, is exposed to significantly lower temperature than the crucible, or the nozzle of the tuyere. This means that one of our most significant indicators, vitrified and glazed clay-sands, would not be formed on the furnace. During all my trials I used a simple horse-shoe shaped furnace. A rough mixture of dry and crushed clay, coarse sands and generous portions of straws were mixed well while dry. Water was added and the mixture was left for several days while the moisture evaporated; only stirring once in a while. Then a pit was made in the ground, and the furnace was built in a single operation with walls 3-4cm thick. When the furnace had dried for 24 hours (in dry summer time), a small fire was lit inside it, and gradually increased during 4-5 hours. If temper is generous and well mixed into the clay, one could probably complete such

160 a project in shorter time. It is useful to have the tuyere to be used at hand during the construction of the furnace, and make a good fit for the tuyere by simply pressing it into a thick slab of clay left on the ground at the tuyere-end of the furnace. There is little information available about the specific nature of melting projects in NW Scandinavia, other than the amounts inferred from moulds and artefacts. When it comes to the crucial containers that were to receive molten bronze and whose walls would decide the shape of the castings, the data is more rewarding.

7.3. The making of moulds

Bi-valve (clay, stone, bronze), lost-wax and sand moulding, are the most common concepts for describing different moulding practices in prehistory (e.g. Tylecote 1987: 209pp.). This analytic apparatus stem from descriptions of the typical moulding practices used historically in Europe: a complex lost wax technique for unique, complex artefacts (art); a less complex sand moulding technique for less complex artefacts, and the use of stable, reusable bi-valve moulds for mass-production of simpler shapes. This rather simplistic terminology tends to hide nuances and variations that are relevant in order to close in on prehistoric practices. It is important to realize that the above terms are biased as they highlight only single aspects of complex operational chains. For instance, lost-wax or cire-perdue highlight the principle of melting wax templates out of the mould (loosing them). This might lead to the view that wax templates are used only together with closed moulds, since closed moulds necessitate the loosing of the template. This tends to hide the fact that wax templates have other qualities besides being lost, and that other materials than wax might also be lost. Lost-wax procedures have also been intimately linked to complexity in both technology and social organisation. A good place to start a more open minded presentation of moulding principles is by making a distinction between hard and soft moulding materials. A cavity in a stone mould simply has to be carved by edge-tools. A bronze mould is also a bronze artefact, and must be made aided by some other moulding technique (probably a lost-wax procedure). Let us first take a look at soft moulding materials. Soft moulding might be explored along degrees of moisture (wet and dry), and along degrees of binder. This brings a floating continuity between the extremes of a wet clay slur to a dry sand, both extremes typical of modern bronze casting (cf. Thomas 1995; Ammen 2000; Birks 2001). Soft moulding mediums will in fact always be compounds of sand and binder (clay etc.), and sand-casting proper

161 designates a moulding medium with so little binder that it cannot hold itself together without being rammed into a box or frame. The advantages are that the mould can be cast instantly, without curing (heating, burning), that a significant part of the moulding medium can be recycled, and that the porosity of the medium transport gasses well.

Fig. 8: Mould terminology (bi-valve mould with core for socketed axe).

It is difficult to shape more than the simplest of cavities in a soft medium using fingers or small tools. This is partly because in a mould with two or more valves, there is a cavity to be shaped (the one that is to receive bronze), and a parting face that is not to be distorted (cf. Fig. 8). This is the main reason why templates are so fundamental to soft moulding. A template is simply a copy of the artefact to be cast, and may in principle be made from a wide range of materials. Thus, a significant first step in making bronzes through soft moulding techniques is the making of templates. And here we arrive at another crucial aspect of wax: it can be made into shapes that other materials cannot, i.e. twisted, bent, coiled, stretched etc. It is also worth considering that it might in many cases be easier to make the same form in wax than in wood; i.e. that it is the versatility of wax rather than its potential for being lost that makes it a preferred medium for templates. Brass casters of the Bihar and Dariapur districts of India, studied by Lee Horne, claim that template-making, from resin and bees wax, was the most difficult part of the entire technological project (Horne 1995: 276). When taking a look at the Nordic Bronze Age gallery with template-making in

162 mind, it becomes clear that there are potentially a multitude of unexplored challenges. Let us have a look at the moulding projects deduced from our specific data on a general Nordic background.

7.4. Early moulding projects in the Central Zone

The spine of bronze technology in the Nordic BA I was the making of axes with developed flanges, socketed spearheads and shaft-hole axes, the latter two often decorated with geometric patterns. One of two assumptions might be made on this basis: either that these were all made using basically the same moulding procedures, or that different procedures were used for each category as well as for decorated and undecorated specimens. In my opinion, previous studies have been either too vague or too narrowly concerned with single artefacts or categories. Or, more precisely, there is a lack of studies that compare moulding techniques used in e.g. Faardrup/Bagterp/Underre styles, styles that are likely to have been produced at the same time, in the same areas, and sometimes probably in the same foundries by the same people. Several of the western Faardrup axes have been considered products of local casting (Shetelig 1936: 274p.; Johansen 1984: 138). This assumption was based mainly on the flawed appearance of the axe from Kvanngardsnes (nr. 417), but comparable surfaces are found on Tjelta and rekol as well (nr. 415-16). In what kind of moulds were these axes, and Faardrup axes in general, cast? Faardrup axes are conventionally grouped into decorated and undecorated specimens. The first question to be addressed, is whether such decoration could have been made mechanically? I doubt that they could, and I find it an unlikely hypothesis (in agreement with Rnne in Vandkilde 1996: 227). This doubt stem from attempts to trace bronze with bronze, i.e. to trace tin classes 5 and 6, i.e. tin levels above 4% prevalent in Faardrup axes (Vandkilde 1996: 31, fig. 155), with a chisel tool made from bronze. All analysed specimens from the area have more than 7% tin, and the decorated specimen from Lgsand had 10% (cf. Fig. 3). I doubt that such markings can be made on a 10% tin-alloy with a bronze tracer/chisel e.g. of 15% or even 20% tin-alloy. We lack any convincing chisels/tracers from the period, and no one has yet published a convincing demonstration of such a procedure. E. Pernicka and C-H. Wunderlich on the contrary demonstrated that in order to copy the simple markings on the star-disc from Nebra, containing only 2.5% tin, a chisel containing 15 % tin with a cold hammered edge was needed (2002). This strengthens the suspicion that the making of complex tracings on high

163 tin-alloys with bronze chisels is an unlikely hypothesis. This means that the decoration was already in the mould, that it was also present on the template, and that a soft moulding medium was used. Decoration on Faardrup axes is found on all four sides and on the neck, e.g. the axes from Hjsted, Holbk C. (AK II: 978). This means that they must have had their in-gates at the edge, and that they were cast from the edge. The lack of parting lines on Faardrup axes is also of interest. In the case of decorated specimens, as well as flawed specimens, parting lines are unlikely to have ever been present since removing them through hammering and/or grinding would have left traces on a decorated surface as well as on a flawed, pitted surface. Such flawed specimens are valuable data, and in this case they indicate that also simple, undecorated specimens were cast in closed moulds. The BA II shaft-hole axe from Raknes (nr. 425) represents the second generation shaft-hole axes (or third if counting the Valsmagle type). In this case it is its typological features that indicate local production: the lack of a collar around the shaft-hole, and the rough but unique decoration of triangles at the neck. These large triangles were no doubt cast, and a bi-valve mould is unlikely since a parting line would have come into conflict with these triangles. This is an even clearer indication that a closed mould was used, built around a decorated template probably made from a wax/resin compound. The simple morphology of the axe, as well as the simple ornaments, could have been achieved by a wooden template, but still a wax/resin template would have been easier to make, and easier to loose. From this I conclude that the heavy shaft-hole axes from both BA I and II, and both undecorated and decorated specimens, were cast in closed moulds built around wax/resin templates. It is also worth considering that undecorated and flawed castings might very well have been made in decorated mouldcavities, made from decorated wax templates, and intended as decorated axes but something evidently went wrong. To make a perfect mould is only the first step, capturing these patterns in bronze is another. So, what went wrong at Kvanngardsnes, rekol and Tjelta? There are mainly three alternatives: poor mould, poor bronze or poor pouring: A crucial difference between early shaft-hole axes and all other artefacts in the Nordic BA gallery are their thickness and weight. This means that a square-centimetre of the wall in such a mould is exposed to much more heat than e.g. a mould for a flanged axe, blade or spearhead. This extra heat necessitates thicker mould-walls, and these walls need longer curing and burning. If the mould is not cured all the way through, molten bronze will do the final curing at contact, which leads to gasses attempting to escape through the molten

164 bronze. On the other hand, melting 1-1.3 kg bronze is a lengthy and challenging project. It could be that during this lengthy melt, bronze got to much oxygen from the bellows. Pouring such a blowy metal into a perfectly made mould would result in a flawed casting. A third alternative is that the surface pits are not blow holes from gas, but rather cavities produced by bits of charcoal. This is a typical mistake of the novice: not sufficiently skilled in keeping charcoal fragments away from the stream of metal. Particularly in cases in which the load of metal in the crucible is too small or just adequate, the crucible needs to be emptied and tilted more than usual and charcoal fragments enter along with the last drops of bronze. Casting such an axe vertically from the edge puts tremendous pressure and heat on the mould walls. For this reason they might have been cast horizontally, with an extra vertical in-gate and funnel from the edge (still cast from the edge). Such a procedure would make a more gentle casting, but it would also allow any charcoal-bits in the metal to float to the top of the axe the one side that is heavily pitted on rekol, Tjelta, Kvanngardsnes, and Viset. Summing up, I believe that some of the Faardrup axes were made within NW Scandinavia, most likely in the Hustad area. These were heavy castings in closed clay moulds built around templates made from a wax/resin compound. These procedures along with the metal itself and finished axes were brought from eastern Central Sweden in the period 1600-1500 BC. The first indication of bronze casting in our area comes from the rock-shelter site of Skrivarhellaren dated to BA Ia (cf. 5.6.3, 6.2). Although I suspect that it was a metal-hilted dagger or sword that was broken into pieces at the site, it seems an uncontroversial assumption to make, that the persons responsible for the deposits in Skrivarhellaren, were familiar with the production of flanged axes. The morphology of the contemporary HheimSteine axes also suggests that some of them were made locally. I also assume that the techniques used were strongly influenced by those used in eastern Central Sweden. Although stone moulds for both flat and flanged axes are known from continental Europe, the majority of axes were most likely made through soft moulding techniques. There seems to be three alternatives of making a flanged axe from a soft moulding medium: 1. Using an unflanged template for an unflanged mould; flanges are made mechanically through subsequent hammering (flanges are not cast). 2. Using an unflanged template, but cavities for flanges are carved directly into the mould valves (flanges are cast in bi-valve moulds). 3. Using a flanged template for a flanged mould (flanges are cast in bi-valve or closed moulds).

165 During my trials and simulations, I experimented with making flanges mechanically by hammering a flat-axe. Although alloys of 8-10 % tin-alloys are hard to shape by hammer, this is certainly a possibility for the low-flanged axes. From this experience, though, I doubt that the high flanges of the sort seen in Underre and Oldendorf types could be made by hammering. Hence, if we argue that low-flanged axes were made by hammer, we must also acknowledge a technological break with the introduction of high-flanged axes in BA Ib. Kienlin has argued, based on the internal structure of flanged axes, that they received only superficial mechanical treatment, and that they received their morphology in the casting process. This is also in line with a preserved ceramic valve for a bi-valve mould for a flanged axe from Feudvar, Serbia (Kienlin 2007: 6pp.). The mould from Feudvar is dated to Br. A2 (corresponding to our BA Ia) and displays features which are to become characteristic for axe moulds throughout the rest of the BA: bi-valve, in-gate at the neck, lines for matching at the bottom. I experimented with using simple unflanged templates made from wood and carving the flanges directly into the mould. The difficulties with this procedure lie in pressing versus. carving the clay. If simply pressing the flanges with a pointed tool, clay is displaced and tends to distort the rest of the cavity as well as the parting face. It is also possible to let the mould-valves dry at this point, then treat them as a hard moulding medium and carve the flanges (removing clay rather than displacing it). This carving, though, tends to rip up sandgrains embedded in the clay and make a rough surface. Far from a conclusion regarding the potentials of these procedures, I shifted to the use of a wooden template with flanges. All types of flanged axes could be made from wooden templates, from low flanges to high and extreme flanges. Hirsch and Graff for instance, replicated the low-flanged axe of tzi, using a bi-valve ceramic mould, made by a wooden template (1999). Still, I believe that the thin, narrow and low flanges seen on the two axes from Blindheim, Hheim and Kvle (nr. 39497), are unlikely to stem from such wooden templates. To make a wooden axe-template, while saving such narrow flanges on each face, is very time-consuming and delicate work. Southern Scandinavian hoards with numerous, similar axes, might also be interpreted in disfavour of the wooden template: e.g. the six Virring type axes from the Torsted-hoard, have an almost identical appearance, but they measure 5,9; 7,5; 8,1; 8,2; 8,3 and 9,3 (at scale 2:3), and have slightly variable curvature (AK X: 4761). This variance might indicate that they were not cast in re-usable moulds, and that a wooden template was not used. If the Virring hoard is interpreted as the products of a single foundry, this would imply a procedure

166 that led to small variations in size and outline. Such a procedure would involve making disposable templates; one template, one mould, one axe. This would most likely be templates made from a wax/resin medium. This makes more sense, if axe moulding is seen in relation to the procedures used in the contemporary large-scale production of decorated spearheads (see under cored castings, below) and shaft-hole axes type Faardrup. From this line of thought, I shifted to experiments making wax templates with flanges. Simulations and attempts with template-making in a plastic medium available in the Bronze Age, i.e. replicating both Oldendorf and Hhem-Steine type axes, were somewhat of a surprise. Different ingredients and mixtures were explored. Sheep and deer-tallow seemed all too brittle, pig-fat too soft, resin to soft and sticky; and I concluded that any suitable compound had to contain a high amount of a ductile substance such as beeswax or pitch made from birch-bark. Even so, shaping a lump of a wax-pitch compound into a HheimSteine axe was much more difficult than expected. I started out by making an extra broad unflanged wax template, and then carefully pressing flanges from the sides. This was not straightforward to a novice, but possibly with enough experience in wax-compounds and their ideal temperatures, this could be done quite quickly and smoothly. The main challenge is that flanges on both front and back have to be pressed simultaneously. The problem with all my full-flanged templates was first and foremost the top of the flanges, and their transition to the blade. The wax had to be heated to an even, warm temperature in order to get the flanges right. Such a wax template is a very delicate, light thing to handle and any misses are hard to fix. It is impossible to do touch-up work on one side of the axe without distorting the flanges on the other side. On the other hand, decorative patterns seen on some flanged axes in Southern Scandinavia were easily made: facets, hatchings, punctures. So, making templates with flanges, and thus moulds with cavities for flanges, was much more of a challenge than expected. When a wax template had been made, the next challenge was to rap it in a moulding medium, building either a closed mould or a bi-valve mould. The Feudvar mould suggests that bi-valve moulds were used for flanged axes (Kienlin 2007: 6pp.). One way to proceed was therefore to prepare a slab of moulding medium, preferably with a finer mixture as a thin strata on top. The wax axe is now carefully pressed half-way into the slab, until edge and neck flush with the top-surface of the slab. Rather than attempting to retrieve the template at once, it is left in the valve while it dries. When stabilized, the parting face is smeared with liquid pig-fat or wax. A second slab is prepared, and built on top of the template and the first valve. Before the medium sets, the outside of

167 both valves are now shaped, and marks for matching made. When the mould has dried for a day or two, it is heated slowly above 70-80 & the templates melt and the valves come apart. Why was not the template simply retrieved and saved at this point, rather then disposed of? If it was disposed of, it was probably because it was difficult to retrieve it without distorting the valves or the template. If it was retrieved, I assume that a wax template was used simply because it was easier to make than a wooden template. To me the flanged axe is still somewhat of a mystery, and it seems that we have to choose between two radically different alternatives: the casting of a rough flat axe that is subsequently shaped by intense, loud and heavy hammering, or the extremely delicate shaping of tender wax templates with clean hands, resulting in castings in need of only a slight polish. I lean towards the latter. I also lean towards the use of closed moulds rather than bi-valve moulds. This is based on the fact that among the many flaws seen of the flanged axes in the area, there are no examples of a slight mismatch between two valves, and no parting lines. On the paalstaves on the other hand, both parting lines and such miss-match can be seen. This turns the conventional evolutionary trajectory, single-valves (open moulds) to bi-valves to closed moulds, on its head. This trajectory seems to be based partly on an assumption that closed moulds and wax templates are more complex than bi-valve moulds and wooden templates. My conclusion is that early moulding was based on the simple and basic idea of: making an artefact in a combustible medium and rapping it in a refractory medium. This is a procedure that is able to account for the slight variance in axes and spearheads in large South Scandinavian hoards of the time, and it explains why there are no parting lines in conflict with the decoration seen on Faardrup axes and Bagterp spears. Summing up, the procedure of metal-transformation that was transmitted from eastern Central Sweden to the Central Zone from c. 1700 BC, was one that demanded skills in recipes for template mediums, skills in the delicate shaping and decoration of this medium, skills in recipes for soft refractory moulding mediums, skills in rapping the template in this refractory medium, and skills in burning such closed moulds carefully.

168

7.5. The Vigrestad, Gjrv and Kleppe projects

There are also a few very complex artefacts that I suspect were made within our area, or at least that their producers were intimately linked to the North Way (although situated elsewhere). These were stylistic innovations without exact parallels outside the area. I have seen them as part of an intervention into the North Way by persons from Northern Zealand. These are the assemblages from Vigrestad, Gjrv and Kleppe, but also those from Rykkja II, and the ceremonial axes from Lunde and Rimbareid, all dated to the end of the 14 th century. The quality of the Vigrestad assemblage in particular is impressive. The bow of the unique brooch and the large belt plate, have in common an almost paper-thin quality. The large diametered spiral decorated belt plate seems to me as a novice an impossible achievement. The decoration is perfectly executed, and, importantly, there are no marks on the backs of neither the belt plate nor the bow. If the plate and the bow were made thinner by mechanical hammering from a rougher casting, I would admit that mechanical post-cast decoration would have been possible. But this would have been a repouss technique in which bronze was dented and moved, rather than removed or compressed. This would in fact have been the only way to make the wolf-tooth decoration, since it would be close to impossible to hammer a triangular bronze-stamp into a massive high tin-alloyed bronze. But if this procedure was used, these operations ought to have left traces on the back of the plate and the bow. No such marks are detected. Even if they had been present, such marks could just as well stem from stamping the decoration on a wax template. On the bow it is possible to observe the wolf-tooth pattern running unchanged from the thin area to the thick base of the bow. Making such a pattern on this thick section through mechanical procedures, seems again unlikely. Hence, I suggest that both the plate and bow were cast in moulds built around very thin decorated wax templates through a lost-wax procedure. The brooch-bow has a massive section with a rod coming out of each side and coiling into spirals. There are two likely alternatives for how this double-spiral was added. One is that the bow was cast with a small hole through this section, and a straight rod was afterwards inserted through the hole, and then coiled into spirals. Casting such a hole, means that a very thin clay-core inside the mould has to withstand molten bronze entering at a high speed. A more likely alternative would be to build the wax template for the bow directly on to an already finished, bronze double spiral, and cast the bow onto the spiral. The pin from Gjrv has made use of the double-spiral in a less complex fashion. One way to make two come out of one, would be to cast a fork, and coil up the spirals

169 afterwards. The belt plate from Kleppe is extraordinary with its multiple zones of circular bosses. While the rest of the decoration is clearly cast, it is very difficult to assess whether these bosses were made in the wax template and cast, or whether they were made on the casting through a repousse technique proper. My conclusion is that the belt plate and bow from Vigrestad were cast with no or insignificant subsequent mechanical modifications. They imply total control of melting procedures, moulding mediums and procedures and the fluidity of bronze. They also imply perfection in template mediums, recipes of wax/pitch compounds for different temperatures in the work-shop, and in modelling techniques. They imply perfection in the making and use of the spiral stamp, the wolf-tooth stamp and the pearl-band stamp, finesse and accuracy in the outline of patterns, and the use of a centering-device for the template for the belt plate. These were large moulds that needed careful burning and needed to be heated probably above 800 & in order to increase the fluidity of metal. And rather than complex meltingfurnaces I believe such projects demanded separate furnaces for the moulds. I believe we here get a glimpse of separate foundry buildings containing several furnaces for melting bronze, melting and heating wax and for burning moulds. These impressive achievements are best considered in light of their historical context. They have features that link them to founders in Zealand in late BA II, to an environment that produced some of the most exquisite castings from the European Bronze Age: the thin, large diametered belt plates with four spiral zones, with boss-collars identical to the one on the Kleppe plate. They also made both bronze and gold vessels decorated with repouss technique comparable to the Kleppe plate. And they were closely related to the operation of a network that included both the North Way and the area south of the Elbe. The persons that made the artefacts from Vigrestad, Kleppe and Gjrv were part of the most innovative technological milieu in Northern Europe at the end of the 14th century. The discrepancy between the Raknes project (see above) and the Vigrestad project in terms of know-how and skills is striking. The Vigrestad assemblage in particular convinces me that we are largely ignorant of the boundaries of clay, bronze and fire in the Bronze Age. A clarification of these boundaries, of what is possible and what is not possible would demand long series of experiments; or more likely, it would demand life-long experience resting on the shoulders of generations of bronze casters.

170

7.6. The paalstave mould from Voile

To the same period and the same network belongs the soapstone mould from Voile (M 26). Only three stone moulds for paalstaves are known from the Nordic area: a complete mould from Valby, Zealand, a single valve from Trrd, Zealand, and the complete mould from Voile (M.26). They are all made from soapstone, and were all designed for casting the very same variant of paalstave, with the straight V-rib on the broad side (Jantzen 2008: 134, nr. 140, 141, E.185, Taf. 23-24). These might be the earliest examples of soapstone moulding in the Nordic Zone, and the innovation was probably related to the use of bronze moulds in Northern Germany, but also potentially to the use of soapstone moulds in the Seima-horizon north of Beitstad. Interestingly, the Voile mould might be the very first combinationmould in the Nordic Zone, i.e. with more than one mould-cavity. On the side of one of the valves is a simple cavity for a long narrow artefact, possibly for an awl or a nicked-flanged chisel. In my simulation and trials I experimented with the carving of moulds for both paalstaves and socketed axes, and although these were made from square blocks bought from quarries, these experiences allow me to sketch how such moulds might have been made in the Bronze Age. The first step would be to release one large, or two smaller blocks from a bed-rock of soapstone. The soft soapstone that seems to have been preferred for moulds, could have been cut easily by both stone and bronze tools. A relatively long tool with a narrow angle of edge would have been preferable in order to make deep, narrow grooves, saving both material and time. Then, if a single large block was released, this had to be split into two halves. Again a long narrow tool is preferable for saving material. Now the two halves must be adjusted to each other so that they fit together. The simplest way to do this is to simply make both sides flat and plane. This practice of plane parting faces is an important point to make, since it is typical of stone moulds, not of clay moulds. Sawing a larger block in two with a bronze saw like those in the hoard from Ekudden, Sdermanland C. (Minnen 1020) would be a very effective way of making two plane valves, especially for someone with limited access to soapstone. Else, one could quite easily plane the halves into shape with bronze or stone edges. In either case, one would best finish the faces of the valves on some kind of planer or level base: a sand stone slab, or perhaps a wooden board with sand on it. If care is taken in this operation the parting faces of the two halves will now make a tight fit. The next step would be to synchronize the perimeter of the valves to each other. One way to do this is simply to finish the outside of the first valve, hold it against the second valve, and make a

171 tracing around the perimeter of the first valve into the second valve. The second valve could now be reduced down to this mark, and when assembled, marks for matching could be cut on the sides and bottom. At this stage a complete bi-valve mould is ready, except for the internal cavity itself. The next challenge is that these cavities must be placed identically in relation to the outside perimeter of each valve. One way to proceed would be to make a thin template of stiff skin that fits the outside perimeter of the valves, and has a hole that corresponds to the outline of the axe to be cast. Such a template could now be applied to each valve, and it would insure that both cavities have identical outlines, and that these outlines are located identically relative to the perimeter of the valves. A more direct approach would be to just make a cavity in one valve, even finish one valve, and then simply copy its placement by eye to the other valve. This works well with smaller moulds such as axes. When the axe has been outlined on both valves, the next step is to actually cut or carve the cavities. For this purpose various stone flakes and blades with various facets, angles and edges could have been used. To me the ideal tools were a copy of the socketed chisel from rnes (nr. 519) and various fragments of bronze beaten and ground into miniature edges with hafts. Carving a paalstave in the negative is not simple and straightforward. It requires that the carver has a thorough understanding of the morphology of the paalstave in three dimensions, i.e. its different cross-sections. The novice will better proceed slowly and carve little by little, and explore the shape as he proceeds one cut to deep ruins the mould. This tends to be time-consuming for the novice, mainly because he does not have a clear image of bulk-sections that can be removed roughly and rapidly. The experienced carver will have a clear strategy for what to cut first and what to do next: he might e.g. carve a groove along the perimeter of the axe-shape, controlling its depth at certain points, and then remove material in between on the blade section, down to the same level. Then he carves the flanges, the C-facet and the V-ornament. Experience leads to a deeper understanding of how the paalstave looks without the V-ornament and without the flanges in the negative. But there is more to this than shape and symmetry. In order to make a reusable bi-valve mould, it is crucial to avoid undercuts, i.e. to make sure that the walls and facets in the cavity are sloping in the right direction so that a future bronze casting can be released. The paalstave-shape was in fact particularly challenging in this respect. The high flanges demand a narrow and deep groove that creates a knob that will make the haftsection of the axe. This knob becomes a particularly fragile part of the mould. The novice

172 might see to that, in theory, the casting can be released. The experienced soapstone moulder takes into account the rapid shrinkage of the casting, and understands that this is the point where a long mould-life can be insured. A too sloping angle, on the other hand, would probably weaken the precision of the axe in the haft and the performance of the tool. The experienced paalstave-maker has future castings in mind as he works on the mould: he conjures up an image of how these valves are to be assembled when hot, and images of the pouring and the release of the casting, as well as the sharpening of the edge, the hafting and use of the axe. If the mould is ruined or it produces dysfunctional axes, his investments in a durable stone mould will be wasted. When the cavities have been carved they are brushed and polished to a glossy finish by sand, stones or perhaps straws. The final step might have been to put the mould to trial with a softer and less risky medium than bronze; in order to observe the positive shape of the cavity, to see if the valve-cavities match, and to check if a casting is easily released. Wax, pitch, tallow or a mixture of these, were available lowmelting mediums for this purpose. Remnants of wax/fat on soapstone moulds could also stem from such trials before putting them to the final test of bronze. Such trials had to be made in moulds that were soaked in water, so that the castings did not stick to the soapstone. Soapstone is actually very well suited for such wax castings, since soapstone is porous and able to hold water. Today gypsum and plaster are the preferred mediums for casting wax, much because of these same qualities (Miller 1987: 110pp.). Whether soapstone moulds were used for direct bronze casting or just for making wax templates for clay moulds, is an old controversy (Jantzen 2008: 156p., with further references). I will return to this question, but in my opinion they were used for direct bronze casting. However, in certain settings, they might also have been used for making wax templates. The mould-valves from Voile have a characteristic c. 5mm band of soot on the face around the perimeter of its cavities. In my experience this feature only occurs as a result of the gas pressure from direct bronze castings. In addition, the knobs of the haft-section are damaged on both valves from Voile. The damages on the Voile mould might be the flaw of the first casting in a new dysfunctional mould made by a novice; or simply an accident. The same happened during my simulations after eight successful castings in a paalstave mould. Even a functional paalstave mould must be handled with care. Immediately after casting, the mould must be opened and the axe released. If something unforeseen occurs after pouring, delaying the release for 20 seconds more than usual: the axe cools and shrinks more than usual, it gets stuck and when the mould is opened it tears apart, and the knobs of the mould

173 is stuck to the hafting section of the axe. The Voile mould seems to have experienced exactly this kind of mishap. So, were the preserved paalstaves cast in soapstone moulds like the one from Voile? As demonstrated above, the straight, plane face of the stone moulds is a direct consequence of the procedures used for making bi-valves from a hard moulding medium. Bi-valve moulds made from soft mediums might very well have curved faces as well as straight. The plane faces of stone moulds produce straight parting lines on the castings from neck to edge. These can of course be removed by hammering and grinding, but in many cases the parting lines from bi-valve moulds are visible on original castings. At least three paalstaves have such lines: Helleve (nr. 408), Tu (nr. 411) and Jren (nr. 406). Helleve and Tu have curved parting lines. Such curved parting lines easily occur when pressing an axe-template (wood, wax or bronze) into a valve made from a soft moulding medium (clay or sand). Not necessarily, but often depending on the moulding compound, amount of moisture, and shape of template. The third axe from Jren has rather straight parting lines. The only lessons from a study of the parting lines on the paalstaves are that: 1. parting lines are lacking on most axes, because they were removed or because they were never present, i.e. they were cast in closed moulds 2. the axe from Jren was cast in a bi-valve mould in either clay, stone or bronze 3. the axes from Helleve and Tu were definitely cast in a bi-valve mould made from a soft moulding medium, probably a ceramic bi-valve mould. This strengthens my suspicion that soapstone moulds did not make a significant contribution to the total number of preserved paalstaves. There are several large hoards with series of similar but not identical axes much like the situation with flanged axes and spearheads in BA I. In the Smrumovre hoard there are many similar but not identical axes, and several also have curved parting lines (AK I: 354). My reading of this is that soapstone moulds had still not made a significant effect on axe production, and that they were introduced rather late, at the very end of BA II. In BA II ceramic moulds made by wax or wooden templates, were still the spine of axe production. The Voile mould represents a novel practice of hard moulding mediums and is intimately linked to Northern Zealand and to the Vigrestad-GjrvKleppe phenomenon in the late BA II. Hence, Northern Zealand stand out as a central node with both soapstone moulds and bronze moulds, a result of their close links to the Lneburgarea on the one hand, and their engagement into the North Way north to Beitstad on the

174 other hand. I suggest that these persons were able to pick up innovations both from the Seima-network north of Beitstad and from the Elbe in the southwest.

7.7. Blade moulding

The high number of soapstone moulds for double edged blades within the area is not paralleled anywhere else in the Nordic Zone (cf. M 1-9). In order to appreciate these moulds, the sword moulds from Olset and Slottsvik in particular, we need to see them in light of conventional procedures for blade moulding in the Nordic BA. The great majority of bronze swords in the Nordic BA must have been cast in clay moulds built around templates from wax or wood. The making of such a thin delicate blade template in either wax or wood, straight and without dents, often with decorative line-bundles and central ridge, is quite demanding. The next step would be to rap it in moulding material without distorting the template. And third, to be able to cure such a long, thin and narrow mould without it getting slightly twisted, bent or broken from shrinkage. Original clay moulds demonstrate that the latter was an issue: blades seem to have been cast in bi-valve moulds, and each valve has a hole running lengthwise through the entire valve. These holes stem from wooden rods embedded into the valve during its making, most likely to prevent it from being distorted through curing or burning (Jantzen 2008: Taf. 1-2). The main point I would like to make is that the conventional BA method of making bi-valve blade moulds was particularly demanding (cf. also Liebel 1985). Possibly, blade casting was embedded in strong foundry traditions involving significant cross-generational teaching as well as foundry-buildings with extra facilities for making, curing, handling and burning 60-100cm long blade moulds. The moulds from Olset, Slottsvik and possibly also Bremsnes (M 1-3) demonstrate how the entire process of template making, valve construction and curing was bypassed. It is not entirely clear whether these moulds were used for making templates (wax castings) or for direct bronze castings. Either way, they bypassed critical stages in the traditional southern method of making blades. I have suggested that these innovations were made in late BA III and IV. In BA IV there was widespread use of soapstone also in Denmark, but it was used mainly for sickles and axes. To the Danes, soapstone might have been much too valuable to be used for such a purpose, and they had already developed the skill and means to do it without. But for the Central Zone there might not have been a continuous tradition for blade production in the EBA, and when persons and groups first attempted to make their own blades in BA III, they might have found it surprisingly challenging. But most of all, these

175 moulds indicate that their makers had ample access to soapstone quarries, that they had the bronze to fill the moulds, and that these were probably not their first experimental moulds of this kind. The Slottsvik mould is somewhat curious in that it is a combination-mould for two slightly different blades (M 2). This might of course indicate that the caster supplied two variants for a large market. More likely, perhaps, is that it represents a process. One possible scenario would be: the Slottsvik mould was initially made for casting one type of blade only, and its valves had cross-sections comparable to the Bremsnes mould (M 3). For some reason the founder was not satisfied, e.g. the bronze castings turned out too heavy, the cavities were damaged etc. Rather than making a new mould from scratch, the valves were helved plane on their backs, and a new and smaller cavity was made. It was only at this second stage the Slottsvik mould got its delicate, tender appearance which seems to be a risky project to be conducted with direct bronze casting. The carvings are clearly high quality: the faces seem absolutely plane and the cavities seem smooth and without dents. I had difficulties finding proper lengths of soapstone in the right soft quality in order to make replicas of the Slottsvik and Olset moulds. An Olset replica was made in gypsum, and although gypsum is a far more homogenous and soft material, it was still a challenging task. The difficulty lies in carving such a blade in the negative: dents easily occur, and these will be very visible on the finished polished casting. Using edged tools for carving or scraping tends to make such dents, and the original carvers probably made use of small pieces of sandstones with proper facets for grinding. Concequently, I believe the Olset and Slottsvik moulds in particular were the products of hands experienced in similar operations in wood or soapstone. The performance of these moulds in direct castings has not been explored. One might suspect that they needed pre-heating and that they demanded careful handling as they became fragile through repeated pre-heatings and castings. On the other hand, these moulds would also be ideal, not for direct castings, but for casting wax templates and as the ideal foundation for the template to rest on while the first clay valve is being made: first, liquid wax/pitch was poured into a mould that had been soaked for some time in water. One valve is removed, and the template rests in the second valve. The first valve is now replicated in a refractory mix of clay/sand with a straight, dry wooden rod embedded, and left to dry. Then, the half soapstone half clay mould is turned around and left to rest on the clay valve. The second soapstone valve is removed and replaced by a second clay valve. This procedure was explored with an Olset-replica made

176 from gypsum, and this clearly indicated that a blade mould from wood or soapstone would have been a significant aid when attempting to build a bi-valve clay mould around a wax template.

7.8. Cored moulds

The most immediate challenge presented by the socketed axe and the socketed spearhead, is their internal cavities. The phenomenon was familiar from spearheads from the earliest Bronze Age onwards. Even at the end of LN (Br. A1b), the art of cored moulds was brilliantly executed on the bronze-hafted halberds of northern Germany (Wstemann 1995: nr. 98-136). There are basically three ways of making such a hollow artefact: 1. Starting from within by making a clay core (which will make up the cavity), and building the artefact in wax around this core, and then make a bi-valve or closed mould around the template with core in place. 2. Starting by making an outer, bipartite mould, either from clay aided by a template, or in stone; and then making a core that fits the mould (the classic LBA soapstone procedure). 3. Starting by making an outer, bipartite mould, filling it with liquid wax and then emptying it. This creates a wax template shell that can simply be filled and rapped in a moulding medium. All three of the above involve a clay core. This core ought to fulfil the following tasks: 1. It should be porous in order to let gasses escape, especially if they cannot escape through the mould wall (e.g. the airtight soapstone). 2. It ought also to be porous so that it can easily be crushed and removed from the socket of the casting and give room to the hafting. A well burned core made from a clay-sand mix only, is very difficult to remove. 3. In procedures 1 and 2 above, the core medium also better be ductile and plastic so that it can be shaped. 4. In procedures 1 and 2 above, the core must have some kind of facility that links the core to the mould in order to hold the core in place during casting. This facility is termed a core-print (Fig. 9).

177

Ic

Fig. 9: Elements of core-print designs appearing alone or in combinations on Nordic and Arctic moulds

We might thus assume that the recipe for core mediums in the Bronze Age was different from other mediums (i.e. furnace, tuyere, crucible and mould mediums), and that it contained a fair amount of organic material (dung, hair, straw etc.), which created a porous core when burned through. In modern sand-casting wax strings are often embedded in the

178 sand-core. These strings are lost and produce channels for the air to escape (Ammen 2000: 152). This is worth noting since the sand used is in itself a porous medium, and the need for such channels would be even larger when using a clay compound. A heavy portion of organic temper would also make the core more easily removed. A successfully cast spearhead or axe is of little use if the core cannot be removed; and effective moulding procedures are of little value if the removal of cores is very time-consuming. I have had a hard time removing well-burned cores from axes even with modern steel-tools, cores that were made from clay-sand mixes with a too low portion of organic temper. When the first socketed axes were made in the Nordic Zone we might assume that the procedure and materials used were similar to those used for making spearheads in BA I and II. Let us have a look at the first soapstone moulds for socketed axes.

7.8.1 First generation socketed axe moulds

There are in fact rather few soapstone moulds for EBA socketed axes, and members of the first generation moulds for socketed axes are: Sllerd, Zealand C., in the vicinity of one of the paalstave moulds (Jantzen 2008: nr.142, Taf. 25); Lugns, Vstergtland C. (Minnen 998; Jantzen 2008: nr. E 108); and possibly Mellem-Bodal, stfold C. (Oldeberg 1943: 142, 296; Johansen 1981: Pl. XXXII; Jantzen 2008: E 179) and Foss (M 12). The dating of these moulds rests entirely on the chronology of axes (cf. chapt. 4.4). The moulds from Sllerd, Mellem-Bodal and Lugns are all for large axes with C facets, and Foss for a large axe with A facet. Loops are present on Sllerd and Lugns, while Mellom-Bodal and Foss are fragmented without information on this feature. The fragment from Mellom-Bodal corresponds very well with the Sllerd mould, while the Lugns mould is for the Central Swedish type with a decorative, vertical rib. From this first generation of cored stone moulds, we see that the designs of coreprints are highly variable. Sllerd has a broad vertical groove (type IIa), possibly a less intentional result of carving the axe-cavity; Lugns has notches at the upper face (type Ia); while Foss and Mellom-Bodal both have core-prints of the rare type IId (Fig. 9). This feature makes an interesting link of shared technological procedures between Orkla valley and stfold in BA III. This also strengthens the idea that groups in Zealand turned their attention away from the North Way and to the Glomma-Gta area in BA III, and that they procured their soapstone from this area. BA IV seems to be the significant breakthrough of soapstone moulding. Let us have a look at the two complete moulds from Nyhamar (M 16-17, hoard 19).

179

7.8.2 The Nyhamar projects

The two complete moulds from Nyhamar are significant in that they are large, well made and show several unusual features. The Nyhamar B mould was intended for casting a rare variant of late Y-ornated axes, paralleled in Swedish axes and a single mould from Kinneved, Vstergtland (Minnen 1067; Jantzen 2008: E 101). The Nyhamar A mould was intended for a looped axe with B facet. Along the parting faces of one of the Nyhamar A valves, there were three alignmentdowels corresponding to pits on the other valve. As far as I am aware, no other stone mould in Eurasia has this feature. Alignment-dowels and pits were not unusual on stone moulds in Continental Europe, but the procedure was different: holes were made in both valves, and then separate dowels were inserted into one valve. The significance of Nyhamar A is that the valve and three dowels were made from a single piece of stone. This means that a lot of extra work was invested in saving three knobs on the valve, while levelling the areas in between. It could i.e. not be planed against a level base, which would be the most effective way of making the valves fit. Comparable facilities are found on paalstave moulds made from bronze (Jantzen 2008: nr. 183-187). This potential relationship puts the dating into question: is it possible that the maker of the Nyhamar A mould was inspired by bronze paalstave moulds? The transverse bevel on the Nyhamar B mould is the late element in the Nyhamar hoard that points to BA IV. The large size of the axes is more in line with BA III types. Therefore, the Nyhamar A might be somewhat older than Nyhamar B, and this would also be in line with the use of a different more complex core-print on the Nyhamar B. This would place the making of the Nyhamar A within BA III, and Nyhamar B at the BA III/IV transition; and this would enable a possible link between the bronze paalstave moulds of Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein. The Nyhamar A has another interesting feature: a vague, circular depression on both valves on the lower broad sides of the axe-cavity. That these depressions should have been made by mistake is in sharp contrast to the otherwise very precise execution of the carving. They seem to be intentional, but hardly meant as a stylistic feature. From simulations of casting large socketed axes, I have often noticed depressions from shrinkage on the castings. This shrinkage always occurs just below the core, at the transition between the thin walls of the socket and the thick section of the edge-section below. As bronze solidifies it shrinks, and it will refill material from the area above, and ideally bronze is fed evenly from the ingates through the casting. The problem of the socketed axe is that the thin walls around the

180 core might cool and solidify before the thick, massive area just below. In a modern foundry such a design would most likely have been cast from the other end, from the edge, or a reservoir would have been made in the mould to feed the area in danger of shrinkage (cf. Ammen 1979: 148, fig. 9.2). I suspect that the Nyhamar A mould demonstrates the latter solution, that the depressions were made as a kind of reservoir to counteract shrinkage defects just below the cavity/core. That such shrinkage actually occurred in the Bronze Age too, can be seen on the Hiksdal axe. Whether this was a common problem, and how this actually can be solved is difficult to assess. Relevant variables are the thickness of the axe below the core, the thickness of the walls, the precise shape of the core-end, the heat distribution and probably also the temperature of the bronze, the mould and the core, and finally the ability of mould and core material to conduct heat. How rapidly bronze enters the mould, and thus the in-gates and pouring motion, might also be relevant. I experimented with some of these variables without really arriving at a conclusion. The Nyhamar A demonstrates a very direct and fool-proof remedy to the problem: a depression in the valve as an exact opposite to the shrinkage-defect on the casting. The Nyhamar moulds both stand out among the other axe moulds as large, complex and well made, by a skilled and experienced person intent on making many, safe, and nice axes. This is valuable insights in persons in the Central Zone engaged in bronze casting and expeditions through the inlands beyond Lake Vnarn, c. 1100 BC.

7.8.3 The Hiksdal axe

The Hiksdal axe is unique with its net or textile pattern (Engedal 2010). In short, the crucial question is how such patterns were made on the mould-cavities, and from where the inspiration stemmed for such a decorative pattern. From a close examination of the pattern, I doubt that it was carved into a soapstone mould. Such a pattern typically results from using some kind of stamp and a stamping procedure. There are basically two candidates for stamps, producing similar patterns but opposite in terms of positive and negative. The first is a textile of tightly woven broad, flat fibres, like a cloth. The other is a textile of thin threads loosely knitted, like a net. Both types could, with different procedures, produce a Hiksdal mould. A cloth might have been applied on to a model of heated wax or plastic clay, and then a mould could have been made around this model. Alternatively, a clay mould, smooth without pattern, could be made in a conventional manner, and a net applied directly on to the still plastic insides of the mould. Judging, without doing actual experiments with a range of different textiles and procedures, I

181 would favour the first alternative and the cloth-onto-model-procedure. Quite similar patterns were widely used at this time north and east of the Nordic region, on so-called textile-ceramics but never on bronze. Interestingly, a finding from Satinskoe, Eastern Russia provides insights into aspects of Arctic moulding procedures as well as a possible solution to how the Hiksdal axe was made. This is a ceramic model or stamp for making bivalve ceramic moulds for socketed axes of Akozino-Mlar type (Kuzminych 1996: Abb. 10). More complex than merely a model-axe, this stamp makes both the mould cavity and the parting face. The Satinskoe stamp is furthermore asymmetric, and demonstrates that it was meant for one valve or left-valves only, the other valve or right-valves had to be made from a stamp with loop on the opposite side. When such a stamp had been made, but before it had lost its plasticity, it would have been possible to press a textile cloth against the face of the axe-model. Such a ceramic stamp used in combination with some kind of cloth could have produced a Hiksdal axe with slightly different decoration on each side. I see the Hiksdal axe as a merging not merely of Nordic and Arctic designs and procedures; but also a merging of procedures from bronze technology with procedures from ceramic technology (Engedal 2010).

7.8.4 Small socketed axes

The largest group of moulds, in Western Norway as well as in Scandinavia, is those for casting small socketed axes from BA IV-VI. These represent significantly smaller projects of quarrying and carving, as well as less demanding melting and casting projects. These show common core-prints like Ia/IIa (Eide, M 14), Ia/IVa (Forssand, M 21), IIIa (Gar, M 20), Ia/IIa/IIIa (Stangeland, M 23). The moulds from Skjeldestad, Grtavr, Brualand, Vestre Goa and Litleb have somewhat unusual core-prints. The Skjeldestad mould has a core-print of type Ib, the common notch added horizontal grooves. Simulations show that these extra grooves give extra precision, and prevent the core from being lifted up as the mould is filled by molten bronze. This could of course be prevented by other methods, such as resting the crucible on the core-gate. Coreprints of variant Ib are only known from Skjeldestad and the mould from Kinneved, Vstergtland. Thus, both Nyhamar B and Skjeldestad are linked to the same mould from Kinneved. Skjeldestad thus combines Vstergtish technological style with a predominantly Danish design. This might have occurred when the east-west relation across the alpine plateau prevalent in BA I-III, met an increasing activity in the southern highlands linked to a new Jutland-Telemark network in BA IV.

182 The mould from Grtavr (M 11) is for a very common axe type of BA V-VI, looped with B facet. One valve has a core-print combination Ia/IIIa/IVc, and the other has Ic/IId. The IId design was found on the BA III moulds from Foss and Mellem-Bodal, and none of the Swedish or Danish moulds carry this core-print (Mellem-Bodal is designated type V by Jantzen, corresponding to my type IIc). The core-prints of group IV is characteristic for Northern Jutland (four specimens) and is paralleled also on the mould from Forssand (corresponding to Jantzen var. VIIIa; 2008: Abb. 57, Taf. 107). The core-prints strengthen the idea that the area north of Tjeldsund was linked in a direct manner to Rogaland (Forssand) and Northern Jutland in BA V (cf. Map. 16). It is important to be aware that identical core-prints might have been used on clay moulds as well.

7.8.5 Arctic and Nordic methods of handling cores

The three moulds for large axes with extended necks, from Tjesseim (M 22), Randaberg (M 25) and Eide (M 18) lack conventional Nordic style core-prints. On the moulds from Tjesseim and Randaberg the decoration of the cavities continues to the top, and these lines might have been used as a core-print. The moulds from Eide (M 18), Tjesseim (M 22) and possibly also Litleb (M 13) have notches on the top rim. These are tempting to relate to core-prints of type VI found on Ananino moulds from Northern Finland (Isalmi) and North Karelia (Valtimo), on a mould for long-necked axes from Kemi, Northern Finland, and possibly also on a mould for long-necked axes of the Norwegian variant from Luusuavaara, Rovaniemi, Northern Finland (Pl. 62,64). These are not just another variation of the coreprints seen on Nordic moulds, but are different also in their location. In chapter 4.4.11 I argued that the small loopless axes were related to northeastern axes, i.e. Ananino type axes. The moulds from Stangeland (M 23), Brualand (M 24), and Litleb (M 13) are moulds for small loopless decorated axes (group 9), and Eide (M 14) and Vestre Goa (M 26) for loopless axes without ornaments (group 8). While the Eide and Stangeland moulds were equipped with rather complex Nordic core-prints (cf. above), the moulds from Brualand and Vestre Goa have no core-prints at all, and Litleb seems to have a type VIc core-print. Moulds without core-prints are in fact rare in the Nordic Zone; all Danish and Swedish moulds have core-prints, except for a mould from Vreta Kloster, stergtland C. (Norden 1925: Pl. XI.6; cf. Jantzen 2008: nr. E153, taf. 107). The Vreta Kloster mould is actually very similar to the mould from Vestre Goa; both were for casting loopless axes with facet B, but with a more lenticular cross-section than what is typical of Nordic axes. I have also suggested that the sudden appearance of a regional NW

183 Scandinavian ornamental style, the volut-motive, was related to the Ananino axes. In fact another ornament, the fringe-motive bridges the gap and this pattern is found both on the above Norwegian axes with volut-motives and on Ananino axes proper. The links between the western coast and the interior of Northern Sweden and Finland can now be strengthened: the lack of core-prints the use of core-prints type VI the volute-motive paralleled on a mould from Akonlahti, Karelia the fringe-motive paralleled on Ananino and pre-Ananino axes in the Arctic the eye-pattern seen on Ananino axes is also found on the back of the mould from Randaberg the mould from Tjesseim has a close parallel from Luusuavaara, and a core-print best paralleled at Kemi the Randaberg mould has a large face relative to its cavity best paralleled on a mould for a long-necked axe from Kemi When evaluating the nature of Nordic-Arctic interaction it is important that this technological data is taken into consideration; indicating the presence of not merely Arctic designs but also of Arctic moulding techniques, particularly at Jren but also Hardanger and Sunnmre. These procedures involved different procedures of assembling the core in the mould. This happened at a time in which there was a developed tradition of specific coreprint designs in the Nordic Zone. The procedure prevalent in the northeast is likely to have been one of the following: 1. these moulds were intended for casting wax patterns and there was therefore no need for core-prints 2. these moulds were intended for direct bronze casting and they simply demanded that greater care was taken when core and valves were assembled and positioned, perhaps making extra use of the top-rim and sometimes core-prints type VI. In light of this, the groove on top of the valve from Gullvika (M 10) might be indicative of the same procedure: using markings on the top of the valve for holding the core in place. Interestingly, it is possible to see the spread of distinct Nordic core-print types into the interior north of Beitstad. The mould from Hotingsjn is for an axe closely related to the Ananino type, but it has a unique combination of face-notch and pits, Ia/IIIc. The moulds from Vadsjbcken and Sandudden are also for axes closely related to the Ananino type, but have typical Nordic core-prints type Ia (Pl. 64). The early stone moulds for Seima type axes

184 in the east clearly demonstrate that the eastern axe-tradition used moulds without core-prints. E.g. on the axe mould from burial 21, Rostovka, the loop is placed just beneath the rim of the mould, meaning that the entire cavity was intended for the axe and not for holding a core (Chernykh 1992:fig.76.2-3). There are a number of indications of transmissions of both designs and moulding procedures between the Arctic and Nordic Zones. This transmission seems to have occurred through two nodes: Lofoten and Rana, possibly also along River Pasvik-Lake Enare. I find it unlikely that founders in Jren picked up or got inspired by Arctic designs and in particular Arctic moulding procedures. The more convincing explanation is that it was people that had been taught to do it this way in a purer Arctic context that made and operated these moulds in Northern Jren, and that they adapted some features of Arctic designs to this new context. The Grtavr mould demonstrates that typical Nordic designs were cast in the Tjeldsund area, using typical Nordic moulding procedures. The Arctic designs that spread to the southwest was on the one hand the fringe-pattern, characteristic of the interior east of Rana; and on the other hand the volute-motive and core-prints type VI. The latter two, along with the intimate link between Tjesseim and Luusuavaara, point to Northern Finland and Karelia (cf. Pl. 64, Map 16-17). I contend that the context for these transmissions was the full-blown North Way linking the Southern Zone directly to Tjeldsund in combination with the Tjeldsund-Torne River channel. Summing up, my main point here is to argue that Arctic-Nordic contacts during the LBA were more dynamic and fundamental than the mere diffusion of Arctic designs. There was a movement of persons taught in Arctic moulding procedures and designs to Jren in the south. If we include the axe from Hiksdal, there are indications that these movements started in BA IV.

7.8.6 Casting in cored soapstone moulds

The soapstone mould is different from the clay or sand mould in one important aspect: its walls are absolutely airtight, while clay and sand moulds will have more or less porous walls and a higher permeability (cf. Ammen 1979: 16p.). This means that a melting/casting procedure that will work with a clay or sand mould, might not work in an identical mould made from soapstone. The gasses in the empty mould represent a minimum that has to escape in order for bronze to enter. In addition there might enter more or less gas into the metal being melted. If we take a look at the earliest soapstone moulds for making paalstaves it seems clear that this problem was solved with a particular pouring procedure. A modern

185 founder would have designed a mould with separate inlet for metal and exit for gas, and he would pour fast so that both the in-gate and the funnel are kept full or choked from start to end. The Voile founder, on the other hand, would have poured slowly and not choked the ingate, so that the air inside the cavity could escape through the in-gate next to the bronze entering. In this way the in-gate was also an exit for gas. Although these paalstave moulds may have been identical to conventional clay moulds, and the pouring technique was the same, the initial use of soapstone might have involved difficulties in this respect. The paalstave mould from Valby has a number of thin channels on its parting face, probably intended as exits for gasses. Some of the gasses that would normally escape through the clay-walls are now forced to escape through a different route. Hence, greater care might have been taken to pour carefully (letting air escape beside the incoming stream of metal). In the case of the cored soapstone mould, there might have been a change towards more porous cores, since in these cases gas has to escape through the core itself. Several ways of making a core might be suggested. I used the following procedure: pieces of wet and malleable skin of proper thickness are pressed into each valve, cut so that they fit the axe-cavity. The two valves, each with its skin-piece in place, are pressed around a sausage of core-mix. While holding the mould assembled, the end of the sausage sticking out is shaped into a funnel, and in-gates are made by a thin wooden stick. As the core dries and gets stronger, one valve is lifted off. The tip of the core is cut to shape, a groove for internal haft-support in the axe can be cut, and one in-gate channel can be trimmed. When one side is finished, the core is shifted so that it rests in the other valve, and now the other side of the core is trimmed in the same way. When the core has dried for a while, it is carefully released, and put aside to dry. To make sure that it still has the right shape after all the trimming is done, it can be assembled in the mould again. It must be placed standing vertical, resting on the funnel, so that the risk of the core bending during curing is eliminated. The preserved axes clearly indicate that flaws were common; several axes have holes and incomplete mould walls. In some cases the flaw probably stemmed from imprecise coreassemblage, from a cold-shot in which bronze cooled so that it left a hole open on the mould wall, or from gasses. Casting socketed axes put demands on melting practices. It was not large loads, but they needed relatively higher temperatures (compared to flanged axes and paalstaves), which again put higher strain on crucibles. The small size and high number of both socketed axes and moulds for such should not lead to the impression that making a

186 socketed axe was a simple project. Casting a hollow bronze artefact is always complex and risky; the larger the size and the thinner the walls the more risky it gets. Such a casting also puts high demand on the melting and pouring procedures. A charcoal fragment slipping into the mould can make greater damage to a cored casting than to a massive casting like e.g. a flanged axe or a paalstave. Thin walls also necessitate relatively hotter bronze with maximum fluidity. Some of the axes have very thin walls and an almost shell-like appearance (nr. 432, 435, 439, 451, 469, 510, 516). To accomplish such thin walls the core has to be assembled very precisely, bronze ought to be heated to c.1150 &, and both the mould and especially the core ought to be preheated. It might be that these thin-walled axes were not cast in soap stone mould, but in clay moulds that in principle could be preheated almost to the temperature of the metal. A core made from a compound with a high level of organic materials must be burned well. After this it can be assembled with the mould valves preheated to c.200 &, in a clam made by two green sticks. 200 & means that it can be handled with thick skin gloves. Such gloves tend to make precise work difficult and indeed, fitting a hot core into hot mould valves, and the assembled mould into the clam, with thick gloves while the crucible is about to get ready, is frustrating for the novice. It is risky to attempt to heat an assembled mould with the core in place without the wooden clam (this would burn): soot, particles etc. might enter the mould and ruin the casting. Heating the valves and the core separately enable a last check of the insides to be made before casting. Regardless of specific procedures the experienced founder will plan this act of getting the mould ready for casting thoroughly. The final step in any casting project involves taking the crucible out of the furnace, and moving into pouring position. This is hotter than it looks, it is rather dangerous, and once the process has been instigated it has to be continued and completed. The experienced founder will plan this act and get rid of as many eventualities as possible. The novice is inclined to underestimate the heat-radius of the small crucible, and might make an attempt too thinly gloved; he reaches his limit of pain just as he is about to pour into the mould, resulting in burns if he is tolerant and spillage of bronze and potential catastrophe if he is not. The skilled one therefore has gloves on the safe side. The experienced founder will also have decided what is the optimal shape of a crucible and thongs, and makes everyone according to this. In this way he is able to achieve a certain degree of confidence in moving the crucible. He has also learned that the shorter the distance between mould and furnace, the better. Although, not too close so that his hands are placed above the furnace when in

187 pouring position, since this would burn his gloves and his hands. There might also be an unexpected change in wind suddenly leading both heat and smoke in an otherwise safe position. Finally, the glowing charcoals that he rakes swiftly of the surface of the molten bronze must not land on a spot that he is about to step or kneel onto.

7.9. The transformation of metal in NW Scandinavia

A more thorough inquiry into the transformation of metal has led to the following insights: In some cases the direction of networks have been strengthened, i.e. by differences and similarities not in the castings but in the tools and procedures involved in their making (e.g. the Nyhamar-Kinneved link, the Grtavr-Forssand-Northern Jutland link, the other Rogaland-Arctic links) In some cases the nature of networks has been illuminated, giving more information on the nature of the skills that was transmitted It has brought to light a number of crucial non-human entities involved in the transformation: e.g. clay, fire, fuel and their specific forms as crucibles, tuyeres, furnaces, charcoal etc. It has brought information on the experiential qualities afforded by the project of transforming metal (colour, tactility, and easy/complicated) Four cultural-historical phenomena in particular are highlighted by this exploration: The early metallurgical activity within the Central Zone involved the use of a soft moulding procedure, probably a clay/sand mix, wax templates and closed moulds. The Vigrestad, Gjrv and Kleppe assemblages indicate that highly advanced casting projects were performed in Jren and probably also at Beitstad at the end of BA II, intimately related to foundries in Zealand. The complexity, size and quality of soapstone moulds from the SognefjordTingvollfjord area in BA IV; seen in the moulds from Nyhamar, Olset, Slottsvik, Bremnes and Skjeldestad. Valuable information is gained from the design on the Nyhamar A cavity, the core-print on the Skjeldestad mould and the general appearance of the Slottsvik mould. The quality of the moulds testify to an intimate knowledge of the type in question, and how to carve it in negative, as well as a

188 familiarity with soapstone. The moulds from Nyhamar, Olset and Slottsvik could hardly be the work of novices, i.e. the hands that made these must have made moulds before this, a signal of access to metal and the scale of production. This indicates that the overland networks of the Central Zone were still going strong in BA III-IV, but for some reason few bronzes were deposited. The novel axe-designs of Arctic inspiration in LBA were accompanied by the spread of Arctic moulding practices, and most likely involved the movement of people from the interior of Northern Sweden to the coast on the one hand, and from Northern Finland via Torne River to Jren and Sunnhordaland on the other.

189

Chapter 8: Displacement
Chapter 8 is about the displacement of metal, and will take us to the ground level in order to explore the resistance and hindrances along specific paths. There are two major uncertainties when reconstructing human long-distance movements in the past. While we are quite good at exploring how far an artefact has been moved we have greater difficulties when it comes to the question of how far each person actually travelled, i.e. how many middle-men to include? I believe this uncertainty is somewhat easier to handle if we stick to things and paths a bit longer before we start modelling social organization on the basis of long-distance travels and contacts. The second uncertainty is about which route or path was used between place A and place B. This is no doubt one good reason why we rarely see specific paths discussed in Bronze Age studies. The problem is that if we let this uncertainty, whether it was path X, Y or Z that was used, convince us that we better not be specific, we are never faced with the resistance embedded in every path in the real world. I believe there is something to be gained from once in a while choosing a path, and the wrong path rather than no path.

8.1. Towards moving assemblies

When it comes to reconstructing some likely routes and paths for prehistoric networks, there is much to be gained by taking a holistic perspective: I am chasing a moving assembly of humans and non-humans along a specific path with specific qualities. If there is no food available along the path, food for the entire journey has to be brought along a significant addition to the total assembly. If there is food available along the route, this might be available only if certain tools for procuring and processing e.g. fish or game, are brought along potentially also a significant addition to the assembly. Thus, it might be rewarding to consider, not merely moving humans, but moving assemblies attuned to features of specific paths land, water, elevation, temperature, vegetation, fauna, snow etc. I am first going to explore the technology of movement in a narrower sense, i.e. the means of propulsion ranging in complexity from the human feet to the boat.

8.1.1 Animals
There were several domestic animal species in the Bronze Age; ranging in size from the dog via sheep, goat and pig, to cattle and horses. These might have been part of long-distance journeys, as 1) something brought along for exchange, as 2) walking food for the journey;

190 as 3) pack-animals, carrying a significant part of the non-human assemblage, as 4) traction, dragging humans and/or non-humans on runners or wheels, or for 5) carrying humans. The rugged topography of NW Scandinavia excludes the wheeled wagon or chariot from longdistance journeys. While animals might ease the journey in terms of food, in terms of carrying goods or hauling or carrying humans; they might also narrow the choices of paths. Animals might have difficulties with narrow and steep stretches, deep snow or river crossings. Driving a large herd of animals for exchange, would necessitate a wide, open path with few hindrances and plenty fodder. The horse seems to have been introduced to Scandinavia in the Early Bronze Age. In Norway the earliest horse bones come from layers in the rock-shelters of Ruskeneset and Skipshellaren with only a general date to BA (stmo 2005b: 190). The Unnestad-charioteer (cf. chapt 5.3) is probably the first depiction of a horse in our area, possibly also the first indication of actual horses. Horses seem to become more common in rock art towards the end of the Bronze Age. While four-legged animals are extremely rare in the rock art of Rogaland (Fett & Fett 1941: 126), Nord-Trndelag has a large number. Particularly the Stjrdal and Beitstad areas have many animal depictions, often with distinct horse-like features (Sognnes 1999: 25; 2001: 68). Fordal in Stjrdal is unique with its more than 150 horse images (ibid: 25; 2001: 68). The horses at Reppe were probably carved after 500 BC, while those at Vikan and Grbrekk might have been made at the end of the BA (ibid 1999: 25). In this area there are also depictions of riders; at Fordal (ibid 2001: fig. 136,137), Reppe (ibid: fig. 102), Bjrngrd (ibid: fig. 123) and Leirfall III (ibid 1999: 43). These depictions seem to be closely related to those of Bohusln, and horse-back riding seems to have been introduced at the very end of the BA, or in the first centuries of the PRIA (Kaul 2004: 204pp.). Hence, horses might be relevant to the overland networks during BA VI, but they are unlikely to have made significant contribution to long-distance mobility before this time.

8.1.2 Snow technologies

Snow and ice-technologies like skis, skates, sledges and snow-shoes can be defined as tools that enable movement on snow or ice through a redistribution of weight and/or a decrease of friction (cf. Berg 1993: 10). While snow-shoes are simply large shoes that enable a person to walk on top of deep snow, skis are long runners that also decrease friction and allow the skier to glide forwards. Skis are usually used in combination with one or two poles for propulsion and balance. Skates are shorter and narrower runners also used in pairs, for gliding across frozen water. The sledge is a vessel mounted on one or two runners that can

191 be moved by either human or animal traction. Snow is in principle a hindrance as much as water for human mobility. On the other hand, heavy snow also levels the irregularities of the landscape, thus shortening the distances. In combination with frozen rivers and lakes, snow makes highly favourable paths for humans with the proper skills and equipment. Skis are depicted in Fenno-Scandinavian rock art in three cases: from Bla, NordTrndelag C., Rdy, Nordland C. and Jiebmalukta, Finnmark C. (stmo 2005d: 327). At Bla, a skier is depicted along with a bird almost in realistic scale. It is conventionally attributed to the naturalistic phase 1 of the regional typo-chronological schema and dated to the earliest Neolithic (Sogness 2001b; Stafseth 2006: 41, fig. 12). No skiers are depicted on Nordic Bronze Age panels. The oldest skis known are the fragments from Vis I, Russia, radiocarbon dated to 6000 BC (Burov 1989; stmo 2005d: 326). There are three Neolithic findings from FennoScandinavia; from Srkiaapa, Salla, Finnland, dated to 3316-3096 BC, from Kalvtrsk, Sweden, dated to 3623-3110 BC, and from Vefsn, Nordland C., dated to 3343-2939 BC. Only two more skis from Norway, from Nordland and Finnmark C., are dated before 0 AD, both from the PRIA (Edgren & Trnblom 1992: 68; Berg 1993: 14; Torgersen 1999: 26p., 37; stmo 2005d: 326). A bronze hilted dagger of Seima-Turbino type, from the burial ground at Rostovka, eastern Russia, carries a sculpture of a skier holding on to the reins of a horse a horse-drawn skier (Pl. 60.3; Chernykh 1992: Pl. 22). This is interesting in light of other links to Seima-Turbino assemblages (cf. chapt 4.4.11). Hence, according to rock art and actual findings, skis were known from at least 3000 BC in the area north of Trondheimsfjord, and might have been of particular relevance to the Taiga-connection during the Bronze Age; i.e. Seima-Turbino and Ananino horizons. Several runners for sledges of different types are known from Finland and Northern Sweden, dated to the Neolithic and the Early Metal Age. These might have been used with both human and dog-traction. Interestingly, some of the Finnish specimens are made from Cembra Pine (Pinus cembra), a species that did not grow west of the Urals (Edgren & Trnblom 1992: 66pp.). Here too, there are indications that extensive long-distance journeys were made on snow during winter in the Taiga and the Arctic. No snow-shoes are known from prehistory. Possible indications of the use of snowshoes are some atypical rock art foot-print motives. They are shaped as conventional footprints but are added a net-pattern possibly referring to a frame with crossing strings like a snow shoe. It might of course be a reference to some kind of protection underneath a

192 conventional shoe. Even if this is dubious evidence for snow-shoes, it is interesting that the two known specimens come from Benan in the Beitstad area (Lindgaard et al. 2006: 20p.) and Hgebyn, Dalsland, strengthening the idea of long-distance journeys on foot or on snowshoes between Trndelag and Lake Vnarn17. The inner fjord areas, the eastern lowlands and particularly the alpines receive heavy snowfalls in the winter season. The alpine crossings above 800 m.a.s.l. would have been covered by heavy snow from late fall to late spring/early summer. Snow-technologies would certainly have been relevant if not absolutely necessary for crossings during the winter season. Long-distance journey on skis would be one of the swiftest and most flexible technologies in this world, in combination with frozen rivers and lakes and level, snow covered terrain. Snow-technologies would create the shortest overland paths between two places. Although the data is meagre it would seem that the taiga-networks during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age involved a highly effective high-speed technology for wintertransport. In southern Scandinavia these technologies were of less relevance, with more level terrain and less snow. The important question is whether these were used across the highland and interior of the Scandinavian Peninsula south of Beitstad, and thus integral to the displacement of a significant portion of the bronze explored in this study. I have argued that the impact of relations with the taiga-area, both during the Seima-Turbino and Ananino horizons, were significant to large parts of NW Scandinavia accordingly, skis and snowtechnologies might have been both the vehicle of this impact as well as a part of the impact.

8.1.3 Boats
Boat technology is highly relevant as both a maritime and inland technology. Boats are, except for the cup-mark, the most numerous motive in the rock art of the Nordic Bronze Age. Potentially, there is much information available on boat technology in these images. One uncertainty in particular has precluded this potential from being realized; are these figures of vessels with a skin hull or a hull made from wooden planks? (cf. Marstrander 1963: 109pp.; Crumlin-Pedersen 1970, with references). The boats depicted seem in many cases to be large vessels with large crews. The technology of building a large skin boat is radically different from that of a large planked vessel in terms of tools, operations and rawmaterial. The Bronze Age rock art artist has in fact been rather consequent in certain details, details that can be seen as elements of construction. We would know quite a bit of Bronze Age boats if we only could decide whether the building material was skin or wood.

193 There is wide agreement that the Arctic boat-images of the Mesolithic and Neolithic represent skin boats (Marstrander 1963: 117; Engedal 2006). The southernmost variant of these, boat type 1a can be seen as the direct forerunner to boats type 1b-c (cf. chapt. 6.1): they have low height-length ratio (short vessels with high hulls), they lack keel-extensions and they are often asymmetric with a hull that is higher in one end. These are all features easier to make through a skin technology than through plank technology. In case of patterned hulls, patterns might represent the seams of the skin-cover as well as the frameworks behind the cover (Engedal 2006: 175p.). The argument so far is uncontroversial: the EBA boats 1b-c represent a skin boat with roots in northern traditions. The real issue is introduced by boats of type 2 (Rrby). This boat might be 1) a Nordic EBA innovation inspired by Mediterranean plank-built boats (Crumlin-Pedersen 1970: 237; 2003: 230); it might be 2) a South Scandinavian plank technology developed during LN (stmo 2005a); or it might be a 3) South Scandinavian innovation inspired by northern skin boats (Marstrander 1963). Type 2 boats are the first of the large category of classic Bronze Age boats, all of which are likely to have been made by a similar technology. Hence, if one argues that the type 2 boats are skin boats, the same arguments would tend to make most if not all BA boat carvings representations of skin boats. A qualified guess to the construction of the type 2 boat is thus crucial to in-depth investigations into Bronze Age maritime journeys. If we take a look at the relative size of type 2 carvings within our area, we see that crew members numbers 41 (47 including the lures) at Bardal (Gjessing 2007); 39 at Bakke I; 21 at Hamarhaug; 19 at Haustveit (Mandt 1972: Pl. 30.38, 20.24, 52.13); 17 at my IV and 16 at Haga (Fett & Fett 1941: Pl. 23A.16, 38A.2). The eponymous Rrby boat carries a crew of 32 (AK II: 617). Is a crew of 40 realistic or even possible? I would like to use an Inuit umiak, the Pearyland reconstruction presented by H.C. Petersen (Petersen 1986: 187, fig. 182) and the reconstructed Hjortspring boat Tilia (Crumlin-Pedersen & Trakadas 2003), as foundations for sketching some alternatives: a type 2 boat made from skin versus one made from wooden planks. It seems clear that Bronze Age boats were paddled, and there are thus limits as to how high the hull of a paddled vessel could be. Boat type 2 as a skin boat, in light of the Pearyland umiak: The Pearyland boat had a hull c. 10m long, or 11m including the extension of the stringers, and it was 0.7m high amidships. It weighed 223 kg (dry), and was intended for a crew of 12-13. The height-length ratio of the Pearyland-hull is thus 1:14.3, which in fact resembles the ratio of the eponymous Rrby boat, at 1:14.6. This means that if type 2 boats had a comparable height of hull, the

194 length of their hulls would have been about 10.2m (Rrby), 8.6m (Bardal), 10.4m (Haustveit). This makes me suspect that the artists have not been realistic on the number of the crew. If we keep the height-length ratio of the Bardal boat, and makes it long enough for a crew of 40, c. 25m the height of the hull is c. 2m. This is not a realistic height on a paddled vessel. Assuming that the artists were less accurate with the crew strokes, and deciding on a length of hull within the range 8-10m, it is possible to get a glimpse of the scale of such a project realized in the medium of skin: 28-31 skins of the smaller harp seal, 14-16 of the larger hooded seal or 12-14 skins of the largest bearded seal (Petersen 1986: 123). This might be the equivalent of 12-14 cow skins. When the Greenlanders used the large hooded or bearded seals for cover, skins were used lengthwise from one sheer stringer to another, and sewn in a tutittitat-pattern (ibid:138). The bottom-keel would have to be 8-10 m long, plus additional length for the curved extensions, the horns. The keel would have to be strong, and might be joined together from two or more pieces. Such joints would also ease the making of strong, curved keel-extensions. The weakness of this argument, i.e. that boat type 2 was a skin-construction, is the keel-extensions. Basically, a part of the internal framework has to pass through the skin-cover underneath the water-line. In historical times keel-extensions on skin-vessels seems to be known only from Alaska and the Aleutians (Johnstone 1980: 32, fig. 33). These were moderate extensions, and at least in some cases they did not actually pass through the hull, rather the skin-cover was fitted around the entire extension. This would also be a likely solution for the moderate extensions seen on the early boats (phase 2 according to Helskog) in Finnmark and the White Sea (Helskog 1988: 90; Lindquist 1994: fig. 37). If so, the extensions serve less purpose as protection of the hull when beaching. On the other hand, it is no doubt possible to let the keel extend through the hull, as Valbjrn did in his reconstruction of a Bronze Age skin-version of the Hjortspring boat (Valbjrn 2003a: 140). A third alternative would be to let an entirely external keel run underneath the skin hull like Marstrander did on his skin boat the Kalnes (Johnstone 1972; 1980). This would give much better protection to the hull, and it could even function as a runner if the boat was hauled across land. This could have been achieved through principles comparable to those seen in the arctic sledge-runners (cf. Edgren & Trnblom 1992: 67), or the skin-hull might have been secured to a keel-frame above sea-level. Type 2 boat as a planked boat in light of the Hjortspring boat: Sketching a plank alternative for boat type 2 based on Hjortspring boat is relatively easier. The Hjortspring boat had a hull 13.6m long, or 19m including the extensions, and was 70 cm high amidships

195 identical to the height of the umiak above. It weighed 530 kg, carried a crew of 20 paddlers, and consisted of the following main parts: a hollowed out keel-plank, two keelstrakes (lower planks), two sheer-strakes (upper planks), a stem post and a stern post; and finally the four characteristic horns fitted to the stem and sternposts. We need only shorten the keel-plank and the strakes, and put on horns with stronger curve to get a glimpse of a type 2 boat in wood. Accordingly, the description of reconstructing the Hjortspring boat, the Tilia, is highly relevant in the scenario of planked Bronze Age boats. The making of the Tilia demonstrated the demand put on large, high quality timber, linden in this case (Valbjrn 2003b: 70pp.). The keel-plank and the strakes were made from single-lengths without joints. The winged stern and stem posts were each made from single large trunks with a diameter of more than 0.9m. The total cost of four linden trunks, 130-170 years of age, procured from Poland for the Danish reconstruction, was no less than 140 000 Danish Kroner and even these turned out to be a bit too small. This would have been somewhat easier to procure for a shorter vessel. The process from split timber to finished construction parts, was work relying on high-quality axe and adze edges. The strakes as well as the keelplank have carved cleats, a total of 198 on the strakes only. Assembling the pieces also necessitated a high number of drilled holes for sowing. Comparison: In the skin alternative, the most time-consuming task would be preparing the skins, sowing the skins together, and joining the multiple ribs to keel and stringer. This would be an expensive vessel in terms of skins, and time-consuming and demanding in terms of sowing. The plank alternative is expensive in terms of timber and tools, and time-consuming particularly in terms of axing, carving and drilling. On the other hand, the latter would be much more robust against blows and rubbing, and less in need of maintenance. Although the principle of construction used in the Hjortspring boat is very light-weight compared to other wooden constructions both planked and dug-out (CrumlinPedersen 2003: tab 6.3), such a boat would be nearly twice as heavy (1.7 times as heavy) as the umiak principle. There would be 38kg per meter of hull, and with a crew of 16 and a 10m long hull, there would be 23.8 kg per paddler to propel or to carry. The umiak version would be 22.3 kg per meter hull, and 14kg per paddler. If type 2 boats were skin boats, large skins from seal, moose or cattle, would have been in high demand, to such a degree that it should change our view on Bronze Age economy. The existence of such a technology, the production and maintenance of perhaps the largest known skin-covers, or not, has immense consequences for the demand of skin. It

196 would also make the technology of leatherwork and sowing, possibly a gendered activity, relevant. If they on the other hand were made of planks, certain areas with proper timbers would be nodal. This would no doubt be the most time-consuming and complex task put to a bronze-edge, far beyond the mud-walled, thatch-roofed long-house. This task being both large scale and complex, would demand a high number of high quality tools. Accordingly, this vessel would put the bronze axe more in demand than the skin boat. It is also possible to see the bronze awls (cf. chapt. 3.11) as a tool for burning holes in the planks for sowing. The skin technology would have another advantage. It could be applied to smaller, lightweight, temporary craft, made in a day or two (Adnay & Chapelle 1964: 212pp.; Anderson 1977:115p.; Engedal 2006). The planked technology does not offer the same flexibility, as it is difficult and somewhat irrational to apply the plank technology to a small, temporary craft. This is a difference that would have been of relevance particularly to inland travel. Wood technology would here probably shift from plank to dug-outs. I suggest the following scenario: a skin technology in the Arctic and Northern Sweden preserved and developed from early Mesolithic boats, spread southwards as boats type 1a in the LN, and inspired the making of boats type 1b-c, used in BA I-II south to Lista (cf. Engedal 2006). These, particularly the light type 1b skin boat, are likely to have been used for overland travel across the interior of the peninsula. Meanwhile, a complex planked vessel is developed in eastern Scandinavia, boat type 2, and this is introduced to NW Scandinavia in late BA II with the Zealand-intervention. This still leaves two significant gaps: what kind of boat was used in the flint dagger traffic across Skagerrak in LN, and what kind of boat was used by the Elbe-Kiel Bay Centre in BA I and early BA II? The Skagerrakbarrier might have been conquered at the transition MN-LN by northern type skin boats (cf. Engedal 2006), and/or by boats used by the coastal Bell Beaker groups. It is also possible to relate the Skagerrak-traffic in both the LN and the early BA II to Atlantic boat technologies. Either a plank boat of the heavy British tradition, such as those preserved from North Ferriby and Dover, dated between 2000-1500 BC, or a skin boat related to the historical curragh (Crumlin-Pedersen 2003: 211pp., tab. 6.1). A characteristic feature of the early British planked-vessels is their heavy weight: 211kg per paddler for the North Ferriby vessel (ibid: 224p., tab 6.3), compared to the 23.8kg and 14kg per paddler in the above scenarios. For this reason Crumlin-Pedersen doubts the use of the British planked boats for navigation at open sea, and argues that boats of the curragh type was used for this purpose in the west (ibid: 228p.). If so, the maritime Bell Beaker network that extended north to Limfjord and

197 even Slettab in Rogaland, was focused on either log boats or more likely, on skin boats. Consequently, the breaking of the Skagerrak barrier c 2500-2300 BC might have been: 1) the meeting of two different skin boat traditions, an Atlantic and an Arctic, separated since the Middle Mesolithic by log boat traditions, or 2) the diffusion of skin boat technology from the Arctic to the Atlantic. To summarize the above argument: the skin boat was used in the LN traffic along the North Sea coast of NW Scandinavia, Jutland and the Netherlands to the Atlantic. It was also used for overland journeys across the interior of the Scandinavian Peninsula, and was also used in the voyages between Elbe-Kiel Bay and Jren 1600-1340 BC. The light Scandinavian plank built vessel was invented by groups in Skne-Zealand inspired by east Mediterranean vessels, and this vessel was introduced to NW Scandinavia by Zealanders c. 1330 BC.

8.2. The Central Zone and the Central-Swedish-Water-System (CSWS)

In part I, I found strong indications that bronzes in the Central Zone of NW Scandinavia, throughout the Bronze Age, pointed eastwards to Sweden. In several cases, I was not able to find any convincing middle-men in the lowlands to the immediate east of the mountains. Such potential middle-men were rather located east of Glomma, most often east of the Vnarn-Gta line. This extreme inland network seems to be a stabile network at work throughout the Bronze Age, and a deeper exploration of it is of outmost importance to an understanding of the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia. The eastern half of this network, the lakes and rivers in the interior of Central Sweden, I will term the Central Swedish Water System, and the abbreviation CSWS will be used throughout the rest of the thesis. The Central Zone-CSWS Network refers to the relations between western Norway between Trondheimsfjord and Hardangerfjord/Boknafjord and the Swedish east coast. The CSWS has the potential of effective boat-travel. A first issue to be explored is the nature of the CSWS, and to what degree it can be extended westwards towards the Central Zone (Map 18).

8.2.1 The CSWS

The dominant features of the CSWS are the three large lakes of Vnarn, Vttern and Hjlmaren and the Bay of Mlaren (the historical Lake Mlaren was actually a fjord/bay until the 13th century AD). In the Bronze Age it is possible to discern a water-network of

198 three main east-west running routes that could be linked to each other at various points. From Mlaren, River Eskilstunan, Lake Hjlmaren and River Svartn make up a water-path that reaches 190km in a westwards direction almost to Lake Vnarn. This is referred to as the Mlar-Hjlmar Channel. South of Mlaren, River Nykpings stretches 150km from the coast westwards to its source Lake Tisaren, just north of Lake Vnarn. This will be referred to as the Nykpings-Tisaren Channel. South of this, River Motala Strm reaches 100km from Norrkping, via Lake Glan and Lake Roxen, all the way to Lake Vttern. Although the latter would seem to be the best route for travel between the eastern coast and Lake Vttern, this seems not to have been the case in the Bronze Age. The distribution of both rock art and bronzes indicate that the main route from Lake Roxen to Lake Vttern, went via River Svartn and Lake Tkern. This route will be referred to as the Roxen-Tkern-Vttern Channel. A likely water-route between Vttern and Vnarn would be along the modern channel Gta Kanal. But in this case too, findings seem to indicate a southern overland crossing through the Falkping area. Thus, the core of the CSWS is the three main channels linking Lake Vnarn to the east-coast. In the north, this system extends northwards towards River Dalalv, in the west towards River Glomma. To the southwest, Lake Vnarn is linked to the coast through River Gta. Further east, the CSWS and the lowlands are isolated from the southern coast, Skne and Halland C., by the South-Swedish highlands. That the CSWS actually facilitated effective movements of people and displacement of bronzes is demonstrated particularly by a few bronze types. In the case of socketed axes with extended necks, variant Mlar, we can see how the Mlar-Hjlmar channel is linked to the western part of the Roxen-TkernVttern channel, probably through a crossing from Lake Hjlmaren. It also demonstrates a close link between the two largest clusters around Mlaren and south of Lake Vnarn (cf. Map 16). On this background it is possible to recognize a similar network in BA I. At this time there is a zone with 12 Faardrup axes, isolated by the South Swedish Highlands from the southern main zone of distribution, while both the southwestern coast between Rivers Nissan and Gta as well as the eastern coast, are empty. One of the Rmlang axes and one Faardrup axe point to the existence of a fourth east-west channel in the CSWS at the beginning of the Bronze Age: from Lake Roxen via River Stngn to Lake sunden, via a crossing to River Loftn running eastwards to the coast. The Olofsborg axe was found at the crossing between Lake Tynn and River Loftn (cf. chapt. 4.1.5). Even the distribution of type ID flint daggers draws a comparable network (cf. chapt.2.5). The most important issue

199 is therefore: to what degree can the CSWS be extended westwards towards the Central Zone? Beginning at Lake Vnarn, there are several riverine routes leading towards Glomma in the west. Three of them are highlighted by Bronze Age findings: a southern MangenFoxen-stebosjn route, a central Vrangslv-Glafsfjord route, and a northern Trysil/Klarlv route. Let us take a look at each of them, beginning in the south. The Mangen-Foxen-stebosjn route: An extremely long spearhead of Ullerslev type was found at sea at 2m depth, 3m out from the western shore of Ruvn in Lake stebosjn, Dalsland C. (Jacob-Friesen 1967: nr. 245; Old 2617). It is tempting to make this a link in the network behind the largest known hoard of Ullerslev spears, from Svenes in the west (hoard 17). It is in fact the nearest finding outside of the western zone (cf. chapt. 3.10). From stebosjn it would have been possible to reach Lake Foxen via Lakes klang, Rvarp, Lelng and Laxsjn. From Lake Foxen it would be possible to travel on smaller rivers to Lake Mangen, and cross over to River Glomma near the BA III hoard from Steinerud. The hoard from Steinerud contained a socketed axe with Y-ornament (group 3 in this study) and an awl (Johansen 1993: nr. 21); and could be seen as a link between the CSWS and the axe from Bjrnes and the awl from Dvingen (nr. 359, 451, Map 14). Two flanged axes strengthen the idea of this route between Vnarn and Glomma: from Bastugrdet (Old 2636) and Djursgrd (Old 2634). The Vrangslv-Glafsfjord route: From Byviken in Lake Vnarn, River Bylven can be paddled through Harefjord and Lake Gilgabergsjn into the long Lake Glafsfjord. From Jsseforsviken in Glafsfjord, River Jsselv can be followed up to Lake Nysockensjn. A Faardrup axe was found by the rapids Stlpet on Jsselv (Old 2627). From Lake Nysockensjn it is possible to enter Lake Askesjn, and follow River Norelv into Lake Hugn and then River Vrnslv north to Lake Vingeren at the edge of River Glomma. This is the place, Kongsvinger, where River Glomma makes a sharp turn westwards. In cases of high water, Glomma runs over its south bank at this place and flows into Lake Vingersj just south of the bend. Accordingly, River Glomma is in some cases, and possibly more often in prehistory than today, in principle a direct western extension of the CSWS. The axe from Stlpet is the most likely link between the Faardrup axes of the CSWS and Skne on the one hand and those from NW Scandinavia on the other. The Trysil/Klarlv route: From the northwestern shore of Lake Vttern it is possible to follow River Trysil/Klarlv 460km to its sources just south of Lake Femunden. A complete mould for tanged daggers and sickles was found near Klarlv, at Blia near

200 Munkfors (Boudou 1960: 230; Old 2628). This mould has features in common with the mould from Slottsvik. The type of sickle cast in the Blia mould are dated mainly to BA IV, but also BA V, and in one case BA III (cf. Boudou 1960: 47). The Blia mould is accordingly an interresting contemporary paralell to the Slottsvik mould in BA IV. The socketed axe variant Mlar from Ljrdalen, Hedmark C. (Johansen 1981: 22), indicates a crossing between River Trysil/Klarlv and the western Dalalv river. This is the most likely link between the numerous Mlar axes in the CSWS and the single specimen from Hovde, Nord-Trndelag C. (cf. chapt. 4.4.5). East of Lake Vnarn, the CSWS extends through several rivers north towards River Dalalv, i.e. the Dallv routes: Two routes northwards from Mleren, through Rivers Fyrisn and rsundan, are highlighted by early bronze findings. River rsundan leads northwards to Vansjn, which is a short overland crossing away from Harbo/Vretan, and another crossing away from River Dallv. A somewhat atypical Faardrup axe from Mllersta (Old 2816), was found not far from this route, and further downstream River Harbo/Vretan comes the hoard from Torslunda, with a Faardup axe, a flanged axe and a Valsmagle spearhead (Old 2840). One of the potential crossings between Rivers Fyrisn and Harbo/Vretan, the smaller River Bjklingen, is marked by a type Ullerslev spear from Solvallen (Old 2865). River Dalalv is also marked by an Ullerslev spear from Store Skedvi (Old 2874). Together these indicate that the Ullerslev spear from Fiskvik and possibly also from Srnesje on the west coast were procured via the Fyrisn-Dallv route (cf. Map 13). The socketed axe with Y-ornament from Torgrd (Old 2873), and the low flanged axe from Lima (Old 2872), both from Dalarna C., indicate that River Vsterdallv was a route used between the western and eastern coasts. Clearly, it could also have been used in combination with Rivers Kolbcksn or Arbogan in order to reach Lake Hjlmaren or the eastern end of Mlaren. Consequently, we glimpse three main routes into the CSWS from the west, a southern Glomma-Vnarn route, a central Trysil/Klarlv route and a northern Dallv route. Although it is difficult to asses the resistance in the above riverine routes in practical detail, such as numbers of falls, rapids and overland crossings, I believe the distribution of relevant bronzes support the idea of water-transport, and that the CSWS could be extended westwards to Glomma and the highlands around Lakes Femunden and Aursunden. However, there is a long way from the west coast to these gateways to the CSWS.

201

8.2.2 From the fjords to the CSWS

There are numerous paths from the coast to the central highlands from each of the main fjords, and I will explore a few of the more likely alternatives. Southern Central Zone; rdalsfjord: The paths from the fjord-bottoms up to the alpines in the southern part of the Central Zone, in Hardangerfjord and Sognefjord, are steep and mostly between 30-60km long, i.e. 1-2 days walks. rdalsfjord makes an interesting case since there is ample evidence for the use of this route in the Bronze Age, e.g. the rock shelter from Skrivarhellaren with thick deposits from LN to EIA, with evidence of Bronze casting. Before the LIA, Lake rdalsvatn at 3 m.a.s.l. was part of the rdalsfjord, and would have been the easternmost part of the large Sognefjord (Prescott 1991a: 12-13). From the end of Lake rdalsvatn a path runs eastwards along River Tya, via Lake Torolmen to its source Lake Tyin at 1080 m.a.s.l. The first part through valley Moadalen is steep up to 790 m.a.s.l. and on top of this first step lies Skrivarhellaren. This is well suited as a first-night stop when arriving from the fjord. From here the path runs through more sloping and open terrain through valley Tyedalen to the shores of Lake Tyin, a likely second-day journey. Lake Tyin lies in the high alpines and a number of paths leading eastwards are available. One of the main alternatives would be a northern route, via Lakes Bygdin and Vinstri and down into the major River Lgen. The Avlund hoard might indicate one route used between Vinstri to Lgen (cf. Map 17; hoard 13). The southern alternative would go from Lake Tyin into Lake Vangsmjsi and down to Lake Slidrefjord and River Begna. The bronzes from Lomen, Svenes and B clearly demonstrate the nodal position of the Begna route. The first major hindrance here is the climb down from Lake Tyin at 1080 to Lake Vangsmjsa at 466 m.a.s.l. Here Begna passes the rapids of Eidsfoss. From Vangsmjsa Begna continues southwards through the rapids of Ryfoss, into Lakes Slidrefjord and Strandafjord, then it continues through the rapids of Faslefoss into Aurdalsfjord. From here, Begna runs into Lake Sperillen at 152-55 m.a.s.l. On the latter stretch lies Bagn and a chance to make a short overland crossing over to River Etna that runs into Randsfjord at 134 m.a.s.l. This might have been done in cases when River Begna was large and difficult to paddle. The Etna-route is marked by Stone Age rock art of the hunters type on the shore besides the rapids Mllerstufossen (Mandt & Lden 2005: 270). Along Sperillen there are one or two more potential crossovers to Lake Randsfjord. Finally, from Sperillen, River Begna enters the falls of Hnefoss, and meats River Randselv coming out from Randsfjord. Getting into River Glomma and the CSWS via River Begna, means that one has to pass Lake Randsfjord, and

202 this is the last chance to do so, by passing Hnefoss and follow River Randselv upstream into Randsfjord at 131-4 m.a.s.l. It would also be possible to bypass Randsfjord by using the crossing at Bagn, and extend the crossing to Lake Mjsa. Regardless of which route is used to access Lake Randsfjord, if one travels by boat now a more significant overland crossing has to be made. While Lake Tyrifjord lies at 63 m.a.s.l. and Randsfjord at 134m.a.s.l., the terrain rises above 300 m.a.s.l. to the east of these lakes. The best candidates would be from the southeastern shores of Lake Randsfjord and cross into the smaller rivers of either Leira or Hakadal-Nitte, both leading into Glomma at Fetsund. These overland crossings would pass through an area with a cluster of bronzes (Johansen 1981): In BA I there are the flanged axes from Morstad and Grumstad, but none of them comparable to western axes. In BA II, further east between the rivers Leira and Hakadal/Nitte, there is the cult axe from mot, the closest parallel to the one from Raknes (chapt. 4.3.3). In BA V there is a pair of lures from Rossum and several tanged swords comparable to those from Ulstein, Sandnesenget and Tomsvik. In BA VI the Vestby hoard parallels the disc-headed pins found in the Vikedal hoard and the spiral neck-ring from Stle, both in Hordaland C. This indicates that western travellers had dealings with people at the southeastern shores of Lake Randsfjord, at least in BA V-VI. It is also of interest to take a look at the area just north of Lake Tyrifjord, an area that is likely to have been rather densely populated, and one that had to be passed through by travellers using the full Begna-route. In BA I there is the flanged axe from Skalstad, closely related to the Hheim-Steine type axes particularly to the axes from Steine in Aurland valley to the immediate south of rdal valley. There is also the axe-shaped slate pendant from Bjrkebakken, strengthening the idea of close relations with the Central Zone (cf. chapt. 5.5). From the rest of the Bronze Age there are few findings from this area, and none of them are close parallels to those of the Central Zone. Still, the southern part of the Central Zone accessed bronzes from the CSWS: the BA II and III hoards from Svenes and B, the clear-cut CSWS BA III type socketed axe with Y-ornament from Seim, the BA IV moulds from Nyhamar and Skjeldestad, the Ananino spearhead from Luster, the Mindelheim sword from Lekve, the hoard from Vikedal and the spearhead from Tjelflot, from BA VI. This might indicate that the preferred routes shifted from the southernmost Begna-route to northern routes crossing into Randsfjord or Glomma. Clearly, such a shift would have had consequences for the Central Zone south of rdalsfjord and particularly south of Sognefjord. These routes went through thinly populated areas except for the southern part of Randsfjord and around Mjsa. Even Randsfjord and Mjsa could be bypassed, and this would ensure

203 that all overland crossings into Glomma were made through unpopulated highlands or forests to the north. Thus, it might have been an issue of safe-guarding the journey and the cargo, and of avoiding overland crossings through the southeastern centres. The cluster of Bagterp type spearheads and a Wohlde sword from the Mjsa area in BA I might be an indication of attempts to intercept Central Zone-CSWS journeys, possibly under East-Jutish influence. On the other hand, the lures from Rossum and the cult-axe from mot could be seen as indications of large scale rituals that also involved guests from the west. Mid Central Zone; Romsdalsfjord: One of the most comfortable routes across the mountain-plateau was from Romsdalsfjord across Lesja. While other routes typically cross altitudes above 900-1000 m.a.s.l., the highest altitude on this route is no more than 610 m.a.s.l. The Romsdal-Lesja has historically been one of the most travelled paths between west and east (Standal 1996b: 106pp). From the estuary of River Rauma a path winds 40km up the steep Bjrneklev (Bear-climb) to Stugufltten, before continuing in a calmer terrain 28km to the source of Rauma, Lake Lesjavatn at 611 m.a.s.l., a likely two-days journey. In recent history there was a large marketplace Veblungsnes at Rauma-estuary. In the 17th century 3-4000 pack-horses passed down this path in early October each year. Although it was considered a winter-market, it seems clear that pack-horses were used because there was still no snow. For this reason easterners often stored goods bought at the market at Veblungsnes, and returned for them by horse and sledge around Christmas when there was ample snow (ibid: 106). The goods traded were mainly fish from the coast for cereals from the interior. But also vessels of wood and birch-bark and iron ingots from Lesja are mentioned, as well as salt and horses from the coast (ibid: 79, 106, 112). It seems clear that the pack-horse and horse-sledge were crucial in the historical long-distance trade along this route, as along many others in this area. For BA long-distance travellers it would be possible to paddle the 10km long Lake Lesjavatn. From the lake runs River Lgen 204km into the 117km long Lake Mjsa, then it continues another 30km as River Vorma, before finally joining River Glomma at Vormsund. From Vormsund it would be possible to paddle upstream Glomma and make a crossing into the CSWS. The first part of this route descends from 611 m.a.s.l. at Lake Lesjaskog to 120 m.a.s.l. at Lake Mjsa. One of the rapids on this stretch, Eidefossen, is marked with hunters rock art from the Stone Age. No doubt they paddled these waters since the carvings are located at a block in the midst of the rapids (Mandt & Lden 2005: 274). After the two-days journey on foot from the fjord, there is

204 potentially a 360km long water-path available for the daring rafter, and thus a 470km long path from Romsdalsfjord to the Glomma-bend. Northern Central Zone; Stjrdal: Historically, the Trondheimsfjord area has been linked through overland routes in two directions. One is the north-south routes between the medieval centre of Nidaros (modern Trondheim) and Oslo, much travelled by kings as well as pilgrims (Selnes 1997; Kollandsrud 1997). The other is the east-west routes between particularly Stjrdal and Verdal in the west and the Swedish Counties Jmtland and Hrjedalen in the east (e.g. Sandvik 1987). This is somewhat problematic to transfer back into prehistory, particularly to the Bronze Age. It would seem that the Trondheimsfjord area, Stjrdal and Verdal included, procured very little bronze via these routes, but instead from the CSWS in a southeastern direction. The Stjrdal area with its numerous rock art panels, with many figures paralleled in Sweden, might have been linked through Stjrdal-valley, across the highlands to the east coast, and then through a maritime link to Mlaren. This is certainly a possibility, but this would mean that Stjrdal was linked mainly to the northwestern corner of the CSWS, and that it was relatively isolated from the rest of the CSWS as well as from the Central Zone. In my opinion, it would seem that Stjrdal, along with the rest of Trondheimsfjord, was linked to the CSWS through southeastern, interior routes. The sea level at the estuary of River Stjrdal is estimated to have been 20m higher than at present at the beginning of the BA, and 15m at the end of the BA. Although dramatic changes such as land-slides have occurred since the Bronze Age, making it difficult to reconstruct the landscape, it is likely that the fjord reached all the way to Forra-estuary (Sognnes 2001a: 38pp., fig. 8). This situates the many early carvings at Leirfall, Bjrngrd, Hegre, and Ydstines at the northern banks of a fjord. The sites in the valley further east are dominated by horses and footprints and these are all considered to be late carvings (Fordal, Ingstad, Kil). One likely route between Stjrdal and the CSWS would be: along River Sona through valley Sona to its source Lake Sonavatn at 389 m.a.s.l., and then across the mountains Storskarven and Nautfjellet to Lake Ldlasjen. From here one could stick to the highlands east of Finnkoisjn, and proceed to Lake Essandsj at 706-29 m.a.s.l. From here, across a series of small lakes, it would be possible to reach Lake Aursunden at 684-90 m.a.s.l., the source of River Glomma. From the highlands around Lake Aursjen there would be easy access to Rivers Dallv, Trysil/Klarlv as well as Glomma. Clearly, this area would have been not merely important as a rein-deer habitat, but also as a major crossroad. The above route from Stjrdal to Lake Aursunden is also interesting since it passes no less than

205 three historical copper mines: Dronningens Gruve, Gils Gruve and Lillefjell Gruve (cf also Melheim 2009). The southern part of the Trondheimsfjord, would have had shorter routes into the CSWS, along Rivers Nea, Gaula and Orkla, to the highlands around Aursunden, and via Gaula and Orkla one could also choose a southern route and cross into the Lgen-channel.

8.2.3 The Central Zone-CSWS journeys

Although a poor estimate of the character of the Central Zone-CSWS journeys, they can be given metrical estimates: c. 415km from rdalsfjord to the Glomma-bend; c. 450km from Romsdalsfjord to the Glomma-bend, and 440km from Orkla estuary to the Glomma-bend; and 620km from Gaula-estuary via Trysil/Klarlv to Lake Vnarn. If we calculate 30km a day by foot, it would take between 14-15 days to reach the Glomma-bend from the western fjords18. From the Glomma-bend to Lake Vnarn there are c. 270km and 9 more days. Clearly, large parts of these routes could be paddled in a southeastward direction at a much higher speed, even if the boat had to be carried past rapids and from one river to the next. On the other hand, it is rather unlikely that travellers returned to the highlands with boats. That Central Zone-CSWS routes were asymmetric in this way might be significant. Let us take a closer look at travelling by boat. There are significant differences between boats made entirely from wood, both planked or dug-outs, on the one hand and boats made from wood with a skin-cover on the other. Straight trees of high quality, and with large diameter are necessary in order to make a dug-out or the keel-stem and planks for a composite wooden vessel. Both types are time consuming in terms of cutting wood, and both put demand on quality edge-tools. Both types are also difficult to make in small scale: a rather big tree is still needed for making a small, short vessel. Historically, dug-outs (skje) were used on the paths through Orkla valley, for crossing the many tributaries into Orkla River. Probably, and this is one advantage of wooden boats, the dug-out in particular, these lay permanently throughout the year at these crossings. Dug-outs are heavy, and the poorer the quality of the wood, the heavier. Although trees grew at higher altitudes in the Bronze Age than today, timber for boats would still have been confined to the fjords and low-land valleys. The skin boat on the other hand, can be made in large and small scales according to its purpose and the materials at hand. A small vessel for crossing one of the tributaries that run across the Orkla valley, could probably have been made from a single moose skin stretched around a simple framework made from thin branches of birch, tied together by

206 twigs or skin. And, rather than leaving the vessel or bringing it along, it could be assembled and only the cover might be carried. The ingredients for skin boats, either small and simple or large and complex, could be found at both low and high altitudes. The small and relatively simple boat type 1b (cf. chapt. 5.1 and 8.1.3), characteristic of the Central Zone, could easily have been made from seal along the coast, moose and deer in the lowlands and reindeer in the highlands. It could have been used for different purposes: along the coast, crossing a side-river while on foot, paddling the high alpine lake systems, and steering down rapids in the rivers east of the highlands. Clearly, the lightweight boat type 2 built on a Hjortspring principle could also have been carried, with its mere 24kg per paddler. The problem would not be the weight in itself, but rather the problem of a large crew having to move in synchrony along steep and narrow paths from the fjords to the alpines. In this case the skin boat would have been a lot more manageable, but the skin boat might also have been carried unassembled or been made from scratch in the slopes east of the mountains. Thus, there are several alternatives when it comes to boats in the CSWS journeys launched from the west: 1. Were boats carried from the fjord across the alpines? 2. Were boats stored in the alpines or beyond? 3. Were boats made in the alpines or beyond? It is likely that maintenance of boats, repairing frames, joints and impregnating the hide, or putting on a fresh hide, were activities thoroughly embedded in projects of long-distance journeys to the east; most likely activities performed away from lowland settlements. In the hunt primarily targeted for more precious hides and furs, moose or reindeer could have been hunted for new covers for the boats as well as for food. When it comes to boat journeys with such light boats the number and length of landcrossings is only problematic if there is a significant cargo on board. With a boat type 1 with a skin-cover it would have been quite manageable to use many landcrossings, even up to several kilometers, as there would have been few persons per boat and only 14 kg or less per crew member to carry. A large cargo means that there is space for fewer crew-members, and weight per person increases. On top of this comes the added weight of the cargo itself. As the cargo increases the weight might reach a point at which the boat with cargo on board can not be carried by the crew, and the weight, the type of boat or the topography might prevent the loaded boat to be hauled. If so, the boat must be unloaded, and the cargo carried on foot, and the crew must return for the boat. The heavy cargo is accordingly a significant addition to a moving assembly, and it might inflict on the choice of paths and the duration of the

207 journey. E.g. in the case of a boat-crew assembly, the bypassing of 500m of rapids makes little difference to the duration of the journey; while in the case of a boat-cargo-crew assembly such a bypassing would implicate unloading and loading, and walking back and forth the 500m stretch. Potential western commodities are all relatively high bulk: fur, skin, soapstone, pitch-wheels etc. I find it likely that if such cargoes were brought all the way into the CSWS, they had to be large, possibly 200-300 kg. Assuming that the return-cargo was bronze, weights are likely to have been of an entirely different scale. The large hoard from Svenes which might have originally contained as many as 30 spearheads, would have weighed no more than 5kg. 20 average sized Faadrup axes would amount to 20kg, metal enough to make 70 flanged axes similar to the one from Hheim. Even extreme scenarios of bronze displacements, do not make up more than insignificant weights that could be carried by a single person and carried with ease by a crew. Consequently, there might be a relationship between the character of the paths and the character of the cargos working in resonance in the Bronze Age: speedy, riverine paths with high cargo to the southeast, and more time-consuming, overland paths with small cargo to the northwest. Considering the plan for an escape and the aim of the second strategy (cf. chapt. 1.3.3): is this a scenario of displacement that is in accordance with the data analysed in part I? Are such journeys needed or sufficient in order to account for the displacement of metal into NW Scandinavia? If some of the above journeys are extended not merely to the edge of the CSWS but to the rock art centres at the eastern edge, I believe it is a workable scenario that is able to bring bronzes and rock art motives into the Central Zone. In order to also bring in knowledge of funeral-traditions and metallurgical knowledge, it will be necessary to extend the westerners stays in the CSWS, or even include people in the return cargo. Possibly, snow-technologies introduced from the Taiga and the horse changed the nature of these journeys during the Bronze Age, intensified them and made the boat less relevant. During the EBA only the boat and cattle as pack-animals were able to displace large cargos into the CSWS.

8.3. Maritime journeys along the North Way

Norway originates from the areas status as the maritime route to the arctic, the North Way, in early history. There are totally 1580 km from Lista in the south to Tjeldsund in Lofoten, and 2380 km from Lista to River Pasvik in the northeast (cf. Map 19). With favourable conditions, by a straight route in the open waters, paddling 55km a day19, the

208 journey from Lista to Tjeldsund would take 29 days, and the journey from Lista to Pasvik 43 days. This is how long the coast would be in the mind of daring and highly competent navigators. But this coast is, or more precisely, it often is a highly demanding path, mainly because of shifting winds, currents, tides and waves. It is important to acknowledge that although it is an entirely flat and even path compared to the interior, it is also a very heterogeneous path. Historically as well as in modern times, some waters have gained a reputation as particularly harsh and dangerous. Less skilled, less daring or less wellequipped navigators will attempt to bypass these stretches by using longer, more protected routes, or overland routes across short isthmuses. In the mind of these navigators, i.e. most navigators, the coast might seem significantly longer than a 48 days journey. Below, I will explore these feared stretches and the routes that bypass them. Although there has been changes in sea-levels, and potentially also in other relevant features, I trust that these have not changed the main characteristics of the North Way.

8.3.1 Barriers and bypassings

Historically, shipwrecks along the North Way have clustered in areas with particular difficult and dangerous seas (Den Norske Los 1: 199pp., fig. 22; Kval 2007: 65). These areas are marked on Map 19, along with potential overland bypassings. I assume that the slightly warmer temperatures and the often higher sea-levels during the Bronze Age did not radically change these features (cf. Kval 2007: 65pp.). The waters outside Lista: This is the maritime gateway to the western coast from the south, for navigators coming either along the coast from the east or across Skagerrak from Jutland. It is relatively heavily guarded by harsh waters. A wide arch will trouble voyages to western Jutland. For coastal traffic, some of the most dangerous waters might be avoided by overland crossings, including those outside the Lista peninsula. Still, there are rough waters north of Sira estuary, and from here to Eigery there is a c. 45km stretch without protective islands. The weapon-axe from Hove and the sword from Eia both demonstrate the importance of a lengthy land-route that bypasses this stretch. The waters outside northern Jren: From Eigery to Jren Reef there is a 56km long stretch of naked, unprotected coastline (ibid: 67). The waters north of Jren Reef are particularly difficult because of the shallow banks outside the coast. In the Bronze Age the Lakes Orrevatn, Horpestadvatn and Ergavatn on 4 m.a.s.l. would have been a protected fjord or lagoon behind the reef and accessed through present day River Orrena. This would have been the only significant harbour on the 78km between Hafrsfjord and Eigery. But from

209 this lagoon it would also be possible to make overland crossings in order to bypass the waters north of the reef (cf. also Map 30). This could be achieved by a crossing through the area of Bore, Grude and Kleppe into River Figgjo and then either 1) cross into the now drained Lake Skassvatnet reaching in an arch from Voll to Soma, then across Lura or Stangaland to Gandsfjord; or 2) follow Figgjo upstream, and make a land crossing over Sandnes to Gandsfjord. The first alternative along Skassvatnet is strongly suggested by the early bronzes from Hole, Voll, Stokka and Tjelta (nr. 385, 390, 401, 415). The large rock art centre of my also seems better located for such a route. BA III findings in the Hafrsfjord area mark the two southern land crossings and entrances to this fjord: across Risavika-Haga and Solavika-Sola. The waters north of Karmsund Sletta: All journeys that pass through Karmsund will face the rough seas at Sletta just north of Karmsund. These occur as a result of heterogeneous topography at the bottom, from 2m to 250m depths, and rough seas increase when waves collide with tidal currents (Den Norske Los 1: 202). Both Karmsund and Sletta can be bypassed by inner protected routes. One such crossing would be 8km across from Sandeidfjord to len with a maximum altitude of 60 m.a.s.l. Alternatively, a 2km crossing from Vatsfjord to Lake Vatsvatn at 15 m.a.s.l. could be made. Here the vessel could be paddled 6km, before a second overland crossing 6.8km across marshes and altitudes of 45 m.a.s.l. and down to the fjord. The cult-axes from Lunde might indicate the importance of this crossing in BA II. The rise of Karmsund in BA III signals the importance of the outer direct sea-route, and it indicates that the waters of Sletta were conquered on a regular basis. Compared to some of the other dangerous stretches along the coast, Sletta is rather limited in its spatial extension, and there are safe harbours at each end as well as in the middle. These short distances would make it easier to plan the journeys and to make them in good weather only. The waters outside Stadtlandet: Between Karmsund and Stadt it would be possible to travel along protected routes. The dangerous seas outside Sognefjord could also be bypassed by paddling east of the many islands. The peninsula of Stadt is famous for the rough waters outside its coast. Shallow banks in combination with winds from the SW to NW bring waves from the North Sea into collision with coastal currents, and make journeys around Stadt difficult. These are dangerous waters but mainly to those voyaging by the outer waters. When coming via an inner route from the south, the dangerous stretch is limited to the narrow Stadt peninsula itself. This stretch too might be bypassed by using one of three likely

210 overland crossings. The shortest and innermost at Mannseidet is highlighted by the mould from Eide (M 14). Further west is another potential but more strenuous crossing across Sandvikseidet. And west of this lays a third alternative at Dragseidet which is highlighted by a BA cairn with coffin and an asbestos-tempered pot from Drage (B 4708; Bakka 1976: Pl. 8; gotnes 1986: 95 nr. 4). The crossing over Mannseidet is c. 3km long and involves a maximum altitude of 192 m.a.s.l. Dragseidet involves a crossing 5km long and a maximum altitude of 220 m.a.s.l. The waters outside Hustad Hustadvika: Again, shallow banks and waves coming straight in from the North Sea create a highly dangerous stretch. The worst scenarios occur when high waves from the North Sea collide with the shallow banks as well as with coastal currents and outwards running tidal currents from the fjords. In this case several short crossings are available nearby. Frneidet, 13km long, is the most likely candidate. For a crew carrying a light-weight paddled vessel, it might have been preferable to use a western route involving a series of lakes at altitudes from 10-50 m.a.s.l. This route would involve a 1km trip to Lake Litlevatnet at 47 m.a.s.l. Here it would be possible to launch the vessel and paddle 6.7km via Lake Skellbreia and Lake Langevatn at 43 and 38 m.a.s.l. From here one would have to cross 6.2km over marshes down to Lake Nsavatn with direct access to the sea. This crossing could probably be done in a day. The waters outside Fosen: The west coast of the Fosen peninsula is unprotected from waves from the North Sea. The extreme depths of 300-500m just outside the coast, might be the reason for the rough climate in this area (Den Norske Los 1: 199). Of all the dangerous stretches along the coast this is the most extensive spatially. It is also distinguished in that it does not offer alternative inner routes or short overland bypassings. In light of many of the maps presented here, this is perhaps the most interesting maritime barriere along the coast. Since many of the common western categories are lacking on this stretch, it might be of interest to list those categories that are found. One isolated Mesolithic round axe from Stakanes diabaze (Map 4); slate projectiles decorated with transverse lines are clustered here (Map 6), as well as fluted and perforated slate projectiles (Map 7); there is a concentration of LN II flint daggers, type V in particular, the last one before the final cluster in Lofoten to the far north (Map 8); and there are axe-shaped slate pendants type 4 (Map 10). Clearly some groups navigated these waters in the Stone Age, and particularly in the MNb-LN. The only candidate for bypassing Folla would have been through Trondheimsfjord into Beitstadfjord, and across either Namdalseid or through Lake Snsavatn. There are 25km across

211 Namdalseid. After a 6.5km trip via Lake Gladsevatnet and marshes at 25 m.a.s.l., it would be possible to launch a small vessel on River Ferja running the remaining 18-19km to the coast. Lake Snsavatn was until the end of the Stone Age a fjord and thus a northeastern extension of Trondheimsfjord (Stafseth 2006: 49pp.). In the Bronze Age there would still have been easy access through River Snsa into the lake and thus almost to the Namsen river system. From the end of Lake Snsavatn there would be a 11.6km crossing up to Lake Raudsjen at 202 m.a.s.l. Here it would be possible to launch a vessel and follow River Raudhylla 5 km down to River Sanddla running 16km down into River Namsen. Finally, Namsen could be followed 48km to the sea. In stead of following Namsen to the coast it could be followed northwards. The route via Namsen is clearly longer, and when it was used it might have been because of its proximity to interior highlands and water-routes. The cluster of bronzes in the inner part of Trondheimsfjord ought to be seen in light of the position of this area as the only alternative to a hazardous maritime journey outside Folla.

8.3.2 Travelling the North Way

Although it is difficult to assess the specific challenges to Bronze Age navigation along the North Way, it would seem that Fosen represented the most significant challenge south of Varanger: the dangerous stretch of water is long, it is continuous and it can only be bypassed through a significant overland crossing. Compared to this Hustad and Stadt were short stretches that could be bypassed swiftly and safely through short overland crossings. The difficult stretches outside Sognefjord could also be avoided by using a protected route. Sletta north of Karmsund is a difficult but short stretch, and could be avoided by using relatively short overland crossings further in. Jren, on the other hand, is a stretch that is difficult to bypass. Finally, Lista is comparable to Fosen in that the stretch is long if not continuous, and with few effective bypassings available. The journey from Nrysund to rlandet would be 3 days effective paddling, 2 of them through potentially very difficult waters. Alternatively, there would be a 1.5 days journey to Namseid, a two days overland crossing, and 2.5 more days in protected waters to rlandet. Circumventing Fosen would thus take 3 extra days and involve dealings with settled groups at both ends of the overland crossing. From rlandet down to Hustadvika and Kornstadfjord there are 146km, or 3 days journey (2.7). The outer maritime route outside Hustad is 32km, a days journey (0.6), and the alternative overland bypassing across Frneidet would also involve a days journey. From Julsund to Vanylvgapet there are 147km, a 3 days journey. Using the outer route around Stadt would involve a days journey

212 in potentially very dangerous waters (33km). A bypassing across Mannseidet (3km) or Dragseidet (5km) would be both safer and more effective. From Sildagapet there are 300km to Titleneset, 5.5 days effective paddling, or 6.3 days to Karmsund (346km). From Karmsund to Tangenes there are 47km, a days journey, or 65km and a day more to Orrelagoon. This means that under ideal climatic conditions a journey between Boknafjord and Beitstad could be completed in less than 20 days. A scenario for BA III expeditions might be sketched: gathering at my and launching the expedition at dawn. The first seven days intensive paddling takes the crew 393 km to Sildagapet through a rather daring route across open stretches of water. They cross Stadtlandet at Mannseidet and start paddling from Vanylvgapet the 8th day, and enters Julsund on the 11th day. On the 12th day they cross Hustadvika. On the 13th day they start the last leg and reach Tonnes-Holan on the 16th day. Thus, a my-Beitstad journey of 16days, adding the return pluss a week stay in Beitsad, amounts to a total of c. 40 days away from home. And, a hypothetical BA IV-V extreme journey from Boknafjord to Tjeldsund, using the direct route outside Fosen, would take 16 days after crossing Hustadvika, and accordingly 28 days from my to Tjeldsund. An even more extreme journey all the way to Pasvik River would have added 15 days. The first Nordic bronzes north of Rana (from BA IV); the sword from Vinje, the stud from B and the reported razor from Pasvik, all point to the North Way and Northern Jutland (Map 15). This link is supported by the collars from Tennevik and Trondenes possibly cast in Jutish foundries, and the core-print on the Grtavr mould, in BA V (Map 16, cf. chapt. 7.8.4). In BA IV in particular it is difficult to discern a middle-man situated at Beitstad or Namsfjord, and I suggest that we here glimpse some of the most extreme maritime expeditions along the North Way, from the centre in Sunnhordaland and Karmsund to Tjeldsund. One alternative scenario would involve direct interaction of southern and northern boat crews somewhere in between. In conclusion, the 32 days journey (with return) between Trondheimsfjord and Boknafjord, in both planked and skin-covered vessels, was one of the crucial features in the prehistory of NW Scandinavia throughout the LN and BA.

213

8.4 The final act of displacement

I have now arrived at the final act of displacement. This was an act that brought bronze artefacts from one web or set of associations to another, and I will attempt to explore what kind of new webs that were made at this final act of displacement. Those acts of deposition that did not involve a dead human and a burial structure, but rather natural things like water or stone, archaeologists often brand as ritual acts with a focus on the collective aspects of society. Thus, these acts of deposition have come to stand in direct opposition to those that placed bronze next to a corpse in a burial in a funeral celebrating the indvidual aspects of society (e.g. Kristiansen 1987: 43; Vandkilde 1996: 276p.). I hesitate to acknowledge this division, mainly because I do not take for granted that a deposition in water, although it is ritualized and concerned with the super-human, is necessarily a collective act. In fact, I am very much in doubt whether there was a single person or a large group present at these scenes but in both cases the displacement was made by hands attached to individual bodies, and in both cases these bodies might have acted on behalf of themselves or others, for the well being of themselves, someone else or a larger group. It is not that I have arguments that hoarding was not collective, it is rather that the collective/hoard-individual/burial dichotomy is based on such a weak foundation that it should not occupy such a central position in our reasoning it has become a too dominating short-cut of the social in Bronze Age archaeology (cf. chapt 1). In many cases we have very little information on the exact place and circumstances of the discovery of bronze artefacts. Moreover, in many cases in which such information is present these places has changed significantly since the Bronze Age; through human activities (cultivation, construction work and farming), or natural processes, to such a degree that it is difficult to assess what kind of associations were present at the time of deposition. Typically, many bronzes have been found simply in the ground. Still, in many cases the finder reported features of the spot that are of interest to us. Let us take a look at how bronzes ended their co-existence with humans in the Bronze Age.

8.4.1 Recycling
The broken flanged axes from the Central Zone make an interesting case (see below). For what purpose were the missing pieces intended? The fragments from Skrivarhellaren also indicate that complex artefacts were broken with the intention to remelt them. In fact, there is hardly any evidence for trade in bronze as bars in the Nordic Bronze Age, and I assume

214 that most if not all casting projects involved breaking up artefacts of the categories and types known from the Nordic Zone and recycling them (Engedal 2009: 38). Many artefacts must therefore have ended their biographies in a melt-down, and their final contextual webs were in this way not really final they entered first into fire, clay, heat, charcoal and forced air, and then into a new artefact. And through this transformation they might also have been merged with pieces from other artefacts (ibid).

8.4.2 The condition of bronzes

There are differences among bronze artefacts, specific features that are not taken into account by typological definitions. These are differences that archaeologist are trained to sift out, and typically ignored when it comes to typological comparison. Some of these differences are simply due to variations in their making and some are the result of corrosion or other post-deposit processes. But some of the differences are due to what they were exposed to between their making and their deposition. It is possible to discern that artefacts were removed from the world of humans, at different stages in their biographies, from still not having seen action to worn, repaired or broken. I will restrict myself to a few cases that I find particularly interesting. The paalstaves from Helleve (nr.408) and Time (nr.409) seem to have been radically shortened most likely through extensive wood-working and resharpening. This is in fact a rare feature: none of the socketed axes and only a few of the flanged axes (some of the Oldendorf axes from Jren) have such clear signs of heavy re-sharpening. We might speculate that the owner of the Helleve axe managed to shorten his axe this much through a life with many wood-working projects, e.g. from the age of 15 to 50 years of age, a total of 35 years. This would indicate that the owners of most of the other preserved axes participated in significantly fewer wood-working projects, or that they did not use their axes very long before depositing them. There are clearly limits to how much a socketed axe can be resharpened, but none of them seem to have come even close to this limit. This might indicate that socketed axes were rarely life-long companions, and that they were not intended as such. Still, there was much wood-working to be done in BA III-VI, such as the making of houses, boats, hafts, ploughs, fire-wood, bows etc. These tasks are likely to have been solved by the socketed axe as there are no other likely candidates preserved. Compared to flanged axes and paalstaves, they were short-lived things, enabling frequent acts of recycling or deposition and demanding constant access to bronze to be added in each recycling or access to new axes.

215 There is a peculiar concentration of broken flanged axes in the Central Zone in BA I (nr. 392-395, 402). While only one of the flanged axes from the Southern Zone is broken (nr. 401), there are four more from the eastern lowlands, and the phenomenon seems to be particularly common in Sweden. In one case, Hheim (nr. 394), the axe is broken but complete. This is paralleled in three cases from eastern Vstra Gtaland C. (former Vstergtland C.).20 These axes are not heavily corroded and the damages were clearly made in the Bronze Age. All fragments in the Central Zone are edge-parts except for Hheim that also contained the neck-part. It is highly unlikely that such axes would break during axing. To break it in a cold state, both a heavy blow and a stabile mounting is necessary. I have simulated such cases, and I found that a tin-bronze axe shaped like the one from Hheim is very difficult to break, even if it is put in a solid mount and hit by a heavy sledge-hammer. These simulations also demonstrated that even if one manages to break an axe in this way, each part becomes slightly bent, and a stone-hammer tends to make markings on the flanges. Since none of the axes are bent and there are no such markings, I am inclined to argue that these axes were damaged in a hot state. If a Hheim axe is heated to 4-500 &, it will break with a slight blow and with less bending. If heated to orange the axe can be broken easily without bending it. But in these cases the face of the fracture is covered with sharp points like icebergs. No microscopic studies of the fractures have been made, but some appear to be a bit too rounded, and to smooth for any of the above scenarios. Smooth and rounded surfaces could only be achieved when bronze is close to molten, in one of two ways. The first involves flawed procedures well-known to modern founders: short-pour and interrupted pour. Pouring short means simply that the amount of metal needed to fill the mould has been miscalculated, and the mould is not filled. An interrupted pour involves a stop in the pour. Even a second or so interruption in the stream of molten metal into the mould, will create a broken casting, as the metal poured after the hiatus fails to weld into the first (Ammen 2000: 9pp.). This means that the missing necks from the Kvle, Steine and Lomen might never have existed at all, and that the complete but divided axe from Hheim was not broken but disintegrated from birth. Both types of mishaps are common and both would result in distinctly rounded, smooth surfaces. On the other hand, there is also the possibility that similar surfaces could have been made through a partial remelting of the axe; e.g. leaving the neck in the crucible with the edge up and away from the heat-centre. Although inconclusive, I arrive at the following: either the axes are to be seen as flawed castings, or they were intentionally distorted by use of heat prior to deposition. That broken specimens cluster in

216 specific areas, might be seen as evidence of a custom of intentional destruction, but broken axes could on the other hand signal production areas as opposed to areas of distribution. Clearly, many of the deposited bronzes, axes in particular, have casting flaws. The Faardrup axes from Kvanngardsnes, rekol and Tjelta, and the flanged axe from Voll all have thoroughly pitted surfaces, but it is difficult in these cases to assess whether they were accepted and used in the Bronze Age. Among the socketed axes the one from Indre Oppedal (nr. 439) has a severe flaw on the socket, but it seems to have been sharpened and put to use. This reveals something about the concepts of flaw and success and the nature of a proper axe in these specific contexts. The extraordinary Ananino type spearhead from Srheim in the alpines above Luster has two different damages, probably from the same incident: the fracture at the weakest point of this specific type of spearhead, and the blunted, slightly bent point (nr. 332). These damages could be explained by a hard blow at a slight angle to the point when the spearhead was mounted on a long and heavy wooden shaft. Information on the discovery is scarce, in the high mountains/alpines above Srheim [...] at the edge of a snowdrift. Spears and arrows are in fact not that rare from the alpines, but they are generally from the IA. In fact a LIA arrowhead carries the same information: found in the mountains above Srheim, but in this case the place is specified to Tynningane [...] at a bare rock at the transition between Svartavatn and Myrkdalen (B 10364, UB 1952/2). It is thus possible to see the bronze spearhead in light of this, that it might have been found in the same area, and that both were well preserved from their inclusion in permanent airtight snow. Most of the IA projectiles found in the alpines are likely to have been projectiles that missed their targets during hunts and got buried in permanent snow or glaciers some even have shafts and feathers intact (Farbregd 1972; 1991; Farbregd & Beverfjord 2000). It is tempting to see this spearhead in the same perspective: a spear was thrown, missed its target, hit something hard, broke - shaft and the rest of the socket was retrieved while the point was lost in the snow. Aside from the questions of how and why a spear made in the Volga-Kama area came to this area; what kind of situation was this final act of deposition? It might have been an act of self-defence in which a traveller aimed at an attacking bear, wolf or human. It might also have been a case of attack, in which a person sought after a bear, wolf, reindeer or human. This also brings on the issue whether bronze spearheads in general were used for hunting. The decorated Smrumovre type spear from Kaldafjell was found by grouse hunters above 1000 m.a.s.l. in the slopes of Kaldafjell (nr. 298).

217

8.4.3 Rock & water

One significant non-human entity in the new webs that bronzes regularly entered, was rock in several variants: single large boulders, groups of such boulders, e.g. in screes, crags, and in or by formations of solid bed-rock. Two discoveries involve large boulders, farmers and explosives. The axe from Hiksdal was found in the soil underneath a round boulder 1m in diameter situated within an earthen mound on marshy terrain (nr. 516; chapt. 7.8.3, Engedal 2010). The stone was demolished by explosives and the axe was later discovered among the remains. In a similar vein, the large hoard from Svenes (hoard 17) was found in a layer of charcoal underneath a large stone in a cultivated field, and this stone also removed with explosives. Several more discoveries were made underneath stones: the axe from Hheim (nr. 394), the awl from Dving (nr.359), the spearhead from Hol (nr.296), the sword from Sandnesenget (nr. 254); the mould from Slottsvik beside a smaller stone (M 2); the axes from Krokan (hoard 4) and the chisel from rnes (nr. 519) under a small, flat stone. There are instances with two stones: the shaft-hole axe from Raknes (nr. 425) and the weapon-paalstave from Hauge (nr. 404) were found between two stones, the latter deep in a bog. The weapon-paalstave from Hove (nr. 405) was found underneath some stones, and finally the Steine hoard (hoard 16) was found lying on top of a large stone, but hidden by smaller stones and turf. The large hoard from Skjerdalen (hoard 14) and the mould from Grtavr (M 11) were also found by or near large boulders. Several bronzes have been found in or by presumably natural aggregations of large and small stones, i.e. screes: The swords from Lekve (nr. 245), Ulstein (nr.253), Tomsvik (nr.255), and Vanvik (nr.248), the socketed axes from Ingdalen (nr. 486) and Sunndalen (nr.517), the spearhead from Tjelflot (nr. 323, in gravel), and the hoard from Vikedal (hoard 21). Many bronzes have also been found at the foot of larger, steep rock formations or crags: the sword from Blindheim (nr.217), the Faardrup axe from rekol (nr. 416), the hoard from Erdalen (hoard 15), the gold rings from Vikse (nr.109), Leiknes (nr.101) and Strand (nr.102), and the socketed axes from Revheim (nr.433) and Smme (nr.443, by bedrock in the ground). Some cases specify bogs under crags, i.e. the neck-ring from Stle (nr.151) and the mould from Eide (M 14). The description of the discovery of the Stle ring argues specifically that the ring lay on a stone and that it would have been visible had it not been for the bog-sediments. The bronzes from Trondenes (hoard 2), Skrivarhellaren (nr.371-374) and Ruskeneset (nr.375) were found in rock-shelters.

218 Some findings are reported to have been discovered in narrow cleavages in boulders or bedrocks: one of the axes from Blindheim (nr.396) and the spear from Hoddy (nr.326). The gold ring from Berge (nr.107) was found in a cleavage six meter high in a crag. The mould from Randaberg (M 25) was found inside a large vitrified stone-block that was cleaved into three parts. Thus, by, underneath and within various forms of rock seems to be a characteristic feature of the final acts of deposition. The other significant element is water, and it is possible to discern different kinds of water. The most common is still, shallow water in small lakes or ponds that later became bogs. Most often the find-descriptions contain no more than found in bog. Importantly, not all bogs have been lakes (cf. Mandt 1991: 438). In a few cases, bronzes have been found in close relation to springs of water: in the cases of the large cult-axes from Rimbareid and Lunde water was still present at places were strong underground veins of water come to the surface as natural wells (hoard 22, nr. 424). When the Rimbareid axe was discovered a strong water current splashed into the air beside the axe. The Lunde axes was found during maintenance of a well just beneath a scree beneath a mountain side. It is interesting that these rare and very similar axes were deposited at such similar and rare landscape features. Similar contexts are reported from the LN (ibid: 440). Several findings from Lista and Jren come from larger lakes, some of them drained intentionally in recent history: the swords from Lakes Brastadvatnet (nr.293), and Hilandsvatnet (nr.293), the spearheads from Lakes Orrevatnet (nr.321), Selevatnet (nr.324), and the flanged axe from Voll (nr.390) from Lake Skassvatn. Running water is reported in some cases. The moulds from Nyhamar (hoard 19) were found in a small stream in sloping terrain. Several bronzes, particularly in the Trndelag area stem from or by rivers: the dagger from Borre by River Figgjo (nr.252); the Faardrup axe from Viset in a river (nr.419); the hoards from Gunnesyan, Stav and Vlebru (hoards 6,7,12) and the sword from Sndre-Holme (nr. 247) by Rivers Gautvella, Staven, Vla and Verdalselv respectively; and the neck ring from Brudal (nr.154) underneath a funnel shaped formation of stones on the bank of a river (cf. also Johansen 1993: 160pp.). In a single instance is bronze reported to have been found in close relation to saltwater and the sea. The socketed axe from Nes (nr.445) was found in the tidal belt but since the site lay just beneath a sand quarry the context is somewhat dubious.

219 As for the rest of the Nordic Zone, fresh-water and various forms of rock were significant attributes of the final webs that bronzes entered into in NW Scandinavia (cf. Mandt 1991: 436pp.; Johansen 1993: 152; Melheim 2006: 54pp., 67).

8.4.4 Burials and houses

Some bronzes ended their trajectories in complex structures created by humans. The most common are those involving the remains of dead humans in coffins made from stone slabs within a monument made from stone (cairn) or earth/sand/turf (mound) or a mixture of both. Important distinctions in NW Scandinavia are cairn versus mound, large versus small coffins, unburned versus burned bones, and primary versus secondary placement of coffin in the monument. The conventional trajectory goes: monumental burials (mounds or cairns) first appear in BA II, with inhumations in large stone-built coffins. During BA III the building of monuments continues and now cremations appear within small coffins alongside inhumations in large coffins, placed in new monuments or secondarily in old monuments. From BA IV cremations in small coffins dominate, placed secondarily in old monuments or without monuments. Spatially, monuments made from earth exclusively or with an earthen mantle are found in Lista, Jren and Karmy with the exceptions of Srheim (bur. 32), Grindheim (bur. 33) and Mjeltehaugen (Linge 2007), and one more potentially BA monument in Etne from the Bronze Age (Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 188). In a larger perspective the earthen mounds seem intrusive since there are cairns also in these areas as well as at Jren and Lista, and since cairns are characteristic both to the north and east of this zone. There seems to be two main types of coffins. The most common has long-sides built from small, fragmented slabs placed horizontally on top of each other in combination with single large slabs placed vertically at each end. The other type has both long and short sides made from larger slabs placed vertically. Among the 47 coffins excavated at TonnesHolan both types as well as combinations were used (Grnnesby 2009: 68). Among a total of 46 registered coffins from Jren, only those from Srheim, Hognestad, Holen and Re were built from vertical slabs (Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 139). In Karmsundet two of the undated coffins from Storesund and Reheia (ibid: nr. 30, 84pp.) and possibly those in Reheia III and Reheia V, were built of vertical slabs (Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 138p.). The central coffin in Kongshaug (C14 dated, cf. chapt. 5.6.5, App. VII.12) and the coffin in Gunnarshaug I were built from small, horizontal slabs. Nordenborg Myhres claim that coffins made from vertical slabs are typical of Karmsundet as opposed to Jren, and that this indicate intimate relations with Limfjord, is not a strong one (ibid).

220 On the basis of the analysis in part I, some adjustments could be made to the above trajectory. First, cremation seems to have been introduced through the Elbe-Kiel Bay link during early BA II, and cremations in relatively small coffins (0.60-0.75m long) this early are found at Jren, Etne as well as at Frset at Beitstad. This means that cremations in small coffins were made from the very start of monumental burial tradition in the study area. I also found reasons to believe that large monuments with inhumations in large coffins were still made at the transition BA III/IV, probably even in the first part of BA IV particularly at Karmy. This means that cremation and inhumation, small and large coffins had a parallel existence within the same general areas from 1500 BC to 1000 BC, and that the presence of one of these features in itself is a very vague chronological indicator (cf. chapt. 5.6.1, 5.6.5). Both cairns and mounds are in many cases complex structures. This complexity often consists of masonry in its interior, i.e. circular walls, spiral shaped walls and pointed ovals (ship-settings). Such complex masonry seems to have become common in BA III and is present at Beitstad (Grnnesby 2009: 68, pp.), Jren and Karmy, also in the very late monuments at Karmy (Reheia I, Kongshaug, cf. chapt. 5.6.5, Gunnarshaug I-II; Nordenborg Myhre 1998: 151pp., fig. 94-100). Some burials also incorporate features from the sea or the tidal belt such as beach sand, beach pebbles or molluscs (Larsen 1996: 52; Grnnesby 2009: 68, 75p.). In a few cases artefacts seem to have been deposited in post-holes for houses. From Talgje, Finny in Boknafjord four loom-weights made of burned clay were found in a posthole (Hemdorff 1993). In one of the houses at Forsand, a ceramic vessel had been put down in a post-hole, and in one of the other houses a complete soapstone mould for a socketed axe (M 21; Lken 1987: 239). Probably the most common information linked to the discovery of bronze is from the ground. It is even more difficult to reconstruct the original sceneries in these cases: lakes that became bogs that became fields? Cultivated fields that were left and became outfields? Fields that stayed fields until today? House grounds that later became a field? A burial site that was later levelled and cultivated? The bronzes from the ground are simply of little use from this perspective.

8.4.5. The final web

The final act of deposition could be seen as a transmission and a transaction between two relational webs. Dominant in the first web is the living humans, and dominant in the second

221 are non-humans and/or dead humans. We arrive at radically different conclusions when placing focus on either one of these webs. Conventionally, we see those depositions that did not involve dead humans (burials) as some kind of transaction a ritualized sacrifice, a gift to some divine entity. Since rock and water are the dominant entities, we might assume that these were receivers in their own right, that they were the dwelling of some other receiving entity, or that they were gate-ways to the receiving entities. The receiving entity might be seen as a craving entity and accordingly as a pull-factor in the transaction. We might also contemplate the nature of the original web that bronzes departed from, whether there was something in this web that made the artefact superfluous a push factor. In principle, the important thing was not where it was deposited, but that it was removed thoroughly from its original web among the living. This original web was not static and its threads stretched out in every direction: the haft of the axe, the owner of the axe, the kin of the owner that might borrow the axe, the previous owner of the axe, the maker of the axe, the artefact from which the axe was made, the mould in which it was cast, houses, boats, fences, tools that were made with the axe etc. A change in these relations, one of these trajectories coming to an end, might simply bring the axe and its place in the web into disharmony and some kind of transaction had to be made. If the owner of the axe, either a person or a house comes to an end, the person dies or the house is left, the axe must either be given to a new owner, a new house, recycled, or simply removed and hidden in waters or screes. The deposition of a sword in Hylandsvatnet need not be a proper gift to the gods, if the depositor is not its proper owner. It might also be seen as removing an element that has no longer a place among the living (See Randsborgs wider discussion of hoarding, 2006: 45pp.).

8.5. In between transformation and displacement

I have focused on the transformation and displacement of bronzes; on melting, moulding and casting projects, long-distance journeys, and deposition. For most bronzes the above settings must have been episodes and ruptures in their biographies, as they were in human biographies. How can we explore bronze in-between castings, depositions and long-distance displacements? How did humans in NW Scandinavia relate to bronzes in-between these rare occasions? I believe that Marstranders statement in his article Lista-Jutland is an explicit formulation of a point of view that lies implicit in many accounts of the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia:

222 Have the Nordic Bronze Age landscape ever seen warlike skirmishes settled by the bronze sword? I have my doubts. Have the sky of the battle been darkened by a rain of bronze arrowheads? Hardly. Have trees generally been felled with flat-axes or socketed axes of bronze? No. Have the game been shot or the fish caught with bronze implements? No. Bronze was first and foremost the common circulating currency in a European exchange (Marstrander 1950: 65, my translation) I suspect that this is a view based on three assumptions: the preserved bronze artefacts are relatively few (quantity) bronze was imported from Central Europe and was therefore valuable and rare (distance) the functional qualities of bronze is doubted, much because of our modern associations to copper-alloys in the shape of art and jewellery (quality) I believe all these assumptions can be questioned. The ideas that bronze was exclusive in a temporal sense (that it was not used for solving everyday practical tasks) and in a spatial and demographic sense (that because of its value only a small segment of the population had access to bronze), have one important consequence: the playground of bronze as historical agent in general is narrowed down to rare occasions of ritual display involving a small segment of the population. Although I agree that bronze did not replace stone in the case of arrowheads, I believe bronze was highly functional and was used for both violent, peaceful, ritual and mundane day-to-day purposes. In particular I shall argue that, on the one hand the importance of bronze in the transformation of trees into artefacts has been seriously underestimated, and on the other hand, that the importance of wood and transformation of trees to artefacts in general has been underestimated. I believe that it was precisely through mundane day to day experience with the sharp edge against wood, that a large segment of the population extended their bodies and minds into bronze.

8.5.1. Edges and points bronze and physical impact

The axe is the most numerous category of bronze in the Bronze Age this is true for Continental Europe, for Scandinavia as well as for NW Scandinavia. Comparative simulations and trials with different bronze axes, as well as stone and steel axes, have brought forth some important insights: sharpness of edge is not the all-important quality of

223 an axe (Mathieu & Meyer 1997). What is more important is that stone, bronze and iron have different net weights, and that each of them demands their own distinctive technology in order to be transformed into axes: stones are chipped and ground, bronze is typically cast in moulds and iron is typically forged by hammer. Although the stone axe might be dull, it is also light weight, non-plastic and fragile, leading typically to axes with simple morphologies with wide edge-angles. Both bronze and iron are distinguished by their ability to be shaped into any form, particularly into much thinner and delicate forms, and be able to withstand these forms against hard blows. The effectiveness of the modern steel axe, lies not so much in the sharpness of its edge, as in its ideal shape: the oval shaft-hole enables a relatively small heavy axe, with both a solid haft and a sharp edge-angle. If we imagine a similar axeshape in flint, this would have been lighter, and be prone to fractures both at the edge and the shaft-hole. But drilling a shaft-hole in flint was close to impossible, and certainly an oval one. The haft types necessitated by the flint axe increased the hewing angle, as did the fragility of the material. It would also have been possible to cast a replica of a modern steel axe in bronze, and the Faardrup axe is in fact close to this scenario. Hypothetically, if identical axe shapes of flint, bronze and iron were put to the test of chopping in fresh, green wood, it would have been difficult to measure the difference between iron and bronze, while the stone axe would most likely break. Evaluations of axe performance must also take into account the object being cut. Clearly there is a significant difference between a green willow full of sap, and an old, dry oak board. It is when working with dry wood that the steel edge surpasses the bronze edge. Analysis of both bronze axes and swords demonstrate edge treatment through cold-hammering (Tylecote 1987: 248; Northover in Vandkilde 1996: 321pp.). It is important to realize that although this represents a significant increase in hardness, and thus sharpness, this effect is hardly noticeable in conventional chopping action in green wood. It is more noticeable when working in hard or dry-wood, and in shaving actions; but most importantly it relates to how often the edge needs re-sharpening. Accordingly, rather than dull versus sharp, axes ought to be evaluated on weight, edge-angle and allowed chopping angle, and axes must be explored as elements in a dense web of haft, axe, tree and wood. There is a significant difference between stone on the one hand and metals on the other. When it comes to working in green wood the bronze edge and the bronze axe were potentially highly efficient. In the hands of an unskilled experimentalist, the chain of innovation in hafting facilities from flat to flanged to mid-stopped (paalstaves) to socketed bronze axes, is clear.

224 Still, I believe that with proper skill and energy, all axe types could be securely hafted. The early flat and flanged axes were thin and heavy compared to flint axes and they simply cut deeper. These deep cuts brought on a new challenge - that of axe stuck in wood. In these situations the hafting mechanism becomes highly relevant. The first and main weakness of the hafted flat axe, was a weakness against vertical torsion such as the movements used for loosening an axe blade stuck in timber. The increased flange height seems directed towards this problem, and these stabilized the axe-haft against vertical torsion. The second weakness, of both the flat and flanged axes, was that the thin, sharp neck of the axe blade was prone to be hammered into the haft and in the end splitting it. This was remedied by the raised midstop that developed into the paalstave. The third weakness was the constant friction of wood against the lashings when chopping at narrow angles, e.g. when making a plank. This problem was eliminated by the socket. It has often been stated that the socket was introduced for secure hafting and for saving raw-material. The socketed axe certainly enabled lighter axes, but it did not necessitate lighter axes. The low weight of most socketed axes from BA IV-V is no doubt a serious draw-back in heavy wood-working. Although some weight might have been added by special haft types, this extra weight would make the axe somewhat unbalanced and unwieldy. Summing up, bronze axes were more effective than stone axes, but the socketed axe was not more effective than the flanged axe or the paalstave however, its hafting was simpler and demanded less skill and effort to maintain. The conclusion from this line of argument is that the most effective axes in the Nordic Bronze Age were the heavy paalstaves and first generation socketed axes of BA II-III. Within our area full size paalstaves with V-ornament weighs c.300-320g, and the largest of group 1-3 socketed axes c. 150-240g. In Denmark axes from BA IV-VI are generally lighter than this. In conventional chopping action, it cannot be ignored that the narrow edge and small weight of these axes (cf. groups 4, 6-9) makes slower work. It is clearly a regression compared to paalstaves. But on the Scandinavian Peninsula the large axes with extended necks break the general trend towards lighter axes. In fact they combine a weight comparable to the early paalstaves with a much more robust type of hafting. In the context of NW Scandinavia I believe that the most effective axes were those of the Norwegian variant from Sln (nr. 461), Mlster (nr. 462), and Rosendal (nr. 463) weighing 299g, 374g and 297g respectively. For conventional heavy wood-working aimed at transforming trees into artefacts such as planks, posts, beams, ploughs, bows etc., these axes of the LBA with links to Volga-Kama and possibly containing Uralian rather than Alpine coppers, were highly functional.

225 A basic precondition of early plank-built boats, like e.g. our boat type 2 (Rrby boat), was long, broad planks or strakes. Large diametered, straight, knot-free timber would have been sought after, felled and split. Then the inside had to be trimmed by axe, and then the back of the two halves had to be trimmed down to proper dimension. Such chopped-boards (Norw. huggenbord), were made in Norway for export long after saws and saw-mills were introduced. The knowledge of were to find and how to recognize proper timber was handed down from father to son (Leirfall 1968: 349). Early boat strakes of the type seen in the Hjortspring boat were especially demanding, since ridges for clamps were to be saved along the back of the board. A few bronzes can be linked to more specialized wood-working projects. The socketed chisel from rnes (nr. 518) has a shape corresponding to a modern wood chisel or mortise chisel, and were probably fitted with a short, straight haft and might have been either hand-pushed or used with a mallet. The smaller of the socketed axes, especially those without loops, might also have been used as chisels. The wooden stool or headrest from Bysen in Sr-Trndelag C. most likely from BA V gives an example of projects ideal for such tools (Marstrander 1979: Fig. 12-13). Although it is clear that flint, quartz and quartzite remained in use for arrowheads into the PRIA (Prescott 1991: 44pp.), copper and bronze were used even for projectiles always prone to be lost. Of particular interest is the northern group of projectiles indicating that the first metal was put to highly functional tasks: as the killing point in what was most likely a harpoon-system (cf. nr. 261-262), or as large and heavy arrowheads probably intended for a large animal at close range in combination with a powerful bow (nr. 263-68). Bronze arrowheads also appeared within the Nordic tradition in BA IV-V, of which we have two specimens from Sola V (nr. 260, bur. 54) and Vest-Hassel (nr. 259, bur. 99). With its heavy net weight compared to flint, quartzite and slate, copper and bronze surely brought a new and interesting weight-balance to the arrow. And again, it was not the sharpness of these tips or edges that were important: copper could be perforated in the same way as slate could, and entirely new tang-shapes extremely long and thin could be made. I have already argued that the damages of the Srheim spear as well as the location of the finding, indicate that it was put to practical use, most likely for hunting. This opens the possibility that bronze spearheads might have been used for close-range hunting in the highlands of the Central Zone: there is the large hoard from Svenes (hoard 17) in the eastern

226 slopes and the one from Kaldafjell (nr. 298) at 1000 m.a.s.l. on the other side of the mountain. The bronze dagger is also a type with potential practical qualities. From the Nordic Zone in general, we know that both males and females were buried with daggers. Since females carry no other potentially martial artefacts, I suspect that the female dagger was not intended for stabbing humans. There is a range of tasks suited for a dagger in working with soft tissues like leather and meat in domestic activities. The female dagger might have been a central tool in the killing of domestic animals, and the subsequent butchering, cutting and division of the carcass. In a pastoral economy the season of slaughter in fall is important, and a sharp edge is essential in the project of getting from the still living ox or sheep to suitable pieces of meet to roast and finished leatherwork.

8.5.2. The heavy cutting edge 9500-500 BC

Above I quoted Marstranders negative perspective on the functional use of bronze, and argued that this perspective was based on three assumptions: the low number, the longdistance from ores to deposition and the dull and fragile quality of bronze tools. It is possible to add one major factor that runs much deeper in western philosophy, one that relates to the bifurcation that makes the modern mind run into two separate rivers (cf. chapt 1): the categories of matter and mind, doing and thinking. Conventionally, we suspect that iron was important because it solved new tasks, and solved old tasks more efficiently, and that it did so on a larger scale because it was cheap, and that it was cheap because it was produced locally. But did a novel material have to fulfil all these measures in order to replace old tools? I believe not. This view does not take into account how the Bronze Age wood worker or hunter evaluated efficiency and success. Or significant to this thesis (cf. chapt. 1), it does not take into account how wood workers or hunters evaluate their activities, efficiency and success in any time or place. Was an Ullerslev spearhead more expensive 1320 BC than a rifle 1700 AD in this area? And was it more expensive than the rifle fully rigged with up-to date telescopic sights of the modern hunter in these very same highlands? The engagements of the wood worker and the hunter with trees and game through their sharp and expencive equipment are aspects of human engagement with the material world that have been left unexplored by modern philosophy and science. The manipulation of trees into artefacts was a significant aspect of BA life, to such a degree that it should be placed alongside procurement and preparation of food. Behind every stone arrowhead at Skrivarhellaren and Nyset-Steggje there was an arrowshaft and a bow,

227 both known from ethnography and history to be delicate projects of woodworking. Behind every plough mark at Forsandmoen, Flatebakken, Vollsvika (gotnes 1984: 46pp.; Bakkevig 1998) there was a ridging plough; behind every system of post-holes a complex construction of many pieces of timber, and behind every hole and pit there was a wooden diggingimplement. A high-quality chopping-edge stood at the centre of living; and enabled what we think of as a BA way of life: heavy built long-houses, cultivation, and hunting. Many of our source categories can be traced back to wood and wood-working: the plough mark to the making of the plough, the post-holes to houses and fences, charcoal pits to fire-wood and digging implements; the many boat images to either planked or wooden frames. And this, through the sharp edge against wood, I suggest, was the way bronze poured through the day to day life of a large portion of the population. The point is not that bronze was a significant improvement from stone in this respect, but simply that these crucial tasks were now solved by bronze. And the point is also that edges were from the initial colonisation of NW Scandinavia procured from relatively few circumscribed locations: first from the few beaches with major occurrences of flint pebbles; then from a handful quarries in the MMMN; then mainly from flints brought from Denmark in the LN-EBA. Thus, functional edgetools and axes in particular were always relatively exotic, rare and valuable. How did poor people solve their day-to-day tasks when flint pebbles were no longer available on the beaches, when the quarries at Hespriholmen and Stakaneset came to a halt after several millennia, or when persons in nodal positions in the LN flint network instead turned to bronze? The point I am getting at is that when flint quarries in Southern Scandinavia stopped producing flint axes or blanks for such axes in BA I-II, axes of reasonable quality but less expensive than bronze were no longer available. There were no one to resurrect the old greenstone and diabaze quarries, and if such quarries and such networks had existed would we not have found remnants of them? The harsh alternatives for a poor household in the LBA were either 1) to procure bronze or 2) to live and adjust to a technology that was far simpler than those seen in the Stone Age. It was not possible to remain in the Stone Age because the Stone Age was also an intricately woven world, one that did no longer exist. To fall outside the metal-networks in LBA had much more profound consequences than merely returning to a LN way of life. Summing up, I have argued 1) that bronzes were used for solving practical tasks, 2) that from the mid BA there were no longer cheap alternatives to the bronze axe available, and 3) that the place of the edged tool in prehistory has been seriously underestimated. In

228 light of the above arguments, it is possible to conclude that the heavy cutting edge was a driving force through the Stone and Bronze Ages in NW Scandinavia: a new edge is introduced, made available, and ways of life adjusted to it and when the distributors of the edge turn their attention elsewhere towards another yet more exotic edge, their actions put all of their former recipients into a crises.

8.6 The displacement of bronze into NW Scandinavia

A closer exploration of the displacement of bronze has led to the following insights: Bronze was displaced along two distinct types of paths, maritime and overland, implicating distinctly different challenges, possibilites and technologies. Of particular importance when it comes to accounting for the networks and displacements recogniced in part I, are: o expeditions from Boknafjord to Trndelag, from Trndelag to Tjeldsund, and from Jren to Jutland along the maritime North Way o expeditions from the fjords and highlands of the Central Zone, across the eastern lowlands and into the Central Swedish Water System. There are major differences between these expeditions and forms of displacements: o the maritime North Way demanded complex technologies of boat building and navigation, and it allowed journeys to be made mainly in summer. o the Central Zone-CSWS overland routes opened for the use of a range of different technologies; feet, riverboats, pack-animals, riding, skis, snow-shoes and sledges, and expeditions could potentially be made through all seasons of the year. I have argued that boats were crucial in both types of displacement. Although it is difficult to assess whether trading partners met up somewhere in between the nodes that I have discerned from mappings of bronzes, I believe that journeys between Trondheimsfjord and Boknafjord of two-months duration (with return), and journeys from the fjords to Lake Vnarn of similar duration, were regularly made throughout the LN and the BA. Such journeys I believe to be necessary in order to account for the displacement of bronze recognized in part I. The final act of displacement in which bronzes ended their coexistance with humans was seen as a transaction from one network or web to another:

229 o one category of such webs are dominated by still or running fresh water and various forms of rock o a second category of such webs are dominated by the remains of human bodies and intentionally constructed monuments of various forms A short consideration has been made of the position of bronze points and edges in human engagement with the material world. I argued that the importance of transforming trees into artefacts has been seriously underestimated in general, and that the importance of the sharp edge, the bronze axe in particular, has been underestimated in BA archaeology. Finally, I argued that the weaving together of the phenomena of long-distance journeys, sharp edges, exotic materials and day-to-day transformations of wood into artefacts, is to be seen as a significant motor in the prehistory of NW Scandinavia.

230

Part III Shifting Webs

Explain: to make (something) comprehensible, esp. by giving a clear and detailed account of the relevant structure, operation, surrounding circumstances, etc (Collins English Dictionary).

Explanations are aimed at states of affairs, i.e. at their coming into being, how one state of affair shifts into another. The previous sections have been attempts to gather, locate and sort, in order to describe and arrange chronologically a great many states of affairs, or webs of related entities. Part I and the first strategy yielded a nine step trajectory and nine states of affairs displayed on Maps 3-17. The Maps 9-17 that deals with metal artefacts (Nr. 1-523) and moulds (M 1-32) have a multitude of threads leading out into much wider networks, i.e. these states of affairs were not circumscribed in space in a convincing manner. Chapter 9 takes on the task of exploring these loose ends as well as explaining this trajectory, i.e. distributing agency to the dots on the maps. Part II brought to light a different set of affairs, of dense webs. Chapter 10 takes on the task of explaining these affairs, not from the perspective of modern metallurgy or archaeologists, but from the perspective of those minds that were once immersed into these dense webs. Chapter 11 represents a decisive shift in focus, from bronzes with humans in their periphery, to humans with bronzes in their periphery. Alfred Gell described anthropology as distinctly biographical, and that the characteristic focus of anthropology is the act in the context of the life. From this point of view anthropology occupies the middle ground between the intra-biographical cognitive psychology and the supra-biographical sociology and history (Gell 1998: 10). If so, (Bronze Age) archaeology might be seen as the act within the double-century (i.e. the short and long bronze rhythms, cf. chapt 1.3.1). It is no coincidence that this attempt comes at the very end of the thesis: I consider the time-scale of human biography as one that can be reached only through in-depth investigations into the acts and the double-centuries. Hence, chapters 2-10 might be seen as essentially a byway to get in position for discussing biographical scales and issues at heart of social anthropology. Part III and the final step aim to stay in the stream of the river (cf. chapt. 1), to make bronze flow - to cause, intend and explain.

231

Chapter 9. From the Alps & the Ural explaining wide webs
This chapter aims at the Bronze Age as historical trajectory, i.e. it seeks explanation, intention, and causation in the wide webs of bronze types and it necessitates a compression of the long rhythm of bronze down to a rhythm compatible with those encountered in the discipline of history. In light of the broader project of escaping bifurcation in archaeology, this chapter is an attempt to reason in a style that does justice to what is given in our experience as archaeologists, through our distinct archaeological mode of seeing and reasoning through the type, the period and the type-map (cf. chapt. 1). It is a return to the heart of archaeology as a historical discipline, in which the basic mode of narrative is getting from one map and one state of affair to the next. In Part I I concluded that metal was displaced from two major sources into NW Scandinavia, from the Alps and the Ural. I also concluded that five areas/groups/agents outside NW Scandinavia played significant parts in the historical trajectory of NW Scandinavia in the Bronze Age: 1) the CSWS (Central Swedish Water System), 2) the ElbeKiel Bay area, 3) Northern Zealand, 4) Limfjord, and 5) the interior between Beitstad and the White Sea. In this final attempt at explaining the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia I will take on a broader geographical perspective, expand the wide webs further, and explore the dynamics that these outside agents participated in.

9.1 Enigmas, compensations and mechanisms in Bronze Age networks

When things have been gathered, compared and sorted into types, one of the basic archaeological strategies is to plot selected types on maps in order to explore their spatial distribution. In light of Gabriel Tardes and Bruno Latours ideas of natural sciences adding themselves to the world, these maps make up a body of facts that archaeologists add to the world, in order to see and discern something that is not readily given in experience neither in our experience nor in the experience of Bronze Age people. Clearly, we should evaluate our maps as matters of concern, explore the full scale of historic as well as prehistoric trajectories leading towards their specifics, and acknowledge that these maps need not reflect neither the relative number nor the spatial distribution of artefacts in the Bronze Age (cf. chapt 1.1.2). But in the end, we have no alternative but to treat our maps as facts, disputable

232 and use them with or without modifications. They are distinctly archaeological images of states-of-affairs in prehistory. In this chapter I will embrace the type-map as a historical state-of-affair, and present series of them as a way of discerning historical change. By the concept of explaining the Bronze Age, I aim specifically at explaining the Bronze Age as we experience it through diachronic series of such type-maps. I will seek mechanisms, agencies and intentions deemed necessary for bringing these patterns into existence.

9.1.1 Enigmas of the Northern Bronze Age

Perhaps the most challenging aspect of exploring the European Bronze Age as history is to balance the contemporary, far-reaching, and interconnected trajectories and networks; from the Atlantic in the west to the Altai or even China in the east, and along a north-south axis with the Mediterranean in the far south and the Nordic in the northern end. Any presentation of this vast and complex web depends on its point of view, which treads it chooses to trace and map. This will be a view from the northwest. Even from such a rather narrow vantage point, it still becomes an exercise in balance: east-west overland routes versus north-south maritime routes, coppers arriving from Ural versus coppers arriving from the Alps. Although there has been a revival of arguments of local metal-production within Scandinavia (Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 24p.; Johansen 2000: 26p.; Prescott 2006; Melheim 2009), in my opinion none of the arguments presented yet change the general impression that the majority of metal was brought into NW Scandinavia from mainly two outside sources: from the Alps in the south and from the Urals in the east. From the Alps, possibly from the Mitterberg area and the Inn Valley, bronze entered via southern Scandinavia (cf. the major categories AsNi and NS of Liversage 2000: 79pp.). From the east came coppers from the Ural Mountains beyond the Kama River (Chernykh 1992; Koryakova & Epimakhov 2007: 28pp.), although there is still a lack of metal analyses of relevant artefacts in the far west. A significant challenge when it comes to exploring the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia is thus to balance the interrogation of these two major streams of copper from the Alps and the Urals. In my opinion, any attempt at a grand narrative of the Nordic Bronze Age should seek to remove the enigmatic veils that have surrounded three phenomena in particular: 1. The compensation that brought bronze and thus a Bronze Age to Scandinavia. Any exploration of either Alpine or Ural copper-networks leading into Scandinavia in the Bronze Age, will sooner or later strand as it cannot with equal certainty assert what went in the opposite direction.

233 2. The unique status of Southern Scandinavia in a European context, in the words of Kristiansen and Larsson: (...) why this region [southern Scandinavia] more than other regions in Europe adopted a Mycenaean cultural ideom as a basis for the new Nordic Bronze Age society remains yet to be explained (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 236). To this mystery could be added the volume of imported metal, the high levels of tin used in Nordic alloys, the volume of local production, the complexity of moulding techniques, and the volume of weapons deposited (swords and spearheads in particular). Henrik Thrane calculates a total of c. 2746 swords deposited in Southern Scandinavia and Schleswig in the EBA (Thrane 2005: 621). Taken at face value, this indicates the displacement of 2.7 tons of bronze from the Alps to Scandinavia, and the transformation of most of it through highly complex casting operations into swords, predominantly within 400 years from 1500 to 1100 BC. 3. The third enigma rests in the LBA and is evident mainly in Central Scandinavia: the appearance of looped axes with extended necks, the KAM (Akozino-Mlar) axes, in a belt from the North Sea in the west to Volga-Kama in the east (cf. Meinander 1985; Kuzminych 1996). On the basis of the results in part I and II the magnitude of this phenomenon must be upgraded in light of both eastern designs and moulding procedures in the southwest corner of this belt, at Jren in southwest Norway. Below, I will attempt to unravel these enigmas and argue that fur was the main compensation for metal, and that NW Scandinavia was both a habitat of valuable fur bearing species as well as a gateway to such habitats. The second enigma linked to Alpine coppers and Mycenae I suggest was the result of the ability of South Scandinavian groups to successfully funnel fur from the north and amber from the Baltic, and bring these directly into the hands of both Mycenaeans and copper-producing groups in the Alpines. Finally, I shall argue that the third enigma linked to Volga-Kama and Uralian coppers, was merely another development in Scandinavia-Volga networks, and one that must be considered in light of the declining availability of bronze in SW Scandinavia and the rise of a competing fur trade network along Volga to Caucaus in the east.

9.1.2 Compensations for metal: amber, textiles and fur

Any exploration of either Alpine or Ural copper-networks leading into Scandinavia in the Bronze Age needs to propose something that went in the opposite direction. Candidates often listed in Bronze Age studies are: amber, fur, soapstone, slaves, wives, porphyr, paint-

234 stone (hematite), bees-wax and pitch (e.g. Magnus-Myhre 1976: 190p.; Rnne 1996a; Johansen 2000: 131p.; Jensen 2002: 211p.). Soapstone has been highlighted as a major commodity from Norway to Denmark (Rnne 1996a; Johansen 2000: 131). But soapstone moulds were extremely rare in the Nordic Zone before the LBA, and Jren with its peculiar collection of moulds from the end of the Bronze Age, hardly deserves a status as an important bridge-head in soapstone trade (chapt. 4.4.11). Soapstone trade did flourish after 1100 BC, but the material exported to Denmark and Scania at this time was more likely quarried in Eastern Norway and Sweden, rather than in the west. I believe this excludes soapstone as a significant compensation for metal in NW Scandinavia. Although the other candidates might certainly have existed as commodities, I believe that amber (from Southern Scandinavia and the Baltic) and fur (from Northern Scandinavia and Northern Russia) are in a different league than the others. Amber and fur are the only two of those listed above that we know were displaced to the Mediterranean and beyond in later history. Below is a short resume of the historical trade in fur. The first written references to a major north-south trade in fur stem from Islamic writers in the 9th century AD, and these refer to two significant actors: the Scandinavian Vareg or Rus closely related to the Vikings of Eastern Sweden, and the city of Bulgar at the Volga-Kama confluence (cf. Map 20). In the 9th and 10th century, the Bulgar population was a mix of Finns, Slavs and a ruling segment of Bulgars that arrived in this area in the 7th century from the steppe north of Sea of Azov. At the market place of Bulgar traders and merchants arrived from as far as Kwarezm (in modern Uzbekistan) and Bagdad in the far south. The major trade routes at this time displaced northern furs through Bulgar, along Volga down to the city of Itil at the Volga estuary, across or around the Caspian Sea, to cities at its southern shores (Derbent, Baku, Abaskun), and from here either eastwards to the far east or westwards via Near Eastern cities as far as Spain and Northern Africa (Martin 1986: 5pp.). Not only did the Scandinavian Rus become a major contributor to the supply system of Bulgar on the Volga, they also traded directly with Byzants via river Dniepr and the Black Sea, and bypassed Bulgar through a southern route and traded directly with cities around the Caspian Sea and even directly with Bagdad via a Dniepr-Black Sea-Don-Volga-Caspian Sea route (ibid: 112pp.). At the same time in the far west, King Alfred in England wrote down the tale of his guest Ottar arriving c. 890 from his home in Hlogaland (Nordland and Troms C. in modern Norway). He states that Ottars main income came from hunting and from the

235 taxation of the Finne to the north and in the interior. The tax collected from each of the most wealthy Finne was: 15 marten furs, 5 reindeer furs, a bear fur, a cloak from otter or bear fur, a rope made from seal-hide, a rope made from whale(-rus?) hide, and feathers. He also reported that the journey to Sciringesheal (modern Kaupang, Vesfold C.) took a month, and from here to the city of Hedeby in southeastern Jutland took another five days. Both Ottar in the late 9th century and Tore Hund in the early 11th century made journeys northwards around Kola Peninsula to the White Sea to explore, hunt, trade or plunder (Roesdahl 1996: 122pp.; Carpelan 1992a: 223; 1992b: 231). Ottar reported contacts with groups that he called Finne, Kvene, Bjarme, Svea and Terfinne to the east and northeast of his home. The Finne were most likely identical to those later known as Lapps or Sami, and it was from these that he collected taxes. The Kvene were most likely members of a trading organisation consisting of armed tax-collectors, much like Ottar himself, located at the northern and northeastern shores of the Bothnian Sea (Carpelan 1992a: 223p.). The Bjarme seem to have been located on both sides of the White Sea, and were most likely linked to the fur trade of Bulgar (Carpelan 1992b: 231pp.). Carpelan suggests that Ottars expedition to the White Sea c. 890 was merely another development in North Way-White Sea relations, i.e. that it was an attempt to find a safe alternative sea-route to the White Sea, because the overland route used till this time had come into conflict with the Kvene situated in the northeastern Botten Sea in the 9th century. The result was a marked decline in western imports in the area between Northern Norway and the White Sea from c. 900 BC (Carpelan 1992b: 231). This conflict might have been the result of the Kvene expanding their activities parallel to the rise of Bulgar. These first accounts of fur trade were written by southerners and their knowledge of what went on along the northern fringes of the fur-networks was clearly insubstantial. Still, if we take information from King Alfred in the west and the Primary Chronicle of Kiev in the east (speaking of the early activities of the Rus), as well as the accounts from Islamic writers in the south; we get the impression that during the 9th-11th century a western and an eastern fur-network rubbed against each other in the hunting grounds between the White Sea and Lakes Onega and Ladoga in the east and the Torne and Kalix river systems in the west. It seems beyond doubt that Ottar and his likes in the northwest (the Hleygja), the Vareg or Rus from eastern Sweden as well as the Kvene in Northern Finland obtained fur through a combination of trade, plunder and subjugation of groups living closer to the fur habitat than themselves in order to collect tribute. The early Rus collected tribute, typically one black

236 marten pelt per man, from a range of tribes in a large region between Kiev and Lake Ladoga (Martin 1986: 8p.). Although a range of species are mentioned, such as black martens, other martens, grey squirrels, other squirrels, sable, ermine, otter, and red, white and black foxes, the Islamic writer Al-Masudi states that the fur from the black fox north of Bulgar was the preferred material for royal garments for both barbarian and Arabic kings (ibid: 7). These black fox furs evidently came from the Murtas located three days north of Bulgar and the Ves located three months journey northwest of Bulgar between Lakes Onega, Ladoga and Beloe. While Scandinavian Rus brought fur to Bulgar and later to Novgorod mainly in exchange for Islamic silver coin, the situation changed to the opposite as the NovgorodScandinavia link shifted to a Novgorod-Germany link. The German merchants that now entered the Baltic Sea trade bought fur from Novgorod and paid mainly in silver and Flemish woollen textiles. In the 11th century Adam of Bremen comments on the westerners taste for marten fur. Later, in the 12th century the kings of England and France preferred instead sable and ermine, both procured via the German trade routes to Novgorod (ibid: 52). In the 13th century as German traders expanded their trade in the Baltic, and the eastern trade-networks of Bulgar and Kiev was brought down by the Mongol invasion, Novgorod came to direct its fur-export exclusively to the west. In the 14th and 15th century the major customer was German merchants organized in the commercial organization of Hansa. While the western kings of the 12th century preferred sable and ermine, the English Kings Henry III and Edward I in the 14th and early 15th centuries preferred garments made from multiple furs from the northern grey squirrel, a species dwelling only in Scandinavia and Northern Russia (ibid: 64). Thus, squirrel fur from the north was brought to Novgorod, then to Petershof, then in barrels by German merchants to Danzig and further west by ship, or to Lbeck and overland to Hamburg and to Flanders or England. Each wooden barrel contained between 5000 and 10.000 squirrel pelts, an indication that fur could be a high-value/low-bulk commodity (ibid: 65). In Western Europe legislations made clear that garments made from the northern grey squirrel were reserved for ranks above and including the wealthiest stratum of knights (ibid: 64). While Novgorod had specialized on the narrow niche of trade in squirrel pelts, two new competing centres, Kazan and Moscow, took over the northern supplies of other luxury furs. In the late 14th century the fashion among western kings again changed to sable, marten and ermine. In the five years 1413-18 AD Henry V ordered no less than 625 sable pelts, two

237 sable linings, 20.000 marten pelts and 113 marten linings. Legislation was again made in an attempt to restrict the use of luxury fur for the upper classes, but had little effect the wealthier of the lower strata continued to copy the fashion of the upper class (Martin 1986: 104). Novgorod was unable to adjust to this shift in taste in the west, and Moscow backed by its northern supply lines as well as fur arriving from Kazan, took over the European fur trade. Now there were three main routes: one went overland through Lithuania to Germany, a second went to Pskov and Dorpot and into the Hansa network, and a third went across the steppe to the Italian (Genoese) colonies in Crimea, from which they were brought to Western Europe (ibid: 90pp.). By c. 1550 Moscow had monopolized the fur trade, and exported fur to Western Europe, the Ottoman Empire in the south, and Iran and Central Asia in the southeast (ibid: 109). A new fashion emerged in Western Europe in the late 16th century, the beaver felt hat, and this brought new opportunities in the newly discovered territories in the far northwest. The increased demand for beaver pelt in Europe coincided with an incipient beaver trade in the colonies of North America. In 1588 the Cartier brothers petitioned King Henry III of France for a monopoly of the trade in beaver furs in the Gulf of St Lawrence, Canada (Ray & Freeman 1978: 19p.). This launched a competitive race over fur supplies in the northwest, between French and British trade companies, and these overseas networks challenged Moscows monopoly in fur trade. Vitus Bering reached Alaska in 1741 on behalf of the Russian Navy and brought sea otter fur from the Bering Sea, and Russia continued to dominate the fur market through its expansions into Siberia and the Russian Far East. The millennium of documented history of fur trade on two continents is basically a story about shifting access to furs in the boreal forest and arctic zones, shifting access to old and new markets for fur-consumption as well as the rise and fall of different middle-men. The compensation for fur throughout the fur trade history seems to have been mainly metal and textiles; silver in the Russian trade, iron tools in North America, and woollen textiles in both. Throughout its history the fashions among the recipients at the opposite end of the trapping-grounds, the Arabian, French, Italian and English elite, seem to have had a crucial influence over the focus of fur trade, shifting between sable, ermine, marten, fox, beaver and squirrel. It also demonstrates that fur both in quantity but particularly in quality depends on climate, and that the species in high esteem 800-1900 AD were those of northern Russia, Siberia, Scandinavia, Greenland, Alaska and Canada, preferably caught during winter.

238 I am suggesting that the above dynamics were not essentially new to the 9th century AD, but that a similar dynamic started almost 2600 years earlier. I contend that fur was a crucial compensation for metal in the Bronze Age, and that along with metal, woollen textiles and amber, it dominated Eurasian long-distance networks from c. 1800 BC.

9.1.3 Mechanisms of displacement: The Gift, the Journey & the Karoum
The notion of many unrepresented links in Bronze Age networks; that there might have been agents in-between the dots on the map, fused with our vague vocabulary of diffusion, influence and process, has one simple effect: the displacement of matter through space is slowed down and minimized in volume (e.g. Hagen 1967: 138p.). In order to start an alternative account, I need more effective mechanisms of spatial displacement of matter; and by effective I mean mechanisms with the capacity to move more material, across longer distances, in shorter time. Two concepts, the Gift and the Journey, have come to dominate notions of the displacement of valuable goods in the Bronze Age, replacing the vague concepts of diffusion and migration of cultural-historical archaeology. The concept of the Gift is based on Marcel Mauss influential study (1990), and has tended to expel trade with its commercial associations from the Bronze Age. Particularly the displacement of bronze in the domain of elites, chiefs, big-men, is seen in light of the gift and the personal relationships and social obligations embedded in it. The study of historical fur trade in economical anthropology has been entangled in issues of indigenous versus modern modes of exchange, and taken the form of substantivist versus formalist stands (Ray & Freeman 1978: 241; White 1991: 94pp.). The crucial question in my case is not necessarily whether indigenous hunters, pastoralist and farmers of NW Scandinavia and Continental Europe originally had commercial, maximizing attitudes to goods and exchange; the issue might rather be whether the slightest tendencies for such commercial, maximizing attitudes were cultivated and strengthened in face-to-face encounters with traders from the Eastern Mediterranean, just as they were among the North American Indians in their interaction with European traders. The substantivist/formalist dichotomy seems poorly suited for explorations into meetings of different attitudes to artefacts and exchange. Another study from the realm of social science gained popularity from the nineties. This was Mary Helmss Ulyssess Sail (1988), exploring the religious and political significance of long-distance journeys and materials from distant locations. This clearly brought increased mobility and larger spaces into Bronze Age studies and provided the key

239 to a renewed interest in Nordic-Mediterranean connections (e.g. Sherratt 1995; Engedal 2002; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005). The Gift and the Journey brought new dimensions to the study of artefacts and mobility in the past, but they both tend to exclude commercial attitudes to exchange, and lead into a substantivist position. Generally, trade has been replaced with exchange or gift-exchange and focus has shifted to the social obligations of exchange. Since it is most often valuable goods that has been displaced over long distances, the valuable artefact as gift, the long-distance journey, and the social elite are merged into a dominant model of material displacement (cf. Harding 2000: 187; Engedal 2002; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005). I argue that this is a model that is unable to account for the displacement of matter that archaeologists have discerned for the Bronze Age, and the displacements discerned in part I and II in this study. The Karoum-system was a complex and highly commercial arrangement of caravan trade c. 1880-1740 BC, based on family or household companies situated in the Old Assyrian capital Assur by River Tigris. Younger males acting as representatives for their companies and families followed the caravans and stayed for longer periods at trading stations (the karoums and wabartums) under the protection of local rulers. These groups of foreign males lived within local architecture using local material culture, and left very few traces at these trading stations. The rest of the family company, including the patriarch and the females engaged in the production of textiles for trade, stayed behind in Assur. The existence and details of the system are revealed mainly by inscribed clay tablets from one of the karoums at Kanesh in Central Anatolia, more than 800km from Assur, and it is a crucial lesson on the relation between archaeology and history, artefacts and texts (Larsen 1987; Engedal 2002: 32p.; Roaf 2004: 113pp.; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 90p.). The Karoumsystem brought woven woollen textiles and tin from Assur into Anatolia on donkeys in return for silver and gold. Each donkey carried a cargo of c. 90 kg; either 30 textiles, or a combination of 10 textiles and 65 kg tin, plus some tin for unforeseen events and payments along the way (Roaf 2004: 113). Thus, hypothetically a single caravan of eleven donkeys would have displaced a ton of valuable textile cloth and tin over 800 km. One reference actually speaks of a single shipment of 15 tons of copper, and Larsen consider 80 tons to be a conservative estimate of tin traded through Assur from Afganistan in a 40-50 year period (Larsen 1987: 51). Larsen comments also on the trade-exchange dichotomy: A crude distinction between a market economy and an embedded, status-oriented system has little relevance for the Mesopotamian evidence from any period (ibid: 49). Although the sources

240 are meagre, I suspect that the attitudes to material goods and the scale of displacement revealed in the Kanesh documents were characteristic of all large city-states in the Near East as well as Minoan Crete, at the time. At heart of the phenomenon lies a certain attitude towards artefacts and exchange, and an urge to trade more and to trade from a distance. What the karoum-system offer is this: rather than being present at a single distant exchangeencounter at a specific time each year, the family/household/company can be represented at multiple such encounters throughout the year at this distant location. Archaeology generally lack models and tools to handle movements of people that fall outside the box of large-scale migrations (cf. Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 367p.). The scouting phase of David Anthonys migration model (1990), as well as Mary Helmss long-distance journey (1988) are important remedies to this vacuum, as are the exchange of marriage-partners and foster-children (Rowlands 1998; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 236). The karoum-system is also of interest since it falls into a gap in the archaeological tool-box between the long-distance journey with a more or less immediate return on the one hand and the permanent migration on the other. It also touch into the sort of commercial attitudes not embraced by the term gift-exchange in archaeology, attitudes that in my view are needed to account for the large scale displacements of metal. It has been argued that many ideological, religious and institutional features from the Eastern Mediterranean were adopted in the north during the Bronze Age (e.g. Larsson 1999; Engedal 2002; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005). Commercial attitudes to material goods and trade, such as those read from the Kanesh tablets might have been the most crucial of these features. The NW-Alpine network of the 18th-17th century, the one that brought Alpine axes to Central Sweden and Vevang on the western coast of Norway, might actually have been linked via Mycenae, Byblos and Cyprus to the Old Assyrian Karoum-network. Encounters with Mediterranean traders might thus have opened the eyes of ambitious individuals north of the Alps, to what could be achieved by moving large amounts of goods the long way from location B to C, and by making sure that their movements were in resonance with the activities of people in locations A and D. Below I shall attempt to embed fur as compensation for metal, and directional commercial long-distance trade as mechanism of displacement, into the Bronze Age networks 2000 500 BC.

241

9.2 Scandinavia & the Alps

The time-span 1950-1300 BC of the European Bronze Age is conventionally interpreted as a three-step development, with east-west shifts in gravity and routes of importance (cf. Sherratt 1994; Kristiansen 1998: 368pp.; Jensen 2002: 61pp.): 1. the BA enters into a new mode north of River Danube between Rivers Oder and Elbe, with the appearance of the Classical Unetice Culture, the triangular metalhilted dagger, and the princely burials of Leubingen, Helmsdorf and Leki Male (Br. A1b, 1950-1700 BC) 2. gravity shifts southeastwards to the Carpathians with the emergence of the Hajdsmson-Apa horizon and the first swords (Br. A2, or A2/B1, or A3, 1700/1600-1600/1500 BC) 3. gravity shifts westwards with the emergence of the Tumulus Culture, and a consolidation of sword-production with the octagon-hilted Tumulus sword (Br. B1C2, 1600/1500-1300 BC) The above three-step model is a generalization as are all models. In the following I shall try to demonstrate that it is a model in which the Nordic Zone is poorly integrated: i.e. it fails to incorporate Nordic groups as agents on the larger continental scene, it ignores the shear volume of bronze in the north and Nordic production of first generation swords and spearheads, and it fails to unravel the Scandinavian-Mycenaean enigma (cf. above). I will also propose that it carries an eastern bias ignoring significant western contributions in the shift from step 1 to 2. The typology and spatial distribution of metal-hilted blades provide the lens for an investigation of this trajectory. It is the most pronounced category of bronze in all three stages with its combination of weight, size and complex moulding procedures. The shifts from triangular to ogival blades and from short to long blades (from dagger to sword), are seen as essential early developments within this time-span, and both will be paid particular attention to in the following.

9.2.1 The fall of the Unetice Culture

The metal-hilted dagger with triangular blade is a characteristic category of the Classic Unetice phase (Br.A1b), but such daggers are in fact distributed over a much larger territory than that of the Unetice Culture proper. Regardless of stylistic features, eight clusters or

242 centres of distribution are defined in Map 21: the Meckl.-Vorp. (MecklenburgVorpommern), Elbe-Saale, Elbe-Vltava and Oder-Warta centres in the area north of the Danube; and the Rhne, NW-Alpine, S-Alpine and Central Apennine centres south of the Danube.21 Stylistic features characteristic of the two Alpine and the Central Apennine centres are merged with the distribution of other contemporary types and visualized in Maps 22-25 as four separate but chronologically overlapping networks. The first of them, Map 22, highlights a Ster Ripatransone Network. 22 It demonstrates that stylistic features of the southernmost centre, the Central Apennine, are brought along an east-central route to eastern Scandinavia. This network involved the Elbe-Vltava and Meckl-Vorp. centres, and the features in question are the tripartite ribs found on the daggers from Vigerslev and Alt-Schnau. On the dagger from Alt-Schnau the ribs were combined with local features, but the Vigerslev dagger is closer to actual Italian type daggers. The links between the Elbe-Vltava centre and eastern Scandinavia are strengthened also by the presence of a distinct Central Swedish stone axe type, type Hagebyhga, in this area. In light of this the three senringe from Sweden and the Malchin type dagger from Ster, Dalsland were probably procured via this network. I contend that this was a network that extended from the Central Apennine in the south to Lakes Vttern and Vnarn in the north, and that Scania-Zealand and the Elbe-Vltava centre occupied central positions as middle-men in this network, and I suggest that this network flourished in the 18th century BC, possibly late. Map 23 highlights a Vester Skjerninge Byblos Network, and demonstrates how a characteristic feature of the NW-Alpine centre, burials with Swiss/Rhne type daggers, enters the Elbe-Saale centre through a western route along the Main and Rhine rivers 23. This was probably the same network that brought Mediterranean features across the Alps, since the most convincing evidence of such at this time is found in the NW-Alpine and Elbe-Saale centres: the silver senring from Dieskau with parallels at Byblos, the Cycladian spearhead from Kynha, the Cypriotic toggle-pin from the Hilterfingen burial and the copper/goldinlay in the Thn burial. Map 23 also demonstrates how this network had a separate branch along the Seine to the Atlantic, with Gaubickelheim at a significant cross-road. Rather than a direct maritime relation between Scandinavia and Britain, it is more likely that it was the Elbe-Saale centre that provided Scandinavia with both daggers of Saxon type and British axes through this Atlantic branch. This network extended northwards to Northern Jutland, as demonstrated by a Saxon type dagger from Brndumgrd and a halberd blade from Vester

243 Skjerninge. This halberd blade links Northern Jutland to the S-Alpine and Central Apennine centres through the Elbe-Saale centre. Thus, Map 23 attempts to capture four phenomena: The first is the early western distribution of the first convincing indications of Mediterranean contacts, and that these were brought via the NW-Alpine centre to the Elbe-Saale centre. The second is that there existed exclusive links between the Elbe-Saale centre and Northern Jutland. The third is that the ogival blade was a western innovation of Bretagne that arose in combination with increased blade-length, and that it reached Continental Europe at Gaubickelheim via the Seine. These Quimperle daggers are often as long as those considered the very first swords (Hajdsmson-Apa, cf. below). And the fourth is that pontill-decoration was a British innovation, one that reached the NW-Alpine centre via the Seine. This network probably existed parallel to the Ster-Ripatransone network (Map 22), possibly also at the transition to Br. A1b/A2 c. 1700 BC. This network is entangled in a Mediterranean-Atlantic network and it is best considered in light of a heavy Mycenaean presence in the far west, probably at the Rhne-estuary. This would account for the links between the zig-zag bone pommels in Bush Barrow in England and S-G Iota at Mychenae, the wheel-headed pins from Kernonen, France and S-G Ypsilon, and parallels in gold-pin decoration on hilts, still within the Middle Helladic and before 1700 BC (Schauer 1984:151pp.; Gerloff 1993; Dietz 1991; cf. the more sceptical views of Gallay 1981: 116; Needham 2000: 117p., 177). On Maps 22-23 rests my argument for the importance of the southwestern and western relations of the Classic Unetice Culture. The Elbe-Vltava centre was linked to the S-Alpine and C. Apennine centres possibly via river Inn, while the Elbe-Saale centre was linked to the NW-Alpine centre and an Eastern Mediterranean agent via River Maine and the Upper Rhine, and to the Atlantic via Rivers Maine and Seine. Interestingly, these networks seem linked up via separate routes to two separate agents to the north: Elbe-Vltava to Scania/Zealand and the Central Swedish Water System; and the Elbe-Saale to Northern Jutland. In light of the LN II of NW Scandinavia and the distribution of type V flint daggers (cf. chapt. 2.5, Map 8), I suspect that Northern Jutland could pass on goods from Jren and even Lofoten to the Elbe-Saale centre. Also, particularly in light of type IV flint daggers, I suspect that Scania-Zealand could pass on goods from Inner Sognefjord and the StadtTingvollfjord area. Thus, northern pelts might regularly have entered the two Elbe centres, and probably also into the Alpine centres in the 18th century BC. Maps 24-25 take this argument further and argue that the further development, the downfall of the Unetice

244 Culture, was to a large degree a result of the exertions made by the two Alpine centres; these were responsible for bypassing the Unetice centres, for linking up north and south and bringing the positions of the Elbe-Vltava and Elbe-Saale as middle-men, to an end. Map 24 highlights a Vevang Mycenae Network, and demonstrates how the Unetice area is circumvented and the NW-Alpine centre linked to the eastern Baltic through an extreme eastern route24. This could be interpreted as an active engagement from the NWAlpine centre to bypass the Elbe-Vltava centre and get direct access to the eastern Baltic. This extraordinary network is of particular interest to us since the characteristic NW-Alpine axe types of this network can be traced across the Baltic Sea, across Central Sweden to the western coast of Norway. The first western bronzes can thus be directly linked to this NWAlpine engagement for access to the Baltic, and the Central Swedish response to this engagement. The horizon of Rmlang type axes can be linked via the copper and gold-inlays on the axe from Thn-Renzenbhl, to S-G IV and Late Helladic IA at Mycenae, early Br. A2, and c. 1700-1675 BC according to the high-chronology of Dietz (1991). This inlay technique is also found on an axe in the Trassem hoard, and related techniques are also found on blades in the west, as well as on a blade from Vreta Kloster in Sweden. These are not necessarily as early as Thn-Renzenbhl, but they are plotted on the map to demonstrate their western distribution on the continent. The Trassem hoard demonstrates that a secondgeneration socketed-hilt was combined with an ogival dagger blade at this time. The gold pin from Trassem resembles the spiral beads from from S-G Omichron, Circle B at Mycenae. This belonged to skeleton 1, the most recent interment, and is dated to LH IB and 1675-1625 BC (Schauer 1984: Abb.30.1; Dietz 1991: 128p., fig. 82.25). The Karlevi, Felsberg and Trassem daggers might be seen as a direct development from the combination of socketedhilt and ogival blade (on separate daggers) seen in the Gaubickelheim-hoard (cf. Maps 2223), ultimately a hybrid of Italian and Breton features (cf. Engedal 2005). These developments provide the background to the making of the swords with socketed hilts from Nebra, Blindheim and Rastorf (cf. below). Map 25 highlights a Svanekjr Mose S-Alpine Network, and demonstrates how this network bypasses both the Unetice area and the Rhine area, and links the S-Alpine centre to Scandinavia via River Weser 25. This can be seen as an active engagement from the S-Alpine groups to bypass the Elbe-Saale centre, in order to take over the route to the Western Baltic and Northern Jutland. A novel centre and middle-man is now emerging in the Lower ElbeKiel Bay area. This network seems clearly later than those on Maps 22-23, i.e. clearly within

245 Br. A2, and is best seen as a direct development from Map 23. The possibility exists that already at this time persons from the Lower Elbe were present at Jren, involved in the building of a three-isled house at Kvlehodlen, and trading the Blindheim sword to a person from Sunnmre for pelts (cf. chapt. 6.2-3). The engagement of the NW-Alpine centre in the establishment of this VevangMycenae network also brought eastern Central Europe into contact with western Central Europe. It is worth noticing that the only two metal-hafted triangular daggers southeast of the Elbe-Vltava centre, are an Alpine tanged dagger from Szentgal and a Rhne type haft from Tata (cf. Map 21). This is an interesting observation since the transference of the metalhilt from the Unetice culture to the Carpathians and the Hajdsmson-Apa horizon (steps 1 and 2 above) has often been considered a fundamental step in the origin of the first metalhilted swords (the Hajdsmson-Apa type). It seems clear that the metal-hilt was not brought from the Unetice area but from the Alpine centres, probably in the context of establishing the network seen on Map 24. This takes us to the origin of the sword and Map 26.

9.2.2 From dagger to sword

Map 26 attempts to deal with the complex issue of the first swords26. Following the argument of Maps 21-25, my main intention is to demonstrate the western foundation for the development from dagger to sword. The conventional trajectory puts heavy focus on the Carpathians: the metal-haft was borrowed from the Unetice area and the increased blade length from Mycenae; these features were combined in the distinctive Carpathian swords from Hajdsmson and Apa, and these swords spurred the production of imitations in the rest of Central Europe and Scandinavia. Map 21 demonstrates that both the Carpathians and the central Danube area lay outside the zone of metal-hilts, and that the hilt was borrowed from one of the Alpine centres rather than from the Unetice Culture. Map 22 demonstrated that the ogival blade (without metal-hilt) as well as increased length, was introduced from the Atlantic to Gaubickelheim on the Rhine in the 18th century. Map 23 demonstrated that metal hilt, i.e. a socketed variant, was applied to a rather long, ogival blade in the mid 17th century BC, probably in the vicinity of Gaubickelheim and Trassem on the Rhine, and that this type was distributed to the Alps as well as to eastern Sweden. These developments all occurred before the Hajdsmson-horizon in the Carpathians, before Br. B1 as well as the difficult A3 transitional phase. In my view, these arguments call for an alternative trajectory from dagger to sword.

246 The first step is to introduce two intermediate types between the triangular dagger and the ogival sword. The first is the Trassem-Felsberg type dagger plotted on Map 24. The second is the Maiersdorf type dagger comprising the four specimens from Maiersdorf, Perjen, Hungary and Zivalji. They are distributed in an arch from the Alps via the Danube to the Croatian coast. They all have long, somewhat concave blades, waisted hilts, large circular pommels, and all four carries halbeswinkelkreuz-motives. They are thus clearly interrelated and are best seen as the creations of one or a few artists leaning heavily on decorative patterns characteristic of the Alpine centres. While the Felsberg dagger with socketed hilt was located to the immediate east of the NW-Alpine centre, the westernmost dagger of the Maiersdorf type from Perjen is located further east, along River Inn. These both suggest the formation of a novel E-Alpine centre, still within the 17th century. The arch drawn by the Maiersdorf type has its centre close to the fortified settlement of Monkodonja. I propose that the presence of Mycenaeans at Monkodonja, indicated by its acropolis and stone architecture (cf. Teran et. al. 1999; Hnsel & Teran 2000; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 162; Hnsel et. al. 2007), is fundamental in order to understand the development of the sword as well as the rise of fortified settlements immediately north of the Maiersdorfarch, at Bernstorf and Nitriansky Hradok. The second step in order to construct an alternative dagger-sword trajectory is to dissolve the Hajdsmson-Apa type as defined by e.g. Ebbe Lomborg (1960). Rather than the number and type of rivets, I will focus on some of the decorative patterns. On Map 26 is plotted a selection of motives: halbeswinkelkreuz, hanging concave, striated triangles, plaited, striated triangles, C-scroll, and line-dot flower. From this it seems clear that the Carpathian swords are isolated from the rest with their use of the C-scroll and line-dot flower-motives. It is also clear that the Torupgrde sword from Lolland, the largest and most impressive of all the early European metal-hilted swords, is related to the decorative tradition of the S-Alpine centre with its combination of hanging, concave, striated triangle and plaited, striated triangle. This combination is replicated only in a single case, on a long dagger blade from Barche di Solferino in Northwest Italy. In my view this releases the Scandinavian metal-hilted swords from their tight links to the Hajdsmson horizon and the Carpathians. The Sgel type represents another early sword type in the north. Although with organic hilts, these are also conventionally considered to be strongly influenced by the Hajdsmson-Apa type. Three features point in a different direction: The Sgel sword from

247 Frotheim carries a Halbeswinkelkreuz-motive; a characteristic northern Sgel type sword is found at unknown location in Italy; and a related sword from Hochenlocksted carries a hanging, concave, striated triangle motive. Thus, both the major early sword types of the Nordic zone carry distinctive decorative links to the Alps. A third type, with socketed hilts from Blindheim, Nebra and Rastorf, is firmly grounded in western traditions along the Rhine. The NW-Alpine zone seems not to have participated in the development of the ogival metal-hilted blades. Map 26 shows a peculiar void along the Danube and in the Alps, and in the vicinity of the significant sites of Nitriansky Hradok and Bernstorf. I would suggest that this is largely artificial, and that this void is filled with some of the swords conventionally designated as second generation (early Tumulus) swords: the Au-Zaijta-Spatzenhausen category, as well as a great many blades with trapezoid, organic hilts (cf. Map 27)27. Neither the NW-Alpine nor the E-Alpine centre embraced the ogival-blade but instead created a long blade with parallel sides. The hilts of these blades reveal strong links to the Maiersdorf type dagger, especially the running arches on the pommels, and to the trapezoid hilts of the Trassem-Felsberg daggers. Thus, I suggest that the Hajdsmson Apa Zaijta trajectory discerned through Carpathian hoards to the east (cf. Mozolics 1967; Lomborg 1960) is not a direct reflection of the chronological development of the area in the far west. The Cascina Ranza hoard in the S-Alpine combines what I consider to be very early ogival, metal hilted blades with a sword of this Au-Zaijta-Spatzenhausen category. Some of the western variants of the Au-Zaijta-Spatzenhausen category are thus seen as a direct development from the Maiersdorf and Trassem types, and belong in the 16th century, largely contemporary to the Hajdsmson-horizon in the east. I believe that the ultimate inspiration for the increased length of blades and the development of the sword north of the Alps, was the Mycenaean rapiers. These, and related specimens are present in the Carpathians, just east of the Hajdsmson, Apa, and Zaijta hoards. This would fit well with an origin of the European sword in the Carpathians. Still, it seems clear that both the metal-hilt and the ogival blade were western features. And, although there are still no Mycenaean rapiers from the Gulf of Venice, the architecture of Monkodonja strongly suggest that Mycenaeans with their rapiers were present in this area. The earliest increase in blade-length, the Quimperle blades of the Atlantic, was most likely also the result of the early Mycenaean link through the Rhne-Loire channel; a network that bypassed Continental Europe and linked Mycenae to Wessex before 1700 BC. Although

248 they are without metal-hilts, they are as ogival and as long as the swords from Hajdsmson and Apa (cf. Engedal 2005: fig. 5). Rather than a shift in gravity from the Unetice zone to the Carpathians, it was a shift from S and NW-Alpine centres towards a novel E-Alpine centre. This is in accordance with the idea that the Mitterberg-mine was opened at this time and that its AsNi-coppers came to dominate in the Carpathians, Switzerland and Scandinavia (Liversage 2000: 73pp.). I have tried to demonstrate the phenomenon of contemporary, competing longdistance network stretching across the European continent. This could logically be reflected in several contemporary ports of trade with Mediterranean networks. In this way, different continental groups had relations with different Mediterranean groups, and the outcome of these encounters might have been different at different places. In Transylvania we see a rather pure version of the Mycenaean rapier. In the Gulf of Venice we see a rapier with indigenous features, i.e. the Sauerbrunn rapier. And in Bretagne we see the Quimperle sword with ogival blade. This might reflect the differences in blade traditions of these regions: while Transylvania was basically an axe-using region, the Adriatic and Breton groups rested heavily on long local blade-traditions. Differences might also be a result of different strategies used by Mediterranean groups at different ports: from the violent establishment of bridge-heads, via intermarriage and gift-exchange to commercial trade. Recently the western entries have been strengthened by excavations at Monkodonja and Bernstorf, both with convincing Mycenaean links (Teran et. al. 1999; Hnsel & Teran 2000; Moosauer & Bachmeier 2005; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 162; Hnsel et. al. 2007). In light of the above arguments I suggest the following trajectory: 1. The origin of the Maiersdorf type and its distribution (the Maiersdorf Arch) is to be seen in light of the Vevang-Mycenae network (Map 22), of the shift in Mycenaean presence from Bay of Lyon to the Adriatic, i.e. the establishment of Monkodonja, and of the start of copper production in the Mitterberg area. The stylistic elements were mainly derived from the NW and S-Alpine centres. 2. The swords from Donja Dolina and Cascina Ranza represent the first step towards the metal-hilted ogival sword. Both carry features related to the Maiersdorf type, they are located at each end of the Maiersdorf-Arch, and they are also the only early metal-hilted swords found in the vicinity of the Maiersdorf-Arch. Their ogival outline was inspired by Atlantic Quimperle blades.

249 3. Although the date of the Sauerbrunn rapiers is controversial, I propose that this series began at this time. Their extreme length was inspired by Mycenaean rapiers at Monkodonja, their decoration was elaborated from S-Alpine patterns, and the ogival shape inspired by Donja-Dolina and Cascina Ranza, and ultimately from the Atlantic via the Alps. 4. Several production centres outside the Maiersdorf-Arch now start independent production of metal-hilted swords: variants Hajdsmson and Apa in the Carpathians, variant Nebra-Rastorf of Saale-Mecklenburg Bay, variant Torupgrde-Mosstugan of Eastern Scandinavia, and variants Spatzenhausen-Au of the Alps. None of these foundries were primary in relation to the other, rather they were all agents interacting with each other somewhere within the primary Maiersdorf-Arch. Thus, both the swords from Rosenfelde and Torupgrde have blades with an outline reminiscent of the Sauerbrunn rapiers, and these, located within the Maiersdorf-Arch, rather then the Carpathian swords were the common inspiration for the first generation metal-hilted swords in Europe. From Map 26 describing the development after Map 24 and the Vevang-Mycenae network, it seems clear that NW Scandinavia was drawn into southern dynamics via two major northsouth axis. The first includes the bracelet from the Steine hoard, paralleled in Skne and at Nitriansky Hradok (nr. 67, cf. chapt. 3.5.1). It is best seen in light of Scanian journeys to Nitriansky Hradok and beyond, to the curved scimitars, the axe from Ssdala and to the sunthrone from Balkkra (cf. Engedal 2002: 66pp., fig. 33). The Norre scimitar suggests a link between the CSWS and Skne through Lake Vttern and the South Swedish highlands. A direct encounter between trappers from Aurland and Scanians might thus have taken place at the shores of Lake Vttarn. These Scanians might thus have brought pelts from the Central Zone directly to Nitriansky Hradok. The five scimitars make two important points in this respect: 1) they are testimonies of complex modelling and moulding skills; and 2) they demonstrate familiarity with Anatolian (Hittite-Trojan) symbolism. The first point, which is rather uncontroversial, strengthens the idea of an independent skilled production of swords in Scandinavia (Torupgrde, Bragby, Mosstugan, Stensgrd). The Pella sword might in fact be considered a Nordic sword rather than a Carpathian. From Pella in Saloniki Bay there are only 380 km to Troy, were the only actual curved bronze ferrule has been found. Such ferrules are the most likely source of inspiration for the Nordic scimitars (cf. Grslund 1964;

250

Engedal 2002). The bracelets, swords, scimitars and the Ssdala-Hasfalva findings together draw a rather clear-cut route from Aurland to Troy. The second major north-south axis is represented by the Blindheim sword and moreover House 3 at Kvlehodlen. The Blindheim sword can be related to the northwestern production of third-generation socketed-hilts (Nebra, Rastorf, Roum). I suspect the presence of groups from the new Elbe-Kiel Bay centre at Jren, and that these very same groups operated a direct network with Bernstorf. Thus, it is possible to discern a network extending from Blindheim in the north to Mycenae in the south. The Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia begins in a rather extraordinary way: a Alpine battle axe (Vevang), a one-of-three bracelet for a child (Steine), evidence of casting and recycling of complex bronzes (Skrivarhellaren), a sword with its best parallels alongside the unique sky disc in the Nebra hoard (Blindheim), and architecture at this time known only south of the Nordic Zone (House 3 at Kvlehodlen). I propose that the peculiar start of the Bronze Age in NW Scandinavia is best accounted for by magnifying the importance of northern pelts in the expeditions made first by groups on the Swedish east coast, and later by Scania-Zealand on the one hand and Elbe-Kiel Bay on the other. These latter expeditions brought northerners in direct contact with Nitriansky Hradok (Scania-Zealand) and Bernstorf (Elbe-Kiel Bay).

9.2.3 The rise & fall of the North Way

The three-isled house from Kvlehodlen and the Blindheim-sword are the first clear indications of close links between the maritime North Way and the Elbe-Kiel Bay area. The Kvlehodlen-house supports the idea that this link was forged from the south by placing representatives of the Elbe-Kiel Bay at Jren; as wives, as migrants or as stationary traders. At the same time extraordinary artefacts with Mediterranean links are found in Northwest Germany; the Mycenaean gold cup from Dohnsen and the sky disc from Nebra. The interest in the relationships between metals and celestial phenomena seen on the Nebra disc (Schlosser 2002), is echoed in several findings in the Alpines, e.g. the calendar code hidden within the gold pins on the axe from Thun-Renzenbhl, and the Venus sight from Hilterfingen (Kerner 2007); and might ultimately be inspired by Near Eastern astronomy (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 267). Moving to BA II (1500-1300 BC), and Maps 28-29, dynamics have changed beyond recognition from the situation on Maps 21-2427. From the distribution of the octagon-hilted swords it is now clear, following the arguments above, that the Alpine and the Nordic Zone

251 have finally linked up and circumvented the intermediate zone between the Danube and the Baltic. This is also reflected in the composition of copper. At this time AsNi copper dominates in the Nordic Zone, in Switzerland and the Carpathians, but is less popular in Germany (Liversage 2000: 73pp.). The Nordic Zone also uses high tin-levels, much more in line with the Atlantic zone than with Continental Europe. Since tin-levels in the area around Ertzgebirge in Germany are generally low, in line with the rest of Continental Europe, Liversage rules out this as a potential source of tin, and points instead to Cornwall in the Atlantic. While both the octagon-hilted swords and the AsNi copper indicate a direct relationship with the Alps; the high tin-levels indicate an exclusive trade in tin with Atlantic Europe. A few Nordic bronzes indicate the route used westwards: the Nordic cult axe from River Meuse in Belgium (Jensen 2002: 292p.) and the Nordic Smrumovre spear from Nijmegen, Holland (Jacob-Friesen 1967: nr. 1732, Taf. 52.10). These indicate an inland, riverine link from the Nordic Zone via the Rhine and Meuse to the Seine and the Atlantic coast. The octagon-hilted sword was made during the entire Nordic BA II, and it hides the for this study important shift in the North Way: from an Elbe-Kiel Bay link in the early BA II (cf. Maps 12, 28), to a Zealand link in late BA II (cf. Maps 13, 29). I have suggested that the only Norwegian octagon-hilted sword from Madla is late BA II and related to the Zealand link. Interestingly, the extraordinary early BA II twin-daggers from B, Jren and Albertsdorf in the Elbe-Kiel Bay area also have octagon hilts (Pl. 56). In light of the above, it seems clear that these owed their peculiar waisted-hilts to earlier swords such as the one from Heitersheim (with copper inlay), and ultimately from the Maiersdorf type daggers. Thus, both the Blindheim sword and the B dagger can be traced to a stylistic milieu dominated by rare features such as waisted and socketed hilts, and copper and gold inlays (Trassem, Nebra, Heitersheim). I contend that during the period 1500-1340 BC the Elbe-Kiel Bay centre controlled the North Way, possibly even by a short route along the Jutish westcoast, roughly 600 km from Elbe-estuary to Jren (Map 25). Through their nodes at southern Jren and Beitstad, these groups were able to draw in goods from the northern part of the Scandinavian Peninsula. I have suggested that the Anderlingen burial with rock art imagery from this stage at the Lower Elbe, indicates northern influence, perhaps in the form of a bride from the Trondheimsfjord-area. The direction is reversed in the early cremations at Frset in Beitstadfjord. This North Way worked in combination with both a southern route to Bernstorf and a western route to the Atlantic. Bernstorf has produced convincing indications

252 of Mycenaean relations; an early golden diadem and an amber piece with a Linear B sign (Moosauer & Bachmeier 2005). Monkodonja and Bernstorf might thus be understood in light of the karoum and wabartum in the Old Assyrian trade-system: Bernstorf as a satellite north of the Alps for Monkodonja. At this time the Elbe-Kiel Bay is unique with their mass of artefacts of Mycenaean origin or inspiration, such as the cluster of camp-stools and metal drinking cups. These indicate that persons from this area sat and drank with Mychenaeans at Bernstorf. The best preserved stool was found at Guldhj, Jutland, and dendrodated to 1389 BC. This was furnished with seat of otter fur, and beside it was a wooden bowl adorned with ornaments of pure tin pins (Jensen 1998: 134pp.). Guldhj thus combine undisputable Mediterranean symbolism with pure tin most likely from Cornwall and fur possibly trapped somewhere along the North Way. During this time (early BA II), Scania and Zealand probably operated the routes along the Oder to the Danube and procured octagon-hilted swords from the eastern end of its main zone of distribution in the south. If tin really did come from Cornwall rather than the Ertzgebirge, this would put Elbe-Kiel Bay in control of the import of tin to Scandinavia, and thus potentially in a dominant position relative to Scania and the Danish Islands. As I have proposed earlier (cf. chapt. 6.5), in the late BA II Zealand engaged heavily both in Elbe-Kiel Bay and Lneburg areas, as well as in Jren and the North Way. The reason for this sudden intervention into the North Way Elbe network from 1340 BC onwards, might have been because of obstructions, e.g. hostilities along the Oder-route, or it might have been because of the increasing domination and success of the full North Way-Elbe-Bernstorf-Mycenae network, e.g with its control of Arctic furs and Atlantic tin. As Zealanders started to engage heavily in both the North Way and the Lower Elbe area, as seen in the findings from Vigrestad, Kleppe, Gjrv, Rimbareid and Lunde, Scania strengthened its relations into the waterways of the interior, as indicated by the burials from Kivik and Sagaholm. Both engagements can be seen as intentional acts to seize control of furs from NW Scandinavia. Thus, during this short phase 1340-1300 BC NW Scandinavia was linked into the same Scania-Zealand centre via both maritime and overland routes. The extreme richness of this centre at this time, embracing enigmatic findings such as the Trundholm Sun-Chariot and Kivik, was thus due to its successful funnelling of furs from the entire peninsula. The distinctive brimmed hats on the Stockhult figurines is best linked to the image of a brimmed hat on the Kivik-coffin, and the brimmed gold-hats from the Main-Rhine area. The cult-axe from the Meuse is also best linked to the Scania-Zealand centre. Together, these

253 indicate the magnitude of the western engagements of these groups during 1340-1300 BC. At Bruatorp, near Kalmar in Sweden, the largest known EBA long-house has been found, 60m long, dated to 1500-1300 BC (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 278p., fig. 125). From nearby land comes a pin imported from the Lneburg area, demonstrating that Kalmar, land and Bornholm were also involved in the Lneburg-intervention (Old 2051) Moving to BA III (1300-1100 BC), the Nordic scene is characterized by the rise of the Thy-centre in Northern Jutland, and its production of female accessories and male swords in the distinct BA III style, as well as gold in the form of twisted arm-rings and coiled finger/arm-rings. AsNi-copper is still dominant, 58 %, but with a less characteristic profile, less tin than in BA II but more than in BA I (Liversage 2000: 27). Especially the gold-findings seem to indicate that an inland route southwards now dominated, leading from Limfjord along the Jutish mainland to the lower Elbe. Such an inland caravan route in combination with an extended maritime route along the North Way to a strengthened centre at Beitstad (Tonnes-Holan), was probably a crucial foundation for the rise of the Thy centre. Thy might have rose to power from its position as a stepping-stone for Zealanders engaged in the North Way. Now Thy came to occupy a central position at the gate to the North Way, both in relation to Scania-Zealand on the one hand and southern Jutland and SchleswigHolstein on the other. Among the significant changes from BA II is also a significant drop in the import of foreign metal-hilted swords: a Riegsee-sword, variant Lorch from Limfjord, and type Zsujta from Ringkbing, Jutland (Quillfeldt 1994: 181), and from the transition BA III/IV, a dreiwulst-sword type Illertsen from Eia, Rogaland. Although imported metalhilted swords are rare in the Nordic zone in this period, the pattern of octagon-hilted swords from BA II is now replicated in flange-hilted swords of type Traun and Annenheim (Schauer 1971: Taf. 118). The origin of the flange-hilted sword is no less debated that that of the metal-hilted sword. And again the Nordic Zone occupies a central position with early specimens such as Dollerup and rskovhedehus, linked to Mycenaean specimens (Schauer 1971: 112). And again the number of deposited developed flange-hilted swords in the north exceeds the numbers of Continental Europe (cf. Schauer 1971: taf. 118). Between 1200-1100 BC the palace-civilization in the Eastern Mediterranean came to an end, and northern raiders armed with flange-hilted swords, most likely played some part in the widespread attacks (cf. Drews 1993: 192pp.; Popham 1994: 285). Ca. 1100 BC the area north of the Alps witnessed the first major change in metal supply in half a millenium, as the AsNi copper disappears and the extremely widespread NS copper is introduced (Liversage 2000: 81pp.). If we

254 upgrade the Mycenae-Monkodonja-Bernstorf to an Assur-Karum-Wabartum system, the collapse of the palaces in the eastern Mediterranean would have had significant repercussions north of the Alps. The collapse in the organization of copper-production at Mitterberg might be one such effect. BA III, 1300-1100 BC is also the peak in NW Scandinavia in terms of number of bronzes, numbers of burials and size of monuments. The extreme extension of the North Way into the Arctic from ca. 1100 BC, might have been a reaction to the changes in the southern end of the BA III network: as the southern trade collapsed, the northern networks were extended. Parallel to this expansion in the northern end of the North Way, there seems to have been an eastern shift in its southern end: Karmy and Jren now engaged in maritime networks towards Halland, Mecklenburg and the Oder-route. These expeditions ran parallel to the final erection of monumental burials, with complex internal structures and ship-settings. The collars from Trondenes and Tennevik and the mould from Grtavr are the last traces of the fully extended North Way; before it looses its significance on the wider North European scene after 700 BC.

9.2.4 Decisive events in the history of North-South Networks

My main argument above is that the period 1800-1100 BC can be read as a trajectory in which middle-men are excluded in a north-south axis in networks that brought northern valuables to the cities of the East Mediterranean. It is also the story of the rise and fall of the Mitterberg-mine, and the vast but uneven displacement of its yield of 18 000 tons of AsNi-copper (Liversage 2000: 80). Possibly, it was Mycenaean expeditions to the west and into the Gulf of Lyon that brought the European Bronze Age into a new pace. These were aimed mainly for amber and tin, possibly also for silver and gold, from the Atlantic. By its use of the Rhne-Loire and Rhne-Seine channels this network bypassed most of Continental Europe. But the NW-Alpine centre in particular arose at an intersection between Central European and Atlantic networks. A scenario might be suggested: the individuals of the NW-Alpine centre that first came in direct contact with Mycenaean traders changed their attitude to goods and logistics as they saw how these traders acted towards artefacts and materials. This spurred an interest in the origin of the goods that arrived irregularly and in smaller quantities from the north, primarily amber and furs, and it lead to exertions to access larger amounts of these goods. Initially, this led to increased attention towards the ElbeSaale and Elbe-Vltava centres of the Unetice area. Later it was followed up by attempts to circumvent these centres and forge direct links to both the western and eastern end of the

255 Baltic Sea. The most important single effect emerging from the early Mediterranean-Alpine encounters was an attitude to the displacement and exchange of objects. These Alpine groups brought this attitude to each end of the Baltic Sea, in their attempts to bring more goods, regularly and directly from the north to the Mediterranean. In these encounters in the far north, two areas in particular were involved, Elbe-Kiel Bay and Eastern Sweden. And these two agents explored the North Way and the Central Swedish Water System respectively, in order to access furs trapped in the highlands of the Central Zone and in the Arctic, and thus brought NW Scandinavia into a Bronze Age. In light of these new networks north of the Alps, Mycenaeans established a colony at Monkodonja in the inner Adriatic, and from here they launched expeditions across the Alps possibly in attempts to intercept the long and winding routes and to bypass the Alpine middle-men. In the northern end, groups in Scania-Zealand and Elbe-Kiel Bay organized access to northern furs, as well as combined raiding-trading expeditions to the heart of the continent. From this scene arose sites like Bernstorf and Nitriansky Hradok. In this way Nordic groups and Mycenaeans came to meet face-to-face and in some cases bypassed much of Central Europe. Crucial to this shift in pace, I propose, was the clash between attitudes to exchange, logistics, artefacts, materials and mobility; between a commercial attitude characteristic of the Near Eastern city-states and attitudes dominated by the gift and its social obligations north of the Mediterranean. The shift in pace was also a result of new southern markets and an entirely new market and demand for northern fur and amber. These dynamics emerged because Mediterranean markets were mainly interested in amber from the Baltic, fur from the Arctic and tin from the Atlantic, thus in commodities from the northern and western fringes of Europe. Finally, this explains why the Nordic region picked up so much of Mediterranean beliefs, ideas and material culture, relative to the rest of the Continent. At c. 1500 BC, pelts and amber from the north had become an integral part of the exchange at Bernstorf and Nitriansky Hradok. Once this ball was put in motion, dynamics within the Nordic Zone came to be dominated by the competition between different groups in the south over access to different routes to the continent on the one hand, and different routes to the hunting grounds in the north on the other hand. These networks might thus have been competing for pelts trapped by the same trappers. If the trappers operating in the highlands of the Central Zone in NW Scandinavia were turning their attention towards the North Way in stead of the CSWS to the east, this would have brought the Scania-Zealand groups into a crisis. Such a development might have been underway in BA II, and this would

256 account for the Zealanders intervention in the North Way to secure access to northern goods in order to operate on the continental scene. Alternatively, the access via the CSWS was simply too unstable and ineffective in order to fulfil their continental ambitions. The Scania-Zealand centre stands out in late BA II by a series of women, probably brides, with accessories from the Lneburg zone in Northwest Germany, the development of distinct and highly complex bronze and gold technologies, the incorporation of Mycenaean imagery in their burials, and finally, their engagement in the North Way. Women with accessories of Lneburgian inspiration also dominate the burials along the North Way at this time, at Jren and Trondheimsfjord. These females were probably crucial in the establishment and the dynamics of this network. The nodal settlements at Spisk tvrtok, Nitriansky Hradok and Bernstorf were located to receive traders from the north. That they were enclosed by huge ditches, fortifications in wood and stone and tower bastions, indicate that they also faced the risk of hostile visitors (Osgood et. al. 2000: 67; Moosauer & Bachmeier 2005). These defences might very well have been intended for protection against raiding warrior-bands organized from the Nordic Zone. From the perspective of the dwellers of these sites there were both friendly and hostile northerners. Indeed, skirmishes might have been a continuous feature of the Nordic Zone, between different groupings claiming access to the same routes, ports and networks. Some of these groups entered the gates of Spisk tvrtok, Nitriansky Hradok and Bernstorf as traders, others attempted to put fire to the fortifications or raid caravans on the route to and from. The accumulation and displacement of larger amounts of valuables from the 17th century, paved the way for new mechanisms of displacement, theft by raiding and warfare, and thus the need for protection. Bronze Age history from 1700 BC onwards is also a story of an arms-race in which Southern Scandinavia played a significant, if not leading, role. One of the likely scenarios for warfare in our area would be conflict between the Central Zone and southerners operating the North Way. We might imagine hostilities over access to hunting grounds in the southern highlands, between Kaldafjell and Svenes. The Svenes hoard on the eastern fringe of these highlands is the largest single collection of Ullerslev type spearheads, i.e. 20-30 highly functional weapons. On the other side there is a trail of Smrumovre type spearheads from Jren into Hardangerfjord and into the highlands at Kaldafjell. Thus, warriors from the southern part of the Central Zone armed with spears of Ullerslev type procured via the CSWS might have faced boat-crews of warriors from

257 Zealand and Jren armed with Smrumovre type spears. Another potential area of conflict would be at Beitstad, at the gate to the Arctic and the northern interior. In this case there is massive evidence of violence from Sund (cf. chapt 5.6.6). The presence of skeletal remains of small children and females, indicate that the losers were locals being ambushed rather than members of a long-distance expedition. The wide dates allows a link to the establishment of a node in the early BA II Elbe-Kiel Bay network, the late BA II Zealand network, the era of the T-H burial ground in BA III, as well as to the peculiar void in BA IV findings. In any of these scenarios this could be interpreted as the outcome of a battle over access to the gate to the Arctic and furs.

9.3 Scandinava & the Ural

I have argued that the perforated copper projectiles from Karlebotn (nr. 261) and Pitsusmurust (nr. 262) ought to be seen in relation to a series of perforated slate projectiles, dated to c. 2000-1700 BC. Together, these copper and slate harpoon-points are distributed along the coast from Varanger in the north to Jren in the south; copper dominating in the north and slate in the south; and together they bridge the void between the fringes of the southern and eastern Copper Ages: Northern Jutland (Vandkilde 1996: 177pp.) and KareliaOnega (Huggert 1996; Chernykh 1992: 187pp.). These copper projectiles suggest that forging technology was introduced to the northwest, and that the introduction of copper was linked to complex and innovative hunting technologies possibly for some fur-bearing mammal swimming in the sea (e.g. otter). If these coppers were procured from the east in exchange for furs, this was a network in competition with the southern flint dagger network centred on Northern Jutland and at this time extending north to Lofoten.

9.3.1 Volga-Kama and the Seima horizon

From the advent of written history it is clear that political power in Russia was linked to the fur trade (Martin 1986). Two of the major centres in the fur trade were located at the confluence of Volga and Kama Rivers; first Bulgar and later Kazan. These centres procured its furs from the north mainly via Kama and Upper Volga Rivers. It is precisely along Upper Volga, Kama and particularly their confluence that we find clusters of both Seima-Turbino and Ananino sites. The next horizon of eastern metals is linked to the Seima-Turbino phenomenon, and again the northwestern end takes on an extraordinary position (cf. chapt. 4.4.11). Soapstone moulds common on Seima burial grounds east of the Ural, disappears in the west only to

258 reappear in Northern Norway and Sweden. Most researchers that have dealt with the SeimaTurbino phenomenon have seen it as indicative of extensive long distance migrations westwards from the Altai-foothills. It introduced a range of novel features to the foreststeppe belt north of the steppe proper: cire-perdue moulding, core-moulding for socketed axes and spearheads, tin-alloys, horse-drawn sledges, complex stone knapping techniques and lamellar body-armour made from antler (Kohl 2007: 168; Koryakova & Epimakov 2007: 106pp.). We might thus envision swift long-distance movements of warrior-bands, on frozen rivers by horse and sledge and a range of other ski and sledge technologies. That the stone mould industry disappears west of the Ural, but reappears in Northern Scandinavia, as well as the character of the Jarfjord-moulds, indicate a migration directly from Irtysj river: e.g. from Rostovka, crossing the Urals and following Volga to Lake Onega, and here perhaps splitting in a northern (towards Varanger) and a southern (towards Finland and Vektarlia) branch. I have argued for a late date of the Seima-horizon, c. 1500-1300 BC (chapt. 4.4.11). I concluded that the two westernmost assemblages with Seima types from Galich and Borodino pointed to Nordic BA Ib-II (1600-1300 BC), with links to the BA II hoard from Stockhult (Galich) and spearheads with spiral-decorated sockets (Borodino) of Valsmagle, Smrumovre, Kirke Sby, Gundeslev or Ullerslev types. Interestingly, while the large Jarfjord mould corresponds well with the Seima type, the daggers cast in this mould seem to be larger than those known from eastern burial grounds (Pl. 60). This increase in bladelength in the far west could be seen as influence from Nordic swords. The Kaskelouktemould, with a typical straight Seima style haft, has a complex ribbed cross-section unknown on eastern blades (Pl. 63). A focus on the similarity between the leg-calves on the figurines from Galich and Stockhult opens interesting new avenues. Firstly, figurines are unknown in the steppe, the taiga, and Central Europe at this time. Secondly, the only three figurines with a comparable early date are Near Eastern standing arm figurines from Scheren, Poland and two specimens from Ukraine (Bouzek 1985: 69p.). It is thus likely that both the Galich and Stockhult figurines had a common inspiration in these Near Eastern figurines, probably derived from the Hittites or Trojans (Pl.63). To this can be added the strangely isolated Borodino hoard with its combination of two characteristic Seima type spearheads, nephrite maze-heads from the Altai, a dagger with vague Mycenaean links, and a fragmented spearhead with spiral-decorated socket reminiscent of Nordic types (cf. Hachmann 1957:

259 nr.688, 170pp., Taf. 67.2-16; Lichardus & Vladar 1996: 43, taf. 22-23). It is thus possible to gather the findings from Galich, Stockhult, Borodino, the standing arm figurines, the early iron artefact from Ganovche high in Tatra mountain between the upper Vistula and Tisza rivers (Furmanek 2000; Engedal 2002: 45p.), and postulate an eastern Baltic-Black Sea network involving Scania, the Seima-network, and Hittites/Trojans, one that ran east of the Carpathians Mountains. Finally, the profilation in the Seima mould from Kaskeloukte is in fact closer to the Tudhalyias sword from the Hittite capital Bogazky than to Nordic blades (Mller-Karpe 1994:434pp., abb.3b; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: note 11). This sword carried an inscription celebrating King Tudhalijas destruction of the land of Assuwa, according to Mller-Karpe an event dated to c. 1420 BC (Mller-Karpe 1994: 436). The mass of imagery with Hittite analogies in southeastern Sweden (cf. Larsson 1997), might have been the result of direct interaction with Hittites through this network, one that bypassed the tell-cultures of Balkan and the Carpathians. The experiments with socketed flanged axes, particularly common in Southern Sweden from 1500 BC (e.g. Old 11, 67, 1584), might have been inspired by encounters with Seima type axes (Pl.63). The origin of the long, sometimes spiral-decorated Valsmagle type spearhead might also have been entangled in this network. One consequence of a hypothesis of a simple linear migration from Altai to the North Sea is an autonomous invention of both the axe and spear with cast sockets in the Altai to the far east (cf. chapt. 4.4.11). If the origin of the Seima-Turbino network on the other hand was entangled in Nordic and Anatolian networks along the eastern fringe of the Carpathians c. 1550-1500 BC, this might also remove the need for postulating separate autonomous innovations of very similar forms in the far west and the far east. This opens for a more complex origin of the Seima-Turbino phenomenon, and that the Great Tin Road from Altai to the Baltic (cf. Chernykh & Kuzminykh 1989 in Koryakova & Epimakov 2007: 40), really was a two-way street from the beginning (cf. Pl. 60,63, Map 29). There are only a few miles between the Seima mould from Vektarlia and the cairns with early cremations on Frset in the Beitstad-fjord (cf. Map 12, chapt. 8.3.1). If the Seimanetwork had reached Vektarlia by 15-1400 BC, it is worth noting that the Elbe-Kiel Bay centre established a node not merely at the very fringe of the Nordic Zone, but also at the northwestern gate to the Seima network. This scenario thus adds potential intentions to the establishment of the Beitstad-link both in the case of early BA II (cf. Maps 12, 28), and late BA II (Maps 13, 29): to access tin flowing in the Seima-Turbino network via Beitstad. There

260 is thus a possibility that the Seima network contributed to the high tin-alloys of the Nordic Zone in BA II. Although Seima-artefacts west of the Ural is generally poorer in tin-levels (Koryakova & Epimakov 2007: 40), the reappearance of soapstone moulds in the far west, might have been paralleled in a reappearance of high tin-alloys. I am thus inclined to argue for a late date of the Seima-horizon, and for a scenario in which the Nordic and the Seima networks met up at several points, at Beitstad and MlardalFinland, as well as along a southern route to the Black Sea. If we accept this and upgrade the importance of east-west dynamics in the period 1500-1300 BC, this has consequences for our understanding of the later developments between Volga-Kama and the Nordic Zone.

9.3.2 From Seima to Ananino

The Ananino culture of the Volga-Kama area embrace series of large burial grounds, such as Akhmylovo with 937 burials and Akkozino with 110 burials, as well as both open and fortified settlements on river-banks (Koryakova & Epimakhov 2007: 252p.). These are extremely rich in both bronze and iron artefacts. Interestingly, the earliest burials of 800-500 BC are relatively richer in iron artefacts and demonstrate links to the Caucasus. At this time there are no comparable iron industries in-between Volga-Kama and the Caucasus (ibid: 158p., 194p., 200). The sudden boom in the Volga-Kama area and the intimate, direct links to the Caucasus, makes me suspect that this was the establishment of a network much similar to that of Bulgar and Kazan more than 1.5 millennium later: one that brought fur from the north to the Caspian Sea and Caucasus and to southern markets beyond (cf. Martin 1986: 107; Map 20). Of particular relevance to Scandinavia is that these burial grounds contained burials with two types of axes: the small, flat and loopless Ananino type and the large, looped axe with extended neck, the KAM axes or the Akkozino-Mlar type (both are generally included in the Ananino Culture in Russian studies). The first is known in the west primarily from Finland and in Sweden from Mlardalen northwards, but I have proposed that this type also influenced the western coast down to Jren. Variants of the second type are heavily represented in Central Sweden and Western Norway south of Trndelag. In the far west the two types overlap in Mlardalen, but moulds for both types are also found in Suossalmi, Northern Finland (Lavento 2001: 124p., App. 9b). In the east they are found on the same burial grounds. KAM axes are generally found with other types characteristic of the Ananino culture, but rarely in combination with the small Ananino axe (Meinander 1985: 25, Fig. 1011). KAM axes appear e.g. in three cases alongside spearheads with lunate openings like the

261 one from Srheim (nr. 332; e.g. Meinander 1985: bur. 29, 408, 816 at Achmylovo). The distinction marked on eastern burial grounds might be between a group with close relations northwestwards towards Northern Finland and Sweden, and a group primarily linked to southern groups at Mlardalen. In the latter case, I suspect first a western impulse on the east, and a second major movement from east to west it was the eastern core-techniques that became prevailing in the west. This is in essence, in line with Tallgrens perspective (1937b: 41). It seems clear, though, that the greatest typological variation in KAM axes is found in the Volga-Kama area, including the Mlar variant, but not the Norwegian variant. It is rather in Northern Finland that we find moulds for both Ananino types and KAM axes both of Mlar and importantly of Norwegian variants. I believe Nrmans proposal of the LBA as the first Viking era is interesting when it comes to the above situation. C. 890 AD Ottar from Hlogaland opened a maritime route to the White Sea, possibly to avoid conflicts with the Kvene on an overland route. I have suggested a similar scenario, in which a Lofoten-Jren-Jutland network was linked to the interior both through the Torne river system, and through a martime route eastwards to Pasvik Valley in BA IV-V. This network thus collided with Swedish networks into the same area via an eastern North Way (cf. chapt. 6.7, 6.8). And as a parallel to the situation in the Viking Age, these two networks might have tangented a fur network linked to Volga-Kama through the Onega-Volga channel, and ultimately to Caucasian centres for further distribution. While Nordic interrests in this area might initially have been fur (traded for bronze or textiles), the flow might at some point have shifted and bronze from Volga-Kama started to flow not merely towards the northern hunter-gatherer populations (in the form of Ananino type axes), but also to Nordic groups. After a peak in BA IV and V of Nordic bronzes in the north, there seems to be a total void of Nordic BA VI bronzes north of Beitstad-Mlardalen. This might indicate that the eastern fur network won this first battle of the north. This coincided with a set of changes in NW Scandinavia: 1) the appearance of Ananino-inspired axes from Rana to Jren, 2) Jren no longer procure bronzes from the south, but from the Central Zone to its north, 3) a reflourishing of the Central Zone-CSWS network. It also explains why, among multiple Arctic features, it was the volute-motive and the top-notch core-print from North Finland and Karelia that found their way to Jren. Hence, it might have been in the traffic on River Kemi in the high north that the Norwegian KAM variant was invented, by persons involved in a fur-copper trade between Kemi and Volga-Kama. These might have leaped over to the competing North Way network

262 and in this way a rare eastern variant amongst many others would come to dominate NW Scandinavia. This scenario explains why distinctly eastern moulding practises appeared in the southern end of the North Way, at Jren. Thus, I believe it is possible to discern a Scandinavian Kama network operating from 1600/1500 BC throughout the Bronze Age. This means that the Volga-Kama is a highly relevant, but the least understood outside agent to the Nordic Bronze Age in general and to NW Scandinavia and Mlardalen in particular. We have failed to embed this network in the EBA, and therefore the massive evidence from the LBA has become such an enigma. The collapse in the Mediterranean 1200-1100 BC might have brought on a reorientation in the north, making eastern coppers and bronzes more relevant. The duality seen on the eastern burial grounds of Akozino and Achmylovo, between burials with small, loopless Ananino axes and burials with large, looped axes with extended necks; might be explained by a largely local group vs. a group mixed heavily with migrant warrior-traders from Mlardalen. This duality in axe types is strangely replicated at Jren at the end of the BA: an axe and two moulds with extended necks, and three moulds for small, Ananino-like axes; and no typical Nordic axe types. I suggest that the Volga-Kama centre and its northwestern relations escalated both because of its link-up to Caucasus in the south and to the Nordic Zone in the northwest. For this reason fur from northern Scandinavia now started to flow predominantly in a southeastern direction, and copper rather than fur flowed into the Nordic Zone from the north. The existance of a Lausitz trade-colony at Vistad 1000-400 BC by Lake Vttern might indicate that the furs supplied by the Central Zone again came to dominate Continental Europe, via the CSWS but also via the Gta-Glomma Zone. Within the fortified settlement at Vistad, groups from the Polish Lausitz-area used foreign pottery, build foreign, square houses with roof-supporting walls and used a range of cupola-shaped kilns (cf. Larsson 1993; Larsson & Hulthen 2004: 24). This has been interpreted in light of metallurgical activities, i.e. that these groups came to Lake Vttern primarily to refine local iron ores and bring refined ores or iron to the south of the Baltic. At the end of BA VI there is a field of gravity of rich multi-type hoards, often with Central European Hallstatt imports, in Mlardalen, land and Gotland (Jensen 1997: 180). The Vistad-colony might be seen as a Karoum type settlement. This might indicate that the Central European imports found in the CSWS and Western Norway was not the result of groups in Mlardalen engaging directly on the Continent, but rather goods procured from the Lausitz-traders at Vistad (cf. Map 16). The

263 large hoard of socketed axes of both Mlar and Norwegian variants at Balsmyr, Bornholm, might be a southbound cargo of bronzes procured from northern groups visiting Vistad. Possibly both bronze from the Volga-Kama as well as locally produced coppers and iron were traded south to the Oder. The location of the Vistad-colony and its Polish origin is strangely reminicent of the relationship between eastern Sweden and the Alpine-colony at the lower Vistula at the very beginning of the Bronze Age (cf. Map 8, 22). I do not doubt that the Vistad-colony was engaged in the production of metal, but I suggest that the main purpose of its establishment was the same as it was at the beginning of the BA: to access fur via the CSWS, from the Central Zone in western Norway in particular.

9.4 Jren a close up view

A closer exploration of the bronzes of Jren is a key to an alternative Bronze Age history of NW Scandinavia: perhaps nowhere else is the merging of Ural and Alpine networks, east and south, better explored than at Jren. I have argued that Norwegian BA research has suffered from a maritime bias in terms of logistics, and that it has taken the maritime North Way for granted once it was opened at the transition MN-LN. On the contrary, I believe that the full blown North Way, in its BA IIIII variants, was a highly fragile network compared to the eastern overland networks in terms of organization and equipment. In addition, a farming-bias has created the notion that Jrens position in LN-BA networks was rooted mainly in its high quality soils and large population. If this was the case, one would expect this soil to have enabled people at Jren to procure bronzes from Jutland in a less variable fashion, and that bronzes would have been clustered more clearly on the best soils. If the position of Jren in flint and particularly in bronze networks was mainly that of a middle-man, one of several possible nodes between hunting-grounds and copper-mines, this would make Jren more sensitive to the activities of other agents to the north, east and south. The distribution of findings in Jren (Map 30, cf. also Map 19) suggests that the coast of northern Jren was feared, and that there was an effective network of rivers and lakes across the interior from Gandsfjord to the coast south of Orre, largely bypassing this coast. The settlers from the Elbe-Kiel Bay area chose evidently the southern interior of Jren, a favourable location in order to access land-routes from Gandsfjord and the eastern interior; suggesting that they were mainly seeking furs from the north via Gandsfjord and from the interior highlands. Northern style rock art at Nag and Bru suggest that northerners

264 preferred to enter the Boknafjord basin rather than the outer coast of Jren. The Zealand intervention seems to have been aimed at southernmost Jren, Hna river as well as the area immediately to the north. The hoarded octagon-hilted sword from Madla and the type 2 boats at Haga and Revheim suggest that these groups also explored bypassings across the Hafrsfjord area. Burials with bronze do not appear in the Hafrsfjord area and to the north of Srheim-Orre Lagoon until after 1300 BC. In fact, there are few bronzes from the heartland of LN flint daggers, except for the 200 years of BA III. This zone comprises H, Time, Klepp and southern part of Sola Municipalities. A few comparisons can be made if we look at the three municipalities of Kleppe, H and Time: This zone contained 11 loose-found bronze axes from the EBA, and it scores on top on all statistics of major LN types: daggers type I (83stk), type III (24stk), type IV (4stk), type V (9stk), type VI (52stk), simple shafthole axes (49stk) and sickles (43stk) (cf. Zinsli 2007: XXXIV). The dominance of this area is also clear in MNB (Hinsch 1956: 206pp.). From the 600 years of the LBA though, there is only a single axe found south of a line drawn between the southern ends of Gandsfjord and Hafrsfjord. This is a Scanian variant (nr. 476) from Anda, most likely procured from the north. In fact, it is possible to argue that the final imports arriving by boat from the south were the lures at Revheim and the axes from Myklebust and Sola (nr. 493-94) in their vicinity in the Hafrsfjord area. These might have been procured and deposited by the same groups that brought neck-collars from Jutland to the Tjeldsund area in the far north, and this need not have occurred later than late BA V, 800-700 BC. Nordenborg-Myhre has also argued that the majority of the rock art of Rogaland dates mainly from BA III-IV. This means that boats and scenes typical of BA V are rare, as well as boats related to the Hjortspring type (Nordenborg-Myhre 2004: 203p.). Compared to the other significant rock art centres of Trndelag, Hardanger, stfold and Bohusln, this is remarkable. What happened at Jren after 800 BC? The soapstone moulds from Jren indicate that something significant did happen: 5 out of 6 (the sixth is fragmented) moulds hint at casting procedures and styles at odds with those of Jutland and Southern Scandinavia in general. These moulds are mainly located north of the Klepp-H-Time area. Interestingly, axes of the types cast in these moulds are found only to the north. I find this convincing evidence of northern groups settling in Northern Jren, groups that were involved in a maritime network from Northern Jren to Tjeldsund. This might indicate that the large population of Jren at the end of the Bronze Age was short on material for edged tools. The above perspectives on the end of the Bronze

265 Age open interesting avenues for a re-evaluation of the beginning of the Iron Age, and indeed, in light of both the Lausitz-colony at Lake Vttern and the links to Volga-Kama: the beginning of iron-production. Is it possible that Jren converted to local iron production at such an early stage? Finally, I believe that making Jren mainly a meeting place for groups to the north of Jren and groups to the south of Jren, depriving Jren of some of its local agency, explains the quantitative and qualitative features of bronzes discerned through the previous chapters. In particular, it explains why so few bronzes were procured from Northern Jutland. It was mainly in the period 1300-800 BC, that local groups were able to establish themselves as middle-men and operators of a full North Way. Thus, my interpretation of Map 30 is that of Jren as a maritime barrier, as a gate to the Arctic and the northern highlands, and as a target of outside interventions.

9.5 Explaining Bronze Age history

Throughout this thesis I have argued against a set of biases that dominates perspectives on both the Stone and Bronze Ages of NW Scandinavia: maritime rather than overland, an arrow of agency from south towards north, and a hierarchy of agency: farming>pastoralism>hunting. In chapter 2 I stressed the importance of the area north of Hustad (Meso-MNA) and north of Stadt (MNB-LN) in the Stone Age. The activities of these groups might not have put the western Stone Age onto an entirely new track, i.e. they did not incorporate the full Funnel Beaker or Corded Ware modes of economy, material culture and burial practices. What they did do, was to develop a deep tradition for the organization of long-distance expeditions into the interior of the peninsula, in combination with coastal expeditions both to the south and the north. It was this capacity for long-distance mobility, and this complexity of networks, that would come to change the historical trajectory of NW Scandinavia. Possibly, these groups had specialised in fur-hunting over extensive hunting grounds both along the coast and in the highlands, long before the LN. The total dominance of South Scandinavian flints in a limited number of types through the 500 years of the LN tends to cover up the real complexity of the networks at work. Through an assessment of the spatial distribution of individual dagger types and sub-types as well as various slate types, the idea of a simple North Way network from Jutland to Jren and northwards crumbled (chapt. 2.5, 6.1). Clearly, the north, and the area between Stadt and Hustad in particular, also procured daggers from the Glomma-Gta zone across the highlands. The events that shifted

266 the direction of the inland-networks from the Glomma-Gta and Lake Vnarn area eastwards towards Lake Vttern and Mlardalen seem to have been related to the beginning of the BA. That the Stadt-Hustad groups visited Lake Vnarn throughout the LN, means that they were probably linked into the Ster-Ripatransone network in LN II, dominated by Scania-Zealand and the Elbe-Vltava (cf. Map 22). Thus, already at this time, their attentions might have shifted towards the area east of Lake Vnarn. At the far southern end of Europe, Mycenaean expeditions beyond the Apennine Peninsula into the Gulf of Lyon and particularly their meetings with people in the Alps were decisive events that would bring the European Bronze Age into a new pace. In these encounters novel attitudes towards goods, logistics and exchange was transmitted to the southern fringe of Central Europe. In light of these interactions Alpine groups established far-reaching networks in order to bring amber and pelts, along routes that bypassed the old routes controlled by the Unetice Culture and Scania and the Danish islands in the north (cf. directional commercial trade, Renfrew 1972: 470p.). Rather than towards the heart of Southern Scandinavia, these networks were directed against the eastern and western extremes of the Baltic and the Scandinavian Peninsula. In this way these networks came to bypass not only the Unetice Culture, but also its northern periphery in Scania and the Danish islands. Thus, the actions launched from the Stadt-Hustad area, the Pelepones and the western Alps were decisive in bringing NW Scandinavia into a European Bronze Age, and the Bronze Age writ large into a new pace. They also led to a meeting between northern hunters rock art and Alpine rock art, and initiated the Nordic Bronze Age rock art tradition in Eastern Sweden. Its distinctive features of depicting artefacts, weaponry and clothing in particular, was a revival of the ideas surrounding menhir-statues of the Alps (cf. Marinis 1998). The making of the peculiar signs on the Oppeby panel is likely to have involved persons from the Alps that were familiar with written symbols such as those from Lipari Islands (cf. Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 167pp.). I thus suggest that there was a bridge between the two major rock art regions of Europe Val Camonica and the Nordic running from the western Alps to eastern Sweden in the 18th century BC. In the west the Elbe-Kiel Bay centre, also in close contact with Alpine groups via western routes, launched maritime expeditions that bypassed the Jutish peninsula, and established nodes at Jren at the gate to the North Way, and later at Beitstad at the gate to the Arctic. Thus, considering the conventional trajectory of Nordic relations with Europe; Unetice, Carpathians, Tumulus (cf. above), it is now clear that the decisive Alpine cross-

267 continental expeditions of the 18th century that drew NW Scandinavia into the Bronze Age have not been discerned in previous studies. These exerts aimed at each end of the Baltic, in fact cultivated an already existing duality of NW Scandinavia: between a Central Zone extending into the CSWS and a coastal North Way extending across Skagerrak. This duality came to dominate NW Scandinavia until 700 BC, the North Way being linked variously to Elbe-Kiel Bay, Zealand and Jutland. The decisive changes in the LBA were largely brought on by the extension of several north-south networks; one from Caucasus to Volga-Kama and into the northwestern Arctic, another from the Lausitz culture to Central Sweden and into the Arctic, and finally a third along the North Way to the western Arctic. One of the consequences of these expansions was a potentially significant migration of groups from the Arctic southwards along the North Way, at least their presence left a significant impact in our data. The strengthening of the Arctic-Volga-Kama-Caucasus network from 900 BC might have been linked to the formation of the state of Urartu south of Caucasus and the rise of significant centres in the Caucasus (cf. Kristiansen 1998: 192p.). In order to further explore the significance of this network, more radiocarbon dates from the Ananino sites are needed. On the basis of the above it is possible to stress and highlight some human and nonhuman agents in the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia. The fur-bearing animals in the alpines, in the sea and in the arctic were crucial. From later history we learn that different species of northern furs created such admiration among the Arab, Italian, French and British upper social class far from their natural habitat, that they spurred large scale historical changes in their attempts to procure them. Such furs could only become significant as long as there were people skilled in trapping and hunting them. These skills had deep local traditions in NW Scandinavia, especially north of Stadt. The highlands provided open pastures for both reindeer and domestic-animals, both sources of food easily combined with chasing animals with more valuable furs. The seas provided fish, also a food easily combined with chasing fur-bearing animals in the sea. The people of the Central Zone as well as those of the Northern Zone brought hunting-skills, high mobility on sea, river and snow, and their skin boat from the Stone Age. These were all significant agents in Bronze Age history. Throughout the Bronze Age valuable furs accumulated in the hands of different individuals, households and lineages within the trapper-zone, more than they trapped themselves. While the Mycenaeans, continental copper producers and diverse continental and Scandinavian middle-men in some way or another regularly figurate in Bronze Age

268 accounts; these fur-bearing animals, their tanned pelts, the trappers and these trapperaggrandizers within the fur-bearing zone, make up one crucial set of agents that has largely been ignored in the study of the Eurasian Bronze Age. Although this chapter has drawn into light more relevant agents or actors in order to explain trajectories of displacement and transformation, it does not alone accomplish an escape from bifurcation. For this we need to have a closer look at metal and the human mind, and metal in mind.

269

Chapter 10. Metal in mind agency in dense webs

This chapter aims at those minds that in some way or another were extended into bronze artefacts in the Bronze Age: it seeks explanation, intention and causation in the dense webs spun around bronzes and it seeks short rhythms compatible to those typically found in cognitive psychology. In light of the introductory plan of an escape from a bifurcated archaeology, this chapter is an attempt to reason in a style that does justice to what was given in their experience (cf. chapt. 1).

10.1. Concepts of containment, causation and change

The framework for handling dense webs on the time-scale of acts and events is drawn mainly from two theoretical strands. One concerns human conceptualization of movement, containment and causation, drawn from the work of George Lakoff & Mark Johnson (1999). The second concerns human conceptualization of causation, agency and art, drawn from the works of Alfred Gell (1992; 1998). Lakoff and Johnson argue that concepts of spatial relations are fundamental to our understanding of the world, and that the great range and complexity of our spatial-relation concepts are built from a smaller number of image schemas that are grounded in basic experiences of the body (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 30pp.). Significant among these are the container schema, grounded in an experience of the body as a container. This container schema has a basic structure of inside, boundary and outside (ibid: 32). It is conceptual, but may be physically instantiated, as e.g. a body, room, cup, or as a bounded region in space, like a football field. The container schema may also be imposed on visual, auditory and motor experiences, e.g. when we think and talk about what instruments play in a particular part of a musical composition, or what is done in a sequence of the process of baking a cake (ibid: 32). Our fundamental experience of being bodies is demonstrated by our use of terms designating body parts or body processes to designate a range of other phenomena. Our conceptualization of bodies is thus shaped by our sensory-experience of bodily processes, and we use these basic concepts to understand our surroundings. This means that we have a basic experience of being vessels with contents, and openings were substances enter and leave (cf. Fredriksen 2005: 208p.). The fundamental concepts of causation, space and time, are all rooted in perception of movement (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 140, 157; Tomasello 1999: 74). The human being experiences two basic kinds of motion or movements: the movement of its own body, and

270 movements outside of itself, in its surroundings. Through these two kinds of movements we knit together a range of metaphorical combinations involving space, time, and causation. Our total metaphorical elaboration on causality is vast, according to the kinds of forces, the kinds of changes and the ways in which forces produce them (Lakoff & Johnsen 1999: 206). In order to proceed with the exploration into our recognition and understanding of different kinds of forces and changes, it is useful to move to Alfred Gells dealings with art. Alfred Gell presented a theory of art in its broadest sense: a theory of the social relations that obtain in the neighbourhood of works of art (1998: 7). Gells perspectives can readily be merged with theories on basic human conceptualization of causation, and his anthropology of art is actually an instrument for exploring human conceptualization of its surroundings in general and things in particular. At heart of Gells theory lies the argument of a basic human tendency for inquiry into changes and causes: when we see or sense things our minds automatically start working on how the thing came about:
Any object that one encounters in the world invites the question 'how did this thing get to be here?' [...] This means playing out their origin-stories mentally, reconstructing their histories as a sequence of actions performed by another agent (the artist), or a multitude of agents, in the instance of collective works of art such as cathedrals. We cannot, in general, take up the point of view on the origination of an artefact which is the point of view of the artefact itself. Our natural point of vantage is that of the originating person, the artist, because we, also, are persons (ibid: 67p).

Gells main thrust is that certain objects present us with incomprehensible origins, and when we fail to grasp the forces and processes that brought them into existence, they appear to us as products of enchanted technologies:
In reconstructing the processes which brought the work of art into existence, he is obliged to posit a creative agency which transcends his own and, hovering in the background, the power of the collectivity on whose behalf the artist exercised his technical mastery (ibid: 1992: 52).

Such objects work as breaks on our minds and our mental processes, and from this resistance a desire to posses arises:
The resistance which they offer, and which creates and sustains this desire, is to being possessed in an intellectual way rather than a material sense, the difficulty I have in mentally encompassing their coming-into-being as objects in the world accessible to me by a technical process which, since it transcends my understanding, I am forced to construe as magical (ibid: 49).

271 The concept of abduction is crucial to Gells understanding of the type of inferences we make when we encounter works of art:
Abduction, though a semiotic concept (actually, it belongs to logic rather than semiotics) is useful in that it functions to set bounds to linguistic semiosis proper, so that we cease to be tempted to apply linguistic models where they do not apply, while remaining free to posit inferences of a non-linguistic kind. [...] the means we generally have to form a notion of the disposition and intentions of social others is via a large number of abductions from indexes which are neither semiotic conventions or laws of nature but something in between (1998: 15).

Gell makes no attempt to restrict his concept of agency, and sets no limit to the type of action involved. His main focus is on the polarity between entities, and the direction of this action whether it is physical or psychological (ibid: 66). In order to follow Gell further we must grasp his sets of positions and entities. There are two positions: agent and patient. An agent is a performer of social actions, and the agent acts on and has effect on patients. A patient is also a social agent, but in a patient position vis--vis an agent-in-action (agent in agent-position) (ibid: 21pp.). In addition to these positions, he presents four entities, index, artist, recipient and prototype, that may all enter positions as either agent or patient (ibid: 26p.): Indexes are material entities which motivate abductive inferences, cognitive interpretations, etc. This is the work of art, e.g. the artefact, and in my case, bronze artefacts are to be considered as indexes. Artists are those to whom are ascribed, by abduction, causal responsibility for the existence and characteristics of the index. Conventionally, artists are the painters, sculptures or bronze founders. Recipients are those in relation to whom, by abduction, indexes are considered to exert agency, or who exert agency via the index. Typically, recipients would be audience and spectators. Prototypes are entities held, by abduction, to be represented in the index, often by virtue of visual resemblance, but not necessarily. Typically, the person portrayed would be a prototype. These sets of positions and entities enhance our ability to explore nuances in dense, complex relational webs spun around an index. Gell illustrates the specific relationships and the direction of agency among these entities, by mathematical formulas and arrows (ibid: 28pp.).

272 Crucial to Gells perspective is that objects of art can exert agency, i.e. have an effect on someone. Such cases are illustrated by placing the index in an agent position at the left. The formula index (A) recipient (P) indicates a typical case, say a drawing (index and agent) makes (arrow signals agency) a spectator (recipient and patient) laugh. The A behind the index indicate that the index is in the agent position, and the P behind the recipient that it is in a patient position. The formula index (A) artist (P) indicates that, say a drawing (index and patient) makes (arrow) the one who is drawing (artist) laugh. Further examples demonstrate why the complex terminology is needed: index (A) prototype (P) indicates a typical case of volt-sorcery. Here an image (index and agent) is damaged in order to damage the one represented by the image (prototype and patient), say the doll representing a person being penetrated by needles in order to hurt the person portrayed. In cases were the art-object is in a patient position, the index is moved to the right. The formula artist (A) index (P) designates the obvious case of a painter (artist and agent) painting a picture (index and patient). The formula recipient (A) index (P) indicates a case e.g. when the employer of the painter, a patron (recipient), sees himself also as the author (agent) of the work (index and patient) made by his craftsmen (which are reduced to patients or mere tools). Another example would be cases in which spectators attribute creativity to themselves as spectators, as interpreters. The formula prototype (A) index (P) indicates a case in which the human mind is led to understand the man on the portrait (prototype and agent) as the agent, bringing the picture into being; and generally cases in which the portrayed is more significant than the portrayer. A final case illustrates the possibilities of the framework: index (A) index (P) was exemplified by Gell with a case in which yams among the Abelam of New Guinea are being indexed with agency in respect to themselves the yams is both agent and patient, it is self-made and a closed system of causation (ibid: 41pp.). Equipped with this framework I shall now explore how agency might have been abducted, shared and distributed in dense webs involving bronze artefacts in the Bronze Age.

10.2. Molten metal & malleable minds

How did people in the Bronze Age conceptualize bronze as a material substance in general? Students of the Bronze Age have for long recognized a metaphorical relationship between bronze and the sun. In a recent study of animism Willerslev argues that the metaphor model prevalent in anthropological studies, seemingly sympathetic to indigenous world-view, does not take the experience of the indigenous seriously. The scholar as a rule adds as if to

273 indigenous statements and he argues that they speak and think in metaphors (Willerslev
2007:2p.). Thus, if I am to do justice to the Bronze Age experience, I might have to link

bronze and sun in a more profound manner than we conventionally have done, and I might have to allow both sun and bronze a portion of personhood. What if bronze was sun? Not metaphorically, but actually part of the sun? And what if the sun was a lady? Since nonwestern perspectives on bronze are hard to come by in the literature, I have settled for some views on other cast metals, copper and gold. For the Aztec, gold was intimately linked to the sun-god Tonatiuh (He Who Makes the Day). The term for gold, cuztic teocuitlatl, literally means yellow divine excretions, thus probably the excretions of the solar-deity Tonatiuh. The nature of gold is further elaborated on in the Florentine: it derives from [the fact that] sometimes, in some places, there appears in the dawn something like a little bit of diarrhea...It was very yellow, very wonderful, resting like an ember, like molten gold (Hosler 1995: 106). A legend reveals similar beliefs among their western neighbours the Tarascans: [...] Seeing that yellow gold and white silver, Hiripan said, Look brothers, this yellow [metal] must be manure which the sun casts off, and that white metal must be manure cast of by the moon (Tudela 1977 in Hosler 1995: 105). Evidently Mesoamericans recognized gold and silver as the bodily excretions or manure from the sun and the moon (Hosler 1995: 105p.). The Aztec god of vegetation and patron of metal-workers, Xipe Totec (Our Flayed Lord), and those impersonating him, wore a skin flayed from a human sacrificial victim, and carried the chicauaztli, a rattle-stick with metallic bells, which attracted thunder and rain. In some renderings the rattle-stick is substituted with a snake. The name Xipe Totec might be derived from terms related to foreskin: to scrape or peel, to the head of penis and to layer; or it might also be interpreted as the dry husk containing a living seed (Townsend 2000: 121). The entire religious system of the Dogon, situated on the bend of Niger River in Mali, Western Africa, seems to rest on the correspondence: voice-spiral-copper-rain (Herbert 1984: 34, 282pp). In the Dogon myth of creation, the sun is surrounded by eight spirals of copper which are light and which give it its daily movement. These spirals are also considered to be the excrement of the god Nommo, and are equated with water and with the Word. The rays of the sun is called mnn di, water of copper. Mendi is also the name of a specific mountain containing both copper and water. This is a place were the souls of the dead go before the start on their journey south: [...] to provide themselves with copper to drink on their long voyage. The Dogon priest, the Hogon, is intimately linked to copper. He

274 is said to mediate between mankind and Lebe, the serpent. Lebe is descendant of both the seventh and eight ancestor (eight ancestors in total), and gives life to both man and the land by coming to the Hogon at night to lick him. The Hogon is referred to as impregnated with copper. Since he is like copper he cannot cross over any water because Nommo, being the owner of copper, will take back any copper passing over the waters reserved to him. Water and copper are thus of the same essence, both belonging to Nommo. The Dogon smith on the other hand, is said to be of a different biological status than the eight ancestral families. He was formed by the placenta of Nommo, and Nommo is the offspring of the creator god and the earth: Nommo and the smith are of red blood; Nommo and the smith are twins, both are red like copper (Herbert 1984: 34). The smith was thus even more intimately related to copper and Nommo than the priest, and he had moreover the ability to change himself into all sorts of beings, animals and vegetable (ibid: 33p., 282pp). One version of creation in Hindu religion speaks of the gods and devils trying to churn butter in the ocean. A mountain was used as a stick and a snake was used as a rope. One side was pulled by the gods, the other by the devils. After a long fight the devils won and received eternal life, amrit. But this victory turned into a fight among the devils. Vishnu appeared, disguised as a lady among the devils. He told them that he would distribute eternal life equally among the devils. Everyone agreed to this because of the beauty of the female body. However, the lady took the amrit and gave it to the gods instead, and gave alcohol to the devils. Shiva heard about this and wanted to meet this beautiful lady, and requested for Vishnu to help him. Vishnu showed Shiva the eternal life, and Shiva got extremely exited to meet this lady (Vishnu in disguise). The male sperm of Shiva were therefore spread all over the world, and this turned into gold and copper (Shirimadbhagt, The Teachings of Krishna, part 8, Ch. 12; in Anfinset 1996: 116). In the above cases, Aztec, Dogon and Hindu, metal (copper, gold) is linked intimately to the sun. Clearly, metaphors from the body are also dominant: the sun is conceptualized as a body which gives out (or has given out) excretions. In all three cases the consistency of these excretions are specified as fluids: like diarrhoea, as water and as male sperm. Liquids are moreover central in the form of life-giving rain among the Aztec, Dogon and as divine nectar/eternal life in the Hindu myth. The butter in the Hindu case is somewhere in the process of shifting from fluid to solid. The central entities in the Hindu opening scene: mountain, butter and ocean might in fact be recognized as hard, soft, and fluid; and the snake as the momentum of change. This focus on consistency is reminiscent of

275 one of two Egyptian creation scenes: Ra sat on a mound in the primordial waters masturbating, ejaculated (in another version he spat), and produced Shu (air) and Tefnut (moisture). Shu and Tefnut then mated and Shu gave birth to earth and sky. Earth and Sky engaged in continuous copulation and had to be separated by their mother, who placed them on earth and in the sky respectively (Budge 1912: 4pp.). In the other version, it is the crafting god Ptah who moulds man, the sun and the moon, and hammer out the copper sky (Mackenzie 1915: 31). Herbert describes an interesting correspondence between the historical use and spread of gold, and the status of gold in indigenous philosophies. Gold was generally little valued in African societies at the time of colonial contact (1984: 296). Commercial currents centred on coastal Senegambia in Western Africa, seem to have introduced gold eastwards through the Niger Valley. Thus, on the western coast gold did have a central position in myths and rituals. More distant to these impulses, the Bambara considered gold as:
[...] one of the metals belonging to Faro, the deity of the Niger, and is worn in jewellery as the symbol of purity and changelessness. In the cosmology of the Word, it seems to have preempted the primacy of copper, enabling Faro to hear the most secret and powerful utterances (ibid: 298).

The Dogon, to a large degree cut off from these impulses, classified gold:
[...] as the younger brother of copper, and this may symbolize exactly what happened historically. [...] ritual and myth are no more static than any other aspect of culture [...] (ibid: 298).

The above perspectives on metals must be recognized as products of history, of long and complex trajectories of transmission and negotiation over the meaning and nature of metal. But neither of them is the testimony from the perspective of individual metalworkers. Rather they are all presented as shared bodies of knowledge handed down orally through generations, before being written down by religious specialists, historians and ethnographers. I am thus seeking to highlight the events and persons particularly important in the generative formation of collective knowledge, in the continuous process of making tradition and cosmology (Barth 1989: 84). I am trying to treat these cases as Gabriel Tarde treated scientific laws or philosophical systems (cf. chapt.1): they must be seen as originating in the minds of individuals, put forward as oral utterances, acts and artefacts, and spread to the minds of others. We cannot say exactly whose individual perspectives have come to dominate in these specific cases (priests, metalworkers, chiefs, kings etc.); but I propose that they all originated in direct bodily engagement with metal and metal casting, i.e. that they

276 carry remnants of the metalworkers experience, mind and word. I believe practical experience with metal casting is the crucial element explaining the focus on metal as fluids and as out-of-container elements, and the focus on skins and container-change (skinshedding) in these cases. Moreover, they all tie metal to solar movement and solar intentions. Metal seems thus to have been part of explorations into the causes and intentions of the moving sun. The sun is in all three cases considered as an entity with human-like intentions and body-like functions. I propose that the above metaphors and myths reflect and highlight different stages in metal biographies: the linking of copper to water in the Dogon case highlights copperartefacts in their coming-into-being and copper in its liquid state. This could be seen as a result of the strong influence of the Dogon smiths in the creative process of myth-making, myth-keeping and myth-distribution; their perspectives have come to dominate over others. The relationship between gods, priests and smiths is particularly revealing in the Dogoncase. The Dogon smith is described as being of the same blood as Nommo (from the placenta of, being the twin of), and he was not subjugated to a taboo forbidding him to cross water. The Dogon priest was merely impregnated with copper, and unable to cross water because Nommo (also being water) would take back his copper by right. Clearly, the priest seems to have a superficial (skin deep) relation to copper (and the gods of creation) compared to the smith who shared a biological origin with copper (and the gods of creation). This relational web spun between smith, priest, water, sun, copper and oral speech (word) could be interpreted as the temporary outcome of a continuous process of competitive oral speech in which smith and priest, powerful individuals and institutions, make claims of relationships to non-human forces and mythological precedence; a cosmology in the making that has artificially been frozen by the writings of ethnographers, historians and religious teachers. I take my cue to an exploration into concepts of bronze in the Bronze Age from the sun in comparative Indo-European mythology (West 2007). The sun is best treated as a complex of several intimately related entities in IE mythology: the sun, dawn, night, sister of the sun, and daughter of the sun. Although there is variation on the themes and characteristics of these entities, there are also striking similarities. Most of the southern IE myths describe the sun itself as male, but those intimately related to him, such as dawn, night, sister and daughter of the sun, as female. In northern Europe (i.e. Baltic, Germanic, Old Norse, Irish) on the other hand the sun itself is also female, possibly a reflection of an

277 older substratum (West 2007: 196). Possibly, in practical terms, Mycenaeans and northerners disagreed on this specific issue; and as this myth was brought from south to north after c. 2000 BC northerners adapted many aspects of it on to their all female sun. Regardless of gender the sun is ascribed two interesting abilities: she sees, and she rolls. This is evidenced also in Norse mythology, e.g. in the poetic phrases suns of the forehead for eyes, roaming wheel for moon and beautiful wheel for sun (ibid: 199p.). The sun riding in a wheeled chariot pulled by horses is evidenced in Norse, Vedic, Greek, as well as in a range of other IE myths. Many texts also indicate a more complex transport system of the sun: chariot during day and boat during night (ibid: 208p.). The early IE sun in the north seems thus to be an all-seeing female sun travelling by both chariot and boat. I suspect that the early Mycenaean-Alpine interactions that I highlighted in the previous chapter involved the transmission of novel perspectives on the sun. I also suspect that concepts of the sun were intimately linked to metal. There seems to have been a specific focus on the combination of different metals in the Alpine material at this time and in western Central Europe in the following centuries (e.g. the sky disc from Nebra). Possibly this attention to metallic variation and combination reflects even more detailed sun-myths involving sun, moon, Venus, the Pleiades and other celestial phenomena, as well as copper, tin, gold (cf. also ibid: 233 for the entanglement of Venus and the Moon in stories of the sundaughter and the Twin Horsemen). If so, these perspectives are also likely to have been relevant to the first introduction of bronze to NW Scandinavia: both the Vevang axe and the Blindheim sword can be linked directly to this environment. The specific link between horse, sun, wheel and chariot, though, is not evidenced in the Nordic Zone until the Trundholmchariot in BA II, and the imagery from Kivik in late BA II. I suspect that the Unnesetcarving represent the introduction of further specifics of this myth, and that it was spread through the CSWS across the highlands 1340-1300 BC from the Swedish east-coast. Although the Unneset chariot points to Mlardalen or stergtland, the same myth was probably introduced via the North Way from Northern Zealand (chapt. 6.5, 9.2.3). From this I take it as likely that the sun in the Nordic Bronze Age was a female, and that she was not self-propelled but moved by other forces. Also in the case of the Aztec and the Dogon the sun did not move by its own forces, but by the breath of gods and the spiral rays of copper and water. If bronze was considered as actually part of the sun, e.g. actually bodily excretion of a sun with personhood, there would have been a female aspect to bronze. Bronze might thus have been considered fragments of a sun-goddess Sol. Above I

278 have argued that our concepts of the world are shaped by our experience of being in bodies, and our bodily experience with the world outside. Thus, concepts of both bronze and sun were modelled on such experiences. Since the sun was familiar to all at every stage in prehistory, one crucial question should be: how were concepts of the sun remodelled on basis of bodily engagements with bronze from c. 1700 BC onwards?

10.3. Birth of bronzes

In chapters 7 I attempted to close in on bronze casting with particular focus on projects carried out in NW Scandinavia. I shall now have another look at those entities and potential agents involved in the coming-into-being of bronzes, and explore how human artists extended their minds into these projects. In order to appreciate the sharing of agency in bronze casting, one must appreciate the risk of failure. And this is crucial, since bronze casting in our modern world tends to be placed on the hard bank of the river alongside the science of nature, and it presents itself typically through hard matters of facts: melting points only experienced through a temperature gauge, gasses not visible to the human eye, internal structure seen only through microscope etc. Through the citing of these matters of fact as well as the citing of successful experiments; we create the impression that once the proper procedures have been learned, when doing everything right, the intended index will appear. Natural science produces matters of fact through working, testing and learning in controlled environments. In these settings agents are separated in wanted and unwanted categories, and the laboratory typically attempts through repetition and experiments to control and stabilize agents keeping the majority constant, while varying a few, ideally one at a time. Such a procedure is close to impossible outside the laboratory, without measuring devices, clocks, writing, complex systems of calculation etc. Metallurgy diverges from most other prehistoric technologies precisely in its involvement of the many. Indeed, bronze casting diverged from the bodyclub-flint assembly of the LN. Therefore, bronze casting has been and still is an art of surprise: no modern or pre-modern founder outside the laboratory would feel confident when about to open a mould for a belt plate like that of Vigrestad or Rege. There are still, even in a modern foundry, too many small things that might fail, too many agents involved. Thus, Ammen states that when ever getting an order for a novel complex shape, his foundry used the first casting as a guinea-pig, admitting in advance that the first attempt would most likely be a failure, and instead planned on learning the most from studying the flaws (1979: 150).

279

The insecurity is of course intensified by the fact that the crucial phase of transformation, molten metal taking its shape, are closed off from direct sensory experience since it goes on inside the mould. One of Alfred Gells examples of possible cases of abduction of agency, concerns the painter and his tools; the paint, the palettes etc. When a painter gets sufficiently attached to his tools, he might hesitate to use others, even if they are of the exact same brand and type. He has started distributing agency among his tools, and this, I believe, is typical of an artist engaging in a technology in which he experience the outcome as uncertain, and the variables to be vast in number. As we have already seen, the tools of the bronze caster, compared to the pencils and palette of the painter, are much more inclined to be seen as autonomous agents working in cooperation with the bronze caster: fire, furnace, fuel, bellow, crucible, mould, tuyere etc. (cf. chapt. 7). We should therefore list them as potential agents and as potential artists in Bronze Age minds.

10.3.1. Breath of Celestial Horses

Bellows are simply containers that are rhythmically filled and emptied of air. It is likely that the development in Europe went from simple skin-bags to composite bellows with top and bottom made from wood, the latter at least present in the early Middle Age (Tylecote 1987: 115). In both these variants the skin was the essential flexible part that allowed filling and emptying that made them able to breathe. A verse from the Lay of Vlund, of the Old Norse poetry, is interesting in this respect. Master-smith Vlund was captured by King Nidud in the land of Svitjod, and forced to craft under his patronage. He was hamstrung (sinews severed at knees) and placed on an island to keep him from fleeing. Vlund rebelled and took a cruel revenge, indeed. He killed the two sons of King Nidud, made their crania and their eyes into jewellery and sent them to the king and the queen, and then he raped the queen and made her pregnant. Vlund now speaks to King Nidud:
32. To the smithy go, which thou has made, there wilt thou the bellows find with blood besprinkled, The heads I severed of thy boys, and under the prison's mixen laid their bodies28

280 Why are the bellows stained with blood? It might simply be because he killed the sons within the smithy. It is also worth considering an alternative scenario in light of the creative nature of Volunds actions: he has not merely raped but made pregnant, not merely beheaded but made crania and eyes into jewellery. The bellows with blood besprinkled might indicate that they were made from the skin of the two sons. Looking at the different translations of this verse, in Norwegian, Swedish and Danish there seems to be some variance in the description of what happened to the bodies: the Swedish translation state that it is the bones, not the bodies that are put, not under the mixen, but under the water-pit of the bellows. The Norwegian states that the bodies are simply thrown into the corner. It might thus have been the contents, i.e. the skinned carcasses that were thrown away. In the Norwegian language is still preserved the word belgfling, i.e. bellow-skinning. It designates a specific procedure of skinning in which the abdomen is not cut open in the conventional manner. In stead the head is cut of, and incisions made around all four legs. Air is then forced by mouth in between the skin and the muscle-tissue, and gradually the entire skin is released from the body, and the content is taken out through the opening at the throat. The procedure produces a nearly ready-made bag, with one large and five small openings: the throat, the four legs and the rectum. This practice was in recent history used particularly for airtight floats at sea (Lightfoot 2007). Similar procedures seem to have been common around the world for water-bags and bellows. Anfinset refer to the use of such bellows and comparable skinning procedures in Nepal (1996: 50). The myth of Meketa and the First Blacksmith's Bellows from the Kono district in Sierre Leone, deals specifically with the origin of bellows and forced air:
[...] The hunter had his nets spread in the forest, and this deer got caught in the net. When the hunter came and saw the deer and was going to kill it, the deer told him that if he killed it, he should give its skin to a blacksmith. The hunter killed the deer, skinned it, tied the skin at the neck and at the back, and went home. When he got home, the youngest brother was making knives at the fire and the hunter threw the skin down by the fireside and told his brother about the wonderful deer. The hunter was tired and he sat down on the skin, which was full of air. When he sat on it the air came out and blew up the fire. The youngest cried out at once, Then I will be a blacksmith. This is how the first bellows was made, and the blacksmith got his trade (Scheub 2002).

My intention with the above is to propose an intimate link between the simple skin-bellow and the living (animal-)body, and that the conceptualization of the bellows as breathing

281 bodies is close at hand. Bellows might thus have been linked to forced air, containerconcepts and the animal in Bronze Age minds. Breath is often considered as breath of life and the essential sign of life or soul. Stone nozzles for historical bellows in Norway, was termed avlstein, literally breeding-stone. These are known from the Late Iron Age, decorated as a human face with the nozzle as mouth (Gansum 2004: 144pp.; stigrd 2007: 176). These nozzle-stones thus imply a logic of forging as creation, breeding, procreation, and that bellows provided an essential element of life-giving breath. The attributes of human faces could be taken as support for my suggestion above that Vlund actually operated with bellows made from human skins from the sons of Nidud. The bellows as a potential agent in the making of bronzes might thus be seen as a modified animal body: a shell still breathing but under human control. In the LBA there are interesting clues to specify these general concepts. The tuyeres from Polleben, SachsenAnhalt C., Balslev, Odense C. and Pryssgrden, stergtland C. are fashioned with eyes, noses, nozzles as mouths and manes. The specimens from Mrigen and Thorsager, Randers C. have no facial attributes, but manes with semi-circles that might be interpreted as some kind of harness or reigns (Thrane 2006; Goldhahn 2007: fig. 101; Jantzen 2008: Abb. 76; Engedal 2009: 42). Thus, it would seem that Bronze Age bellows were linked specifically to the horse, and the air current to horse-breath. The paired bellows, synchronized to an almost continuous breath, might have taken on the concept of paired horses, and potentially the panting team of horses in front of the sun-chariot. Potentially horse-teams pulling the chariot of the sun-goddess was paralleled by paired bellows bringing bronze to a molten state. It is also interesting to note that the Aztecs saw the breath of the gods as the motivating factor of the sun. This might reflect a notion that forced air from bellows moves metal from a solid to a liquid state. This is in accordance with the perspective that we have a basic understanding of changes as movements the change from solid to liquid as a temporal movement (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 140, 157).

10.3.2. Vehicle of the Sun

The crucible, although among the smaller tools and with the most rugged looks, has always been an essential and most demanding element in the casting of metals with high meltingpoints. Bronze can very well be cast into a soapstone mould but it cannot be melted in a soapstone crucible. This is because the crucible will be exposed to such extreme temperatures that no material could with-stand it only compounds. Quartz and clay was the ultimate combination for crucibles until the MA in Scandinavia (cf. Tylecote 1987: 189pp.;

282 Goldhahn 2007: 124). These have rather opposite qualities: clay can shift back and forth from solid to liquid according to humidity, and evidently it shifted from solid to liquid at extreme temperatures. Quartz is hard, it crushes and splinters when hit, but it never leaves the hard, solid state. The crucible-shape is a simple container often specified with a spout (cf. Jantzen 2008: nr.48-243). A spout will face left for the right-handed as he tends to pour towards the left and the centre of his body. The crucial transformation from solid but fragmented pieces of bronze to a homogeneous liquid, takes place in the crucible. This could be considered the first of three missions of the crucible: providing a container for the shift from solid to liquid, receiving bronze as it moves into fluidity. The second mission is to keep and contain the molten bronze on the journey from the furnace underneath the mouth of the tuyere, towards the mould outside the furnace. The final mission is to fill the mould, to pour, relieve itself and give. The threefold mission of the crucible is to receive, to transport and to relieve. The crucible is thus the crucial vehicle and link between the spatially separated loci of furnace and mould, between the locus of melting and that of pouring. Visually, the crucible goes into the furnace in a cold grey state and is hidden underneath dark charcoal. When it is again revealed, it is bright yellow and the transportation of it creates a glowing arch from the heat centre of the hearth to the mould, which is grey-black if soapstone or red and glowing if clay. Liquids are essentially in need of vessels as external bodies, they are bodiless. Bronze was, like the sun-goddess, not self-propelled and not self-contained in this manner. The chariot and ship may not have been merely means of transport for increased speed, but vessels essentially containing and keeping the sun-goddess. She might have been, like bronze, molten; and like Nommo of the Dogon, she might have been sun, metal and water at the same time. The crucible could thus be recognized as the body of bronze while bronze is in a state in which it cannot contain itself, when it is bodiless and fluid. The chariot and the ship might thus be seen essentially as different bodies of the sun-goddess fitted to the different terrain of her diurnal journey sky, sea and underworld. Pure speculation, indeed, but if crucibles had been able to carry decoration and complex morphology, like the tuyeres, they might very well have been fashioned as chariots or ships. Actually, in Greek poetry and art the sun seems not to travel in a ship across water, but rather in a cup, bowl or goblet: [...] winged, by Hephaestus intricately wrought, in precious gold as he in grateful sleep skimms oer the water from the Hesperides (West 2007: 208). Thus, in the scenery of bronze

283 artefact-coming-into-being, the crucible is the receiver, the prime mover, and the deliverer the body of bronze.

10.3.3. Body of Fire

The furnace need not be a very complex structure (cf. chapt. 7.2.5). Its main purpose is to keep and concentrate heat, fire and the charcoal that nurtures fire preventing it from diffusing into the surroundings, and focus its energies on the narrow locus of the crucible. The main problem with using a simple pit, is that the walls of the pit will not stay vertical. The fire-heat will tend to have a larger width-height ratio because of the walls made from sand or earth. Thus, the purpose of the clay lined furnace might be specified to focus fire and heat horizontally, while extending it vertically keeping fire and heat high rather then wide, to gather, keep together and contain fire. The contents of the furnace, beside the crucible, might be recognized as fourfold: charcoal (fuel), ashes, the flames (fire) and air (breath from the bellows). This is best explored as a process: bright grey to white ash is a by-product of the fusion of black fuel, red-yellow-white flame and colourless air. The formation of ash is closely synchronized with the dwindling and shrinking of the fuel and the play of flames. There is also a clearly sensed process of fragmentation running parallel to the colour change: larger pieces of black fuel turning into fragile brighter fragments and then into powdery still brighter ash. Flames and fire exist and depend on this process of fragmentation and decomposition. The furnace is a container into which black fuel and colourless breath enters and from which bright ashes leave. This feeding and defecating combined with the heated, lively play of flames within, might be understood in light of basic bodily experiences of containment. The living fire eats black charcoal and defecates white ash; it consumes, transforms and cleanses. If the crucible is to be seen as being the body of bronze in its molten state, then the furnace would essentially be the body of fire, i.e. the body of IE god of fire Agni or at least a variation on him.

10.3.4. Body In-Between

The mould is first and foremost a container whose inside defines the final shape of bronze as it solidifies; it defines and determines the new body of bronze. This is one mission of the mould: to shape bronze. Another mission of the mould is to hold, keep and protect bronze as it goes from a liquid state to solid. This purpose is analogues to the crucible's mission to hold, keep and protect bronze as it changes from solid to liquid. The third mission of the

284 mould is to receive bronze, to let bronze enter. This became evident through the trials and simulations: bronze do not always enter the mould without problems, sometimes the culprit was the metal but sometimes it was the mould (cf. App. VI). This might easily be conceptualized in the way that bronze does not enter because there is already something in the mould. This is also a modern scientific explanation: the air within the mould must in some way escape in order for bronze to enter. Moisture could also be still left in the mould and this certainly tends to reject bronze. Thus, one mission of the mould is also to allow its contents to escape. That this was recognized in the Bronze Age is clearly demonstrated by the moulds from Sllerd, Kbenhavn C. and Rbelf, Skne C. On the parting faces of these valves channels had been cut as paths for the airy insides to escape (Jantzen 2008: nr. 140; Montelius 1917: nr.1183). It seems also clear that the soft-moulding techniques using the medium of clay-sand-dung compounds, were designed to let the inside air escape right through the porous mould-walls, and not through a complex gate-system like those used in modern moulds. The dropping of a lump of wax into the red-hot preheated mould in the last second before pouring is one way of making the mould receive the molten bronze, used by Nepalese bronze founders (cf. Anfinset 1996: 86pp.). One explanation of this would be that the hostile and repellent agent residing inside the mould is turned friendly and receptive by this gift of wax. The violent flame that the wax creates might be seen as Agni, or a related agent of fire, entering and consuming the hostile agent for a gift of wax. Through the simulations I have pondered on ways of making the mould better receive bronze and ridding itself of its contents. While not in control of all variables, and not in the possession of scientific understanding of them, I readily imagine that this could be the source of a multitude of ways of conceptualizing the mould. Were lies the problem, which agent exerted the negative influence on the process: was it the size of the nozzle in the tuyere, or a too eager bellower, i.e. putting to much air into the bronze (bad breath)? Was there already to much air in the bronze in the first place (bad bronze)? Was the mould not burned through (bad body)? Not enough organic temper (bad dung)? Or did I execute the pouring to hasty? Although there are many possible agents, the most immediate to blame is the discontent mould reluctant to make an exchange of its contents. The soapstone mould from Eide has a rare reference to other types of vessels (cf. M 18). Its outside upper part is shaped into a rim reminiscent to those found on contemporary domestic vessels made from either soapstone or asbestos-tempered clay (cf. gotnes 1986; Pil 1990). The design of the Eide mould might thus be a link to the logic of cooking,

285 serving and eating/drinking. Following this argument strictly, the Eide mould would best have attained features of the human body (the receiver), rather than those of the cookingserving vessels. A further clue to this logic appears if we look at the mould and its workings as process. The mould was, like the crucible, the body of bronze as long as bronze remained liquid, boundless and bodiless. But still inside the mould, bronze solidifies and attains a body of its own, it is again able to hold itself together. At this point the mould has become a somewhat superfluous body of a bronze body, much in the same way as mother and child about to give birth, or the snake before shedding its skin. In this way, there might also have been available a logic of mould gives body, or mould serves body to the bronze artefact. In this way, I arrive at the following logic: fire and breath release bronze from its body; crucible receives bodiless bronze and serves it to mould, mould receives bronze and serves the new axe. The moving of substance into containers might thus have been conceptualized as serving and giving: the serving of food to the fire-god (charcoal into furnace), the serving of essence to body (bronze to mould), from one vessel to another. Such logic seems particularly fitted to the casting of the socketed axe which seems to be a clear-cut container in itself. The mould from Randaberg (M 25) carried a decorative mark on its outside, a symbol I suspect was borrowed from Arctic axes, i.e. the eyes of the face-like Ananino axes (cf. chapt. 7.8.5, 9.4). Why could it not be placed on the insides? What good did it do on the outside? I propose that it was made by northerners staying at Jren, and that the facial attributes (eyes, hair) characteristic of Ananino axes was toned down in this new environment. That the eye still was included at the back of a mould might indicate that the facial attributes of Ananino axes were not merely about ornamentation, nor about the axe as a head, but also about them acting as creative agents in the process of casting. The eye might thus have been carved on the back of the Randaberg valve in order to safeguard the casting, and make the mould receptive and friendly towards bronze; or it might have called upon and drawn in an agent capable of safeguarding the project. Although socketed axes are more readily seen as containers, I propose that all bronze artefacts were conceptualized as having bodies/skins and contents. If so, the mould has three missions: to receive bodiless bronze, to shape/mould bronze-bodies, and to serve bronze to its final bronze-body.

286

10.3.5. Making bronze artefacts

I am now in position to explore the coming into being of bronzes as series of dense webs involving multiple potential agents, and subject these webs to Alfred Gell's analytical framework. An important interpretative step has been made that separates bronze body from bronze content, designating liquid bronze as bodiless bronze in need of alternative bodies. On the basis of the above explorations, five important non-human agents could be sketched (cf. Fig. 10): o BB 1 (the bronze body) o BB 2 (the crucible as a body of bronze) o BB 3 (the mould as body of bronze) o B (bronze as content) o F (Fire) o HB (Horse Breath, forced air from tuyere and bellows) o H (human artist in charge of handling and pouring of crucible) Let us first take the conventional perspective of bronze as something being made; and place bronze as an index in the patient position at the far right in a formula. In a conventional distribution of agency to the above agents, the human agent takes a dominant place: (H (HB F BB2- BB3)) (A) BB1/B (P). This describes a case in which a human artist is the main agent harnessing the non-human agents as mere tools and exerting agency through them onto bronze as an index and patient. Keeping both the human artist and bronze at the far left and right respectively, a formula that differentiates the non-human agents can be made: (H (HB-F) (BB2-BB3)) (A) B (P). In this case, fire and air takes precedence over crucible and mould in the transformation of bronze, highlighting the melting of bronze. This might be fairly self-evident, but as soon as something goes wrong this formula might be turned around. The melting of bronze is a challenge relative indifferent of the kind of artefacts made, its complexity relates to amounts of bronze rather then complexity of the bronze artefact to be made. Thus, most metalworkers are likely to develop relatively stable and predictable results in this phase. Thus, the founder skilled in axe-casting failing in his initial attempts to make a belt plate, is likely to blame the other end of the project: entities and actions linked to the mould. This would appear to be a mould refusing to receive bronze properly.

287

Fig. 10. Agents in bronze casting in light of Bronze Age imagery and IE mythology

Ammens hesitation to cast copper on a rainy day (Ammen 2000: 244), could be made into an example. In the Bronze Age such moist air would have entered through the bellows and tuyere as moist breath. If the real culprit was located (in our view), this would look something like: (Rain HB) (H-F-BB2-B3) (A) BB1/B (A). Rain has made the bellows produce bad breath which again has made angry bronze (cf. blowy metal, chapt. 7.1). But such gassed bronze is rarely noticed before pouring, but rather when pouring or when opening the mould. The immediate suspect in such a case might thus often be the BB2, the mould as body of bronze: BB2 (A) B (P). If so, this reverses the entire formula, and place the entire HB-H-F-BB2 complex in the dark: the main observation made is that the mould is not willing to accept the bronze served. From this, the founder might have concluded that the problem was either angry/bad/gassed bronze or angry/bad/moist/airtight mould. But to move from this insight, to locate the real culprit (rain) would take the founder searching from one end to the other of the dense, but still immense web of agents involved in

288 the project: was it the clay used or some of the additives, some mishap in the long trajectory from clay in the ground to mould; was there something in the air?; and on and on. Seeking the cause of flaws in bronze casting outside the laboratory is a complex venture. Thus, the higher degree of risk and potential failure in the mind of the artist, the more he would put in revere his fellow non-human agents: fire (and its food and body), breath, crucible, mould; and the further to the left he would have placed them in a Gellian formula. This might easily lead to restrictions on the human agents involved and their behaviour: humans must bend to the needs and cravings of the non-humans. It might also have led to a general avoidance of melting bronze when the storm-god let its semen fall as rain to fertilize the earth (cf. West 2007: 181, 244p.). It is possible to describe the nature of the agency exerted on to bronze as patient in more detail. The immediate results of the exertions, is a 1) shift from solid to fluid to solid again (a full cycle in consistency), a 2) shift from grey to red to bright yellow and back again (a cycle of colours in centre of furnace), a 3) move from furnace to mould (spatial movement), a d) shift from bronze-body to crucible-body to mould-body to bronze-body (a series of skin sheddings). It is a change or rather a cycle with an extreme phase (bright, fluid, hot, bodiless) and a return, but not entirely to the point of departure since there is a permanent spatial movement (furnace to mould), and since there is a permanent morphological shift, bronze did not return to its original shape, but attained a new, and different bodily shape. These characteristics could easily be compared to the cycle of the sun, both its diurnal and its annual cycle (Fig. 10). Who is the prototype? Although the axe being made might have other axes as prototypes, bronze might also be seen as having the changing sun as a prototype. We might thus include the sun as a prototype both in the patient and agent position. A reversed case is: (H (HB-F) (BB1-BB2)) B (A) SUN (proto) (P). Here, the sun is the index and patient onto which agency is exerted, while bronze is moved to the agent-side, as a means to influence the sun. Thus, bronze as index would be a patient relative to the coalition of agents to the left, while at the same time be in the agent position relative to the sun at the right. This is a specification of Gells general formula index (A) prototype (P), designated as the classic case of volt-sorcery, i.e. the manipulation of an entity (prototype) through direct manipulation of a model (index) of it. The bond between the index and the prototype is often considered to be strengthened if the index incorporates elements from the prototype. The incorporation of nails, hair etc. from the prototype in the voodoo-doll, is a case in point. The

289 Aztec, the Dogon and the Hindu all described copper and gold as, if not parts of the sun, than at least its excrement or semen. If our Bronze Age artists and recipients shared this basic concept, of the sun as a celestial body with contents, and bronze as a part of these contents, this afforded a qualified link between index and prototype for such volt-sorcery. Bronze casting might thus have been performed with less attention towards the specific kind of artefact made. What was important was the successful exertion of agency through bronze onto the sun. The agency exerted onto the sun might have been similar to that exerted onto bronze: an exertion to make a spatial movement, to shift colour, to shift consistency and to shift bodies and to shift shape to make its cycle. This would indicate that molten bronzein-crucible-between-furnace-and-mould equals hot-summer-sun-at-cenit. If sun is considered to be in danger at dawn/spring and dusk/fall, it might equal the final melting and withdrawal of crucible and the pouring and solidification. Thus, if we put the prototype/sun in the patient position towards index/bronze, we would also suspect that the purpose of the agency is to safeguard and aid the movement of the sun at critical passages. Making a bronze artefact, might have been a strategy for calling upon a series of agents, in order to manipulate, safeguard, and aid the diurnal and annual renewal of sun and cosmological order. This would place bronze casting alongside other strategies for similar purposes: dancing, singing, poetry, sacrifice etc. In light of the Greek and Vedic myths of Daughter of the Sun being liberated by her brothers in horse-drawn chariots, the work of the bellows might be paralleled in the liberation of the Sun or Dawn from her imprisonment at sunrise (West 2007: 227, page 189 and 230 for arguments that the Greek Helen corresponds to the Vedic Daughter of the Sun). Liberation of the sun from containment equals bringing bronze out of its stiff solidity; sun proper is the creative free-running sun on sky, like bronze proper is the molten bronze in crucible. From this I suspect that there might have been something inside the bronze axe, something like a creative force, an essence of bronze that could be set free, released, liberated. This corresponds to the notion of bronze artefacts as bodies with contents (cf. above). It would also be possible to reverse the positions of prototype and index, seeing sun as an agent exerting agency onto bronze: SUN (proto) (H (HB-F) (BB1-BB2)) (A) B (P). This formula indicates a case in which the prototype of the index being made is considered as the main creative agent in the making. The potential of such a case is largest in a case were other potential agents are hidden. We might take the position of a recipient other than the artist, one that encounters a piece of art beyond his own abilities and

290 understandings. Such a recipient might move attention from the agency exerted by artist onto bronze, which he is unable to imagine, reconstruct and visualize, and focus instead on the necessity of other more powerful agents such as the prototype the sun. Through such an abduction of agency the sun is shifted to the far left, and the recipient interprets the artefact as sun-made, or that the sun has worked through a human artist. Alternatively, the human artist is placed at the far left, and the recipient interprets the artefact as made by a human artist in control of not merely bronze, fire and breath, but of the sun-goddess herself. Such workings are important in order to explore how persons making and wearing bronzes are conceptualized by different categories of recipients. The true artist (human founder) might thus become an agent/tool of the sun, he might wield the sun as a tool or he might manipulate the sun through bronze. The sun went regularly through phases of darkness in the underworld/sea at night and winter, small cycles within large cycles. Danger is here linked to darkness; while safety is growth and light. In Old Norse mythology the wolves Skll and Hati chase the sun, and the name of one of the horses of her chariot (Arvak, early-awake) indicates that this occur, in line with the Vedic and Greek versions (featuring Dawn or Daughter of the Sun), at dawn (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 297, note 13). Kaul has argued extensively for the dangerous transitions of the sun at dawn and dusk, and the importance of a range of agents and helpers along its cycle: ship, horse, fish, bird and snake (Kaul 1998; 2004). This extensive set of helpers indicate that the sun has to pass through several critical transitions, that it has to be moved by other agents and even that it is not self-contained (rather in need of external containers). The cycle of the sun is seen as a risky movement through several stages. This all-powerful but still in-danger entity might have been paralleled in the domain of earthly females, as well as in bronze technology. The panting horse-team draws bronze up, liberates it, and wakes it into a molten, shimmering state with regenerative potential. They are the horse-team of the Dioskures, the heavenly twins, liberating the sun-goddess and drawing her onto the sky. The crucible and the mould are vessels that safe keep and transport bronze, in line with the chariot and the ship. E.g. the scene at Unneset actually embraces a boat to the immediate right of the chariot, possibly a reference to the shift in transport for the sun. On this foundation I shall move on to explore some of the specific indexes from the Bronze Age. I will highlight the humans most directly available to us, the recipients in possession of bronzes, and explore how they might have understood themselves and how recipients and artists understood them. Bronzes in action will generally be held or wore by

291 human beings, and thus be considered integral parts of the entire costume and even extensions of the human body. For this reason I structure this investigation according to two major categories of human beings, female and male.

10.4. Sticky spirals and tempting waists

I have argued that Bronze Age concepts of both sun and metal were modelled on the human body, and grounded in specifics of bodily experiences with the world. I suspect that there was a tight link between the concept of the sun and bronze, that both had female aspects, and that they were both modelled on the female body. The female body is characterized and distinguished from male bodies, by out-of-container phenomena of menstruation, child-birth, and breast-feeding, and their attributes of sexual organs and breasts. In light of their capacity for reproduction, female bodies may be grouped into pre-fertile, fertile and post-fertile. The female in her fertile phase, is distinguished from all other categories of humans, in that she is governed by short and long cycles of menstruation and child-birth, both marked by bloodletting and out-of-container phenomena. The preserved textiles from the Danish oak-coffins provide us with two distinct female costumes: one with a short skirt and short loose hair, and another with a long skirt and long hair arranged in a complex hairstyle. The Egtvedt coffin contained a female, 16-18 years of age in a short skirt; while the Skydstrup coffin contained a female 18-20 years of age and Borum Eshj a female in her 50s or 60s, both with a long dress and long hair in complex hairstyle (Bergerbrandt 2007: 54pp.). We might thus generalize and assume that there was a shift in the costume of females at the age of c. 17-19, and that two female gender categories are reflected in burials (ibid: 63p.). The short skirt/short hair costume might be linked to a fertile un-married or fertile not-mother stage; and the long skirt/coiffure might be linked to a married or mother stage. There are few clear indications of the specifics of work-division between gender and age categories in the Bronze Age. There are two likely links between females and loom-weights and weaving, one from Denmark (Broholm 1946: burial 1399), and in the burial from Nese (bur. 67). There is a significant link between males, axes and weaponry seen both in burials and rock art. I propose that in the Nordic Bronze Age there existed a pattern of work-division that linked the female to weaving, food-processing and pottery, and thus to wool, clay and cereals, cloth, containers and foods. At hearth of the concept of female was the capacity to reproduce, and to contain and safeguard a child to be born, and the female body was therefore the ultimate container.

292 There are mainly two artefact categories that are exclusive to female burials: neck collars and belt plates. Since skeletal remains are rare and female figures are rare in rock art, this means that the females from the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia that are clearly visible to us, are those nine buried with neck-collars or belt plates: Vigrestad, Rege I, Rykkja I, Gjrv, Kleppe II, Srheim, Orre, Tjtta and S-Braut (bur. 4, 20, 55, 70, 72, 77, 78, 82, 92). To these might be added Bore I (bur. 63) with a small bronze tube similar to the one from Rege I, most likely used as accessory for the short corded skirt. Also the burial from Nese could be assigned as female (bur. 67, with tutuli and female bones). Finally, I would add the cap-stone from Kyrkje-Eide decorated with what I have interpreted as female accessories including a short corded skirt (cf. chapt. 5.3). These women are illustrated in Fig. 12. I have argued that these burials date from late BA II (Vigrestad, Rykkja, Gjrv, Kleppe) and from BA III (Srheim, Rege, Tjtta, Bore, Nese, while Orre is dated to late BA II or III), and that they were part of two distinct wide webs: the first was linked to groups in Northern Zealand that were also heavily engaged in the Lneburg area (cf. chapt. 6.5); the second was linked to Northern Jutland and these females seem to have combined new artefacts from Jutland with old heirlooms from Zealand (cf. chapt. 6.6). With an exploration of the belt plate and the spiral I will attempt to do justice to how these females experienced bronze and how other spectators experienced them when wearing their bronze accessories. Compared to other Nordic females, the Gjrv, Rykkja and Vigrestad women carried extremely large and visible jewellery holding their garments in place. Elsewhere in the Nordic area, brooches were relatively insignificant in size at this time (except for brooches on Bornholm) and pins were quite uncommon (except for pins on Gotland). I thus assume that the intentions of the artists who made these accessories were partly to exert a different kind of agency onto recipients. They seem intent on innovating in order to distinguish rather than copying in order to conform. A significant difference was the agency exerted onto a spectator, a recipient-not-in-possession. From a distance of 4-5 m, most variants of Nordic brooches would look rather similar, and details such as the spiral-terminations would not be clearly discerned as spirals at more than 2-3m. The complex procedures that the artist made use of to make two-come-out-of-one on the Gjrv pin and the Vigrestad brooch in particular, contributed to make them less comprehensible even to an artist skilled in making conventional Nordic types (cf. chapt. 7.5). It is of interest to note that modern scientists have, if not abducted agency, than at least disagreed on how spirals were made in the Nordic Bronze Age. Archaeologists and metallurgists have also been recipients to these indexes, and

293 even armed with significant insight in metals, their structure and characteristics, they have disagreed on the procedures used (cf. Oldeberg 1943; Herner 1987; Rnne 1989, 1993; Liversage 2000). A case at hand is the Vigrestad brooch (nr. 17): the modern scientist would at first glance see the paper-thin bow as unlikely to have been cast, rather to have been forged by hammer. But the details on the front and back of the bow is puzzling if each triangle in the wolf-tooth pattern at front was forced into the bow by hammer and stamp they would, in the mind of the experienced, have left marks on the back side. The lack of such marks, along with the way the bow envelops the mid-section of the double-spiral, seem instead to point towards a casting procedure. The protruding spiral though, seems impossible to cast. Hence, a close reading of the bow of the Vigrestad brooch suggests two separate castings, the bow and a straight rod, and one act of forging the rod into a double-spiral. The brooch-pin suggests a third casting and the forging of a second and third spiral. Thus, a recipient himself an artist of other bronze indexes, would be troubled by this index. An artist of e.g. axes or even belt plates would initially attempt to conceptualize a single making - one mould, one casting but be forced to explore other multiple procedures. Thus, I suspect that the artist also intended to complicate the reading of his creation, to hide his operations, and possibly hide himself as an agent. He achieved this by making an artefact that slowed down the mind of a recipient; even a skilled bronze caster might get troubled when attempting mentally to reconstruct the process of the brooch coming into being. I believe that these women from Vigrestad, Gjrv, Rykkja and Kleppe did not, nor did their suppliers of bronze accessories, intend to make a reference to other wealthy Nordic females, not to blend in among the best of Nordic females, but to hint to otherness, and possibly to Lneburg women (in the upper Elbe area). Although the spiral-motive is not exclusive to female types of artefacts, spiraldecoration reached a particularly high level on the female belt plate. The experimentation with the spiral-motive in the Nordic Zone might be seen as an artistic effort towards representations of the sun. This distinctive spiral-pattern appears to the human eye as a curling multiple-line of shadow and light. The spiral is really made (cf. Rnne 1989), and probably sensed, as a labyrinth. The human eye and mind will be drawn into the spiral, and lured into an attempt to wander the labyrinth, to trace the path of light towards the centre (cf. Gell 1998: 83pp.). The spiral-pattern is thus a complex pathway for the human eye and mind, and in a sense sticky or adhesive. On the belt plates from Vigrestad, Rege and Tjtta

294 there are two ridges of light, flanked by grooves of shadows, and each triple band of shadow-light-shadow come from the neighbouring spiral.

Fig. 11. The path of the Bronze Age spiral ornament

These create two ridges of light that curl back to back inwards and join up at the centre. Thus, the spiral-pattern on the plate creates a vision of a single, continuous ridge of light that curls up, in and out again. To actually trace the ridge is tricky, as the eye has difficulties deciding which line to follow, typically one is tempted to try but gets lost. On the plates from Orre and Srheim, the tutuli from Vigrestad as well as on the collars from Rege and NBraut, a slightly different pattern is found. Here, there is a single groove, a single path of shadow to trace. Did the individual spiral, the individual zone of spirals and the complete decorated disc have prototypes? One and the same prototype or different? The belt plate could be considered to be a straight-forward representation of the radiant sun. But it is also possible to see the matter as more intricate. Randsborg has argued that on some of the more complex belt plates the number of spirals contain a mathematic code, i.e. calendar symbolism. He argues that the duration of human pregnancy, 265 days (9 months), lies hidden in the composition of spirals on the plate from Langstrup, Zealand (Randsborg 2006: 68). Neither the Vigrestad plate nor the Rege plate have patterns immediately recognized through Randsborgs formulas. On the other hand, each spiral might be a general representation (without exact mathematical correspondence) of the short cycles of both the female and the sun (menstruation and diurnal), and the individual spiral-zones as representations of the long-cycles of the female and the sun (pregnancy and year). The spirals might at the same time be representations of the risky phases in the journey of the sun-goddess: getting tied-up and released again, getting caught up before flowing freely again. The ridge of light in the

295

Fig. 12. Reconstructed women from the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia.

spiral is analogue to the sun-goddess that gets captivated and set free by her brothers at dawn. Thus, the prototype of the belt plate is not merely the sun as a static radiant disc on the sky, but the living, animated sun including specifics of its movement, its disappearance and reappearance and the hazards along the way.

296 The formula index (A) artist (P) signifies cases in which the artist feels that the work of art or the medium he is working on, makes him do things. Examples would be the sculptor arguing that he has merely released a form already present within the rock (Gell 1998: 28pp.). Could there, in the mind of the bronze caster, have been something in bronze to be released? Something to be realized? The fluidness of bronze might have been a quality that the artist not merely made use of in order to shape bronze it might also have been something that he released and tried to capture in his art. The running spiral could be seen as a way of preserving the fluidity of bronze after its solidification. The never ending, never starting qualities of the spiral could be the artists expression of the never dying bronze, and an attempt to keep bronze fluid beyond the context of casting. This would correspond to the proposition above, of melting as movement and as an act of liberation comparable to the liberation of Sol at dawn. The spiral-art of the Nordic artists might be interpreted first and foremost as an expression of fluid movement with the qualities of bronze and the sun as ideals and prototypes. Might the maker of the Vigrestad plate have argued that the expression of fluid movement in the spiral was actually present in the medium of bronze? That all he did was to capture the essence of what bronze is? That spirals as patterns of shadow and light in a vision of fluid never-ending movement, is a quintessential quality of bronze as much as it is a quintessential quality of the sun? If both sun and bronze were women and both characterized by liberation, captivity and fluid motion, might not the bronze founder have been a liberator and a male and a brother to goddess Sol and bronze? Thanks to the well preserved oak-coffin burials we have a rather clear image of what a complete index, a complete body-hair-dress-belt plate assembly, looked like (cf. Fig. 12). Belt plates seem to have been worn at the abdomen or belly in contrast to the Lneburgarea where they seem to have been worn at the chest as pendants (Laux 1996: Abb. 58-59). The Egtved girl in particular demonstrates that it was worn on a naked belly between a short shirt and a short corded skirt resting low at the hips. The female from Borum Eshj carried it in combination with a long skirt (Bergerbrandt 2007: 54pp., 63p.). The belt plate and the short corded skirt have been seen as indicative of sun-priestesses, of females occupying a distinct religious position, i.e. acting as representations of the sun-goddess in rituals (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 302). Where all females with belt plates priestesses - or at least those with both belt plate and short corded skirt? I find it plausible that they did act as representations of the sun-goddess, but I am less comfortable with the term priestess. This

297 is because the term implies notions of specialization and exclusiveness at odds with the great number of belt plates from burials. How would different recipients react to the index of the spiral-plated waist? Were belt plates intended to do something in particular, and if so, what? No doubt, there would be an erotic sense to these women when combining plate with short corded skirt and short shirt. The shining disc with the pointed centre-boss would draw in the glance of spectators, and framed by the characteristic feminine transition from narrow waist to broad hips, it might have had particular effects on males. The Rigveda describe Dawn (Usas) as a young girl in beautiful garments behaving like a seductive dancer:
Like a girl proud of her body you go, goddess, to the god who desires (you); a smiling [...] young woman, shining forth from the east you bare your breasts. Goodlooking, like a young woman adorned by her mother, you bare your body for beholding (RV 1.123.10f., West 2007: 221).

The belt plate on a young woman with corded skirt seems to captivate and draw in on three levels: from a distance by its frame of the female body, from a mid-distance by the circle, centre-point and general outline of decoration, and up-close by the details of each spiral, luring the eye into its impossible pathway. The index might thus have been aimed particularly at male recipients perhaps enhanced in certain events by the female copying the fluid path of the spiral in her movements, e.g. dancing. The combination of belt plate and short skirt might have been reserved for fertile, still unmarried girls 16-18 years old, and they could also be considered indexes intended to draw in and tempt potential grooms, and draw in prosperity in the form of bride-wealth to her household, kin or lineage. It is also possible to apply a volt-sorcery formula, placing the sun as prototype in the patient position. Here it is an attempt to get the attention of the sun, not merely making it shine on the polished bronze disc, but to captivate the all-seeing sun and lock its rays and glance into the intricate spiral-path. The placement of the disc on the waist is in this case not merely to tempt the sun in an erotic sense, but also because it was an area of the body in particular need of sunshine and good fortune. The following formula can be sketched: (Plate Sun (proto)) (A) Womb (P). The plate is meant to tempt and captivate the sun so that it exerts agency onto the womb, and possibly an unborn child; to draw in and lure the positive glance of the sun for protection, regeneration and growth inside the womb as container of life. Interestingly, Mychenaeans seem to have used both mirrors and sun-discs in rituals, placed at the belly (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 302, note 14). This placement of

298 a mirror at the belly seems to strengthen the idea of communication with the sun, and of attempts to draw in the sun and link its radiance to the female belly. The woman from Tobl, Jutland was buried with a large bronze wheel placed on her abdomen (AK VIII: 3919; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: Fig. 137). The female wearing the plate would also herself be a recipient to the index: she might feel tempting, at centre of attention, restricted and with a particular intimate relationship to the sun. The abduction of agency in these cases of bronze, were all potentially linked to the basic formula prototype (A) index (P): the technological qualities of the index suggest non-human artistry and point towards an alternative artist - the sun. This abduction could have been intentionally facilitated by the artist: through the use of extremely complex procedures while at the same time enhancing the sun-like qualities of the index. The likely alternative initially (human-made), is by closer scrutiny made problematic, and the less likely alternative (sun-made) is made probable. One intention of the artist might thus have been to downplay his agency, by increasing the complexity of the index and pointing at an alternative explanation. If we accept shining bronze as speaking to the sun, and that belt plates in particular could call upon the sun, the well-dressed women in a crowd would become those closest to the Sun, and those on speaking terms with the Sun. Especially towards recipients not in possession of belt plates or complex bronzes, the belt plated women would force an abduction of agency; i.e. that they were in control of sun-made objects and even that they were sun-made themselves, in a vein similar to the Dogon smith being born of the same placenta as Nommo, or the Dogon priest being impregnated with copper. Interesting in this respect is that Hittite King Mursili II in this period, c. 1335-1310 BC, changed the conventional royal epithet me, the king to me, the Sun (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 291).

10.5 Re-gathering the girl

I am wotsts. I come to be your wife, princess of the chiefs of the tribes. A copper is my seat. Many privileges and names will be given by father to my future husband. ha ha aya ha ha aya. For now is finished the weaving of mother for what is to be my belt, when I look after the dishes, the dishes given as marriage present by father to my future husband when many kinds of foods will be given in the marriage-feast by father to my future husband; ha ha aya ha ha aya (Kwakiutl, Song of chiefs daughter; Boas 1966: 347).

299
Good-looking, like a young woman adorned by her mother, you bare your body for beholding (RV 1.123.11; West 2007: 221).

I have proposed that the imagery on the stone slab from Kyrkje-Eide referred to female accessories from BA II-III, and belonged originally to a coffin (cf. chapt. 5.3, Fig.13). Depicted is a comb, a dagger, a sickle, a belt with fringed termination, a belt plate and a corded skirt. This leaves only 5 symbols in the dark: the wavy, snake-like figure, the concentric circles, the hook and the axe-like figure, and the three bent lines. The hook and axe are at odds: the axe-figure could be a shaft-hole axe seen from the top, i.e. a simple stone axe or a Faardrup axe. But the haft is of the hooked variant and would not work with a shafthole axe. More likely, it is a hooked haft for some kind of socketed tool a socketed bronze axe or perhaps an antler pick for working fields. The axe-figure might thus be a socketed antler tool depicted in the X-ray view common in Nordic rock art. The three bent figures seem to depict three artefacts of the same type but with slight differences in size. We ought thus to look for the kind of tool that comes in series with small variation in length, size, angle etc.; precision tools, were there is a tool for different intimately related tasks: like the wrenches of the mechanic, the carving tools of the wood-carver, or the pencils of the painter. They look very much like spatulate tools often made from pieces of naturally curved antler or horn, used for modelling wax (cf. Tylecote 1987: fig. 6.20). The depiction of a set of three spatulas for wax modelling would seem to point to rather advanced wax-models, and thus complex moulds and castings. Within the Central Zone I found strong indications of the use of wax templates from BA I and II: the heavy shaft-hole axes from Kvanngardsnes and Raknes in particular. The snake and the concentric circles might be abstract symbols rather than depicted artefacts, the snake might refer to the woman buried as a skin-shedder both as potential child bearer and as creator of templates and moulds. Gell explored two issues of importance to the above: a) the notion of personhood being distributed out into space and time; and b) the notion that images (indexes) of something (prototype) are parts of their prototypes:
[...] the idea that sensible, perceptible objects, gave off parts of themselves rinds or skins or vapour which diffuse out into the ambience and are incorporated by the onlooker in the process of perception (Gell 1998: 223).

300

Fig. 13. The carved slab from Kyrkje-Eide and interpretation of the motives: 1-2. Corded skirt from Egtved and belt and plate from Borum Eshj (reworked from Broholm 1952: nr. 228-29), 3-4. dagger and comb from Borum Eshj (from Boye 1896: X.5, XII.9), 5. Iron Age bone tools for wax modelling (reworked from Tylecote 1987: Fig. 6.20), flint sickle (from Gjessing 1920: Fig. 236), 7. tentative reconstruction of digging implement with hooked haft with leather strap and antler/bone tip. The carved slab is reworked from Mandt (1991: Fig. 12.40).

301 Gell explores these issues through the case of the New Ireland practice of carving the Malangan. The Malangan are wooden artefacts made for mortuary rituals:
[...] they are gradually imbued with life by being carved and painted, brought to perfection and displayed for a few hours at the culminating point of the mortuary ritual only to be killed with gifts of shell-money. Once they have been killed they no longer exist as ritual objects (which is why they may subsequently be sold to collectors). The gift of money which kills the Malangan entitles the donor to remember the image on display, and it is this internalized memory of the image, parcelled out among the contributors to the ceremony, which constitutes the ceremonial asset entitling the possessor to social privileges which is transacted at the mortuary ceremony and transmitted from the senior to the junior generations. [...] The purpose of a Malangan is to provide a body, or more precisely a skin for a recently deceased person of importance. On death, the agency of such a person is in a dispersed state. In our terms, indexes of their agency abound, but are not concentrated anywhere in particular. The gardens and plantations of the deceased, scattered here and there, are still in production, their wealth is held by various exchange-partners, their houses are still standing, their wives or husbands are still married to them, and so on. The process of making the carving coincides with the process of reorganization and adjustment through which local society adjusts to the subtraction of the deceased from active participation in political and productive life (1998: 225).

Thus, the Malangan images are parts of the deceased person, they gather and bring together the agency of the person, and redistribute it among the living. In light of the above, the Kyrkje-Eide woman could be seen as a girl that through the course of her life had distributed herself as a person across time and space. Her death left her, in the mind of the living, distributed, and created the need to reassemble her. The carved slab could thus be seen in light of the New Irland Malangan as an attempt to reassemble her agency, and as being a body or skin of these qualities. I this way the slab was dressed up with the image of her garments, her comb and a selection of her tools. The image of the sickle and the hafted pick might have been conceptualized as containing parts of her real sickle and pick, and thus parts of her agency through these tools: the harvested vegetables and the places were they grew. The carving of the tools of cultivation and harvest might thus have gathered her agency, her relations and her rights to specific places, crops and fields. The spatula images would have contained parts of her real wax-working tools, and thus gathered her agency exerted onto wax, and thereby her agency exerted onto templates, moulds, bronze castings and the people in possession of them. She was the maker of moulds and thus of temporary bronze bodies. The snake might thus have referred to the slab as

302 temporary skin of the deceased, or to her role as maker of temporary skins of bronzes. It might generally have referred to the process of shedding of skins, the shifting of containers. The wavy line might not have been a snake at all, but referred to water in general, or to a river e.g. the meander-like Stryn River that ran in the vicinity. The concept of gathering a distributed person through carving her/his belongings or deeds onto a part of the burial coffin, seems to have been a phenomenon particular to the eastern and western coasts of the peninsula, and thus a concept distributed along the westeast inland route. Kivik and Kyrkje-Eide are unique in their depiction of artefacts on burialslabs. It is important to note that it was not the dead woman from Kyrkje-Eide that made the carvings, but probably someone among her close kin. And someone among these represents to us a crucial bridge between the Central Zone and the CSWS. The skirt might indicate that the woman from Kyrkje-Eide was young. If she died 17 years old her mother might have been in her late thirties or early forties. Her mother would be a likely candidate for the artist that made her real and highly intricate textiles, as well as the maker of the carvings on her coffin. She might have come 20 years earlier from the coasts east of Lake Vttern, as newly wed to a distant male kin or ally of her father or brother in the far west. She might have been a member of a leading household and lineage somewhere east of Lake Vttern, and as a youth she might have participated in funerals such as those at Sagaholm and Kivik, and attained various ceremonies at the rock art centres along the CSWS. Such a hypothetical eastern wife would be a significant aid when it comes to account for the practice of depicting artefacts, especially textiles on stone, depicting the myth and image of the sun-chariot. Young women arriving as foreign brides from the east might be a significant mechanism when it comes to explaining the transmission of myths, moulding techniques and specific rock art motives across the Scandinavian Peninsula.

10.6 Woven & cast

In the aftermath of the rich BA III in NW Scandinavia, evidence is suddenly meagre all along the coast. I have argued that this was not a total collapse in the North Way. On the contrary, I argued that the area rich in BA IV burials in southern Hordaland and Rogaland now engaged in extreme maritime expeditions towards the Arctic. And with these expeditions they instigated a new mode in the relations between the larger cultural blocks Nordic and Arctic (cf. chapt. 6.7). The axe from Hiksdal is seen as a crucial piece of evidence of these new dynamics. It is a typical Nordic style socketed axe, with a unique net

303 or textile pattern on both broad sides. This I have interpreted as the presence of Arctic moulding techniques, Arctic ceramic techniques and designs, as well as Arctic weaving or braiding techniques, in northern Rogaland (cf. chapt. 4.4.10, 7.8.3). One way to bring these features and skills to the south is to sketch a marriage between a southern male engaged in the Arctic expeditions and a northern female skilled in moulding, ceramic and weaving procedures. Her specific moulding procedures, in contrast to those of her husband, enabled her to make an impression at the two clay templates used to make each mould valve, at a stage in which they were still plastic. This impression was made with a piece of net or woven textile. In her original environment in the Arctic this textile and this act of stamping were significant in the production of ceramic vessels. The woman from Hiksdal was thus engaging not merely in a merging of Arctic moulding techniques with Nordic axe styles, but in a merging of the containers of pot, mould and axe, a merging of the technologies weaving, pottery making and bronze casting, and a merging of fibre, clay and bronze. Whether she also made textile-impressed vessels for serving and cooking for her household, we do not know. The Hiksdal woman might thus have crossed some significant borders, more so than the other females above. She crossed over the Arctic-Nordic boundary, potentially from a Finno-Ugric speaking people into an Indo-European speaking people, from a people relying mainly on hunting and fishing into a people based on farming, and she was not brought up in a long-house. She is also likely to have crossed different marriage and kin-systems and different gender constructions. It might have been the experience of crossing these borders that spurred the creative making of the Hiksdal axe (cf. also Engedal 2010).

10.7 Facing the other

The well preserved Danish oak-coffin burials demonstrated the clean-shaved faces of Bronze Age males (Jensen 2002: 210). The standard sets of razors and tweezers in male burials were thus for trimming facial hair such as beard and perhaps eyebrows. The burial from Lille Dragshj also indicate the use of a particular hairstyle in which the sides were shaved like a Mohawk, also known to be used by young males in Mycenaean Greece (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 228). In the relatively cold climate of Scandinavia, the face and hands will often be the only visible parts of the body, the only parts not dressed by cap, shirt, cape, trousers, tunika, leggins, and moccasins (Bergerbrandt 2007: 50pp., 62p.). Thus, the use of razor and tweezers can be seen as dressing the undressed, and the completing of an overall dressed personal appearance (cf. Treherne 1995). Hematite is a red stone likely to have

304 been used for producing a red-brown paint. It has been found in three burials from Tobl, Ribe C., Valleberga, Skne C. and Jahrsdorf, Southern Schleswig; two of them male, the third unknown. It was also found on a settlement at Bokenset, Bohusln C. In nature it is found mainly in Norway and it might thus have been an object of exchange (Jensen 2002: 211p., note 40-41; Goldhahn 2007: 152, 184p., 189, fig. 6.19). In addition to shavedunshaved there might thus have been a second distinction in facial appearance: that of the painted-unpainted. In our area razors and tweezers first appear in BA III in burials from Jren in the south and Beitstad and Skjeggesnes in the north. After this phase, the razor-tweezers phenomenon retreats to Jren, Karmy and Sunnhordaland, except for the reported razor from Pasvik in the high Arctic. The significance of razors and tweezers might be analyzed in the setting of long-distance maritime communications along the North Way, and in particular in the encounters and meetings at each end of these journeys. Who were the recipients? Onto whom did the shaved faces exert agency? Who did these males shave for? The mass of recipients might be divided into several categories according to their own faces: the unshavable (women and children), those that could but did not shave (grown males not adhering to the shaved style), and finally other adult, shaved males of the broader TumulusUrnfield Complex. The face might have been particular important at meetings: when meeting outsiders, when facing opponents, facing allies and competitors, and when beaching after crossing substantial distances at sea. It might have been a rite of purification, of marking some of the boundaries they crossed: when entering and leaving the state of warfare as a container in space and time, or the state of being not home, or on the move. Facial hair is a liminal not entirely body phenomenon, and removing or trimming it might have been both an act of purification as well as an act of preparation for the face-to-face encounter of battle, bargaining, competitive oral performances etc.

10.8 Making & breaking bodies

The bronze axe was used for transforming living trees into large, complex wooden constructions. Central among these were boats and houses. The first step would be to fell the timber and to severe the tree from its origin and roots. The shifts in moisture of wood, i.e. the specific consistency of the content of tree-as-container, were significant to prehistoric tree-felling. In historical time in Norway, work in the woods was governed by the rise and fall of sap. The 20th of January (brdremesse) was considered the start of rising sap, while

305 the 20th of august (Larsok) was considered the date when sap returned to the roots. But the felling of trees was also ruled by the phases of the moon. The sap rose quicker and stronger in a new moon, and trees cut on a new moon would grow up again swifter. Wood cut in a new moon would also burn better and hotter. If the intention was to clear a field for trees permanently these ought to be cut in an old waning moon (Hodne 2008: 181). The rise and fall of sap in trees might readily have been linked to the transform-while-wet logic of bronze, wax, clay and human bodies. The tree would also be a living container with dry and wet contents and a skin of bark much like a human body with wet flesh and dry bones. Next, the bark and the skin of the tree was removed and in a careful manner if it was to be used for other purposes. Such purposes might have been containers, such as the birchbark vessels found in the oak-coffin burials (Boye 1896), or for roof-thatching. Thus, from a container-perspective, the skin of the tree went into the skin of food-vessels and houses. Next came the dismembering and shaping of the log for posts and boards. The final phase was that of erection, or rather re-erection of the now dry wooden parts. Thus, if the internal content of trees was considered in light of the contents of humans, it was the bones of the tree that now were erected to a house. The vision of the house as a body with internal skeleton of wooden upright posts and skin of clay and branches, might have been completed by using the skin of trees (bark) for roof, and straws on top (hair, fur). Thus, from early on in the Bronze Age bronze edges took a central place in this project of transforming tree-bodies to house-bodies or boat-bodies, both significant vessels containing significant collectives such as the household and the male crew. The crucial point is not that the bronze edge was much better at this than the stone edge, but rather that the entire conceptual web of trees, houses, boats, and axes changed as the stone edge was replaced by a bronze edge with its novel qualities and its unique story of coming into being. The bronze sword and spear were designed to damage the body of the opponent; not to crush and break bones and crania, but to slice, cut and penetrate the human skin, and thus to spill the contents of the human container. The skilled fighter would design his movements and attacks in order to hurt arteries and veins to make blood flow, to penetrate the beating muscle of the heart, to penetrate the lungs and damage the life breath, or severe the muscles that enable the limbs to move. Their life long experience with slaughter and the dismembering of live-stock and wild game made most adult males skilled anatomists and potentially skilled killers. The spearhead was designed for forceful penetration, mounted on a long shaft and launched from a distance, aimed preferably at the central torso or below.

306 Most Bronze Age spearheads are light enough to also have been used as missiles, i.e. as javelins. The forceful penetration of the spear has produced some of the most clear-cut cases of violence in the Bronze Age. In four cases broken bronze spearheads were embedded in the vertebra, pelvis and pubis bones of skeletons; from England, France, Over Vindinge in Denmark, and Herndkak in Hungary (Osgood et al. 2000: 21p.,73, fig. 2.7, 4.2). The overrepresentation of spearhead (and arrow) wounds may simply be because sword wounds left less clear evidence on the skeletons. The large-scale production and hoarding of spears in the Nordic Zone in the EBA, particularly Bagterp, Smrumovre and Ullerslev types, were most likely intimately linked to warfare and the supplying, rigging and organization of male warrior bands and crews. The significant skill and amount of metal invested into weaponry in the Bronze Age call for attempts to embrace the subject of armed conflict. It also calls for an embrace of the place of warfare and combat in male experience, and attempts to reason in a style that does justice to their experience (cf. Bergerbrandt 2007: 92pp.). Although we may not like it, we need to contemplate the likely possibility that killing and the severing of bodies by the bronze edge was a skill and activity in high regard and the subject of poetry and songs. A significant aspect of the male ethos in practical terms would have involved: skills and daring in the wielding of spear and sword, opening the body of ones opponent at close range, at high risk, face to face, eye to eye. Such encounters are likely to have represented the most risky and dangerous experiences in male biographies, memories and minds, and would have been of significant formative character for male concepts of self.

10.9. Underneath the axe

It is possible to see the entire human being with clothing and accessories as a piece of art or index; such as the Vigrestad woman with belt plate, double-spiralled brooch and garments, or the swordsman with sword, sheath, gold-adorned arm and cloak. Gell exemplifies such a case with the worshipping of young girls, kumari, as the goddess Durga during Nepalese festivals; and argues that it is difficult to distinguish this worship from the worship of cult idols of the same goddess at other times. Thus, the young girl is an index of the prototype Durga, in the same way as the cult idol is in other rituals. Gell argues that this is paralleled in western performance art (1998: 67). Acting, in the conventional western meaning, can also be seen as representational art and described by the formula: ((Artist Prototype)Index) (A)Recipient (P); in which the playwright is the artist, the character is the prototype,

307 the actor is the index and the audience is the recipient. In a case of involuntary roles such as e.g. a shaman being possessed by a deity, the human index is moved to a patient position: Protoype (A) (IndexRecipient) (P). In this case the deity is the prototype, the possessed shaman is the index, and the congregation is the recipient. Let us sketch a case of ritual performance involving bronze requisites. The large cultaxes from Lunde (hoard 22) are likely to have been carried on long shafts in some kind of performance art, as indicated by e.g. the rock art sceneries from Simris, Skne C. (Jensen 2002: 295). Rock art links axes to phallic males and we might assume that males acted as impersonators of a deity indexed by the axe, possibly wearing a phallic costume. The standard formula for secular performative art is: ((ArtistPrototype)Index) (A)Recipient (P). Typical of the ritual is that the artist, the true maker of the ritual, is hidden. The ritual is thus often not-made, traditional and unchanging; or alternatively such a ritual of the axe-deity would typically have been given to humans at some point by an ancestor or mythical hero. Thus, if the movements, words, songs of the performance, are all seen as an index, there would typically be an abduction of agency from the human playwright or artist to the deity (prototype) or a mythical hero. A congregation in the case of a hypothetical ritual of the axe-deity at Lunde, might have involved a large group of recipients (audience): e.g. a large recipient group A of indigenous people from southern Hordaland and northern Rogaland, and a smaller recipient group B of persons intimately related to those carrying the axes (people from Zealand and persons from Jren involved in the Zealand-North Way network, cf. chapt. 6.5). We might assume that three males carried the axes and were actors or recipients in possession of the axes. These males, including the axes on poles and other paraphernalia, their specific patterned movements and their utterances, might thus be considered the index. This index, the story of the ritual or the performance, might correspond to another index, the screenplay, i.e. a myth of cosmological origin. Such a myth would be the prototype of the index. To the recipient, this ritual or index would appear as a compound with several subindexes, such as the bronze axes. The context of the performance would steer the conceptualization of the axes as a sub-index, and the sub-index of the axe would steer the conceptualization of the total performance as index. From the perspective of Gell's theory of art, the bronze axes would be a crucial part of the ritual as a compound index. It is the axes more than anything else that forces the recipients to construct a super-human artist involved in the performance. The axes are elevated above the crowd, no shadows are cast on

308 them, they carry intricate spiral patterns, and they are many times the size and weight of any normal functional bronze axe. Thus, explored from a perspective of theatrical performance, the axes are significant because of their spatial range. Their size and their elevated position make them within visual range of a large crowd. They would also occupy the centre of a vertical hierarchy between sun and humans: sun > axe > carrier. The issue of whether rock art scenes depict human ritual performances or divine mythological performances is an old one in Nordic rock art studies. Adherents to both views have good arguments: that the sun sometimes is supported by a rack or stand seems to indicate a cultic procession; while the super-sized bodies carrying boats above their heads seem to indicate depictions of gods playing their part in a myth (cf. Kaul 2004: 31pp., 341, for an overview). How would this dichotomy between myth and ritual have been experienced by Bronze Age ritual participants and actors? The relationship between the impersonator of the axe-deity and the axe-deity in the sky, might be compared to the relationship between the Siberian moose hunter impersonating a moose and the moose being hunted. In a recent study of animism Willerslev argues that the metaphor model prevalent in anthropological studies does not take the indigenous experience seriously:
[...] if we are to take animism seriously, we must abandon the idea of total coincidence (the Heideggerian tradition) or total separation (the Cartesian tradition) and account for the mode of being that puts us into contact with the world and yet separates us from it. And there is, of course, such a mode of being, a mode that is grounded in mimesis. Mimesis is essentially relational in that the imitator has no independent existence outside or separate from the object or person imitated; and yet the imitator is constantly being thrown back on himself reflexively, without ever achieving unity. Thus mimesis offers assimilation with otherness while also drawing boundaries and distinguishing oneself. Animism demands both, and without mimesis the very basis of animistic relatedness is therefore likely to break down. This is not to say that mimesis is identical to animism. We can and do imitate things without being animists for that reason. Rather, what I am arguing is that mimesis is and must be a prerequisite for animistic symbolic world making (Willerslev 2007: 191).

In our case, this would mean that the impersonator in axe-deity costume is not actually the deity or merged as one with the deity (the Heideggerian tradition), but he is neither himself or entirely human and not-deity neither (the Cartesian tradition). I believe that if we are to strive towards a style of reasoning that does justice to their experience, we need to explore how the impersonator is assimilated and linked into the deity. As much as the rifle in the hand of the hunter in his moose costume is no clear indication that he is not a moose; the

309 rack holding the sun-disc in ritual performance is no clear indication that the disc is not the sun (cf. Willerslev 2007: 1pp., 181pp.; also Gell 1998: 99pp.). I suspect that one crucial thread tying the hunter to the moose ran through his clothing made from a real moose, and between the deity and impersonators at Lunde such a thread ran through the bronze axes and their coming into being. The presence of racks and stands in rock art scenery is of course interesting to us since they still qualify as indicative of human behaviour versus divine behaviour. Not that a recipient in any way was tricked into not seeing the hafts of the axes in the performance at Lunde, or that there were not humans underneath the costumes. It was rather that the category human was stretched, and novel ways of speaking to and with the sun were demonstrated. Myths often refer not only to something that happened once in the beginning of time, but rather to the continuous regular changes of the world. But these changes, e.g. the coming of the sun, the birth of calves and growth of crops, were not regular and automatic, were not to be trusted or taken for granted, and they often failed. This danger and risk central to human existence is crucial in order to understand how the ritual of the axe deity was experienced at Lunde. At this event agency might be abducted in different ways by different recipients: placing the gods in the sky, their non-human fragments on earth and human participants variously in patient and agent position. Categories could be stretched and blurred: humans, things on earth and things in the sky. We have to acknowledge the possibility of super-humans, and a less strict boundary between living humans, living ancestors, ancestors proper and gods. The Dogon smith was drawn to Nommo, or he drew Nommo to himself, to the degree that they were seen as originating from a common placenta (cf. above). In a similar vein, minds immersed into bronzes in the Bronze Age also drew gods, humans and metals into hierarchies.

10.10. Bronzes & minds

In the Mesolithic raw-material was for the first time released from the bed-rocks of Hespriholmen and Stakaneset. Through extensive grinding the colours and sharp edges of their insides were brought to light. At the same time this grinding procedure effectively hid the traces of the artists knapping-operations, and effectively slowed down the mind of recipients accustomed to read un-ground flint tools. Later, the makers of battle axes demonstrated the impossible by doing to hard rock what had previously been done only to soft bone, antler and soapstone. By using intricate procedures of drill-tubes and grinding-

310 compounds, a circular hole was made trough the hard rock. To anyone familiar with stone, but unfamiliar with this specific drilling procedure, this was enchanted technology the battle axe forced abductions of agency, and hinted at super-human artistry. Then came the flint dagger. While the artist could have given the dagger a smooth, polished surface in line with their bronze prototypes, he left it with its complex history of coming-into-being written clearly upon its surface. All people with a minimum understanding of stone-knapping could read this story and be forced to abduct agency to an artist disregarding the laws of fracture. Bronze was even more enchanting compared to all other known substances at the advent of the Bronze Age. It was flint and clay, ice and water, butter and milk, wax and honey, all at once. Bronze was therefore sticky in the sense that it captivated, drew in, held and contained the minds of spectators. If the human being extends his minds into all things within the range of his senses, I believe bronze was extensions of minds in a stronger sense than other artefacts: because it was stickier than other non-humans. Because of its extreme adhesive quality in this sense, bronze was also able: to protect, damage, achieve, procure, lure. Because of its intimate links to celestial objects, to fire, to water, to persons, it was also distributed in the Bronze Age world view. Since the Bronze Age an immense amount of non-human societies, things, have been brought into existence by humans. At present the coming into being of the majority of these societies is hidden from most of us the coming into being of our PCs, our cell-phones, our clothes, shoes and foods. Does this make them enchanted in our minds? Or has human transformation and displacement of matter been so immense that it has dulled our original tendency for reconstructing mentally the coming into being of things? Has this development changed us in any way, i.e. has the great mass of potentially enchanted artefacts done something to how we respond to things? to our instinctive inquiry into the coming into being of things? Have western philosophy aided in this process, and stabilized and removed the need for such explorations? Have we stopped pondering? I contend that bronzes were enchanting in Bronze Age minds much more than in our minds. Has this exploration and distribution of agency in dense webs added something to our understanding of the dynamics of the wide webs explored in the previous chapter? Has it added factors of explanation? I believe it has illuminated how bronze but also by implication fur and other valuables, may have worked on the minds of humans. I believe it has sketched a scenario for what happened at specific events and series of events: how Mycenaean artefacts came to trouble West Alpine minds; slowed down their minds and created desire to

311 possess, to understand, to give and to know. In this way they were spurred to do much more than trade for these artefacts. They also traded for knowledge of the sun, the moon and the morning star, and the earthly representatives of these; they traded for the knowledge of how both earthly and celestial spheres interacted and could be manipulated, and for the skills to change themselves as persons relative to others. In order to enhance this learning they had to give compensations, fur and amber, and we thus arrive at a deeper understanding of the motivation for establishing the links to the Baltic and the Elbe. Although desire to secure access to valuable goods may still stand as a viable explanation to most of the historical events I have sketched, I believe this chapter adds some insight to how this desire came about. This brings us to an apparent paradox when sketching two new perspectives on artefacts at this time: firstly, an increased commercialization and loosening of the social embeddedness of exchange, and secondly, an increased enchantment and desire to become one with artefacts. I shall not pursue this issue further, but I propose that this paradox reflects again dichotomies of modernity, this time embedded in the science of economy.

312

Chapter 11. From cradle to cairn - biographies of the Bronze Age

In the previous chapters bronze has been centre stage. I have attempted to reveal some biographical information from specific bronze artefacts, their births, lives and deaths, and explored them in wide and dense webs. Although there have been glimpses of humans along the way, they have been peripheral, anonymous and most importantly, fragmented. In this final chapter, I would like to make a shift in position and put the human being, its life-world and its life-time centre stage. The mystery of the human story rests within the human ontogeny: the hours, days, months, years between birth and death, between cradle and cairn.

11.1 Becoming human

I do not expect archaeologists to be particularly successful in piecing together the biographies of individual human beings in prehistory. The point is rather that all other paths seem to lead us towards a flawed understanding of the mysteries inherent to all sciences of living organisms: the reproduction of difference (change) and similarity (continuity) through time:
Modern adult cognition of the human kind is the product not only of genetic events taking place over many millions of years in evolutionary time but also of cultural events taking place over many tens of thousands of years in historical time and personal events taking place over many tens of thousands of hours in ontogenetic time. The desire to avoid the hard empirical work necessary to follow out these intermediate processes that occur between human genotype and phenotype is a strong one, and it leads to the kinds of facile genetic determinism that pervade large parts of the social, behavioural, and cognitive sciences today (Tomasello 1999: 216).

An expression of the history of humanity and its rhythm, the way humanity is reproduced and the way human lives and genes stretches through time, is the concept of generation. As opposed to cultural generation (with a broader and less specific meaning), the familial generation is defined as the average time between a mothers first offspring and her daughters first offspring. Currently the length of a generation is 25.2 years in the US (2007) and 27.4 in the UK (2004)30. If we speculate from an assumed shift in female costume at the age of c. 18 years in the 13th century BC, and that this change marked status as married or mother (cf. chapt.10.4), we might calculate that the generation was somewhat shorter in the BA, e.g. 20-22 years. Fig. 14 chart some of the relevant knowledge gained in the preceding

313

Fig. 14. The Bronze Age as history and flow of generations.

314 chapters, framed on such a generational chart, in combination with a life expectancy of 66 years (not considering accidental deaths). This chart clearly demonstrates the contrast between the type-time of bronze artefacts and the life-time of humans. The genetic code that runs through the history of generations in this chart, is considered to be unchanging and identical to yours and mine, and is that of Homo sapiens sapiens. The culture that runs through the chart, we conventionally see as variants of a Nordic Bronze Age culture that took shape at the lower part of the chart. Within this culture there are male and female gender categories, and within these, finally, are unique male and female persons each with their unique coming-into-beings. Our mind is inherently embodied; most of our thinking is unconscious and most of our understanding is metaphorical. We learn through our bodies, and our bodily activities are rooted in a real world of resistance ((Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 3; cf. Gosden 2006: 428p.). In chapter 10 I attempted to explore the unity of mind-body-world, the extended and thus malleable mind the way minds were stretched, bent and moulded in events that involved bronze. This time it is less about bronze, and more about the accumulation of all sorts of events in the experience of individual human biographies. There are no guaranties or recipes inscribed in the child, promising a future typical adult human being; such characteristics are not genetically inscribed but allowed for, and this potential needs to be developed through active participation in characteristic environments of humans and things:
There is, in truth, no species specific, essential form of humanity, no way of saying what an anatomically modern human is apart from the manifold ways in which humans actually become. These variations of developmental circumstance, not of genetic inheritance, make us organisms of different kinds [...] To say that the developmental course of growing up in different environments and circumstances, results in cultural variance, does not capture the fact that we are not even identical organisms (Ingold 2000: 391).

There seem to be no escape from a perspective of life as a multitude of acts, a vast series of events of more or less impact:
(...) whenever you want to understand a network, go look for the actors, but when you want to understand an actor go look through the network it has traced. In both cases, the point is to avoid the passage through the vague notion of society (Latour 2001: 27).

And, if we are to probe deeper into the favourite subjects of students of the Bronze Age such as power, authority, asymmetry and hierarchy, there are no short-cuts that save us the labour

315 of reconstructing the coming-into-being of legitimacy and domination within each human generation.

11.2 Children of the Long-House

Both Norwegian folklore and the Hindu Ajurveda agree that the pregnant mother and her unborn child were in danger, and that the health and looks of the child depended to a large degree on what the mother did or was exposed to during pregnancy (Hodne 2008: 30pp.). She should not be alone in her home, not walk alone in the woods, not fall asleep on the ground after dark, and should in general be exposed only to tranquillity and beautiful things. The Ajurveda warns against pregnant women seeing predators or smelly, ugly, dirty or disfigured persons and recommends exposure to beautiful statues, humans, dresses and jewellery. The large number of Norwegian taboos on this subject also warns against predators, particularly the bear, but also adders, hares, and a range of ugly fishes and birds. There was a direct correlation between defects on the child and the sensory experiences of the mother during pregnancy: A hare led to hare-lip (cleft-lip), a duck to a webbed foot, an adder to a cleaved tongue, adder-skin or evil, shifting eyes. For this reason hunters would cut of the hares snout before entering the presence of a pregnant woman. Other potentially upsetting scenery had also better be avoided: corpses, butchering, wounded, forest fires and crippled persons. Epilepsy was in fact named calf-fall, goat-fall or pig-fall, because it was believed to be caused by the mothers exposure to the killing of an animal (ibid: 28pp.). In general, in the Old Norse saga, recent Norwegian folklore as well as in Greek mythology, all things, both on the pregnant and in her surroundings, should be un-tied in order to release the child from its mothers womb (ibid: 36p.). In a similar vein, parents-to-be among the Kwakiutl of NW-Coast America should not: make basketry [...], twist cedar twigs for ropes or sew boards or canoes; otherwise the navel-string would be twisted around the child (Boas 1966: 359). The afterbirth was particularly dangerous and ought to be burned on the hearth by the husband in the Norwegian case; but could also be dried, ground and used as an effective medicine by the medieval monk in Germany and Italy (Hodne 2008: 39). The Kwakiutl could enhance the characteristics of the child by burying the afterbirth at specific locations or expose it to the ravens; or if the mother did not wish to have any more children she could bury it at the high water mark or low water mark at the sea shore (Boas 1966: 362). I thus assume that there were significant precautions to be taken before and after a

316 birth in the Bronze Age long-house, and that already before they were born, they were intimately moulded by the world. The original human experience of the world is anthropocentric. Human perspective is from a central position within a spherical, potentially multi-zoned world, rather than the detached perspective of modern being living on the surface of a globe (Ingold 2000: 209pp.):
(...) the many pre-modern and non-Western cosmologies that are anthropocentric in the strict sense of placing the human being at the hub of a dwelt-in-world, a centre of embodied awareness that reaches out, through the activity of the senses, into its surroundings (ibid: 218).

Although temperatures were somewhat higher in the Bronze Age, winter and fall were still both cold and dark. The long-house seems to have been widespread in the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia, and is likely to have provided significant shelter against harsh climate at least part of the year. I thus assume that the long-house was the significant hub at the centre of the world for those who made and dwelled in it:
Intimately linked both physically and conceptually, the body and the house are the loci of dense webs of signification and affect and serve as basic cognitive models used to structure, think and experience the world (Carsten & Hugh-Jones 1995: 3)

As the founders of a household build their house and home, they brought together elements from the world into a specific configuration and constellation: the two or three-isled skeleton of posts from the woods, walls of planks or clay, roof of straw and bark; and through this gathering they had already created a highly specific framework, a micro-world, a mould in which a new human could be cast. Crucial restrictions and leads were already in place for children to come and humans to become:
[...] a ready-made environment fashioned by a previous generation and lived in long before it becomes an object of thought, the house is a prime agent of socialization (ibid: 2).

Despite the clear correspondence in architecture and building techniques, a quite heterogeneous image of settlements in the Nordic Bronze Age is now emerging. In the period 2000-1500 BC there are marked differences within the Nordic Zone in house-sizes, ranging from 40 m to 360 m. 31 Within the sample of two-isled houses from NW Scandinavia there is a span from small houses 40-50 m (Voll, Stokkset 1), via houses 60-70 m (Fremre ygarden, Stokkset 2, Fisk), 85-105 m (se, Kvle 2, Talgje, Jtta), and 110130 m (Skeie VI, Fryland, Klepp) to the Kvle 1 house with its 165 m. The Kvle 1 house could thus hold no less then three Stokkset 1 houses. And still, the largest two-isled house from southeastern Scandinavia has a floor 360 m, and could with ease embrace seven

317 Stokkset 1 houses or two Kvle 1 houses (cf. Poulsen 2009: 158). Problematic of course, is that only in rare cases is it possible to separate between LN I, II and BA I, particularly in Norway. I assume that particularly from 2000 BC onwards, there were significant differences in house sizes within our area, and within the Nordic Zone (Poulsen 2009). Although there are less data, this situation is likely to have prevailed through the EBA. The largest house from the Nordic Bronze Age is now the house from Bruatorp, near Kalmar in Sweden, c. 510 m and dated to 1500-1300 BC (Gustaffson 2001; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 278). It seems that there was only a single house standing at each farmstead in Western Norway, at least in the EBA (cf. Soltvedt et. al. 2007: 197). For long a similar situation has been proposed for Southern Scandinavia and the Nordic Zone in general, perhaps with 2-3 contemporary houses in some cases. Recently, this has been challenged particularly by excavations at Almhov, Skne, at the coast not far from the well-known site of Fosie (Arthurson 2005; Gidlf et. al. 2006; Poulsen 2009: 159pp.). From the almost forty two-isled houses excavated at this site, several clusters seem to have been contemporary: a village or rather a core-settlement (Poulsen 2009: 160). Thus, I assume that there was also a difference between single houses and farms isolated from neighbours by 1km and more, and such village-like core-settlements. In addition to these differences concerning size and proximity to neighbours, comes variations from animals kept outside or within the house probably a significant addition to the micro-cosmos under the roof. I suspect that the majority of those buried with bronze accessories in NW Scandinavia were once born in long-houses, and that they were significantly moulded as beings among vertical posts in a two or three-isled formation, a highly specific constellation of pieces from the world brought together by their parents. According to Michael Tomasello the crucial difference between the human primate and the other primates, is its peculiar ability and tendency for recognizing and identifying with other human beings (1999: 84, 90p.). This is not merely a matter of categorization of species, identifying them from us, but a question of knowing the others intention, and thus of understanding self and others as intentional agents. This seemingly small revolution evident in the child after 9 months paves the way for all distinctly human abilities. From this point onwards the child may share attention with others, and they may share attention towards an outside entity. This facilitates a highly effective way of transmitting knowledge exclusive to the human being, as the infant starts to learn through the adult. Animals may be

318 innovative and come up with a range of novelties, but their abilities for learning (lacking insight in intention) prohibit them from passing on these to the next generation. This distinctly human mode of learning results in cumulative cultural evolution, or the Ratchet effect. The unique human ability to transmit the skills developed by one generation swiftly to the next, enables the next generation to elaborate and improve further (Tomasello 1999: 37). The crucial momentum explaining the rise of the able and curious, space-travelling and stargazing primate might thus be this small biological innovation opening the enormous potential of cumulative cultural evolution. The joint active engagement between the imitating child exploring the intentions of the attentive and instructive adult is thus one of the most crucial scenes in order to explore humanity and culture in all its variation and in a long-term perspective. These are valuable insights on the workings of the human being, on the ways in which the child time and again becomes a typical culturally recognized adult human being. According to Tomasello the childs exploration of intention behind movement, is the real motor in learning and transmittance of knowledge between generations. The bodily movements of adults and parents direct attention and point out how a certain effect occurs from a specific movement. They participate in a moulding of the child, directing the perception, attention and bodily movements of child; and thus their fundamental concepts of causation. But they do not mould their pupil all around, transferring culture as software from their minds to the mind of the child; rather they facilitate and arranges for the child and the environment to meet in certain ways. What the child learns in a staged learning-situation depends on the instructors, the media of attention, the human/non-human environment, and the memories of past events. Ingold has argued convincingly that what we conventionally refer to as cultural evolution, and by implication the Ratchet Effect of Tomasello, is also a biological evolution (not genetic), since the anatomy of the brain changes in the process of learning skills (Ingold 2000: 376, 379). Tomasellos perspectives on childhood might thus to some degree be bifurcated (cf. chapt. 1), and he might not take into account the full consequence of Ingolds argument. Such a full upgrade of previous perspectives on culture and humanity has yet to be made simply because these new insights into the extended mind have such profound and wide ranging consequences (Malafouris 2004: 55). The unique human ability to know the intentions of others, to put oneself in someone elses position, and to look at oneself from the outside, as highlighted by Tomasello; is

319 reminiscent of the empathic projection of Lakoff and Johnson (1999: 565pp.). They argue that this projection of empathy is not only towards humans, but also towards animals (ibid: 566). But does it stop there? Might we not assume that the human child is not merely able to know the intentions of adults and to project empathy on to animals; but that it is explorative into intentions in general? Is the instructive adult not merely the one providing clearest feedback and answers, meeting the child half-way? Alfred Gells works seem to point in this direction (1998; cf. chapt. 10.1). Tomasello also opens this avenue:
[...] and they [children] may also analogize to the self, somewhat inappropriately, in their causal reasoning about why inanimate objects behave as they do (1999: 213).

Before knowing intention; the child must seek to find intention. Thus, when perceiving a change in its environment, the human child searches for an intention. Such intentions cannot be recognized as anything else than its own human variants of intentions. The question is rather were, or in what, exactly, the human child and the human being seek intentions reminiscent of its own (cf. Gell 1998: 16p.)? If we consider change as a kind of movement, it is of use to follow Lakoff & Johnson further. The fundamental concepts of causation, space and time, are all rooted in perception of movement (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 140, 157; cf. also Tomasello 1999: 74). For the human being, there are two kinds of motion: the movement of its own body, and movements in its environment. Through these movements the human being knit a range of metaphorical combinations involving space, time, and causation. The metaphorical elaboration on causality (in the English language) is vast; according to what kinds of forces, kinds of changes and ways in which forces produce them (Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 206). Understandings of causation, the whys and hows, are thus grounded in the perception of movements and changes in the environment of the human being. One such movement, repeated every day throughout the human cycle of life, was the appearance, movement and disappearance of the sun; and the light, shadows, colours and heat that followed it. It is as difficult to come up with a more universal moving thing in the human environment, as it is to find a serious evaluation of the moulding role of the sun on the human being. In a longterm perspective the use of fire was a first step of emancipation from solar government, an alternative that moved, flickered and brought heat, light and shadows, and could be controlled, moved, lit and put out. A second step was the harnessing of electricity that separated heat from light, and both heat and light from the sun and the flickering flame, and

320 it could be controlled by a finger on a switch. In the Bronze Age fire was as dominant a nonhuman towards all inside the long-house as the sun was towards all and everything outside. For a while these children of the long-house were much like any other primates, like the calves behind the wall, except perhaps for their helplessness. At first their immobility severely restricted their sensory-motor experiences; being at the mercy of parenting adults that carried, placed and arranged their feeding and defecation. But causal relations of light and dark, heat and cold, were taken in from birth onwards in the environment in and around the house. Two lights and heats were fundamental from the very start: that outside and above (sun) and that inside on the ground (fire); and a significant third source of heat was mothers naked chest. Between 9-12 months a cognitive revolution was evident, as the child started to follow the gaze of the adults, exploring their intentions towards themselves and towards outside entities. They started to tap-into their nurturers intentions towards themselves and towards other entities like garments, tools, vessels and humans. Perhaps did they also attempt to tap-into the intentions of the flickering, colourful fire and the sun gliding across the sky? And perhaps were these attempts encouraged rather than held back by adults? As soon as mobility increased, the built environment of the long-house was explored, its floor, posts, walls and interior furnishing. For the probably privileged children in question, this was an environment of living animals, earth, wood, ceramics, woven textiles, furs, feathers, leather, flint and bronze. A birth into a prestigious line of kinship made a difference right from the start. For the Tlingit of NW Coast America the house and everything within it was alive and acting as persons. Artefacts had names and had the ability to express their intentions and even move around (Mauss 1970: note 277). In the Bronze Age, bronzes, even those considered communal property, had to be safe-kept probably within the houses of leading lineages. Thus, objects such as the Trundholm Sun-Chariot, the cult-axes, the lurs and the Balkkra Sun-Throne, were probably safe-kept somewhere within large houses in Scania and Zealand. The Vigrestad woman for instance might thus have spent her childhood in such a house in Zealand, as might perhaps a foster-child from Aurland Valley in Scania. Even though such artefacts are likely to have been covered up or placed out of reach, their mere presence probably meant restrictions on what the child could do and where it was allowed to be. But bronze might also have been attached to the arm that guided, fed and held and there might have been a coiled bronze or gold ring on the pointing finger that for the first time led the gaze of the child.

321 Improved motor abilities and mobility extended the childs concept of containment, from primary bodily experiences of substances entering (food and drink) and leaving (excrements), onto ceramic food vessels and the inside and outside of the house; the constant activity around the domestic fire, the rhythmic processing and serving of softs and fluids for drink and food. This made up the significant physical world for the child in its most formative stages towards humanity. Distinctions of who did what at which time, and who belonged, slept and ate in the house and who only visited and slept and ate elsewhere, created an elaborate foundation for concepts of insides, outsides, the borders, and the bordercrossings of pouring, drinking, leaving and entering. As more time was spent outside, the diurnal rhythmic movements of the sun was experienced, and the name of and ways of addressing the sun were copied from elders. Time was created by the movement of adults, but their movements were fundamentally influenced by the movement of the sun. The sun made the morning, day and night. The sun created time not only for the human, but also for the vibrating world of animals, birds, plants, all that moved, changed and lived. The sounds of the world changed with the sun, it brought birdcries of different character through its journey. In NW Scandinavia winter is dark and cold. The house provides protection and shelter particularly in the phase were the sun is gone, during night and winter. Affection towards youngsters spurs a more instructive learning, in matters considered particularly important. The farmer-parent was probably more inclined than the hunter-parent, to point at and direct attention to the causal relations between the moving sun and the melting of snow, growth of grass and leaves as building material for animals and crops as building material for humans. The most immediate risk for a future good-life was not the not-coming of the reindeer, but the not-coming of the sun and rain, and of grass, leaves and crops. The sun was in this way highlighted as the ultimate governor, source and nurturer of all earthly movement. Although the sun was far away and always out of reach - it was also fundamentally present, visual and tactile. Children were probably put to work in a household leaning on domestic animals and crop-cultivation. The difference between the island and village type settlements might have had consequences in that child-culture was regularly restricted to siblings and cousins in the island settlements; and in that larger aggregations of children to play or to work as a separate force, were more regular features of the village settlements. The latter case might also lead to more rigid and fine-meshed systems of age-classes. A Kwakiutl song

322 reveals that the sharp asymmetry among NW-coast villagers poured into the child-world, and privileged the son of the chief:
Dont play on my playground children. This is my playground, the top of the hill, children. That is their playground, the foot of the hill, children [...] (childrens song, Boas 1966: 348).

Around the fire at night, on the pastures and fields during day-time, relations and causalities of the world were deepened. As the scope of the childs perception expanded through its increased mobility, stories heard about causations and origins of humans, animals, plants, the sun, the earth, could be directly experienced. It learned and participated in the long journey of the cereal from its placement in the bowel of Earth to the cereal porridge entering the body; it learned the importance of keeping some grains through winter that could in spring be laid anew in the earth for growing. It learned and participated in the logic of bringing the out-of-body excrements from humans, animals and fires (ashes) back to the fields in order to make earth continue to yield. It witnessed the occasions when animals, their co-dwellers and likely play-mates, were killed, emptied of blood and butchered potentially by the bronze blade in parents belt. Through all ages this has been a potential clash of child and adult world-views. A significant event in many respects, as indicated by Norwegian folklore: to ensure a proper bleed from the animal to be killed, a metal knife could be put into cultivated soil before stabbing the animal (Hodne 2008: 134). All killing and butchering had to be done in a waxing moon and at a rising sea (ibid: 132). All things were bound together, even the death of the animal, the soils promise of growth, the waxing moon and the rising sea; they were all in the process of becoming. An intimate knowledge of the animal as container was gained, as the wonders concealed in the sphere of human adults, were spelled out with clarity in the domain of animals: out-of-body processes and the logic of copulation, pregnancy and birth. Our mind is inherently embodied; most of our thinking is unconscious and most of our understanding is metaphorical. Thus the child gradually broadened its concepts of causation, space and time through perception of movement in its circumscribed environment. Concepts of containment were elaborated from experiences of what entered and left its body, what entered and left pots, animals, house, home, the earth and the sky. Through the instruction of adults, and their joint attention towards certain moving entities in particular people, grain, domestic animals and the sun - cultural knowledge was transmitted. It was a world of entangled trajectories and threads, on which the sun seemed to have crucial influence.

323 There were clearly differences in childrens environment of upbringing within the Nordic Zone: many close neighbours versus a few distant neighbours, large houses with many bronzes versus small houses with few bronzes, animals stalled inside versus outside the houses. Whether on the fields of Kvlehodlen, underneath the rock-shelter of Skrivarhellaren or on the banks of Elben; the elder pointing a finger and directing the eye of the youth towards the rising sun, the liberation of Sol by her heroic brothers in their wheeled chariots, for the sole purpose of sharing attention, wonder and controversy of causation, was displaying the most crucial human capacity of all.

11.3 Within rhythms of the world

Modern science sees geological formations as congealed temporality and movement, and we know today that even rocks do not live forever it is just that their trajectories and biographies are so long and takes steps of such immense scale that no individual human being can capture their formation. Although, typically in the rocky and mountainous area of NW Scandinavia hints are everywhere: as crags, screes and in the animated lines of flowing quartz and other minerals in the bed-rocks and an avalange would not be too rare or too far away to escape human perception. Everything becomes, but they have different rhythms and cycles of different duration. To the human being, the mountains, the basic features of oceanography and topography might be more or less unchanging, but the skin of the world is populated by a multitude of animate beings. The more active of these non-humans create a complex symphony of the world through their different rhythms and cycles, a concert in which humans are small, short-lived and secondary, one in which they have no alternative but to merge in:
The rhythm of human activities resonate not only with that of other living things, but also with a whole host of other rhythmic phenomena the cycles of day and night and of the seasons, the winds the tides and so on (Ingold 2000: 200).

The specifics of this rhythm are largely regional and locally specific. Folklore and local history from NW Scandinavia provide interesting information on how people conceptualized this world 3400-2400 years later. There are short-cycles with rapid beats: the sun makes the day and night, morning and evening. Typical in the rugged topography of NW Scandinavia in recent history is the diurnal rhythm of meals marked by the position of the sun above specific features in the mountains. These thus marked a return to house and hearth for serving and eating (e.g. Vinjum 2004: 15pp.). A specific hill was attended to for a sign that could be read and acted upon by those working at displaced locations outside house, as well

324 as those preparing the meal to be consumed. The sun signalled their gathering. This indicate that basic bodily processes, eating, was not ruled by urge or instinct, but merged into resonance with a rhythm held by the sun on the sky and with the rhythm of the other human members of the household. The beats within the diurnal was also marked by animal behaviour, active at morning, evening and night. The proximity to the sea also made the ebb and flow of sea a significant feature. Generally, rising tide was a positive phase in which all risky, complex and important tasks were to be solved. Ebbing tide was a negative phase which could bring misfortune to activities. There where non-humans with medium length cycles. The moon was such a being, and its rhythm could be read from its changing figure on clear nights. Like the ebb and flow of the tides, the new or waxing moon designated a positive phase, while the shrinking or waning moon was negative. This rhythm ordered all major and risky projects (Hodne 2008: 132). There where significant long cycles, i.e. the long cycle of the sun making the year, and having major effects on all beings including the skin of the world: snow, vegetation, the coming and going of leaves, rise and fall of sap in trees, flooded and drained rivers, the coming of certain birds and animals, changes in the wind, temperature and direction. These rhythms structured activities such as sowing, harvest, the pastoral cycle from stables into the highlands and back again, and the making and maintenance of tools during winter. Fig. 15 visualizes how time rhythms were linked to meals, celestial objects, movements of herds, work, melting of snow and blossom of leaves (based on examples from Aurland Valley). Typical of this area is the reading of the situation in the distant highlands from decrease of specific bodies of snow or blossom of leaves on specific trees in the hills within visual distance. These often marked the different stages in the transhumance cycle. Historically this movement was made in three stages: spring and fall-pastures nearby, the summer-pastures further up, and mountain-pastures still further up on the plateau. Summer and mountainpastures were used from end of June to mid-September, and finally 14 days were spent in the fall-pastures before returning home. Thus, the movement of the herd lasted from early May to end of September, 5 months, a significant portion of the year. To these people, time was intimately related to the feeding of domestic animals. Thus, the child at work, tending the sheep at a particular pasture at a distance from the house or camp, was attuned to the sun or at least the ball of light hiding behind the cloudy sky. The child would have learned how to time its return with the herd from the point were the sun correlated with a specific rock formation or tree, in order to be home before the

325 sun left the sky and left the world to the wolf, lynx, bear, wolverine and an array of potentially malevolent spirits in the darkness.

Fig. 15. Rhythm of the sun in a mountain valley (based on information from Aurland Valley in Vinjum 2004: 14pp.).

Somewhere along this rhythm of sun-ups, meals, sun-downs, sleeps, lunar-months and solaryears; gradual development sneaked upon and boundaries had to be made. As the child gradually became human, it reached states already foretold, remembered and recognized by the adults, states marked by ways of speaking, moving and bodily change such as size, height, strength or menstruation. This might have taken the form of rites of passage, typically with an initial phase in which the old being is destroyed or erased, a mid-phase in which the being is neither child nor adult (or neither child nor person), and a final phase in which he/she takes on the new status with its potential paraphernalia (van Gennep 1960). This might thus have been events in which the body of the child was marked or extended by things (cf. Treherne 1995; Srensen 1997; Derevenski 2000: 390). The child had until this time explored metal as things on the bodies of other persons, and as things detached from bodies. The effect brought on by light from the sun-rays or flames might have fascinated from the beginning. Such child-bronze relations took at such a time an important turn towards intimacy. A new shining armlet would lock body and bronze into continuous

326 sensory experience. The combination of weight and thinness took time to get used to and was for a while a constant reminder. Its shimmering response to the rays of the sun opened new gates to self-reflection and communication. From the perspective of the child things had changed: its self, bronze and the sun the change in constellation changed each individual entity: what am I, what is bronze, and what is the sun? The child could also see itself from other persons point of view, and recognize a change in behaviour, intension and expectations towards itself. There arose a certain bond between those bodies extended by bronze. I proposed that in Aurland Valley in the earliest Bronze Age, there was a bracelet designed, moulded and cast with the wrist of a child in mind, probably made in Scania. I find this a convincing case of the practice of fostering, i.e. the bringing up of the child of a distant ally (cf. Johansen 2000: 82; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 238). This would mean that a child born in a house in Aurland was brought up in Scania, and a child born in a prestigious house in Scania was brought up in Aurland. The purpose was to tie a strong bond in order to access the world of the other party. Recent folklore of NW Scandinavia implies that life was filled with risk and danger, that misfortune and evil was always nearby, and it reveals a firm belief in destiny. There was a personal relationship and dependency between any individual and the good and evil forces and entities of the world, and human life was seen as navigation among these relations from birth to death (cf. Hodne 2008: 240). This is demonstrated in the widespread use of foretelling, i.e. attempts to see what comes next, from leaves on trees, cereals, from the intestines of animals etc; and it is seen in the avoidance or taboos: not to sow, fell timber, slaughter animals, hunt or fish on a ebbing sea or waning moon (ibid: 150, 132, 199, 218). This was clearly people marked by insecurity, marked by fear of the agency of malevolent spirits, humans and non-humans. Sickness among kin and herd is the most recurrent dangers, but also misfortune in crops, fishing and hunting. These potential dangers could be contraworked by the use of diverse artefacts and acts in a complex logic of relational webs. Metal, especially silver and iron, had a place in this logic (ibid: 49, 72, 149, 158, 190). Many of these non-human rhythms and entities were probably of equal significance in the Bronze Age, and so were many of the dangers: sickness and health of people, herd and cereal. We might thus assume that these children of the long-houses as they approached youth had become skilled readers of a wide array of non-humans, their rhythms and the logic of the relational web they participated in. They would have been knowledgeable of the dangers and evils in the world, and skilled in avoiding them. Those persons that left the

327 clearest traces for us to study, those involved in the transformation and displacement of bronze and in the carving of rock art, had skills that could only be achieved beyond the longhouse and the hub of the world.

11.4 Beyond the Long-House

Consider the long-house as a mere container of essentially sleeping and eating, two joint activities linked to the inside. Things are brought in and things are brought out the house is a living aggregate that consumes. In addition to the people of the house, we might confidently list fire-wood, water and various edibles being brought in; and ashes, urine and excrements, waste-products of fire and humans, brought outside:
Given its living qualities and close associations with the body, it comes as no surprise that natural processes normally associated with people, animals or plants may also apply to the house. Houses may be said to be born, to grow, to mature and die, to move and walk, to feed and be fed, and they may even be said to marry and copulate (Carsten & Hughes-Jones

1995: 42). To the children of the long-house, it became clear that the world of the long-house and its fields and pastures, was not a closed world. Some kindred of the longhouse were gone for considerable time; and sometimes at important events strangers came in. The great feast was for the child a first glimpse of the larger world: strange people with strange things and strange habits (Dietler & Hayden 2001). One of the things brought in from the outside is of particular importance, when it comes to exploring how this hub of the world, the house and the most basic Us, are related to other houses and Others: the wife or groom. Marriage (most often) necessitates an exchange of humans between houses, and on the basis of comparative IE studies, a patrilineal, virilocal system of the Crow-Omaha type has been suggested (see below; Rowlands 1998; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 236pp.). According to this model, and from the perspective of the child, there is one crucial bond running out from the house: the blood-ties to the kin of its mother, grandmother, sister-in-law; as well as the new families of their sisters and fathers sister (cf. Helms 1998: 55pp.). At any point in time, any household would be linked through a multitude of marital links to other houses more so in a Crow-Omaha system than in cases with other rules and prescriptions for marriage. The typical Bronze Age settlement site seems to be a single house on each farmstead, but possibly such farmsteads were clustered e.g. 2-4 in a valley. The males or patriarchs of such a loose aggregation would, according to the above, probably be close kin descending from a

328 common ancestor. A characteristic trait of the Crow-Omaha-system is that Us cannot receive two wives from the same Others in a row. Accordingly, the adult married females in such an aggregation would not be close kin, and come from households from different Others. I shall now focus on a set of skills of typically male not-home character: the skill to find ones way in the world, how to find good wives, and how to make something in bronze.

11.4.1 The path

When it comes to the nature of human spatial-orientation, the ways in which we find our ways and know where we are in the world, we again touch into now familiar controversies surrounding bifurcation and dichotomization of social/culture/mind versus nature/body. The conventional bifurcated view argues that we all have cognitive maps in the form of comprehensive spatial representations of our usual environments stored in our minds, and that we are born with this capacity in the same way as capacity for speech (Ingold 2000: 219, 232). A related view, from the angle of modern cartography rather than psychology, argues that it strives towards true and objective representations of the world:
There is a paradox at the hearth of modern cartography. The more it aims to furnish a precise and comprehensive representation of reality, the less true to life this representation appears (Ingold 2000: 242).

The basic problem with these views is that they assume the existence of a map before it is used, and that the traveller knows the way before he attempts to find the way (ibid: 230). Ingold argues that we do not commonly use such a cognitive map, and that we, on the contrary, know as we go.
Every living being, accordingly, grows and reaches out into the environment along the sum of its paths. To find ones way is to advance along a line of growth, in a world which is never quite the same from one moment to the next, and whose future configuration can never be fully known. Ways of life are not therefore determined in advance, as routes to be followed, but have continually to be worked out anew. And these ways, far from being inscribed upon the surface of an inanimate world, are the very threads from which the living world is woven (Ingold 2000: 242).

With reference to Casey and Gibson, Ingold argues that we learn to know our environment through movement along paths, leading to and from places; every somewhere is not a location in space, but a position on a path of movement, and our total knowledge of paths

329 and places makes up a region, the sum of all journeys made (Ingold 2000: 227, 230). To this can be added the journeys made by other beings:
For the Saulteaux, then, as indeed for the Ongee and the Walbiri, everywhere is not a space but a region concatenated by the place-to-place movements of humans, animals, spirits, winds, celestial bodies, and so on (Ingold 2000: 228).

The skill of finding way involves memorizing through attentive monitoring of the [...] specific order in which the surfaces of the environment come into or pass out of sight as one proceeds along a path (ibid: 238). A vista is a set of surfaces each and all within sight, but changing as one moves ahead. A transition is the part of the path in which one vista gradually disappears, and another vista come into sight. While every path makes its own specific flow pattern of surfaces and vistas, every such pattern specifies a unique path. And to find ones way, one will [...] travel along a particular route so as to generate or recreate the flow of perspective structure peculiar to the path leading to ones destination (Heft 1996 in Ingold 2000: 238). In this, wayfinding can be likened to playing music, singing or storytelling, since it share a temporal character and the gradual transitions between different vistas, musical themes, verses and parts in a story. These segments of temporality, vistas or segments of paths, are likely to have been understood as containers (cf. Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 32). Since it first started to crawl around the pillars of the house, and from wherever it was put down by its parent, the child engaged in wayfinding and gradually expanded it own unique region of all-journeys-made. For a while, its journeys were all undertaken within a single or a few vistas. As its mobility improved the child expanded its region, it explored the world through following elders around. It listened attentively to stories of what had happened along this path and in that place. In this way the movements of kin, ancestors, animals, the sun and other beings was woven into the region of the child. Through following and aiding elders in their daily engagements, the child learns of places, of what can be found there, and what has happened there and how to get there from other places, and how to get from there to other places. Different places provided different kinds for humans and for their animals: pastures, forest with leaves and bark, certain animal species to be hunted, water, clay, straw, berries. The keeping of large herds and the practice of hunting tend to make a persons region large at an early stage. Especially herding and tending the animals, bringing them from A to B, and watching over them, can be a suitable task for child-labour. This will also include not-finding-them, looking-for-them, and looking-for-signs-of-them.

330 Animals typically lead humans onto a multitude of paths that are animal rather than human in character. Milk teeth from children 10-12 years old were found in the rock-shelter Skrivarhellaren, both in a LN and a LBA layer (Prescott 1995: 123). Assuming that these children were born in long-houses in the lowlands by the fjord, this would indicate that children were engaged on the transhumance path to and from the highlands as soon as their physical strength allowed them to do so. Other osteological material indicates that small game and birds were hunted and trapped. Animals with valuable furs such as arctic fox (Alopex lagopus), hare (Lepus timidus), squirrel (Sqiurus vulgaris), lemming (Lemmus lemmus), marten (Martes martes) were represented at Skrivarhellaren (Prescott 1995: tab. 19, 103). These are likely to have been hunted with arrows with blunt wooden tips for preservation of the fur, or with diverse traps and snares. These bones at Skrivarhellaren may be as close as we get to fur as compensation for bronze in Bronze Age networks (cf. chapt. 9.1.2). These species would all take on a brighter, thicker fur during winter. The hare and the arctic fox, as well as stoat (Mustela erminae) and European Weasel (Mustela nivalis) also available in this area (but not represented at the site), would change to a full white fur. The squirrel would take on the bright grey fur that King Henry III reserved for knights and above, and that was channelled the long way from the trapping grounds through Novgorod to England (cf. chapt. 9.1.2). The Hare Indians of Canada focused instead on the marten, and left the squirrel to novices:
Squirrel hunting is especially carried out by young boys using caliber 22 rifles and the pelts are sold cheaply at the local store. Such hunting is encouraged by elder trappers because it provides the youngsters with training as marksmen and helps develop skills in skinning and preparing the small pelts for sale (Broch 2009: 86).

Tracking animals might be considered a form of wayfinding characteristic to the hunter: following the path and the intentions of the animal rather than his own choice of path. In this way the hunters child learns new paths through being attentive and in resonance with the animal ahead. The skilled hunter and trapper thus maps out the region of animals as well, or rather he incorporate their journeys, their paths and their places into his own region. He is attentive to the behaviour, actions and state of mind of the animal: tracing their eating, defecating, noticing that the animal has been scared and changed its course, or that it feels relaxed and safe; thus exploring the intentions and world-views of the hare and the fox. Particularly in winter on snow covered terrain the movements and behaviour of animals can be clearly mapped out. I propose that the activity that produced the most valuable items

331 readily exchanged for women or metal, was the chasing, hunting, trapping, skinning and scraping of these animals and their furs. Success in this game is likely to have demanded high mobility, skills in wayfinding and reading of tracks and access to a great number of particular paths and places. Thus, the child born into a house in the bottom of the rdal fjord in the Central Zone, learned to find its ways: from the best spots for gathering shells and fishing along the fjord, via good spots for catching salmon, squirrel and marten along the river through Moadal Valley, to the good patches of summer pasture for sheep and goat and the paths and favourite dwellings of the arctic fox in the upper alpines. The domestic animals were the prime asset of the long-house, and the rhythm of the animals is likely to have made time for the humans, as it does for the pastoral Nuer in Africa:
The passage of time is primarily the succession of [pastoral] tasks and their relation to one another (Evans-Pritchard 1940: 101p.; Ingold 2000: 197).

The goods produced along these paths by the total force of labour of the house could be put into diverse projects. For a boy any animals of his own and furs that he had caught, could be accumulated initially in order to make a bridewealth for marriage. For a house of medium wealth, a wife could be courted at a local feast in which groups from neighbouring valleys met up. A successful house in the mature phase of its cycle, i.e. with a large force of labour, plenty quality pastures and a large herd; domestic animals, products from these animals, low-value furs and unmarried daughters/sisters could be exchanged for high quality, topvalue pelts at these same feasts. Large and wealthy households might thus accumulate such top-value pelts from households in neighbouring valleys, and bring these along on longdistance trading expeditions to large-scale feasts within the CSWS to the east. Such households were thus in position to procure a wife from a wealthy distant household, and tie a link valuable in many respects. The first long journeys for an ambitious male juvenile were possibly made as labourer, in exchange for participation in the expeditions. The skills of the leader of a longdistance expedition could thus be exchanged for the labour of those unskilled. Male juveniles might thus aid in the political strategies of successful, experienced and skilled older males, also providing boats, pack-animals and other necessities. These expeditions are also likely to have been supra-house assemblages put together of juvenile and adult males from several houses, and potentially sisters or daughters to be wed.

332 Engagements of long-distance travels launched from NW Scandinavia were of two distinct types according to the kind of paths they used: the flat, maritime path along the North Way, and the uneven paths of the inland, either terrestrial or riverine. Expeditions along the North Way demanded strong physics for paddling, and a leader that knew safe paths, that knew of the dangerous barriers along these paths, and had the skills and knowledge to cope with these barriers. He would have been able to find paths for land-crossings, been able to read whether a stretch afore was in a dangerous or safe mood from birds, winds, clouds, and been able to find safe camps and harbours along the way. The leader might not have been willing to share and reveal his skills in detail, as his leadership in voyages was partly dependant on the rarity of his skills. If his entire crew came out fully skilled navigators after the return, his negotiations for furnishing an expedition would become more difficult next time. The leader might thus, in Fredrik Barths terms, be more of a conjurer than a guru (cf. Barth 1990), channelling his knowledge to his close younger male kin rather than to more distant male kin of the crew. In this way there might have been differences and potential controversies on board the boat: age, skills, experience, knowledge, rank, kinship, ownership of boat, goods for trade etc. Gender differences might also have been present between male crew/warriors/traders and females to be married at destination. In traditional cosmologies distant realms are often more than merely a specific metric distance or number of days journey away. Such realms and the Others dwelling there, are typically conceptualized as different from home and Us (Helms 1988). This difference often relate to temporality and in particular to cosmological time:
The contrast may be expressed in increasing differentiation of cosmological time, as when geographical distance or direction correlates with earlier epochs of human existence and thus with moral or behavioural conditions associated with earlier forms of uncontrolled and uncivilized human behaviour. Conversely, geographical distance as indicative of earlier epochs (origins) may be expressed through association with the heroic deeds of founding ancestors or civilizing culture heroes, who brought social order and useful skills to the chaos of earlier existence. In some cases contemporary travellers to or from such distant places may assume the guise of ancestors or heroes (or even of dangerous pre-civilized beings) while they combat the spiritual-physical dangers and obstacles signified by distance and travel (Helms 1988: 262).

Long-distance expeditions to the CSWS might thus also have been journeys to origins; potentially to the eastern realms where the sun rises and from where specific ancestral heroes once in the beginning of time brought the first domestic animal, the first cereal, the first

333 long-house and the first bronze. Helms has explored the importance of the Other in political strategies, as long-distance travel (1988), skilled crafting and rare materials (1993) and as affines or in-weds and ancestors (1998):
[...] most, perhaps all, of the resource-enhancing competitions; the social alliances, factionings, regroupings, and consolidations; and the craftings and aquisitionings of bodies of esoteric knowledge and of valued tangible goods either at home or from abroad that constitute the heart of political life constitute different ways of accessing origins, and from the perspective of political practitioners, if the means to do so is blocked in one direction, it may be approached by another (Helms 1998: 175). The journey to and from the CSWS and the Central Zone and the displacement of both humans (brides, foster children) and non-humans (bronze, garments, rock art motives, myths, stories, songs, dances) is thus likely to have been fundamental to the political dynamics within the Central Zone. In a similar vein groups in the Southern Zone might have used realms south of Skagerrak as a reference for Others and origins.

11.4.3 The bride from beyond

Marriage marks a significant step in human biographies, it marks the gain of one party and the loss of another and it typically spurs a series of trajectories: child-birth, house-building, clearance of new fields etc. In the Nordic Bronze Age it might have marked a change in female costume, and the bride would have taken on the long dress and let her hair grow long so that it could be arranged in a complex coiffure underneath a woven net. We might also suspect that at least some of the bronzes on the corpses in the burials were attained at marriage, particularly in the case of females. The phenomenon of marriage has been a major focus of social anthropology. It is thus necessary to present the basic nomenclature denominating patterns and regulations of marriage and kinship. If the wives leave their homes to live with their husbands, the anthropological term is virilocal or patrilocal residence. If it is the other way around, the term is uxorilocal or matrilocal residence. Further, exogam marriage systems prescribes that the marriage partner comes from outside the group, while endogam prescribes marriage within the group. How these groups are defined is intimately related to decent: patrilineal, matrilineal or bilateral, meaning that decent is defined through ones father, mother or through both. It must be stressed that there are few if any clues in the archaeological material that can be wielded in favour of any particular kinship, decent or marital systems. In spite of these difficulties, I still believe that this is a crucial bridge to cross in order to tap into the

334 discipline of social anthropology and the rhythm of human biographies. Kinship nomenclature from early IE texts indicate a common kinship and marriage pattern among the IE speaking groups, characterized by patrilineal descent, virilocal/patrilocal residence and a kinship terminology corresponding to what is known in anthropology as the Crow-Omaha system (Rowlands 1998: 144). A distinctive feature of the Crow-Omaha system is its lack of positive marriage rules between exogamous groups, and its prohibitation of marriage with a woman from a descent group that has previously provided a wife within a specified number of generations (ibid: 145). This prevents the development of stabile relationship between groups as wife-givers and wife-takers. A decent group must thus continuously find wives from other groups:
Members of groups that have provided marriage partners are therefore turned into fictitious kin category, and in each generation, new alliances have to be formed with groups that have not previously given or been given a wife. Hence the marriage system created is expansionist and highly probabilistic. [...] The rule operates to maintain ties with previous marriage partners through common rituals and gift-giving but without having to maintain the alliance through the exchange of women. The latter can instead be used to generate new alliances with strangers as part of a larger strategy of developing extencive and extremely dense marriage alliance networks, particularly if polygony is practised. As a result any one group will be linked to numerous others at any particular time (ibid: 145).

Marriage may be seen as a contract between two parties, i.e. two kin-groups or households. The house can also be seen as a labour force with the ability to produce pastures, children, herds, and valuables. In a system of patrilieal descent and virilocality it is not merely a woman that is transferred from one patri-group to another, but the control of her sexuality, her labour and her children as future members of the patrilineal group (Keesing & Strathern 1998: 219). Particularly among horticultarists-agriculturalists and pastoralists, payment for the loss of a woman is made through bridewealth. This is typically made with valuables that are sufficiently scarce so that they cannot easily be obtained by individual efforts, and that have a circulation controlled by senior males, so that young males become dependant on senior males in order to get married. In this way the circulation of the triangle of valuables, fertility and labour tends to be controlled by senior males (ibid: 219p). Top-value pelts, bronze and domestic animals are obvious candidates for bridewealth in our setting. If we accept the argument of common IE marriage-systems as patrilineal, exogam and with virilocal residence, we ought to embrace women/brides as significant transmitters

335 of skills, designs and world-views through space. In patrilineal societies the mothers brother is often of particular importance to the child (cf. Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 237). The son of a wife from a distant realm might keep up the relationship with this realm and in particular with his mothers brother. A boy from Aurland Valley, son of a wife brought to the valley from Scania, might thus have been brought up or stayed for a longer period of time in the house of the mothers brother in Scania as a foster child. In this way skills in melting and moulding procedures might have been transmitted into the Central Zone, and the Steine hoard might be a sacrifice made by a young male returned from the realms in the far southeast. Thus, virilocality and fostering would have provided opportunities for the acquisition of females and female skills and male skills respectively. But fostering in a distant realm might have depended on the ability to first acquire a wife from this area. Large scale transmission of male skills is accordingly best explained by migration. I have recognized the following as females in the previous chapters: Vigrestad, Rege I, Rykkja I, Gjrv, Kleppe II, Srheim, Orre, Tjtta, S-Braut, Bore I and Nese (bur. 4, 20, 55, 63, 67, 70, 72, 77, 78, 82, 92). In addition I have proposed that a female was buried at Kyrkje-Eide, and that females were prominent in arranging the funeral at Kyrkje-Eide (cf. chapt. 5.3, 10.5) as well as in the making of the axe from Hiksdal (cf. chapt. 7.8.3, 10.6). I suspect that females were involved also in the transmission of ceramic technologies into NW Scandinavia, i.e. asbestos pottery and face-urns in particular. In two cases I have proposed a link between females and moulding technology, Kyrkje-Eide and Hiksdal. I propose that while melting was exclusively male, moulding was not gender specific and could be performed by both male and females. This is based partly on the interpretation of the cosmological significance of bronze casting (cf. chapt. 10.3). If so, it is possible that moulding skills could be accessed through acquisition of foreign brides in marriage, and both melting and moulding skills through male fostering. We might thus consider the likelihood that some of the above females (or their mothers) were wives brought from exogame households into their husbands houses and farms in the Southern Zone. To this might be added that they are likely to have been brought up in and married into prestigious groups, and that both parties involved used marriage for making strategic alliances. We might further consider the issue of which party provided the jewellery the belt plates, brooches etc., for these brides? There are clearly multiple alternatives: 1) from an elder female, the mother/grandmother, of either the groom or the wife; 2) procured anew via exchange by either the father, brother of the wife or by the groom. Most of the female cases

336 above are from the latter part of EBA. This is the age of the large long-houses, presumably the home of extended families: e.g. brothers and their spouses and children, as well as any remaining elders such as the parents of the brothers. Interestingly, several cases in Central Jren indicated the use of heirlooms: females buried with contemporary brooches and bracelets in combination with old belt plates. This is clearest in the case of Rege I and Srheim, but is also suspected in the case of Orre and Tjtta. On the basis of the above considerations it is possible to suggest a scenario: when Central Jren rose to significance after 1300 BC, it involved male groups that were able to take a middle-man position and bring northern furs across Skagerrak to Limfjord in exchange for bronze. These males were thus equipped with North Jutish weaponry and accessories. Their wives on the other hand, were brought from Southern Jren traditionally linked to Zealand, a link that was now waning. These wives were equipped from their original households with wedding garments and their mothers belt plates originally procured from Zealand. Their husbands adorned them with fresh Jutish brooches and bracelets, and in this way they came to be adult women wearing combinations of jewellery unique in the Nordic Zone. Importantly, the gifts from their husbands were all types that could be worn by both male and females (cf. ribbed bracelets in App. V). Ambitious males in Central and Northern Jren might thus have spent most of their valuables in exchange for bronze at Limfjord (sisters, daughters, top-value pelts) and in exchange for pelts (sisters, daughters, bronze and textiles), while wives would have been procured at a lower cost from Southern Jren and from the North (possibly also by theft and violence). I thus propose that the Southern Zone did not procure wives from Jutland in BA III. There was a significant shift c. 1300 BC in which a Zealand-South Jren network with focus on lavish female funerals, gave way to a Limfjord-Central/North Jren network with focus on both male and female burials. The North Way may also have shifted from one dominated by foreign males and males with strong foreign links, to one operated by local males in North/Central Jren, Karmy and Sunnhordaland. In the case of Kyrkje-Eide, I have suggested that it was the artefacts belonging to a deceased unmarried female that was carved on the slab: dagger, sickle, pick, comb, belt plate, belt, skirt and a series of spatula tools. I also suggested that it was her mother who carved the slab and that she originated in the CSWS and was brought to the west as a bride. The three spatula figures I interpreted as tools for shaping wax templates, implying that the dead girl as well as her mother were skilled template and mould makers. In this way the Central Zone might have accessed the skills involved in the making of the Steine-Hheim

337 axes, the Faardrup axes and the Raknes axe (cf. chapt. 7.4). The transmission of these skills might thus have been the result of strategic marriage alliances made by the patriarchs of wealthy long-houses in the Central Zone in order to access just this kind of knowledge, as well as strengthening relations to a house on the eastern coasts.

11.4.2 Into the world

Many paths went not along the surface of ground or sea but still very much into the world: paths into the secrets of bronze casting, astronomy, rock art, cosmology etc. How would a child or juvenile learn the secrets of bronze casting? The issue of what kind of context bronze casting was performed in, and by implication, in what context such skills were taught and learned, is entangled in broader issues of specialization, gender, social organization and cosmology (Prescott 2000; Srensen 1996; Goldhahn 2007). I would like to explore the issue from a position at the long-house at the hub of the world: where in relation to the long-house was bronze casting performed, and how were human members of the casting-assemblage (the full web involved in transformation of metal) related to divisions along the lines of age and gender? Since the prevailing situation in the Bronze Age seems to have been a single house at each farmstead, let us for now consider these as single, extended households, typically with two brothers with their wives and children, their parents as well as un-married siblings. First, some of the scenarios along the variables of households and gender/age are sketched: Bronze casting was performed by a household and most members were allowed to participate. Bronze casting was performed by only a few members of a household, based on gender or age. Bronze casting was performed by a supra-household group put together from members of several different households, participation based on gender and age. These variables are potentially of crucial importance to how bronze casting was taught and learned. All these forms could be performed either in or near homes or away from homes. When we find remnants of bronze casting in e.g. a rock-shelter far away from long-houses, e.g. Skrivarhellaren or Ruskeneset, this does not exclude any of the scenarios above. In the case of Skrivarhellaren, it could be bronze casting performed by, e.g: a large portion of the household involved in the pastoral-path; it could be performed only by father, brother and sons or it could be performed by parts of households from neighbouring valleys (a war-

338 party/bronze casting party/expedition crew). Although the concept of specialization has several weaknesses, let us look at the above scenarios in light of some variables commonly linked to the issue of specialization (cf. Costin 2001: 275pp.): bronze casting was performed at household level, and these were excluded from other households through their engagement in this activity, their weaker engagement in the conventional activities of herding and cultivation, and through their lack of self-sufficiency in terms of food. bronze casting was performed by members from different households in stabile, repetitive aggregations. bronze casting was performed at household level, and these were excluded from others mainly by their access to skills and bronze, not because they were not selfsufficient in other respects. At heart of exploring these issues from an archaeological perspective, lies the question: what does it take to achieve the relevant skills and what does it take for these skills to endure ? Specialization is often proposed in archaeological cases when complex artefacts and technologies are encountered, but without any detailed exploration into the links between artefacts, skills and specialization (cf. Peregrine 1991: 1). In this way we suspect specialization in the cases of particularly impressive bronzes: swords, belt plates and lurs. In my opinion, archaeologists generally under-estimate the versatility of individual humans involved. Thus, specialization is proposed not so much because of a clear grasp of the complexity of the artefacts produced and the skills involved, but because of the lack of faith in the capacity of individual humans and individual households. I thus see clear possibilities to account for the data in NW Scandinavia in ways that do not involve specialization in conventional terms. I propose that bronze casting was performed mainly in large wealthy households with access to skills, bronze and labour. I also believe that predominantly male expedition crews/war parties/trading parties in some cases might also cast bronze. It is also possible that such wealthy households sponsored feasts or ceremonies in which they cast bronze as a ritualized performance. Within such a scenario a youth would generally acquire skills in bronze casting from his close kin predominantly from parents along with many other skills. Lineages that at some point in time accessed skills through marriage or fostering is thus likely to have transmitted these skills through parent-child relations, and thus generally kept these skills within the patri-lineage.

339 There is likely to have existed male clubs of diverse sorts in Bronze Age Scandinavia, but I propose that within NW Scandinavia they were short-lived, shifting and gathered for specific purposes: mainly expeditions of war, plunder or trade. Still, this means that an ambitious young male would be on the outlook for supra-household projects to participate in. In these he would be able to gain reputation, skills in wayfinding, fighting, and bargaining, and weaponry and other goods.

11.5 Nurturer, destroyer, gatherer

Hana, hana, hana. The post in the middle of the world broke down [...]. Hana, hana, hana. Our past great chief has fallen to the ground [...]. Hana, hana, hana. Our past great chief who has been at work at both ends of the year giving great potlatches [...] Hana, hana, hana, the great one who destroyed property, the one who broke coppers whose own name was Great-Destroyer [...] Hana, hana, hana, the one who killed by striking, our chief whose name was Great-OneFeared-in-the-World, the great chief [...] the great chief who came down from the above. Let the great one go. Now he is resting, the great one who came down from above, our chief, tribes [...] (Kwakiutl, Mourning Song for Lalakyotsa; Boas 1966: 350p.) O great one, source of surprice! O great one, master! Welcome, master! Welcome! you will be a fisherman, master! (Kwakiutl, Song of a working man for his son; Boas 1966: 346)

Becoming adult, being married and being in mid-life brings responsibility for those coming into life and those leaving life, and thus for the passage of blood, culture and humanity writ large. Characteristically, this involves dealing with the death of ones parents and the bringing up of ones children. As the old order begins to crumble, one is next in line and obliged to fill the voids. Power could be defined as: the ability of a person or social unit to influence the conduct and decision-making of another (Keesing & Strathern 1998: 265). Crucial to an understanding of power is that it is relational and situational. A person or unit can only be powerful in relation to someone in certain situations. In vain have academics been:

340
[...] trying to measure and define an imaginary substance, power, that people are more or less full of. Academics then exert great ingenuity trying to define what it is and to measure who has how much of it (Keesing & Strathern 1998: 265).

Although this is certainly a fair critique, we must also attempt to do justice do the Kwakiutl when they claim:
[...] that a man is made heavy by a potlach given [...]. The chief [...] swallow the tribes to which he distributes his wealth; he vomits property (Boas in Mauss 1970: note 128).

I have attempted to angle the chase for the powerful ones in the Bronze Age in line with Latours recommendations of tracing the networks they have traced (2001: 27): how they have become, in the minds of others, full of power. I assume that if a person in the Bronze Age was considered powerful by a large group of people, this was due to these peoples remembrance or knowledge of events and situations in which the person excelled. One significant variant is cases in which a larger group is persuaded that a person is powerful because he is linked to other entities more established and durable: being born by gods, animals, past heroes, ancestors etc. From an archaeological perspective conventional signs of power in a Bronze Age setting would be: the building of large monumental burials, metal put into graves, the building of large houses, boats, the organization of long-distance expeditions, and the casting of bronze. Power is particularly evident within the household along the axis of gender and age. Universal is the adults power over children, and their ability to influence the decision making of children. In the tradition of Western thought, the project of bringing up children is seen as a project of making, i.e. regarded as [...] a process of socialisation whereby approved norms and values are superimposed upon the raw material of new-born human infants (Ingold 2000: 87). Ingold argues against this view, arguing that it focuses on a too narrow environment, a too narrow childs world, and that it fails to encompass little more than the child and the adult. In stead he argues that it is actually more a case of growing, and that it is a process much akin to growing animals and plants:
[...] bringing up children or raising livestock, just as much as the cultivation of crops, is a process in which plants, animals or people are not so much made as grown, and in which surrounding human beings play a greater or lesser part in establishing the conditions of nurture (Ingold 2000: 87).

The construction of the house and the burial mound or cairn are of such a scale that I am inclined to see them not only as complex gatherings of non-humans, but also the products of human gatherings - and thus of potential feasts. These are possibly the best candidates for

341 direct remnants of specific feasts in the Bronze Age. In addition, most students of the Bronze Age would agree that feasts in a broad definition, is a practice that we infer [...] without necessarily being able to identify its constituent events (Dietler & Hayden 2001: 7). Many bronzes seem designed for a large audience. Also rock art panels often seem to address aggregations of people. The large scale displacement of bronze is also believed to have been achieved through exchange, and this exchange might in many cases have been conducted as part and in the vicinity of a feast. Feasts were large and small scale, and some were held in the vicinity, and thus potentially open for children. But some feasts were held elsewhere and implicated a long journey. In these cases the feast highlighted differentiations within the house: only some from the house left for such feasts, only some humans and only some things. Presumably did several such parts, fragments of houses, gather to form a travel-assembly or expedition crew. Thus, as the feast approached, marked by the sun, the moon, or other celestial phenomena able to synchronize feasters over large geographic areas, it also separated those leaving from those staying behind. This border is likely to have run along gender and age and young and elder but still able men are likely to have dominated such expeditions. The feast might also reinforce distinctions of gender, age, class, especially in terms of sponsorship and preparation, and preparations of food in particular:
Far more common, however, is a dominant female contribution to the crucial culinary and serving labor that transforms raw food ingredients into feasts. [...] cases where women provide the agricultural, culinary, and serving labor for male political activities are quite common [...] (Dietler & Hayden 2001: 11).

The cairn/mound, the house and the boat are interesting starting points for a discussion of feasts in general, and for work feast as a particular category of feasts (cf. Dietler & Herbich 2001: 241). The details of the funerals that left traces to us, were probably the result of decisions made by the small group of close kin to the dead. In cases of a normal death of high age, we might assume that it was the younger members of the house and close kin, e.g. a brother or son and his wife, that seized the opportunity and obligation to sponsor a funeral. But there are indications that the deaths of younger persons through accidents, violence, decease or child-birth were not uncommon. The death of certain individuals had wider repercussions than others, especially the death of aggrandizers well known to many through sponsorships of expeditions, work-feasts and solar celebrations etc. In such a case the news would have been sent out to all with the proper relations to the deceased: to her parents and their siblings living elsewhere, her brother/sister and their spouses and children, to the

342 husbands parents and their siblings, his brothers/sister and their spouses and children. The death of a male might have added other relations and guests: fellow participants in voyages, allies in warfare, trade partners etc. Some of these latter persons would have been located far away, and to give word to these and allow time for them to return and participate, would postpone the funeral. If the trade partners of the male buried in the lavish BA III burial at Jsund were invited, these would have to come from Limfjord, Lista, Sunnhordaland and Trondheimsfjord. There is a 5 days journey from Sola to Limfjord (cf. Kval 2007: 62), meaning that it would take a minimum of 10 days from the time of death to guests would be arriving from Limfjord. Thus, it would be possible to gather guests from the area stretching from Lista and Limfjord in the south to Hardangerfjord in the north within relatively short time (e.g. two weeks). Sending the message and bringing back guest from Tonnes-Holan at Beitstad would take at least 32 days (cf. chapt. 8.3.2). This brings us to the issue of what to do with the body of the dead. Cremation would be an alternative that preserved the dead and enabled the final interment and funeral to be postponed (stigrd 1999: 350p.). But all of the largest mounds above 2000m3, from Jsund, Reheia III and V contained inhumations, two of them seem clearly to have been dressed in textiles and put down in anatomical correct positions (cf. App. III; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: Fig. 78-81, note that different terms and numbers for the mounds are used here). Could these bodies have been preserved for a month? Alternatively, the body was dressed and put down in the coffin in an initial phase without these persons present, with local guests only. The coffin might now have been left uncovered until guests had arrived. In the cases of the males at Reheia III and V and Jsund, 100-150 guests might have participated in a feast involving 10 days of hard labour invested in the building of the monuments. The sponsor is likely to have been a close relative, probably either a son and his wife or his brother and his wife. It is likely to have been a situation of significant political importance and an attempt to transfer the deceaseds relationships, properties and status to the sponsor (stigrd & Goldhahn 2006). Specifically, one such issue might have been the son or younger brother of the dead at Jsund attempting to renew bonds to his allies arriving from afar, and the relations to locals at the same time. The guests arriving from afar might in such a setting be used as a legitimization in local relations, perhaps through a collapse in the distinction between distant lands and the living versus the lands of the dead ancestors. If the sponsor succeeded in bringing in these guests from afar it might strengthen his claims on behalf of the dead towards local guests. Kwakiutl nobles bore titles such as Towards whom one paddles and The Place where one comes

343 (Mauss 1970: note 151). And, no doubt an important aspect of power is the ability to gather both people and wealth. It is possible to see the bronze artefact, the house and the burial as gatherings: these are all constellations or gatherings of bits and pieces from different loci. The burial was a gathering of molluscs and sand from the beach and sea, stone slabs from a specific quarry, boulders and stones from a specific location and turf presumably stripped from specific fields, and also a gathering of the participants, their things and their agency through their labour. The bronze artefact was a gathering of tin and copper, forced air from a skin-bellow from animal-hide, fire, clay and quartz, soapstone, wax, and of specific humans actors, their acts and their effects. The house was a gathering of timber and bark from trees in the woods, straw from the bog, clay, and the bronze axes and humans involved. As acts of displacement, as congealed acts of gathering, the bronze artefact, the burial cairn and the house should be fundamental to an understanding of the Bronze Age. Hence, the funeral can profitably be explored as a Collective Work Event, and most likely as a Work feast (cf. Dietler & Herbich 2001). The labour consisted mainly of moving the basic building materials of turf and/or stone from their place of origin to the building site. Although in the case of funerals, there would be strong and multiple obligations and possible advantages for kin, friends and allies to attend and work, it is also important to see it as an exchange and a possibility for both sponsor and guest to aggrandize. The monumental burials are thus to be seen as congealed action resulting from a work-feast, and the building phases is directly related to the scale of the work-force and in some cases the scale of the feast. Although sponsors and those receiving the political benefits of sponsorships are likely to have been male, it is best seen as a project of the household. The prerequisites would be control of raw goods for food and drink, i.e. domestic animals and grain, the work-force to process these goods into food for feast, and for arranging the serving. It would also include access to building materials and specific places with such materials. The earthen mounds seem to have been built from grass-turfs. The stripping of large fields of valuable pasture have been a recurrent issue in accounts of Bronze Age funerals, and it might be seen as a sacrifice and act of conspicuous consumption in line with the destruction of valuables in the potlach of NW-Coast America. But there are also interesting arguments that this stripping of grasslands might have been combined with the making and preparation of new fields for grain production (Rasmussen 1993: 183). Clearly, making grassland into field was hard, time consuming work with wooden plough, pick, shovel or all in combination. Even after a few

344 years of rest, a dense mat of turf is formed on a previous field. The reliance on a single species, barley, prevented rotation of fields and demanded use of fertilizers and the practice of fallowing (Bakkevig 1998: 57pp.). And if alcoholic beverage, e.g. mead, was essential to feasting and in the exchange of work-commensality, fields and work-force would have been an essential restriction in the process from grassland to cereal. In this way, mound-building might have been linked to the preparation of fields for growing cereal. As soon as more than average sized fields were established, a household might have been caught up in a cycle of labour exchange and work feasts, i.e. that such was necessary in order to harvest the fields. The Bronze Age barley crops are likely to have had long straws, relative more straw and less cereal. If extra care was taken, and extra work invested, these long straws (1.4m) could be preserved and used for roof-thatching. A large house with a large roof might in this way be linked to large crops of cereal. The technological complex of cereal raising-food processinghouse building is likely to have been labour intensive. Expansion in the domain of cereal cultivation is thus likely to have involved exchange of external labour. This might rapidly lead to a division between work-feast sponsors with large cereal production, sometimes sponsoring, sometimes working as guests on the one hand, and those who only attend as working guests but never act as sponsors on the other hand. This, I believe, might be an initial and very subtle distinction of power between houses and households (Dietler & Herbich 2001: 252p.). Mead and meat, and possibly a cereal food (bread or porridge, cf. Hland 2006) are good candidates for feast-food. The slaughter of calves, sheep or goats is likely to have been part of such sponsorship. Thus, large crops and large herds, large fields and quality pastures, would have been necessities for sponsorship of feasts. Although some of the tasks linked to this life-style might have been solved through exchange of labour, it is likely to also have necessitated control of a relatively large core work-force outside obligations of exchange, i.e. the household and close kin. This is a significant cause as to why prominent males and feast sponsors have numerous wives in African societies (Dietler & Herbich 2001: 255p.). Without postulating polygamy in the Nordic Bronze Age, I assume that feast sponsorship necessitated a year-round core work-force of the sponsors female kin. In a system such as the Crow-Omaha (cf. above), this would include wife, un-married sisters and un-married daughters, sisters-in-law and mother. In a Bronze Age settlement aggregation of 2-3 houses located within short distance from each other, with father and two sons, such a female work-force would include: their wives, their unmarried sisters and their daughters. Possibly, fathers brother and his sons, their wives, unmarried sisters and

345 daughters, would also have been located in the vicinity and potentially been part of Us. This indicates that core work-forces might be unstable through time and closely related to the cycles of the individual households. I have suggested that the person buried with the decorated slab from Kyrkje-Eide was an unmarried daughter, and that her mother originally from the Swedish east-coast made the carvings. These carvings seem to stress the deceased position as labourer in life, a maker of fields and harvester of crops. These qualities might have been cultivated and highlighted in political contexts, as marriage was also about the transfer of labour from one house to another. The carvings on the Kyrkje-Eide burial coffin highlighted what the house of the young girl sacrificed from the sphere of exchange: labour, fertility, and creativity. The expedition might also have taken the form of a work-feast rather than a cooperative. Sponsors would equip a boat with paddle-oars and food for the journey. The price could be the goods from an anticipated successful raid, parts of the goods traded by the sponsor at a trade encounter or simply participation in a distant feast. The sponsor simply provided leadership, skills of wayfinding, equipment and food. The sponsor might also have paid such a crew in bronze, i.e. equip a war-party with weaponry. I have suggested a zone division of NW Scandinavia that might also be applied to feasting: an Arctic Zone, a Northern Zone, a Central Zone and a Southern Zone. Feasting within each of these zones might be opposed to feasting between these zones (participants from different zones) in terms of food, scale and purpose. Within the setting suggested for Jren, with a high degree of sedentism, high focus on raising cereal and work-feasts, there might have been less time and energy for hunting expeditions into the highlands for valuable furs. In contrast, it is possible to construct a Central Zone with less sedentary groups with less focus on cereal, perhaps used exclusively for feasting purposes, less in need of collective work-forces, and with a stronger focus on domestic animals through transhumant pastoralism from the fjords to the highlands (e.g. Prescott 1995: 73pp.). This enabled expansion in herd-size to the point that it could not be fed through winter, and winter-fodder might have been a restriction to aggrandizers. But this transhumance and the lower investment in cereals and fields might have been better combined with hunting-and trapping activities. Hunting of small-game and trapping as well as herding might have been activities of less rigid gender divisions, and tasks in which children also could take part. There might thus have been a different kind of aggrandizer in the Central Zone focusing on raising large herds of goats and sheep and hunting/trapping for valuable furs.

346 In the Central Zone I suspect that there might have been feasts outside the sphere of longhouses. The mountains made up a natural cross-road between widely dispersed valleys and fjords. Some kind of highland feast in summer/fall dining on reindeer or domestic animals might have been essential in Central Zone dynamics. In these feasts on neutral ground, sponsorship might have been downplayed, and the feast might have been a purer arena for exchange: of marriage partners, domestic animals and pelts. In such a scenario the aggrandizer in charge of a mature and wealthy household could have exchanged surplus animals for pelts from less wealthy houses with only small and incipient herds. Thus, hunting and trapping might have been one path to building a sizable herd, and thus a path to getting married for young males. In this way successful households would have been able to gather significant amounts of top-value pelts, more than it was able to hunt and trap itself. These two models pose questions: although Jren is likely to have been more densely populated, have witnessed more radical social differences and thus has the potential for the establishment of lasting positions and institutions (chieftains, chiefs); how were these households able to procure bronze? My suggestion is simply that crucial in order to rise to glory in Jren, was besides the above features of cultivation and feast sponsorship, to act as a middle-man between the north and the south. I have argued that the crucial compensation for bronze was fur, and the main goods produced at Jren such as cereals, animals and textiles were less valued south of Skagerrak. This involved sponsoring expeditions along the North Way for raiding or trading, both for procurement of pelts. But with what did Jren trade for pelts? It is also worth considering that Jren was linked to the north mainly through maritime transport, and by implication only relatively low bulk commodities could be used in the exchange for pelts. This rules out the exchange of surplus animals, and probably also cattle hides. Labour intensive textiles produced by the relatively more stationary households at Jren might have been the crucial commodity in this trade already from the Late Neolithic. Possibly, these would be more valued in the Northern Zone (fewer long-houses, smaller herds, higher mobility and reliance of hunting/fishing). This scenario would explain some of the historical developments discerned in the previous chapters: only when Jren was able to act as a middle-man did it procure significant quantities of bronze. The reason why Jren seems to have aimed for Beitstad and the gate to the Arctic rather than the Central Zone, might have been because the commodities offered by Jren, textiles, were also produced on a relatively high scale in the Central Zone (in addition to the Central Zones attachment to the CSWS). If textiles had such a crucial function in the acquisition of pelts,

347 this might have added to the importance of large female core-work forces available to aggrandizers at Jren. Possibly, other surplus (animals, hides, butter etc.) could be traded for textiles from neighbouring households. When it comes to assessing the issue of power in the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia, Jren stands out in particular. Not because aggrandizers here were fuller of power in an isolated sense, but because they were situated in a densely populated area that created a different arena for aggrandizers than elsewhere: there were many more to have power over, and these were stationary because of their reliance on cereal production and thus unable to vote with their feet. Power is relational bronzes are not sufficient, there also have to be someone to impress, dazzle, gather and subdue. Bronzes put down in burials might reflect more than a certain amount of valuable material and success in production and trade. Some of the BA II burials from NW Scandinavia evidently contained persons wearing products from some of the finest moulders and casters in the Nordic Zone. In addition the designs of the B dagger, the Vigrestad brooch, the Kleppe II plate etc. could be considered progressive, and thus the products of founders with the ability and confidence to stretch stylistic trends, to bend ideas of how a dagger, brooch or belt plate was supposed to look like. Regarding the first two horizons of monumental burials at Jren and Beitstad, I believe that the interred persons and the sponsors were not necessarily (or not merely) powerful in Jren and Beitstad, but they were also intimately linked to powerful groups in the Elbe-Kiel Bay area (early BA II) and Zealand (late BA II). I have also argued that these links were forged mainly from the outside, as a result of decisions made by the kin-groups embracing those interred in the Albertsdorf monument at the Elbe and specific groups on Northern Zealand. The primary aim of these expeditions was to procure valuable pelts, and thus to make people come and make people bring and give pelts. The necessary authority might have been created by claiming and demonstrating intimate relations to the far-away, the Elbe-Kiel and Zealand as there-andthen areas as opposed to the here-and-now areas along the North Way (cf. Helms 1998: 157pp.). This might partly have been achieved through the display of bronze. Authority was also needed in order to create the monumental structures of the Kvlehodlen house, and the mounds and cairns at Holen I, B I, Hognestad, Frset, Kleppe II, Vigrestad and Gjrv. For this they had to establish the authority or power to gather, to make people come and participate. Let us imagine that the first link was initiated by a southern household in the Elbe-Kiel Bay area by giving a wife to a rich household such as the one at Kvlehodlen c.

348 1600 BC. Using a 25 year generation would make B, Holen and Hognestad the grandgrand-children of this founding-couple at the earliest or they could have been as much as 5 generations later (cf. Fig. 14). We might see them as descending, and spread the three burials within the 160 year time span, and include the loose findings from Pollestad and Nrland as well (nr. 220, 223): The grand-grand child buried at B c. 1490BC at age 60, Holen 1450BC, Hognestad 1400 BC. Even so, there seem to be a hiatus between the establishment of the Kvlehodlen marriage and the first monumental burials containing bronze. When these first appear they are distributed along the Hana River and its tributaries. This second phase is also linked to the establishment of links to Beitstadfjord, Etne and Lista. This phase reveals the transmission of three features related to funeral rituals encountered along the North Way: the cremation of the dead, the building of monumental mounds or cairns and the incorporation of rock art. This network operated rather directly from the southern borderzone of the Nordic Zone on the Elbe to its northern border at Beitstad. These northern relations are likely to have been an integral part in competition for authority and leadership in the Elbe-Kiel Bay area. That the north was a source of more than pelts is indicated by the imagery incorporated in the Anderlingen burial. The inspiration for this is likely to have been burial-art of Trondheimsfjord, e.g. the stone from Rishaug. A southern male expedition crew might thus have brought a wife from Trondheimsfjord to the far south. And this wife might have introduced the rock art medium to the Elbe as she co-sponsored the funeral-feast of one of her southern affines at Anderlingen (Pl.58, Map 12). We might assume that for the 260 years the North Way Elbe link lasted, it aided the Elbe region to create and withstand close relations with centres south of the Danube, and contributed to the rise of sites such as Bernstorf. The making of authority in these relation, might have involved the use of the North Way in a more subtle way as a locus of the distant, exclusive, strange, dangerous North. To have been there, to be able to find the way, to have endured the dangers and to possess the skills to deal with the hazards of sea, might have been significant assets when about to organize and equip a voyage to the north or any other daring project. Authority measured by the investment of labour in houses, burials or bronze in burials, would no doubt place authority in BA II-III in Jren: large three-isled houses, large monumental burials. The density of houses and households would have been greater in Jren, and thus the logistics and potential of sponsoring work-exchange would have been better. It would have been relatively easier to make workers attend a feast, and thus relatively easier to get large scale projects made. Importantly, possession of bronze does not

349 reflect power in a simple manner: a household in the Central Zone with relatively little power over neighbouring households could hunt and trap pelts and bring these into the CSWS and trade them for many bronzes. And for this reason, I would suggest that power and hierarchy has a too dominating position in the study of bronze in the Bronze Age. The person full of power in the Bronze Age was an elder, still able male; of renown through wide webs as a giver of feasts, skilled in engagement with Otherness, in paths, activities and places unknown to others. He was knowledgeable of other Beings on earth and sky, skilled in bronze casting, in the nurturing of animals, children, household and crops, a skilled killer of enemies, clearer of pastures and fields, and builder of boats and houses.

11.6 From cradle to cairn

The most important result of this attempt, I believe, is the display of what we lack on the one hand, and what have yet to explore on the other. It therefore says also something of methodology and what to do first and second. Clearly, we will never be able to link the person in a specific cairn to a specific cradle in a specific house. The specific constellation of activities, experiences and memories commonly associated with the concept of biography, is thus out of reach for archaeology. Despite this, the exercise of taking a biographical point of view is useful since it reveals some of the pit-falls of archaeological categorisation. It is possible to grasp a sense of the accumulation of actions and experiences in individual minds from the participation in a series of arenas that are not obviously linked in our material: house, feast, path, rock art, bronze-casting, burial. But importantly, there are also a vast range of relevant activities/technologies/situations that may or may not be represented in our data, but have yet to be explored. These appear when we fuse a concept of biography with Latours methodology of thorough tracings, and with ideas of the importance of gradual learning from Ingold and Tomasello. Accounting for the presence of various simple and complex skills would then take us into unknown interpretative territories. Thus, if we become better at tracing transformation and displacement of matter, and better at reconstructing the skills involved, we may also take a step further and trace the coming into being of skills. I contend that making artefacts complete in this way allows us to reconstruct more complete human beings in prehistory. I also contend that the link to social anthropology and its rhythm of event within life is valuable only when archaeology has been allowed to trace both wide and dense webs from its data.

350

Chapter 12: Bronze Age beyond bifurcation

In the introductory chapter I planned an escape from an archaeology that has come to disregard what is given in experience. The archaeological experience, the archaeological aesthetic or way of looking was from the beginning one that discerned human made things from non-human made, that compared and discerned ever more differences and similarities both in material and morphology. At heart of archaeological experience are signs of human transformation and displacement of matter. Rather than disregarding the materiality of archaeological data, and rather than blurring these distinctions and abandoning this distinct archaeological way of looking; I argued that the key for an escape was to upgrade and add to this sight, to see artefacts as: societies, minds and acts. Only in this way will archaeology be able to stay on the river and not strand on one bank, be it the hard one of nature, world and body or the soft one of the social, mind and word.

12.1 Wide and dense webs

A first step was taken in part I in order to discern a long historical time rhythm and wide spatial webs through the bronze type. Aided by a review of the Stone Age background and non-bronze data from the Bronze Age, I arrived at the following: That it is possible to discern 9 historical phases from the preserved metal data That NW Scandinavia may be divided in a Southern, a Central, a Northern and an Arctic Zone, and that although the boundaries were shifting important dividing lines can be drawn in the Hardanger/Sunnhordaland area, at Beitstad, and at Rana. That three major networks existed throughout the Bronze Age, but shifted in character and importance: o The Central Zone was linked through overland and riverine routes towards the eastern lowlands, particularly the Central-Swedish-Water-System between Lake Mlaren in the north and Glomma estuary in the south. This general network was stabile from the very beginning to the very end of the Bronze Age. o The maritime North Way linked up the Southern Zone to Beitstad and the border area between the Central Zone and the Northern Zone, and to the Tjeldsund area in the Arctic. Southwards, the North Way and the Southern

351 Zone was linked first to Northern Jutland, then to the Elbe-Kiel Bay area (1600/1500-1340 BC), then to Northern Zealand (1340-1300 BC) and then again Northern Jutland (1300-700 BC). o An Arctic overland route linked both the Arctic and the Northern Zones to Lake Onega and the Volga-Kama rivers from c. 1800 BC onwards. The first two of the above brought mainly bronzes of Nordic and Continental types made from Alpine coppers, and the North Way and the Central Zone-CSWS networks seem to have worked in competition. The overland Central Zone-CSWS networks dominated 1700-1500 BC and 700-500 BC and were in both these phases able to supply the Southern Zone with bronzes. The Southern Zone dominated 1500700 BC with a boom 1300-900 BC. The Arctic network brought the very first metal 1900-1700 BC probably from the Onega-area. Then it was at work 1500-500 BC, bringing coppers most likely from the Ural via the Volga-Kama, first linked to the Seima-Turbino horizon and then to the Ananino horizon. The Southern Zone extended the North Way network into the high Arctic from 1100 BC, having significant repercussions to both the Central and Southern Zones, i.e. the development of novel bronze designs along the coast.

A second step was taken in part II in order to explore the dense webs spun around the transformation and displacement of matter. The most significant results were: A range of non-human participants in the webs of transformation, i.e. entities involved in melting, moulding and casting operations, were located and explored. A range of non-human participants in the web of displacement were located and explored, in particular a selection of the most important paths, their metrical distances and estimates of the duration of journeys with different technologies along these paths. The Central Zone engaged in complex transformations of metal involving softmoulding techniques and plastic templates as well as melting loads above 1000g in the period 1700-1500 BC.

352 The Central Zone engaged in transformations of metal involving complex soapstone moulding 1100-900 BC The Southern Zone engaged in highly complex and innovative transformation of metal at a short phase c. 1330-1300 BC in which it was linked to Northern Zealand Soapstone moulding did not flourish in the Southern Zone until 900-500 BC, and the majority of these moulds have features that link them to the Arctic Zone both the artefacts made and the specific procedures used. These pointed to a circumscribed area in Northern Finland and Karelia. The Northern and Arctic Zones engaged in simpler mechanical transformations of copper in 1900-1700 BC, in casting operation involving soapstone moulds 15001300 BC (probably also 1300-500BC) After exploring both wide webs through the type and dense webs through the transformation and displacement of individual bronzes, a third step was taken in part III. Here I sought to: Explain changing webs of different density and distribute agency discriminately among the participants. Reason in a style that does justice to the experience of archaeologists. Reason in a style that does justice to the experience of people in the Bronze Age.

These attempts were merged into three chapters focusing on three different time-rhythms: historical, situational and human biographical, with reference to the disciplines of history, cognitive psychology and social anthropology respectively.

12.2 What happened in the Bronze Age?

I set out to a write a story of the Bronze Age in which the displacement and transformation of metals were incorporated, and construct a historical trajectory that were capable of creating the constellations of non-humans that I discerned through basic archaeological tools. A central aim of the thesis, and chapter 9-11 in particular, was to explore and explain. What happened in the Bronze Age, and why? Why did the bronzes from NW Scandinavia appear and take the form they did 1700-500 BC? I contend that the map of distribution is the microscope of archaeology, and that they are crucial bridges to historical states-of-affairs. By explaining the Bronze Age I aimed specifically at accounting for maps as state-of-affairs. Initially two explanatory challenges were closed in on:

353 1) In order to make the displacement of bronze and thus the wide webs rational a compensation for metal had to be located. This might have been immaterial (e.g. services) or material that has not been preserved, either human (slaves, spouses) or non-human (the range of potential valuables from the north). Although all of these might have played some role as compensations for bronze, I argued that it was first and foremost high quality furs and pelts from a range of species available mainly in the Central, Northern and Arctic Zones, that functioned as compensation for bronze. 2) In order to understand the widespread displacement of bronze it was also necessary to explore why bronze was attractive: before other valuables were exchanged for bronze, there had to be a desire for bronze. Rather than standing on the soft river bank and seeing bronze as a passive thing that the human being fills with symbolic content, I argued that bronze was active, i.e. sticky or adhesive towards the human mind, a mind that extended through the body and into the world. The sensory specifics of the way bronzes came into being were significant to their adhesiveness: shifts in temperature, colours and consistency. Crucial also were the containers involved in these transformations: bellows, furnace, crucible and mould. These features linked bronze to bodies and bodily processes on the one hand and celestial entities and phenomena on the other. In this way bronze was a non-human agent working on the human mind as well as an extension of the human mind, and bronze was therefore in itself a significant part of the motor that drove historical changes through the Bronze Age. A first significant state-of-affair and historical phenomenon to explain was the very beginning of the Bronze Age. The extraordinary character of the tracings of the first bronzes in NW Scandinavia and the maps constructed on this basis, steered my interpretation towards rather direct long-distance contacts between the Central Zone and the CSWS on the one hand and Jren and the Elbe-Kiel Bay area on the other. Accordingly, NW Scandinavia was not added onto the end of long chains of down-the-line type networks at Northern Jutland or Oslofjord, but rather directly to two areas with direct and exclusive links to the Alps of Continental Europe, and indirectly to Mycenae. These distinct networks, and by implication the beginning of the Bronze Age in NW Scandinavia, I saw as a result mainly of decisions made in, and expeditions launched from, the Swiss Alps. These actions were aimed for direct access to amber from the Baltic and pelts from NW Scandinavia, and they

354 were aimed at circumventing the dominant Unetice Culture between Elbe and Oder Rivers. The reason for this sudden desire for furs in the Alps, I believe was that the Alps had been linked into an entire new market and network: the Mycenaean and Eastern Mediterranean. Hence, I saw the meeting of Alpine groups and Mycenaean warrior-traders exploring the Western Mediterranean as a crucial source of the changes in Europe from 1700 BC. In this setting too, bronze and gold might be included as significant agents: it was the Mycenaean warrior in his full costume that dazzled, impressed and bent the minds of Alpiners. Not only did Mycenaeans introduce these novel artefacts that stretched imaginations with their morphology, decoration and combination of different metals, they also introduced and demonstrated the advantages of novel attitudes towards artefacts in bulk. From these meetings and in comparable meetings further north as a result, did not only arise an increased desire to posses bronzes and participate in their coming into being, but also novel concepts of large scale transport and exchange of commodities. Behind the first northern expeditions launched from the Alps were two changes in mentality towards metals: A focus on the combination of different metals, copper, tin, bronze, gold, and a strengthened link between metals on earth and entities on the sky. A focus on the displacement and exchange of large quantities of goods, a loosening of the ties and obligations that limited the scale of exchange, and thus an increased commercialisation more in line with e.g. the Karoum system of the Near-East. In light of this scenario, and in light of the historical fur trade (chapt. 9.1.2), we might assume that in the Eastern Mediterranean there were able persons that had their minds moulded by novel materials for costume, dress and thus for personal appearance: the thick, dense, shining, variously coloured pelt from the high arctic, and the red-yellow, translucent and sun-like amber. I thus contend that the material non-human world, bronze, gold, amber and fur in particular, cannot be passive and secondary in our explanations of the Bronze Age. The above scenario had lasting effects on Scandinavia: from now on a significant force in historical change was competition over access to valuable pelts within the Central, Northern and Arctic Zones, pelts to be exchanged for bronze. When the first significant blow to the copper production in the Alps came, possibly related to the collapse of the Mediterranean cities, continental networks shifted their gravity eastwards on the Continent. The reaction to this shift in NW Scandinavia was that groups in the Southern Zone increased their engagement in the North Way, circumvented the previous node at Beitstad, and forged direct links with the Arctic north of Tjeldsund. These engagements had significant

355 repercussions, as they brought bronze and ceramic designs and technologies, and possibly a significant number of people, from the Arctic into the Southern Zone. The specific procedures and designs point to Northern Finland and Karelia, and probably to a link between the Tjeldsund and the interior through the Torne River system. This influx of people southwards might have led to, or been enabled by, the collapse in the southern end of the North Way, as there seems to have been little or no contact across Skagerrak after 700 BC. The state of affairs at the end of the BA seems to strangely replicate the beginning: bronzes enter NW Scandinavia from the CSWS across the interior and the highlands, and again Jren takes the position in the far southwestern end of a mainly overland bronze network. This historical scenario, the Arctic relations in particular, poses new questions to the ensuing Iron Age: when, from where and by whom was iron introduced? What happened to the networks that linked the Central Zone to the CSWS? What happened north of Beitstad?

12.3 Technology, authority and the malleable mind

dimensional art:

Bruno Latour describes modern science and its epistemology as strongly influenced by twoIm sorry to say but epistemology is the fault of Dutch painters and merchants... You the Dutch impressed visitors so much, and especially Descartes, that he ended up confusing the white piece of paper on which figures are drawn with its res extensa! Catastrophic consequences for philosophy: never did it recover from this confusion between ontology and visualisation strategies. [...] No wonder every literate mind all over Europe became intoxicated with such a fabulously powerful aesthetic of reason. And yet, it remains an aesthetic, a way to draw things together (2008: 43).

Latours scenario for the coming into being of modern science can be explored through Gells analytic apparatus of art. Scene one involves painted art as index, painter as artist, world as prototype, and Descartes as recipient: (painterartworld) (A)Descart (P). The painter and the painting exerts agency onto Descartes, and he abducts agency, or rather he confuses or merges prototype and index; and he come to see the painters act of drawing in aspects of the world as a way of gaining knowledge, a way of knowing the world. The second scene involves the science book as index, Descartes as artist, world as prototype, other scientists as recipients: (Descartesbookworld) (A)scientists (P). What this illustrates is the immense agency of painters and pieces of two-dimensional art, and the enchanting qualities of skilled modes of seeing, drawing and printing. Embracing Latours statement, it seems clear that skilled depictions exerted significant agency onto scientists,

356 and in the end steered towards a certain mode of seeing the world and reasoning about the world widespread in Europe. To this must be added the ways in which these indexes were staged as books and plates in classrooms, and the staging of books as artists of indexes such as machines and architecture. The authority of the new mode of seeing was created by staging the new fantastic machines as the creations of the science book. The world is the prototype, and the book becomes a tool for exerting agency onto nature, for controlling and mastering nature, and the machine is staged as evidence for the agency of the book. To what degree does art and technology from perspective painting, photography, film, text and digital computing, shape our minds and the way we reason and experience the world? The popular but inaccurate metaphor of the software mind in a hardware body is a recent example. It is also possible to apply Gells analysis to our own field of art: the technology of writing archaeological texts. Our texts as indexes are no doubt designed to change and influence the minds of recipients. Through the enchanted technology of writing and the enchanted indexes of our texts, we draw together and draw in other more authoritative objects of art and artists through our references to Latour, Gell and Ingold etc. These works are, I admit, more than pure indexes as transmissions of pure information possibly I have made my references also in the same way as the boat builder on New Guinea uses his carvings: to impress, to dazzle and to convince. I draw in more than the sentences and the meaning codified in them; I draw them in and make sure that it is evident that they derive from specific pieces of art made by specific artists and nourish on the authority of their superior skills. To some degree this is regulated by law and norms of copyright, in order to protect these works as creations and extensions of the minds of these writers. The question is: if I could choose, would I have seized the opportunity to remove the quotation marks and the parentheses with the name of Latour, Gell and Ingold from my favourite quotations? Make them extensions of my mind rather than Latours or Gells mind? Despite my expressed will to level the disciplinary hierarchy, was my introductory trips into philosophy, cognitive science and sociology still forced by the agency of these as superior disciplines or schools of art? Asgeir Svestad has termed a trend in archaeological writings from the nineties onwards: find your own philosopher (Svestad 2003: 127pp.). This trend could be seen as a result of a competitive strategy of constantly hinting at new and unknown authorities from the superior school of art of philosophy. As long as the superiority of philosophy is shared by artists and recipients, constantly extending new unknown indexes and minds from

357 philosophy into archaeological texts becomes a competitive game of enchanting technology dazzling and impressing the recipients as well as bewildering them by creating the hierarchy of new philosopher> artist> recipient. It is a creative making that takes the reader by surprise each time. Svestad claims that a serious brake on the success of archaeology as a discipline has been a lack of its own theoretical frameworks (Svestad 2003: 256). I suspect this ultimately is the result of low self-esteem (relative to other disciplines) and lack of belief in the value of things preserved from the past (our data). The entire disciplinary landscape is now changing; many point a finger towards the thing and some point directly to archaeology. With this new confidence, theories that are distinctly archaeological in character will be developed. As these seem all to focus on tracing relations and networks, I believe it is also of importance to become more effective in tracing such networks. Such efficiency will come at a cost, and I believe the trend find your own philosopher and much of the theoretical passages in archaeological works in general, are counterproductive to the project of effective tracing. Not only have these works been ineffective themselves in this respect, but through their enchanted writing they subdue the wider audience and practitioners of the discipline. I suggest that the cost to be paid in order to trace more relations, more and wider networks in a single article, thesis or book, is theory. We do not all need to be philosophers all the time. And we might aim towards ways of convincing, dazzling and impressing an audience that may be still enchanting but more productive in regard to the project of retracing prehistory from data.

12.4 Bronze Age studies beyond bifurcation

Whether I have accomplished to escape as I planned it (cf. chapt.1) will be for others to judge. But this exercise has led to the crystallization of a set of challenges and to specific hopes for future Bronze Age studies. The Nordic Bronze Age has become stabilized, self-evident and taken for granted. It simply needs to be rediscovered and retraced. The Nordic BA or Zone is no more than a set of networks, mainly bronze artefacts grouped into types or societies spread unevenly through the Nordic area. The Nordic BA as a set of networks suffers still from the modern national borders of Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Norway and Finland. The coming into being of the Nordic Bronze Age, the development of its initial networks, ought to be investigated through a comparison of the flanged axes, the spearheads, the Faardrup axes etc. It is not sufficient to demarcate the Nordic against the Arctic and the Continental, we must investigate its

358 internal networks. As I hope this thesis has demonstrated with some clarity, this internal networking was not link ups between the nearest nodes or agents. The perhaps very first distinctly Nordic bronze society, that of the Faardrup axes, was created in Southeast Scandinavia, and one branch of its network reached northwards across the entire Scandinavian peninsula to Stadt-Beitstad, and then southwards along the plateu to Hardanger and along the North Way down to Jren. Such typological societies and their specific pathways should become matters of concern rather than matters of fact. The one strategy that ensures and enables this is to make complete societies available as drawings. When the Nordic Bronze Age, i.e. its networks and entities, are put on public display the pulse of the debate on artefacts as societies should increase. One important criterion when it comes to evaluating how closely related artefacts are, ought to be the specifics of their coming into being, the acts and skills that brought them into existence. At heart of typological grouping lie not only degrees of similarity, but assumptions on similarity between the productions of the artefacts, and that the creative, skilled bodies involved were somehow related. A rejuvenation of the concept of type as society necessitates a tracing between the individual typological representatives, in principle from one Faardrup axe into another. Such a tracing has to move through the dense webs of fire, clay, air, and the containers of crucible, mould and body. Crucial to this tracing will be an increased usage of experimental archaeology and simulations. Here lies an enormous unexploited field, particularly in wax-working and decoration techniques. Through such a strategy we may get in a position where we compare skilled acts and skilled bodies rather than objects, styles and designs. These skills involved in the transformation and displacement of bronze should be confronted with skilled bodies reconstructed from contemporary non-bronze data, i.e. houses, cultivation, rock art, pottery. Then we might close in on more complete skilled bodies capable of producing our data. If we do trace these vast networks we will have before us a gateway to Bronze Age minds. If we take the perspective of seeing the human story as nested webs knitted together through skilled action, and if we dare soften the plasticity of the mind and dare let it slip into the world, we might also pose the questions: how is the Age of Bronzes to be situated within the larger human story? Did the skilled transformations of bronze and the dense webs surrounding these transformations mould our brains in the long run? Did these acts stretch our imagination? Did they mould our metaphorical structures and our language? Did they mould the way we speak and the way we think today?

359

Notes
1. 2. Map 3: ice-sheet compiled from Jensen (2001: 58, 75, 77, 86); Woodman (1999: fig. 1A); Bang-Andersen 2003: fig. 1-3). Site plot modified from Bjerck (1995: fig. 10) and added information from Jensen (2001: 77) and Schmitt et. al. (2006, 2009). Map 4: the distribution of axes made from the Hespriholmen and Stakanes quarries is adopted from Olsen & Alsaker (1984). These are pecked or ground axes of the so-called round-axe type with a pointed or butted neck. The end of the round-axe phase is set to c. 4000 BC when a smaller and flatter axe with rounded rectangular or trapezoid cross-section (type Vespestad) is introduced. These characteristics seem to have been introduced earlier in the north. Recent results from the excavations at Nyhamna, Avery M., Mre & Romsdal C. indicate that comparable axes were present c. 5500-5300 BC (stveit 2008d: 401). For the area north of Rana the distribution of round-axes rests on Myklevoll (1997: group 2, fig. 24). His point-butted, round-axe is included on the map as these are closely related to southern types. Myklevoll suggests a somewhat later date than for the southern axes, but there seems little foundation for these arguments. It could very well be that more of the northern types are Mesolithic (such as the flatter, oval types comparable to southern flat-oval types commonly included in the round-axe category). These are not mapped. The networks of shaft-hole stone mattocks are based on information and maps in Skr (2003). The selection of rock art of potential Mesolithic date is based on considerations in Ramstad (1999) for the Moldefjord area, Stafseth (2006) and Forsberg (2006) for the Trndelag, ngermanland and Jmtland areas, and Mandt & Lden (2005) for the Nordfjord and Hardanger areas, as well as for Altafjord. Recent results from the excavations at Nyhamna, Avery M., Mre & Romsdal C., in particular loc. 68 and loc. 45 has added to this puzzle. All radiocarbon samples from loc. 68 gave LM dates, and the site contained 17 slate fragments. All were fragments, and none of them were definite projectiles. From house 5 dated to c. 4700 BC (stveit 2008d: 400, 409, 412), came a decorated knife-handle. From house 2 dated to c. 4600 BC (slightly younger than house 5, p. 409); came a dagger fragment and chocolate-plate. From loc. 45 dated to the transition LM/EN, came a fragment possibly of a slate spearhead with lensshaped cross-section (ibid 2008e: 580). These results indicate that the development of slate types, knives, daggers and spears in particular, took place in the LM. Nyhamna is located at the southern fringes of the Slate-Complex, indicating that this process was well underway at this time, and that even earlier dates are to be expected in the core areas. The earliest slates in Northern Europe seem to be the large leaf-shaped blades from the Suomosjrvi phase of Mesolithic Finland (Edgren & Trnblom 1992). Mllenhus argued that the blade from Alstahaug of his Trollholmsund type was identical to the Suomosjrvi blades, and that both the Trollholmsund and Hamnes types were related to these Finnish blades (1959: 36). Map 5: the distribution of TRB types in Norway has been compiled from Hinsch (1955), Ramstad (1999), stmo (2000; 2005e), and Bergsvik (2003). For Sweden, distribution of polygonal battle axes has been adopted from Florin (1938), and double-edged battle axes from Kaelas (1957). Slate spears south of the Slate Complex have been gathered from Taffinder for Sweden (1998), Bjrkli for Eastern Norway (2005) and Lindblom (1980), Bergsvik (2003), and T.B. Olsen (2004) for Western Norway. Map 6: the selection of battle axes plotted on the map has been compiled from Hinsch (1956), T.B. Olsen (2004), Asprem (2005), Valen (2007), Reitan (2005) for Norway and Oldeberg (1952) for Sweden. Decorated slate projectiles have been adopted from T.B. Olsen (2004), Langvik Berge (2006) and Bjrkli (2005). To these have been added the following specimens from Rogaland: Njrheim, H M., with transversal lines (S 9525a); Gausel, Hjetland with edge-notches (S 6520; SM 1937-38: fig. 4); Bore, Klepp M., with rhombuses (S 5935a; SM 1932-33: fig. 3); and the following specimens from the area north of Rana: Forselv, Skjomen, Ofoten, with transversal lines (Ts. 3304; Gjessing 1942: fig. 127), and Indre Kvaly, Vik, Nordland C., with transversal lines (T15658). Edge-notches were not included in Langvik Berge (2006) and it is not entirely clear whether these are represented in the Trndelag area and further north. I have added one specimen from Ben, Midsund M., Mre & Romsdal C. with both transversal lines and edge-notches (Haug 2000). The distribution of type I D and IIIB daggers has been adopted from Scheen (1979). Perforated slate projectiles: Single perforation, without agnora: 1. St. 3686, Vestb, Sandeid, Vikedal, Rogaland C. With edge-notches (Gjessing 1920: fig. 156). 2. S 7395, Kda, Mostery, Rogaland C. 20.9 cm (SM 1948). 3. T 3905, ksendal, Mre & Romsdal C. (Ab. 1889). 4. T 17711, Dolmsund, Hitra, Sr-Trndelag C. (TM 1956). 5. T 14684b. Ulvg, Hitra, Sr-Trndelag C. (TMT 1933). 6. T 14263b, ya, Fillan, Hitra, Sr-Trndelag C. (TMT 1930).

3. 4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

360
7. T 13860 Vits, Hemne, Sr-Trndelag C. (TMT 1928). 8. T 1555 fjord, Sr-Trndelag C. (Ab. 1875: fig. 1). 9. T 18009, Guttulvik, Bjrnr, Sr-Trndelag C. (TM 1958: Fig. 4). 10. T 13219, Rrvik, Vikna, Nord-Trndelag C. (TVS 1925: fig. 17; Hinsch 1957: fig. 7b). 11. T 13069, Hestun, Tjtta, Nordland C. (TVS 1925; Hinsch 1957: fig. 7d). Classified as miniature knife but might as well be an arrowhead. 12. Torne, Finnland (Brgger 1906: fig. 31, Hinsch 1957). 13 SHM 14754, Torpa, stra Tollstad, stergtland C., Sweden (Taffinder 1998: 122, fig. 4:41). 14. SHM 15063:18, Berga, Valla, Bohusln C. (Vstre Gtaland C). (Taffinder 1988: 122). Single perforation, with agnora: 1. S 3635m, Solasanden, Hland, Rogaland C. (Gjessing 1920: 170). 2. Ts. 3660, Sanna, Trna, Nordland C. (TsM 57/2; Hinsch 1957: 43). Double perforation: T 6640, Tingvoll, Mre & Romsdal C. (TVS 1902; Engedal 2008: fig. 1.4) T 11434s, Allanenget IV, Kristiansund, Mre & Romsdal C. Uncertain. (TVS 1915). T 16520, Kummervoll, Avery, Mre & Romsdal C. Uncertain. (Ramstad 1999). T 10394, Bud, Mre & Romsdal C. (TVS 1914; Engedal 2008: fig. 1.3). B 12840, Vge, Sande M., Mre & Romsdal C. (HMT 1970-77; Engedal 2008: fig. 1.1) B 10334, Nordpoll, Vgsy M, Sogn & Fjordane C. (UB 1952/2; Engedal 2008: fig. 1.2) B 8948, Mykletun, Alversund, Hordaland C. Fluted spearhead of Sandtorg type with double perforation. (BM 1937: fig. 6; Engedal 2008: fig. 1.5). 8. S 4244, Skjerpe, Nrb, H M., Rogaland C. (SM 1921-24: fig. 6). 9. C 18476 Rgden, Hedmark C. Uncertain (Ab 1896; Bjrkli 2005). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. Fluted projectiles of the small Sundery type are common in Troms and Finnmark C. eastwards to Laksefjord (Gjessing 1942: 172). The following list includes the total distribution of the large Sandtorg type and the Sundery type south of Troms. On Maps 7 and 9 are also included 6 type Sandtorg from Northern Sweden (cf. Bagge 1923; 31 (Dagger blades type D); Gjessing 1942: 151), as well as sites Bellss, R-inget, Hlla, sele and Nmforsen in Northern Sweden with numerous Sundery points (cf. Baudou 1978; 1995), a Sundery point from Myrstuguberget, Huddinge parish, Sdermanland C. and a large Sandtorg type spear from unknown prov. Uppsala C. (Taffinder 1998). 1. Kvfjord, Troms C. , type Sandtorg 2. Sandtorg, Trondenes, Troms C., (Ts. 183,192), 2 stk type Sandtorg 3. Trondenes, Troms C. , type Sandtorg 4. Trany, Troms C. , type Sandtorg 5. Karlsy, Troms C. , type Sandtorg 6. Lyngen, Troms C. , type Sandtorg 7. Hamnes, Skjervy, Troms C., (Gjessing 1942:nr 283-4), type Sandtorg reworked to awl 8. se, Dverberg, Nordland C. (Ts. 1770), concave base but without fluting, type Sandtorg 9. Gimstad, B Nordland C. (Ts. 2621), type Sandtorg reworked into Lyngseid type 10. Buksnes, Nordland C, type Sandtorg 11. Vikdalen, Vefsn, Nordland C. (T 14913), type Sundery and flintdagger type IC 12. Fiskelsvatn I, Nord Rana, Nordland C. (T 18520), type Sundery, 13. Nergrd, Hattfjelldal, Nordland C. (T 18769), type Sundery 14. sterbukta V, Store Akersvatn, Nord-Rana, Nordland C. (T 18507), type Sundery. 15. Rdli, Hemnes M., Nordland C. (T 19533), type Sundery. 16. Smalsundmoen, Hemnes, Helgeland, Nordland C. (T 10554), type Sandtorg. 17. Hestun, Vevelstad, Tjtta, Nordland C. (T 12862), type Sundery. 18. Sellt, Nesna, Helgeland, Nordland C. (T 12445), type Sandtorg. 19. Opdal, Bindal, Nordland C. (T 2122), type Sandtorg. 20. Solsemhola, Leka, Nordland C. (T 10814), type Sundery. 21. Osen, Bjrnr (T 4672), type Sandtorg. 22. Blestranda, Flatanger, Nord-Trndelag C. (T 3684). 23. Ble, Flatanger, Nord-Trndelag C. (T 10882), type Sundery. 24. Selnes, Namsos, Nord-Trndelag C. (T 15811), type Sundery. 25. Skaget, Hitra. (T 14382). 26. Sauehellaren, Bjrnerem, Midsund M., Mre & Romsdal C. (T 10774). 27. Naustbakken, Kjrsvik, Frna, Mre & Romsdal C.(T 14108g), possibly type Sundery.

361
28. Tornes, Frna, Mre & Romsdal C. (T 11637), type Sundery. 29. Eggesbnes lok.1, Hery, Mre & Romsdal C., type Sundery (T. B. Olsen 2004: 70). 30. Yksny, Volda, Mre & Romsdal C., type Sundery 31. Mykletun, Alversund, Hordaland C., type Sandtorg with double perforation. 32. Veslesteinen, Tyin, Oppland C. (C 31325), type Sundery. 33. Mlsnes, Tyin, Oppland C. (C 31792), type Sundery. 34. Bualandet Ster, Bagn, Sr-Aurdal, Oppland C. (C 24468), type Sundery. 35. Vemundsjen, snes, Finnskog, Hedmark C. (C 27728), type Sundery 36. Holmevasskilen, (Tuft. 1), Telemark C. (C 31966), type Sundery (Bjrkli 2005) The spatial plot of Sandshamn type axes has been compiled from Myklevoll (1997); Kleiva (1996), Ramstad (1999), Nyland (2003), and Gjerland (1984). Of those 5 specimens from Rogaland listed by Gjessing (1920) at least the two from Gard, Finny clearly belong to this type (S 2887, S 2991; dark and heavy material). Early northern boat motives (in this study grouped as type 1a, cf. chapt.5.1) south of the rock art centre at Altafjord, are known from: Forselv, Vistnesdalen, and Rdy in Nordland C., Evenhus and Hammer in Nord-Trndelag C., and Vasstrand in Sr-Trndelag C. (Gjessing 1936; Bakka & Gaustad 1974; Bakka 1975; Sognnes 1994). The halibut/flat-fish is depicted at Forselv and Vistnesdalen in Nordland C., Hammer, Hommelvik and Kvennavika in Trondheimsfjord, and my in Boknafjord, Rogaland C. (Gjessing 1936; Fett & Fett 1941; Sognnes 2006: 552; Lund Egens 2007: fig. 10.11). In addition to findings from the coastal Counties from Vest-Agder to Finnmark, the following findings have been included from the neighbouring interior Countes: nr. 262 Pitsusmurust from Lappi C., Finland; nr. 400 Veen, Hedmark C; and nr. 206 Nyheim, nr. 258 Aursjen, nr. 389 Gravh, nr. 402 Lomen, hoard 11 Lom, hoard 12 Vlebru, hoard 13 Avlund, hoard 17 Svenes, and hoard 18 B from Oppland C. I have added two specimens to those listed by Mllenhus (1959), and there are thus 15 type 4 slate pendants in total: 1. "Ljssen", Vika-Floa, Vega, Nordland C. (T 18177). 2. Grttem, Smna, Nordland C. (T 13987). 3. Lysdalsmoen, Smna, Nordland C. (T 13234b). 4. stgrd, Verdal, Nord-Trndelag C. (T 4092). 5. Blestrand, Flatanger, Nord-Trndelag C. (T 3098). 6. Lillestrand, Kolvereid M., Nord-Trndelag C. (T 15639). 7. Rusasetermyra, rland, Sr-Trndelag C. (T 16417). 8. Syd-Skjrn, Bjrnr, Sr-Trndelag C. (T 2650). 9. Fl, Rennebu, Sr-Trndelag C. (T 6501). 10. Helgesta, Rauma, Mre & Romsdal C. (T 14515t). 11. Ulstein, Mre & Romsdal C. ( 1525). 12. Bjrkebakken, Norderhov, Buskerud C. (C 14954). 13. Rake, Stryn, Sogn & Fjordane C. (B 7904). 14. Stangelandshidleren, Klepp, Rogaland C. (St. 3306b). 15. Hanangerheia, Lista, Vest-Agder C. (C 25139). Type 3 slate pendants are listed in Kleiva (1996: 74, note 1): 1. Lok. 2, Buholmvika, Nry, Mre og Romsdal (B 15081-350). 2. Randaberg, Randaberg, Rogaland C. (S 2274). 3. Undheim, Time, Rogaland C. (S 2606). 4. Varhaug, H, Rogaland C. (S 4114). 5. Kverneland, Rogaland C. (S 7350). An alternative interpretation of this case, still within the Bronze Age, would be to place these arrowheads in BA IV and link them to the expansion of the North Way and the rise of the Lofoten Vgsfjord area in BA IV. Such a scenario could be supported by the extremely long tang on the bronze arrowhead from VEST-HASSEL (nr. 259, bur.99). This arrowhead was combined with a double-stud of BA IV type. On Map 9 is also included a copper arrowhead from Lils, s, Eidsvoll, Akershus C. (C 25315). Data on fuel energy have been taken from the information website for Norwegian fire-wood producers, http://www.norskved.no/ (visited on 12.02.09). The slabs from Hgebyn, Dalsland (SHM 24216) can be seen on SHM internet database; http://www.historiska.se/ (visted on 23.05.09). From mediaeval sources we know that 20-30km a day was a common speed for pedestrians on the pilgrim route to Nidaros from Oslo (Selnes 1995: 18). It should be noted that the average pilgrims were hardly especially fit or in their prime. A messenger or an expedition crew of able men might have moved at considerably higher speed.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16. 17. 18.

362
19. Frode Kval uses an estimate for 3 knots for 10 hours a day, and consider this to be a rather high estimate (2007: 59). 1 knot equals 1.852km/h and Kvals estimate equals c. 5.5km/h and 55km a day. Kilometers per hour are used here for comparison with overland journeys. 20. It seems clear from Oldebergs catalogue (1974) that broken flanged axes are relatively numerous in Sweden and in Vstergtland C. in particular. There is no complete overview of Denmark, but none are found in e.g Thisted C. (AK X). A few candidates come from the Islands, but many seems rather to be damaged necks and edges (AK I-III). The breaking of axes seems thus to be a phenomenon exclusive to the CSWS, the Central Zone as well as the eastern lowlands in between. It does not seem to have been applied to later paalstaves or other axes. The practice of depositing the complete but broken axe, like Hheim, is paralleled in only three cases, all east of Lake Vnarn (Old 2289, 2290, 2433). 21. The mapping of the Unetice primary-zone is adopted from Bartelheim (1998: karte 177). The distribution of metal-hilted triangular daggers is based on Uenze's study from 1938, and added daggers from PBF-publications from Poland, France, Italy, and Eastern Germany (Gedl 1980; Gallay 1981; Bianco Peroni 1994; Wsteman 1995). I have also added daggers from Hilterfingen, Switzerland (Gerloff 1993: Abb. 5.2) and Ingoldswil, Austria (Moosauer & Bachmeier 2005: Abb. 104). Uenze's classification is followed regarding types Unetice, Oder-Elbe, Malchin, Saxon, Rhne, Italian and Swiss. The majority of his Rhne-Italian hybrid has been incorporated in the Rhne type. 22. Map 22 and the Ster-Ripatransone Network have been constructed from the following sources. The socketed haft is found on six daggers in the Ripatransone hoard in the Central Appenine centre (Bianco Peroni 1994: nr. 416-421). North of this it is found in four specimens: Polada (Bianco Peroni 1994: nr. 378), two from Kozi Hrbety (Uenze 1938: nr. 62a and c), Meltz (Wsteman 1995: nr. 21) and Gaubickelheim (Uenze 1938: 23, nr. 89c). In support of the argument that these northern specimens actually indicate southern relations, the following is to be noted: the Gaubickelheim dagger carried elaborate blade-ornamentation dominated by hatched triangles, a feature uncommon in the north and typical of the Italian Zone (see feature nr. 3). The blade also carried triangles resembling the halbard blade from Ried, Austria. It is thus hardly to be considered an import from the Italian zone, but reflects Italian influence. The Gaubickelheim hoard in addition contained an unhafted dagger blade, decorated in the typical Italian style. This was considered by Uenze as an actual Italian blade (ibid: 79, nr. 89a). One of the daggers with socketed haft from Kozi Hrbety also carried elaborate blade decoration of Central Appenine/Italian style. The Meltz dagger, seems to be a typical Oder-Elbe type dagger, but with a socketed hilt. In two out of three cases north of the Danube, socketed hilts appear in contexts with other features pointing towards the Central Appenine centre. There is also a second generation socketed hilts mounted on ogival shaped blades: Trassem, Felsberg, Karlevi make up one sub-category; Rastorf and Roum forms one subcategory, and finally there are the swords from Nebra and Blindheim (cf. Map 24; Engedal 2005). Triple or multi-ribbed blades are also characteristic of the Central Appenine Centre (Uenze 1938: 23). Two triangular daggers from the northernmost zone have what seem to be Italian style ribbed blades. The dagger from Alt-Schnau is clearly made locally in the Malchin style but two ribs are added to the typical local style mid-rib (Wsteman 1995: nr. 38). The dagger from Vigerslev, Denmark, on the other hand seems to be closer to the Italian prototypes. Vandkilde saw both daggers from Alt-Schnau and Vigerslev as products of the Baltic periphery of the Unetice culture (Vandkilde 1992; 1996: 192). In my opinion the ribs on the blade and the 13 rivets on the hilt of the Vigerslev dagger indicate a strong Italian influence. The distribution of stone axes type Hagebyhga (var. 1-2) is adopted from Cederlund (1961) and Bartelheim (1998: Karte 136). senringe are taken from Bartelheim (1998: Karte 139). Halberds (Norddeutsche type, var. 3) are taken from Wstemann (1995: nr. 125,126, 128), Gedl (1980: nr. 55) and to these are added those from Klagstorp and rup (Minnen 835-36) in Skne C., Sweden. 23. Map 23 and the Vester Skjerninge-Byblos Network have been compiled from the following sources: Saxon and Oder-Elbe type daggers cf. note 1. Halberds are taken from Bartelheim (1998: N5.2, Karte 122). Burials with Swiss or Rhne type daggers are taken from Uenze (Thn-Renzenbhl) (1938), Gerloff (Hilterfingen) (1993: 71) and from Wstemann (Baalberge) (1995: nr. 72). Daggers with pontill decoration are adopted from Gerloff (1975: App. 2). Daggers type Quimperle (corresponding to Gallays long dagger type Rumedon) are gathered from Gallay (1981; cf. also Needham 2000). The distribution of Cycladian slotted spearheads, Cypriot toggle-pins and silver senrings are adopted from Gerloff (1993). 24. Map 24 and the Vevang-Mychenae Network have been compiled from the following sources: the distribution of flanged axes types Lausanne, Rmlang and Bevaix is adopted from Abel (1972). A few modifications have been made to Abel's maps. Following Mayer, one type Lausanne Ib from Hainburg a.d. Donau is added (1977); following Kibbert (1980) one type Lausanne Ib from Roxheim (nr. 154) is added; following Szpunar three type Rmlang and one type Lausanne Ib are added to the Piltsz-hoard (while Abel only included 1 Laus. var B), the axe from Porzecze is reclassified from type Rmlang to type Lausanne Ib, and one type Bevaix with provenance Poland is added (1987: nr. 248-49, 251-54, 257).

363
Following Pszthory & Mayer, three Lausanne Ib are added from Bayern (1998). Second generation daggers with socketed hilt, type Trassem-Felsberg, have been adopted from Uenze (1938; cf. also Engedal 2005). Bronzes with copper/gold inlays include those from Thn-Renzenbhl, Marais-de-Nantes, Priziac (Schauer 1984: 154p.; cf. also Rieth 1936: 191), Nebra (Pernicka & Wunderlich 2002) and Heitersheim (Quillfeldt 1994: nr. 14). I have also added an axe from the Trassem hoard (Kibbert 1980: nr. 158) and the sword-blade from Vreta-Kloster in Sweden (Minnen 827). These have no metal-inlays but distinct deep and broad furrows probably intended for some kind of inlay (Montelius reported resin). The Trassemproject would be comparable to the Thn-Renzenbhl project (axe), while Vreta Kloster would be related to the Nebra and Marais-de-Nantes projects (sword blades). Although some of these may be slightly later than the rest of the artefacts plotted, they nicely demonstrate the western distribution of early inlaytechniques. As written symbols are included those from the Lipary Islands and the peculiar rock-art at Oppeby, Sdermanland, Sweden (cf. Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 167pp.). Map 25 and the Svanekjr Mose-S-Alpine Network have been constructed from the following sources: the distribution of senring neck-collars is adopted from Wels-Weurach (1978: Taf. 83; cf. Vandkilde 1996: 216, fig. 227). Triangular dagger blades (without metal-hilts) with Halbeswinkelkreuz-motives are gathered from Bianco-Peroni (1994: nr. 155-157, 160), Uenze (1938: nr. 59,19), Abels (1972: Taf. 56 C), Hachmann (1957: nr.208, taf. 32.7) and Gerloff (1993: Abb. 5). The blade from Neu-Ratjendorf has four rivets and corresponds to Bianco Peronis type Mincio, var. A (compare Taf. 32.7 in Hachmann 1957 with nr. 155-157 in Bianco Peroni 1994). Map 26 and the First Swords scenario have been constructed on the following: Post-triangular blades with Halbeswinkelkreutz-motive includes the Maiersdorf type daggers from Maiersdorf and Perjen (Hachmann 1957: Taf. 58.7-8), Hungary (Kemenczei 1991: nr. 7) and Zivalji (Harding 1995: nr. 229). The motive is also found on blades without metal-hilts from Frotheim (Hachmann 1957: Taf. 38.6) and from Borche di Solferino (Bianco Peroni 1994: nr. 369). The early metal-hilted swords from Tgls and Hajdsmson are to be found in Kemenczei (1991: nr. 1,3), from Apa and Oradea in Bader (1991: nr. 25-7), from Donja Dolina and Vajska in Harding (1995: nr. 228, 230), Cascina Ranza in Bianco Peroni (1971: nr. 472-3), Pella in Kilian-Dirlmeier (1994: nr. 444), Alt-Shrkow in Wstemann (2004: nr. 417), Eschwege in Quillfeldt (1994: nr.1), Rosenfelde and Goldberg in Hachmann (1957: Taf. 23.3-4, 52.11), Nebra in Meller (2002), Rastorf in Randsborg (2006: Fig.9), Torupgrde and Stensgrd in Aner & Kersten (AK III: 1675, 1680), and Bragby in Montelius (Minnen 830). The recent addition from Mosstugan, Sdermanland can be found on SHM internet database (SHM 31115) http://www.historiska.se/ (visted on 23.05.09). The distribution of Mycenaean rapiers type A and related specimens is adopted from Killian-Dirlmeier (1994). Sauerbrunn type blades have been compiled from Bianco-Peroni (1970: nr.1-8), Harding (1995: nr.10, 27-28), Schauer (1971: nr. 12-16), Kemenczei (1988: nr.150), and Gedl (1980: nr.137). The Sauerbrunn swords are not found in datable contexts, but are generally thought to be from Br. B1. They are characterised by their extreme ogival shapes and the elaborate decoration on the upper blade. The decorative elements are clearly derived from earlier Alpine daggers. Cf. Engedal (2002) for the curved swords, the Sun-Thrones and the weapon-axes from Ssdala and Gemeinlebarn. Map 27: the distribution of camp-stools is adopted from Jensen (2002: 268). Cf. chapt. 3.9.1, 5.3, 5.6.1 and App. V. 1-2 regarding tanged pommels, the Albertsdorf dagger, early cremations and rock art. Map 28: The distribution of octagon-hilted swords are based on Quillfeldt (1994). The distribution of cult-axes adopted from Jensen (2002: 292). The brimmed hats are found on the Stockhult figurines (Minnen 981), on a slab in Kivik (Randsborg 1993) and on the two gold hats from Schifferstadt and from Southwest Germany/Switzerland (Menghin 1998). The two paalstave axes discovered with the Schifferstadt hat suggest that these hats were made at a time corresponding to BA II. The discovery of a second gold brimmed hat in western Central Europe and the discovery of an undisputable Mycenaean gold diadem at Bernstorf (Moosauer & Bachmeier 2005) I believe strengthen the idea that Kivik had its Mediterranean link via a western route (Elbe, Main, Rhine). For the Nordic reposs-work cf. App. V. The Lay of Vlund is part of the Older or Poetic Edda, available in multiple translations on http://www.heimskringla.no (original, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian) and http://www.northvegr.org (several English translations). The verse number is variously 32 and 34. The original is: Gakk til smiju, eirar er gerir, ar fir belgi bli stokkna; snei ek af hfu hna inna,

25.

26.

27.

28.

364
ok und fen fjturs ftr of lagak. 29. Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation (visited 12.12.09). 30. Two isled long-houses in NW Scandinavia with calculated floor space: Kvle hus 2, Time, Rogaland C.; 16.5m x 6m 99 m (Soltvedt et. al. 2007) Kvle hus 1, Time, Rogaland C.; 23m x 7.2m 166 m. (ibid) Voll, Rennesy, Rogaland C.; 10m x 3.9-4.2m, 39-42 m (Soltvedt et. al. 2007) Talgje, Finny, Rogaland C; 13m x 6.5-6.8m, 84.5-88.4m (ibid) Jtta 2, Rogaland C.; 16m x 6-7m: 96-112 m (ibid) Ryneberg B, Rogaland C.; 13.8m x 6.5m: 89.7 m (ibid) Skeie VI, Rogaland C.; 16.8m x 6.7-7.8m: 113-131 m (ibid) Skeie XXI, Rogaland C.; 14.6m x 5.8m: 84.7 m (ibid) Skeie XXIV, Rogaland C.;12.8m x 5.8m: 74.2 m (ibid) Fryland, Time, Rogaland C.; 19m x 6m: 114 m (three phases) (ibid) Klepp Sentrum, Rogaland C.; 17-20m x 6.5-7m, 110.5 m (min.); c. 124 m (med.) (ibid) Fisk, Mre & Romsdal C; 14.2 x 5m, 71 m (ibid) Sberg, Melhus, Sr-Trndelag C; 16m x 6m, 96 m (min.) (ibid) Stokkset hus 1, Mre & Romsdal C.; 14m x 3.5m; 49 m (Johnson & Prescott 1993) Stokkset hus 2, Mre & Romsdal C.: 18m x 3.7m; 66.6 m (ibid) Stokkset hus 3, Mre & Romsdal C.: ? m x 3.7m; (ibid) Fremre ygarden, hus G; Sogn & Fjord. C; 14m x 4.5m:63 m (Diinhoff 2004) se, lesund, Mre & Romsdal C.; 15.5 x 5.7m 88 m (ibid)

365

References
Aakvik, J. 2000: Med blikket vendt mot sr! Et materialstudie av eldre bronsealder p Vestlandet. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Aasb, M. K. 2006: Srnorske ansiktsurner Et studie av lokal kontekst og interregionale kontakter. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Aasb, M. K. 2008: Norwegian Face-Urns: Local Context and Interregional Contacts. In: Fahlander, F. & Oestigaard, T. (eds), The Materiality of Death. Bodies, burials, beliefs: 105-113. BAR International Series 1768. Ab: Aarsberetning for foreningen til norske fortidsminnesmerkers bevaring. Abels, B.-U. 1972: Die Randleistenbeile in Baden-Wrttemberg, dem Elsa, der Franche-Comt und der Schweiz. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.4. Mnchen. Adnay, E. T., & Chapelle, H. L. 1964: The bark canoes and skin boats of North America. Smithsonian institution. Washington. Almgren, B. 1960: Hllristingar och bronsldersdrkt. TOR VI: 19-50 Alsaker; S. 1987: Bmlo: steinalderens rstoffsentrum p Srvestlandet. Arkeologiske avhandlinger, Historisk Museum, Universitetet i Bergen, 4. Bergen. Alsaker, S. 2005: Steinalderen. In: Alsaker, S. (ed), Trndelags historie bnd.1, Landskapet blir landsdel: fram til 1350: 17-81. Tapir. Trondheim. Ammen, C. W. 1979: The complete handbook of sand casting. A do-it-yourself guide to forming all types of metal in versatile sand moulds. TAB Books. McGraw-Hill. London/New York. Ammen, C. W. 2000: Metalcasting. McGraw-Hill. London/New York. Anderson, 1977: Tundra och taiga. Askild & Krnekull. Stockholm. Andreassen, D. M. 2002: Risvikkeramikk. En analyse av teknologisk stil p Nordkalotten i sein steinbrukende tid. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Troms. Aner, E. 1962: Die frhen Tllenbeile des Nordischen Kreises. Acta Archaeologica 33. Aner, E. & Kersten, K. 1973ff. Die Funde der lteren Bronzezeit des nordischen Kreises in Dnemark, SchleswigHolstein und Niedersachsen. Band 1pp. Kbenhavn & Neumnster. Anfinset, N. 1996: Social and Technological Aspects of Mining, Melting and Casting Copper. An Ethnoarchaeological Study from Nepal. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Anthony, D. 1990: Migration in Archaeology: The Baby and the Bathwater. American Anthropologist 92: 895-914. Apel, J. 2001: Daggers, knowledge & power: the social aspects of flint-dagger technology in Scandinavia, 2350-1500 cal BC. Coast to Coast Project. Uppsala.

366
Arturson, M. 2005: Grds- och bebyggelsesstruktur. In: Lagers, P. & Strmberg, B. (eds), Bronsldersbygd 2300-500 f.Kr: 84-159. Sknska spr arkeologi langs Vstkustbanan. Lund. Askvik, H. 1983: Petrography of the Mjeltehaugen slabs. Norwegian Archaeological Review 16 (1): 33. Asprem, F. 2005: Jordbrukets rtter i Midt-Norge - en forskningsstatus: en retrospektiv og kontekstuell analyse av tidlige jordbruksindikatorer. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU. Trondheim. Bader, T. 1991: Die Schwerter in Rumnien. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.8. Mnchen. Bagge, A. 1923: Om skifferspetsarna i svensk stenlder. Fornvnnen 1923: 9-38. Bakka, E. 1964: Stypeformer. Godbiter fra samlingene. Universitetet i Bergen. Historisk Museum. Bergen. Bakka, E. 1966: Eit kortsverd. Godbiter fra samlingene. Universitetet i Bergen. Historisk Museum. Bergen. Bakka, E. 1973: Om alderen p veideristningane. Viking 37: 151-187. Bakka, E. 1975: Geologically dated Arctic rock carvings at Hammer near Steinkjer in NordTrndelag. Arkeologiske skrifter 2: 7-48. Bakka, E. 1976: Arktisk og Nordisk i Bronsealderen i Nordskandinavia. Det Kgl. Norske Videnskabers Selskab, Museet. Miscellanea 25. Trondheim. Bakka, E. & Gaustad, F. 1974: Helleristningsunderskelser 1974 i Beitstad, Steinkjer, NordTrndelag. Rapport Arkeologisk serie 1974: 8. Trondheim. Bakkevig, S. 1998: Problemer i bronsealderens korndyrking p Forsandmoen, Rogaland, SV-Norge. In: Lken, K. (ed), Bronsealder i Norden Regioner og interaksjon. Foredrag ved det 7. nordiske bronsealdersymposium i Rogaland 31. august 3. september 1995: 55-62. AmSVaria 33. Stavanger. Bang-Andersen, S. 2003: Southwest-Norway at the Pleistocene/Holocene transition: landscape, development, colonization progress, site types, settlement patterns. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36 (1): 5-26. Bartelheim, M. 1998: Studien zur bhmischen Aunjetitzer Kultur Chronologische und chorologische Untersuchungen. In Kommission bei Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn. Barth, F. 1989 [1986]: Cosmologies in the making: A generative approach to cultural variation in inner New Guinea. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Barth, F. 1990: The Guru and the Conjurer: Transactions in knowledge and the shaping of culture in Southeast Asia and Melanesia. Man 25 (4): 640-53. Baudou, E. 1953: De svenska holkyxorna under bronsldern. Fornvnnen 1953: 241-261. Baudou, E. 1960: Die regionale und chronologische Einteilung der jngeren Bronzezeit im Nordischen Kreis. Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis. Studies in North-European Archaeology 1. Stockholm/Gteborg.

367
Baudou, E. 1978: Kronologi och kulturutveckling i mellersta Norrland under stenldern och bronsldern. Acta Bothniensia Occidentalis (Skrifter i vsterbottnisk kulturhistoria) 1: 8-18. Baudou, E. 1995: Norrlands forntid et historisk perspektiv. Cewe-Frlaget. Bjsta. Belbo, H. & Gjlst, S. 2008: Trevirke brennverdi og energitetthet. Viten fra skog og landskap 1/08. Norsk institutt for skog og landskap. s. Berg, K. 1993: Ski i Norge. Aventura. Oslo. Bergerbrandt, S. 2007: Bronze Age Identities: Costume, Conflict and Contact in Northern Europe 1600-1300 BC. Stockholm Studies in Archaeology no 43. Stockholm. Bergsvik, K. A. 2003: Etnic boundaries in Neolithic Norway. Unpublished thesis (Dr. art). University of Bergen. Bergsvik, K. A. & Olsen, A. B. 2003: Traffic in Stone Adzes in Mesolithic Western Norway. In: Larsson, L., Kindgren, H., Knutsson, K., Loeffler, D. & kerlund, A. (eds), Mesolithic on the Move: 395-404. Oxbow Books. Bianco Peroni, V. 1970: Die Schwerter in Italien. Le spade nell'Italia continentale. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.1. Mnchen. Bianco Peroni, V. 1994: Ipugnali nell Italia Continentale. Prhistorische Bronzefunde VI.10. Steiner. Stuttgart. Birks, T. 2004: The Alchemy of Sculpture. The Art of Bronze Casting. Marston House. Marston Magna Bjerck, H. B. 1995. The North Sea Continent and the pioneer settlement of Norway. In: Fisher, A. (ed), Man & Sea in the Mesolithic: 131-144. Oxbow Monograph 53. Oxford. Bjerck, H. B. 2008a: Tidligmesolittisk tid (TM) og Fosnatradisjon 9500-8000 BC. In: Bjerck, H. (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 552570. Tapir. Trondheim. Bjerck, H. B. (ed) 2008b: NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna. Tapir. Trondheim. Bjrgo, T., Kristoffersen, S. & Prescott, C. 1992: Arkeologiske underskelser i NysetSteggjevassdragene 1981-1987. Arkeologiske rapporter 16. Bergen. Bjrkli, B. 2005: Den arktiske steinalderen i sr. En studie av skiferfunn fra Srst-Norge, Oldsakssamlingens museumsdistrikt. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Bjrn, A. 1929: Vestby-fundet. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter II: 35-73. Bjrn, A. 1935a: To nordenfjeldske markfunn fra den eldste jernalder. Det kgl. norske videnskabers selskabs skrifter 37: 1-54. Bjrn, A. 1935b: Arkeologiske misceller. Universitetets Oldsaksamling rbok 1933-34: 1-20 Bjrn, A. 1936: Die Funde der ltesten Bronzezeit in Norwegen. Acta Archaeologica 7: 1-21.

368
BM: Bergen Museums rbok Boas, F. 1966: Kwakiutl ethnography (edited by Codere, H.). The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Boivin, N. 2004: Mind over Matter? Collapsing the Mind-Matter Dichotomy in Material Culture Studies. In: DeMarrais, E., Gosden, C. & Renfrew, C. (eds), Rethinking materiality. The engagement of mind with the material world: 63-71.McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge. Bouzek, J. 1985: The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural Interrelations in the Second Millenium B.C. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology XXXIX. Paul strms Frlag. Gteborg. Boye, V. 1896: Fund af egekister fra bronzealderen i Danmark: Et monografisk Bidrag til Belysning af Bronzealderens Kultur. Andr. Fred. Hst & Sn. Kbenhavn. Brinkmann, A. & Shetelig, H. 1920: Ruskenesset - en stenalders jagtplass. Norske Oldfunn III. Kristiania. Broch, H. B. 2009: Tracks that Matter: On Space, Place and Hare Indian Ethnobiology with special reference to the Marten (Martes americana). Acta Borealia 26 (1): 77-95. Broholm, H.C. 1943: Danmarks Bronzealder. Bd. 1. Nyt nordisk forlag. Kbenhavn. Broholm, H.C. 1944: Danmarks Bronzealder. Bd. 2. Nyt nordisk forlag. Kbenhavn. Broholm, H.C. 1946: Danmarks Bronzealder. Bd. 3. Nyt nordisk forlag. Kbenhavn. Broholm, H.C. 1949: Danmarks Bronzealder. Bd. 4. Nyt nordisk forlag. Kbenhavn.

Broholm, H. C. 1952: ldre Bronzealder. Danske Oldsaker III. Nordisk forlag. Kbenhavn.
Bronk Ramsey 2005: Oc Cal v3.10. (A computer program for radiocarbon age calibration based on athmospheric data from Stuiver et al. 1998). Brck, J. 2005: Experiencing the past? The development of a phenomenological archaeology in British prehistory. Archaeological Dialogues 12 (1): 45-72. Brgger, A. W. 1906: Studier over Norges stenalder. Christiania. Brgger, A.W. 1909: En celttype fra Norges yngre bronsealder. Kunst og Kultur 1909 (Studier tilegnet L. Dietrichson): 1-10. Kristiania. Brgger, W.C. 1918: Bronsecelten fra Ble nr Porsgrund. Oldtiden VII: 38-63. Budge, E. A. W. 1912: Legends of the Gods. The Egyptian texts, edited with translations. Kegan Paul, Trench and Trbner & Co. Ltd. London. Burov 1989: Some Mesolithic Wooden Artefacts from the Site of Vis I in the European North East of the U.S.S.R. In: Bonsall, C. (ed), The Mesolithic in Europe. John Donald Edinburgh. Carpelan, C. 1992a: Kvenerna. In: Edgren, T. & Trnblom, L., Finlands historie, bnd. 1: 223-224. Schildts Frlag. Ekens.

369
Carpelan, C. 1992b: Bjarmerna. In: Edgren, T. & Trnblom, L., Finlands historie, bnd. 1: 231-233. Schildts Frlag. Ekens. Carpelan, C. 1992c: Samerna. In: Edgren, T. & Trnblom, L., Finlands historie, bnd. 1: 178-180. Schildts Frlag. Ekens. Carsten, J. & Hugh-Jones, S. 1995: Introduction. In: Carsten, J. & High-Jones, S. (eds), About the House. Lvi-Strauss and beyond: 1-46. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Cederlund, C. O. 1961: Yxor av Hagebyhgatyp. Fornvnnen 1961: 65-79. Chernykh, E. N. 1992: Ancient Metallurgy in the USSR: the Early Metal Age. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Chernykh, E. N. & Kuzminykh, S.V. 1989: Drevnyaya metallurgiya Severnoi Evraziyi (seiminskoturbinskij fenomen). Moscow: Nauka. Christiansson, H. 1973: Sten-brons-jrn i vre Norrland. Honos Ella Kivikoski. Finska Fornminnesfreningens Tidskrift 75: 20-29. Clark, A. 1997: Being there: putting brain, body and world together again. MIT Press. Cambridge, Mass. Coles, J. 1994: Rock carvings of Uppland. A guide. Occasional Papers in Archaeology 9. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis. Uppsala. Collins English Dictionary. Fifth edition 2000. HarperCollins Publishers. Costin, C. L. 2001: Craft Production Systems. In: Feinman, G.M & Price, D. (eds), Archaeology at the Millennium. A Sourcebook: 273-327. Plenum Publishers. New York/London. Crumlin-Pedersen, O. 1970: Skind eller tr? En studie i den nordiske plankebds konstruktive oprindelse. Vikingeskibshallen, Roskilde. Crumlin-Pedersen, O. 2003: The Hjortspring boat in a ship-archaeological context. In: CrumlinPedersen, O. & Trakadas, A. (eds), Hjortspring. A Pre-Roman Iron-Age Warship in Context: 209-233. Ships and boats of the north. Vol. 5. Roskilde. Crumlin-Pedersen, O. & Trakadas, A. (eds) 2003: Hjortspring. A Pre-Roman Iron-Age Warship in Context. Ships and boats of the north. Vol. 5. Roskilde. Cullberg, C. 1968: On Artefact Analysis. A Study in the Systematics and Classification of a Scandinavian Early Bronze Age Material with Metal Analysis and Chronology as Contributing Factors. Acta archaeologica Lundensia, Series in 4. Lund. DeMarrais, E., Gosden, C. & Renfrew, C. (eds) 2004: Rethinking materiality. The engagement of mind with the material world. McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge. Den Norske Los 2004 (7th editon): Volumes 1-7. Statens kartverk i sj. Stavanger. Derevenski, J.S. 2000: Rings of life: the role of early metalwork in mediating the gendered life course. World Archaeology 31 (3): 389-406.

370
Dietler, M. & Hayden, B. 2001: Digesting the Feast Good to Eat, Good to Drink, Good to Think: An Introduction. In: Dietler, M. & Hayden, B. 2001 (eds), Feasts. Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on food, politics, and power: 1-20. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington and London. Dietler, M. & Herbich, I. 2001: Feasts and Labour Mobilization: Dissecting a Fundamental Economic Practice. In: Dietler, M. & Hayden, B. 2001 (eds), Feasts. Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on food, politics, and power: 240-264. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington and London. Dietz, S. 1991: The Argolid at the transition to the Mycenaean age: studies in the chronology and cultural development in the shaft grave period. Nationalmuseet. Kbenhavn. Diinhoff, S. 2001: En bronsealderboplass p Kvamme i Lrdal med ker, langhus og verksteder. Arkeo 1: 27-35. Bergen. Diinhoff, S. 2005: Tidlige jordbruksbostninger p Vestlandet med spor efter toskibede langhuse. Primitive tider 7: 41-48. Drescher, H. 1957: Der Bronzeguss in Formen aus Bronze. Die Kunde 8: 52-75. Drews, R. 1993: The end of the Bronze Age. Changes in warfare and the catastrophe ca. 1200 B.C. Princeton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey. Ebbesen, K. 1975: Comments on the flint daggers of Denmark. Norwegian Archaeological Review 8 (2): 107-111. Edgren, T. & Trnblom, L. 1992: Finlands historie, bnd. 1. Schildts Frlag. Ekens. Ekholm, G. 1921: Studier i Upplands bebyggelseshistoria II. Bronsldern. Uppsala. Engedal, . 2002: The Nordic Scimitar. External relations and the creation of elite ideology. BAR Int.Ser. 1050. Oxford. Engedal, . 2005: Blindheimsverdet - Eit bidrag til det europeiske sverdets historie. In: Goldhahn, J. (ed), Mellan sten och jrn. Del II: 601-620. Rapport frn det 9:e nordiska bronslderssymposiet, Gteborg 2003-10-09/12. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter No 59. Gteborg. Engedal, . 2006: P blgje og berg bten i rynd og ristning. In: Barndon, R., Innselset, S.M., Kristoffersen, K. K., & Lden, T. K. (eds), Samfunn, symboler og identitet Festskrift til Gro Mandt p 70-rsdagen: 171-182. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Nordisk 3. Bergen. Engedal, . 2008: Ein skiferharpun og andre rekonstruksjonar i den nye steinalderutstillinga. rbok for Bergen Museum 2007-2008: 77-84. Engedal, . 2009: Verdsbilete i smeltedigelen. In: Grnnesby, G. & Moe Henriksen, M. (eds), Det 10. nordiske bronsealdersymposium, 5-8. oktober 2006: 36-49. Vitark 6. Trondheim. Engedal, . 2010: Woven & Cast. Entangled Trajectories in Northwestern Scandinavia, c. 1000 BC. Barndon, R., Engevik, A., & ye, I. (eds), The archaeology of regional technologies: case studies from the palaeolithic to the age of the vikings. Edwin Mellen Press.

371
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1940: The Nuer: a description of the modes of livelihood and political institutions of a Nilotic people. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Farbregd, O. 1972: Pilefunn fr Oppdalsfjella. Det Kgl. Norske Videnskabers Selskab, Museet. Miscellanea 5. Trondheim. Farbregd, O. 1991: Gamle jaktpiler i snfonner: Bom i jakta arkeologisk fulltreff. Spor 2: 4-10. Farbregd, O. & Beverfjord, A. 2000: Finnarlykke i fjellet. Spor 2: 50. Farbregd, O., Marstrander, S., & Torgersen, J. 1975: Bronsealders skjelettfunn p Sund, Indery, Nord-Trndelag p bakgrunn av andre bronsealders funn. Rapport (Det Kongelige norske videnskabers selskab. Museet), Arkeologisk serie, 1974: nr. 3. Trondheim Fasnacht, W. 1995: 4000 Jahre Kupfer- und Bronzeguss im Experiment. Experimentelle Archologie, Bilanz 1994. Archaeologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland. Beiheft 8: 237-246. Fasnacht, W. 2001: Zehn Jahre Kupfer- und Bronzeguss im Experiment oder die wiederholte Erfindung des Rades. Zeitschrift fr Schweizerische Archologie und Kunstgeschichte 58 (1): 67-72. Fett, E. & Fett, P. 1941: Sydvestnorske helleristninger: Rogaland og Lista. Stavanger Museum. Stavanger. Fett, E. 1963: De frste bronsesaker. Godbiter fra samlingene Universitetet i Bergen. Historisk Museum. Bergen. Fett, P. 1960: Gloppen prestegjeld. Frhistoriske minne i Fjordane. Bergen. Fett, P. 1963: Etne prestegjeld. Frhistoriske minne i Sunnhordaland. Bergen. Fett, P. 1973: Fitjar prestegjeld. Frhistoriske minne i Sunnhordaland. Bergen. Florin, S. 1938: Vrkulturen. In: Kulturhistoriska studier tilgnade Nils berg. Stockholm. Forsberg, L. 2006: Tidig hllkonst och koloniseringen av taigaomrdet i Mittnorden. In: Barndon, R., Innselset, S.M., Kristoffersen, K. K., & Lden, T. K. (eds), Samfunn, symboler og identitet Festskrift til Gro Mandt p 70-rsdagen: 87-103. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Nordisk 3. Bergen. Forssander, J.E. 1936: Der ostskandinavische Norden whrend der ltesten Metalzeit Europas . Acta Regiae Societatis humaniorum litterarum Lundensis. Lund. Fredriksen, P.D. 2005. karet/kroppen/identiteten. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Hovedfag/Master 1: 187310. Furmanek, V. 2000: Eine Eisensichel aus Ganovce. Zur interpretation des ltesten Eisengegenstandes in Mitteleuropa. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 75: 153-160. Fyllingen, H. 2002: The Use of Human Osteology in the Analysis of Ritual and Violence During the Early Bronze Age A case study from Nord-Trndelag. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Fyllingen, H. 2003: Society and Violence in the Early Bronze Age: An Analysis of Human Skeletons from Nord-Trndelag, Norway. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36 (1): 27-43.

372
Fyllingen, H. 2006: Society and the Structure of Violence: A Story Told by Middle Bronze Age Human Remains from Central Norway. In: Otto, T., Thrane, H. & Vandkilde, H. (eds), Warfare and Society. Archaeological and Social Anthropological Perspectives: 319-329. Aarhus University Press. Aarhus. Gallay, G. 1981: Die kupfer- und altbronzezeitlichen Dolche und Stabdolche in Frankreich. Prhistorische Bronzefunde VI.12. Mnchen. Gansum, T. 2004: Jernets fdsel og ddens stl. Rituell bruk av bein. In: Berggren, ., Arvidsson, S. & Hllans, A.M. (eds), Minne och myt. Konsten at skapa det frflutna: 121-155. Nordic Academic Press. Lund. Gaustad, F. 1965: Tidlig metalltid i det nordenfjelske Norge. Unpublished thesis (Mag.art). University of Oslo. Gaustad, F. 1966: Et par norske stridskser fra eldre bronsealder. Stavangers Museums rshefte 1965: 53-58. Gedl, M. 1980: Die Dolche und Stabdolche in Polen. Prhistorische Bronzefunde VI.4. Mnchen. Gell, A. 1992: The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology. In: Shelton, A. & Coote, J. (eds), Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics: 40-63. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Gell, A. 1998: Art & agency: an anthropological theory. Clarendon Press. Oxford. Gerloff, S. 1975. The Early Bronze Age Daggers in Great Britain, and a Reconsideration of the Wessex Culture. Prhistorische Bronzefunde VI.2. Mnchen. Gerloff, S. 1993: Zu Fragen mittelmeerlndischer Kontakte und absoluter Chronologie der Frhbronzezeit in Mittel- und Westeuopa. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 68: 58-102. Gidlf, K. et al. 2006: Citytunnelprojektet. Almhov delomrde 1. Malm Kulturmilj Rapport nr. 39. Malm. Gjerland, B. 1984: Bergartskser i Vest-Noreg. Distribusjon sett i forhold til praktisk funksjon, konomisk tilpasning og tradisjon i steinalderen. Unpublished thesis (Mag.art). University of Bergen. Gjessing, G. 1929: Et hustuftfunn fra Lebesby. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings rbok 1929. Gjessing, G. 1935: Fra steinalder til jernalder i Finnmark: etnologiske problemer. Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning, Serie C: III-3. Oslo. Gjessing, G. 1936: Nordenfjelske ristninger og malinger av den arktiske gruppe. Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning serie B 30. Aschehoug. Oslo. Gjessing, G. 1942: Yngre steinalder i Nord-Norge. Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning, Serie B: Skrifter XXX. Aschehoug. Oslo. Gjessing, G. 1951: Arkeologi og etnografi. Viking 15: 115-136. Gjessing, G. 2007 [1935]: Die Chronologie der Schiffdarstellungen auf den Felsenzeichnungen zu Bardal, Trndelag. In: Sognnes, K. (ed), Hundre rs bergkunstforskning i Midt-Norge, utvalgte artikler 1890-1990: 95-107. KRA. Trondheim.

373
Gjessing, H. 1920: Rogalands Stenalder. Stavanger Museum. Stavanger. Goldhahn, J. 2005: Frn Sagaholm till Bredarr hllbildstudier 2000-2004. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 62. Gteborg. Goldhahn, J. 2007: Ddens hand en ess om brons- och hllsmed. In: Goldhahn, J. & stigrd, T. (eds), Rituelle spesialister i bronse- og jernalderen (Vol. I). Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiske Skrifter 65. Gteborg. Gosden, C. 2006: Material Culture and Long-Term Change. In: Tilley, C., Keane, W., Kchler, S., Rowlands, M. & Spyer, P. (eds), Handbook of material culture: 425-442. Sage Press. London. Grslund, B. 1964: Bronslderns krumsvrd och frgan om deras ursprung. TOR 10: 285-308. Grslund, B. 1987: The Birth of Prehistoric Chronology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Groseth, L. 2001. finne sted. konomiske og rituelle landskap i Telemark i sen-neolitikum og bronsealder. Varia 53. Oslo. Grnnesby, G. 2009: En reise gjennom liv og dd, ild og vann. En bronsealders gravruin i Steinkjer. In: Grnnesby, G. & Moe Henriksen, M. (eds), Det 10. nordiske bronsealdersymposium, 58. oktober 2006: 66-78. Vitark 6. Trondheim. Gustafsson, M. 2001: Frn strsta hus til minsta hydda. In: Magnusson, G. (ed), Mre historien om ett smland: 587-610. Hachmann, R. 1957: Die frhe Bronzezeit in westlichen Ostseegebiet und ihre mittel- und sdosteuropischen Beziehungen. Beiheft zum Atlas der Urgeschichte. Hamburg. Hackman, A. 1900: De senaste fynden frn vr bronslder. Finskt Museum 4: 52-61 Hagen, A. 1967: Norges oldtid. Cappelen. Oslo. Hallstrm, G. 1960: Monumental art of northern Sweden from the Stone Age: Nmforsen and other localities. Almqvist & Wiksell. Stockholm. Handeland, H. & Engedal, . 2004: Arkeologiske granskingar p Kvitevoll. Sunnhordaland rbok 2004: 13-21. Hnsel, B. & Teran, B. 2000: Ein bronzezeitliches Kuppelgrab ausserhalb der mykensichen Welt im Norden der Adria. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 75: 161-183. Hnsel, B., Teran, B. & Mihovili, K. 2007: Radiokarbondaten zur lteren und mittleren Bronzezeit Istriens. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 82: 23-50. Hansson, H. 1927: Gotlands bronslder. Kungl. Vitterhets historie och antikvitets akademiens handlingar, del. 37:1. Stockholm. Harding, A. F. 1995: Die Schwerter im ehemaligen Jugoslawien. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.14. Steiner. Stuttgart. Harding, A. F. 2000: European societies in the Bronze Age. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Haug, A. 2000: Bronsealderhuset p Ben i Midsund. Spor 2: 24-27.

374
Heft, H. 1996: The ecological apprach to wayfinding: a Gibsonian perspective. In: Portugali, J. (ed), The construction of cognitive maps: 105-32. Kluwer Academic. Dordrecht. Helms, M. 1988: Ulysses Sail. An ethnographic odessey of power, knowledge, and geographical distance. Princeton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey. Helms, M. 1993: Craft and the Kingly Ideal. Art, Trade and Power. University of Texas Press. Austin. Helms, M. 1998: Access to Origins. Affines, Ancestors and Aristocrats. University of Texas Press. Austin. Helskog, K. 1988: Helleristningene i Alta. Spor etter ritualer og dagligliv i Finnmarks forhistorie. Alta Museum. Hemdorff, O. 1993: Hus fra eldste bronsealder funnet p Talgje. Fr haug ok heidni 4: 24-26. Herbert, E.W. 1984: Red Gold of Africa. Copper in Precolonial History and Culture. University of Wisconsin. Madison. Herner, E. 1987: Profession med tradition. Teknisk-kvalitativ analys av den ldre bronslderens spiralornamentikk, dess central- och lokalproduktion. Acta archaeologica Lundensia. Lund. Hesjedal, A. 1992: Veideristninger i Nord-Norge, datering og tolkningsproblematikk. Viking 1992: 27-54. Hildebrand, H. 1891: Nya fund. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antiqvitets Akademiens Mnadsblad 1891. Stockholm.

Hinsch, E. 1955: Traktbegerkultur-Megalittkultur. En studie av st-Norges eldste, neolittiske gruppe. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings rbok 1951-53: 10-177.
Hinsch, E. 1956: Yngre steinalders stridskskulturer i Norge. rbok (Universitetet i Bergen), Humanistisk serie. Bergen. Hinsch, E. 1957: Saging av skifer. Finska Fornminnesfreningens tidskrift 58: 41-60. Hirsch, K. & Graf, B. 1999: Erfahrungen beim Nachgu von tzis Beil. Experimentelle Archologie, Bilanz 1998, Archologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland. Beiheft 24: 77-86. Oldenburg. Hirsch, K. & Ltjens, I. 2001: Herstellung eines Gussrohlings nach dem Vorbild des Randlistbeiles vom Hauslabjoch. In: Frhlich, S. (ed), Workshop "Bronzemetallurgie in Halle (Saale) 02. bis 05. Mai 1996": 81-92. Landesamt fr Archologie. Landesmuseum fr Vorgeschichte. Sachsen-Anhalt. Hirsch, K. & Trachsel, M. 2001: Temperaturmessungen im rekonstruierten urnenfelderzeitlichen Bronzeschmelzofen von Sckingen. In: Frhlich, S. (ed), Workshop "Bronzemetallurgie in Halle (Saale) 02. bis 05. Mai 1996": 93-98. Landesamt fr Archologie. Landesmuseum fr Vorgeschichte. Sachsen-Anhalt. Hjrthner-Holdar, E. 1998: Samspel mellan olika regioner i Sverige och Ryssland under yngre bronslder sett utifrn jernteknologins infrande. In: Lken, T. (ed), Bronsealder i Norden Regioner og interaksjon. Foredrag ved det 7. nordiske bronsealdersymposium i Rogaland 31. august 3. september 1995: 35-44. AmS-Varia 33. Stavanger.

375
Hjelle, K. L., Hufthammer, A.K., & Bergsvik, K. A. 2006: Hesitant hunters: a review of the introduction of agriculture in Western Norway. Environmental Archaeology 11 (2): 147170. HMT: Tilvekstfortegnelse for Historisk Museum. Frhistorisk Samling. Universitetet i Bergen. Hodne, . 2008: Norsk folketro. Cappelen. Hofseth, E. H. 1980: Bronsedolken fra Lesjafjell. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter. Ny rekke, nr. 3: 131-136. Hofseth, E.H. 1991: "Nr kartet ikke stemmer med terrenget..." Et merkverdig funn fra Lesja. Viking 1991: 41-50. Hofset, E. H. 2001: Fjellgravene p Tullinlkka. Tanker fr og etter utstillingspresentasjonen. Viking 2001: 133-161. Horne, L. 1995: Itinerant Brasscasters of Eastern India. In: Allchin, B. (ed), Living Traditions. Studies in Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia: 265-280. Oxbow & IBH Publ. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Oxford/New Dehli. Hosler, D. 1995: Sound, Color and Meaning in the Metallurgy of Ancient West Mexico. World Archaeology 27 (1): 100-115. Huggert, A. 1996: Early Copper finds in Northern Fennoskandinavia. Current Swedish Archaeology 4: 69-82. Hgestl, M., Auestad, J., Griffin, K., & Myhre, B. 1995: Arkeologiske underskelser i Rennesy kommune, Rogaland, Srvest-Norge. AmS-Varia. Stavanger. Hland, H. 2006: Africa and the Near East: Pot and Porridge, Bread and Oven two food systems maintained over 10,000 years. In: Wotzka, H-P. (ed), Grundlegungen. Beitrge zur europischen und afrikanischen Archaeologie fr Manfred K. H. Eggert: 243-254. Francke. Tbingen. Ingold, T. 2000: The Perception of the Environment. Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill. Routledge. London/New York. Jacob-Friesen, G. 1967: Bronzezeitliche Lanzenspitzen Norddeutschlands und Skandinaviens. Hildesheim. Jantzen, D. 1991: Versuche zum Metallguss der nordischen Bronzezeit. Experimentelle Archologie, Bilanz 1991. Archaeologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland. Beiheft 6: 305-316. Jantzen, D. 2008: Quellen zur Metallverarbeitung im Nordischen Kreis der Bronzezeit. Prhistorische Bronzefunde XIX.2. Steiner. Stuttgart. Jensen, J. 1978: Kultkser fra bronsealderen. Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark 1978: 17-26. Kbenhavn. Jensen, J. 1997: Fra bronze- til jernalder: en kronologisk undersgelse. Nordiske fortidsminder. Serie B. Kbenhavn. Jensen, J. 2001: Danmarks Oldtid, bnd. 1. Stenalder 13000-2000 f.Kr. Kbenhavn.

376
Jensen, J. 2002: Danmarks Oldtid, bnd. 2. Bronzealder 2000-500 f.Kr. Kbenhavn. Johansen, . 1981: Metallfunnene i stnorsk bronsealder. Kulturtilknytning og forutsetninger for en marginalekspansjon. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter. Ny rekke, nr. 4. Oslo. Johansen, . K. 1984: De massive skafthullkser av bronse. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings rbok 1982/1983: 129-144. Johansen, . K. 1986: Tidlig metallkultur i Agder. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter. Ny rekke, nr. 8. Oslo. Johansen, . K. 1988: Bronse kom langveis fra. Spor 2: 34-35. Johansen, . K. 1993 Norske depotfunn fra bronsealderen. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter. Ny Rekke, nr. 15. Oslo. Johansen, . K. 2000: Bronse og makt: Bronsealderen i Norge. Andresen & Butenschn. Oslo. Johanson, T. 1986: Bronsgjutare i Mali och Burkina Faso. Forntida Teknik 12: 17-30. Johnsen, T. & Prescott, C. 1993: Late Neolithic houses at Stokkset, Sande in Sunnmre. In: Solberg, B. (ed), Minneskrift Egil Bakka: 70-89. Arkeologiske Skrifter fra Historisk Museum, no. 7 Bergen. Johnstone, P. 1972: Bronze Age Sea Trial. Antiquity 46: 269-274. Johnstone, P. 1980: The sea-craft of prehistory. Routledge & Kegan Paul. London. Jrgensen, R. 1986: The Early Metal Age in Nordland and Troms. Acta Borealia 2: 61-87. Jrgensen, R. & Olsen, B. 1988: Asbestkeramiske grupper i Nord-Norge 2100 f. Kr.-100 e.Kr. Tromura nr. 13. Troms. Kaelas, L. 1957: De dubbeleggade yxorna i Sverige. In: Meinander, C.F. (ed), Studia Neolithica in Honorem Aarne yrep. Finska Fornminnefreningens Tidsskrift 58. Kaul, F. 1998: Ships on Bronzes. A study in Bronze Age religion and iconography. Publications from the National Museum of Denmark. Kbenhavn. Kaul, F. 2004: Bronzealderens religion. Studier af den nordiske bronzealders ikonografi. Nordiske Fortidsminder, Serie B, Bind 22. Det Kongelige Nordiske Oldskriftselskab. Kbenhavn. Keesing, R.M. & Strathern, A. J. 1998: Cultural Anthropology - A contemporary perspective. Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Fort Worth. Kemenczei, T. 1988: Die Schwerter in Ungarn I (Griffplatten-, Griffzungenschwerter). Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.6. Mnchen. Griffangelund

Kemenczei, T. 1991: Die Schwerter in Ungarn II (Vollgriffschwerter). Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.9. Mnchen. Kerner, M. 2007: Das Randleistenbeil von Thun-Renzenbhl als Venus-Kalender. Gomatique Suisse 8/2007: 392-396.

377
Kersten, K. 1935: Zur lteren nordischen Bronzezeit. Forsch. Vor- und Frhgeschichtl. Altertmer Kiel, III. Neumnster. Kibbert, K. 1980: Die xte und Beile im mittleren Westdeutschland I. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.10. Mnchen. Kienlin, T. L. 2007: Von den Schmieden der Beile: Zu Verbreitung und Angleichung metallurgischen Wissens im Verlauf der Frhbronzezeit. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 82: 1-22. Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1994: Die Schwerter in Griechenland (auerhalb der Peloponnes), Bulgarien und Albanien. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.12. Mnchen. Kleiva, . 1996: Fr det sosiale livet til tinga. Seinneolitikum p Ytre Sre Sunnmre. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Klocko, V. 1995: Zur bronzezeitlichen Bewaffnung in der Ukraine. Die Metallwaffen des 17.-10. Jhs. V. Chr. Eurasia Antiqua 1: 81-163. Knappet, C. 2004: The Affordances of Things: a Post-Gibsonian Perspective on the Relationality of Mind and Matter. In: DeMarrais, E., Gosden, C. & Renfrew, C. (eds), Rethinking materiality. The engagement of mind with the material world: 43-51. McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge. Kock, E. 2001: Bijagt, biavl og biprodukter fra Nordeuropas bronzealder. Aarbger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 2000: 7-54. Kohl, P. 2007: The Making of Bronze Age Eurasia. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Kollandsrud, M. 1997: Pilegrimsleden til Nidaros. En guide til vandringen. Gyldendal. Oslo. Koryakova, L. & Epimakhov, A. V. 2007: The Urals and Western Siberia in the Bronze and Iron Age. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Krmer, W. 1985: Die Schwerter in sterreich und der Schweitz. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.10. Mnchen. Kristiansen, K. 1987: From stone to bronze - the evolution of social complexity in Northern Europe. In: Brumfiel, E. & Earle, T.K. (eds), Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies: 3051. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Kristiansen, K. 1998: Europe before history. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T.B. 2005: The Rise of Bronze Age Society. Travels, Transmissions and Transformations. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Kutschera, E. 1996: RV 11 Framlegg til reguleringsplan Teigland-Lauareid-Hland Etne kommune. Hordaland Fylkeskommune. Unpublished survey report. Kuzminych, S. V. 1996: Osteuropische und Fennoskandische Tllenbeile des Mlartyps: ein Rtsel der Archologie. Fennoscandia archaeologica XVIII: 3-27 Kval, F. 2007: Oversjiske reiser fra Srvest-Norge til Nordvest-Jylland i eldre bronsealder en drfting om maritim realisering og rituell mobilisering. In: Hedeager, L. (ed), Sjreiser og stedsidentitet: Jren/Lista i bronsealder og eldre jernalder: 13-134. Oslo arkeologiske serie 8. Oslo.

378
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1999: Philosophy in the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books. New York. Lange, E. de 1912: Et yngre bronsealders depotfunn fra Nordfjord. Oldtiden II: 41-47. Lange, E. de 1918: Et vestlandsk depotfund fra yngre bronsealder. Oldtiden VIII: 121-135. Lange, E. de 1920: Et nyt fund fra Vestlandets yngste bronsealder. Bergen Museum rbok 191920:1-14. Langvik Berge, S. 2006: Skiferornamentikk. Estetiske og geografiske grupper i Midt-Norge. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU. Trondheim. Larsen, C. 1996: Haugene fra eldre bronsealder p Jren - en religionsarkeologisk analyse. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Larsen, C. 1997: En armring fra eldre bronsealder. Fr haug ok heidni 1: 23-28. Larsen, M. 1987: Commercial networks in the Ancient Near East. In: Rowlands, M., Kristiansen, K. & Larsen, M. (eds), Center and Periphery in the Ancient World: 47-56. University of Cambridge Press. Cambridge. Larsson, T. B. 1993: Vistad. Kring en befst grd i stergtland och stersjkontakter under yngre bronselder. Studia Archaeologica Universitas Umensis 4. Ume Universitet. Larsson, T. B. 1997: Materiell kultur och religisa symboler. Mesopotamien, Anatolien och Skandinavien under det andra frkristna rtusenet. Arkeologiske studier vid Ume universitetet 4. Ume. Larsson, T. B. 1999: The transmission of an lite ideology Europe and the Near East in the second millenium BC. In: Goldhahn, J. (ed), Rock Art as Social Representation. BAR International Series 794: 49-64. Larsson, T. B. & Hulthn, B. 2004: Vistad 88 Revisited. Ceramological Analyses and Lusation Connections. Archaeology and Environment 17. University of Ume. Latour, B. 2001: Gabriel Tarde and the End of the Social. In: Joyce, P. (ed), The Social in Question. New Bearings in History and the Social Sciences: 117-132. Routledge. Latour, B. 2005: Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Latour, B. 2008: What is the style of matters of concern? Spinoza Lectures at the University of Amsterdam, April and May 2005. Van Gorcum, Amsterdam. Laux, F. 1971: Die Bronzezeit in der Lneburger Heide. Hildesheim. Laux, F. 1973: Die Fibeln in Niedersachsen. Prhistorische Bronzefunde XIV.1. Mnchen. Laux, F. 1976: Die Nadeln in Niedersachsen. Prhistorische Bronzefunde XIII.4. Mnchen. Laux, F. 1996: Tracht und Schmuck der Frauen und Mnner. In: Wegner, G. (ed), Leben Glauben Sterben vor 3000 Jahren Bronzezeit in Niedersachsen: 95-116. Niedersachsische Landesmuseum, Hannover.

379
Laux, F. 2000: Die xte und Beile in Niedersachen I. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.23. Steiner. Stuttgart. Lavento, M. 2001: Textile ceramics in Finland and on the Karelian Isthmus: nine variations and fugue on a theme of C.F. Meinander. Finska fornminnesfreningens tidskrift 109. Helsinki. Leirfall, J. 1968: Liv og lagnad i Stjrdalsbygdene. Stjrdalsboka I, part II. Published by Stjrdal & Merker Municipalities. Lichardus, J. and Vladar, J. 1996: Karpathenbecken Sintashta Mykene. Ein Beitrag zur definition der Bronzezeit als historische Epoche. Slovenska Archaelogica 44 (1): 25-89. Liebel, D. 1985: Rekonstruktion des Bronzeschwertes von Stenn in originalgetreuer Technik. In: Feustel, R. (ed), Restaurierung und Museumstechnik 6: 39-53. Weimar. Lightfoot, A. 2007: Skinnbyer firbeinte til sjs. Spor 1: 30-33. Lindblom, I. 1980: Slipte spisser i bergart i Rogaland. Funnspredning og mulige rsaker til denne. AmS-Varia 9. Arkeologisk Museum Stavanger. Lindgaard, E., Nilsen, B. T., Smiseth, M. & Stafseth, T. 2006: Nytt helleristningsfelt i Beitstad. Spor 1: 19-21 Lindholm, K. 1970: En Ananinogjutform frn Tornedalen. Fornvnnen 1970: 30-34. Lindqvist, K. 1994: Fangstfolkets bilder: en studie av de nordfennoskandiska kunstanknutna jgarhllristningarna. Theses and papers in archaeology. New series. Stockholm. Lindqvist, S. 1913: De svenska holkyxorna frn bronsldern. Opuscula archaeologicae Oscario Montelio septuagenario dicata: 79-90. Stockholm. Ling, J. 2008: Elevated rock art: towards a maritime understanding of Bronze Age rock art in northern Bohusln, Sweden. GOTARC, Series B. Gteborg. Linge, T. E. 2007. Mjeltehaugen fragment fr gravritual. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Hovedfag/Master 3. Bergen. Liversage, D. 2000: Interpreting impurity patterns in ancient bronze: Denmark. Nordiske fortidsminder, Serie C, 1. Kbenhavn. Lomborg, E. 1960: Donaulndische Kulturbeziehungen und die relativen Chronologie der frhen nordischen Bronzezeit. Acta Archaeologica 30, 1959: 51-146. Lomborg, E. 1966: Valsmagle und die frhe nordische Spiralornamentik. Acta Archaeologica 36, 1965: 223-232. Lomborg, E. 1969a. Den tidlige bronzealders kronologi. rbger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1968: 91-132. Lomborg, E. 1969b: Frhbronzezeitliche triangulre Metalldolche in Dnemark. Acta Archaeologica 39: 219-239. Lomborg, E. 1973. Die Flintdolche Dnemarks. Nordiske fortidsminder. Serie B. Kbenhavn.

380
Lorange, A. 1875: Samlingen af norske oldsager i Bergens museum. J. D. Beyers Bogtrykkeri. Bergen. Lund Egens, H. 1934: Graver og gravskikk i en bronsealders haug p Jren. Stavangers Museums rshefte 1932-33: 57-69. Lund Egens, H. 1936: En eldre bronsealders ornert gravhelle fra Rege i Hland p Jren. Stavangers Museums rshefte 1933-34: 49-53. Lund Egens, H. 1938: Sjhandelsveier og handelsvarer til og fra Rogaland i bronsealderen. Stavangers Museum rshefte 1936-37: 35-55. Lund Egens, H. 2007 [1940]: To nyoppdagede veideristninger i Vistnesdalen, Vevelstad sogn, Tjtta prestegjeld, Helgeland. In: Sognnes, K. (ed), Hundre rs bergkunstforskning i MidtNorge. Utvalgte artikler 1890-1990: 109-122. KRA 33. Trondheim. Lundholm, K. 1970: En Ananjinogjutform frn Tornedalen. Fornvnnen 1970: 30-34. Lysdahl, P. 1990: Lurparret fra Ulvkr i Vendsyssel. Kuml 1990: 7-44. Lken, T. 1987: Forsand: N ogs med den frste kjente bronsealderlandsby i Norge. Fr haug ok heidni 3: 236-243. Lken, T. 1998: Hustyper og sosialstruktur gjennom bronsealder p Forsandmoen, Rogaland, Srvest-Norge. In: Lken, K. (ed), Bronsealder i Norden Regioner og interaksjon. Foredrag ved det 7. nordiske bronsealdersymposium i Rogaland 31. august 3. september 1995: 107-121. AmS-Varia 33. Stavanger. Mackenzie, D. A. 1915: The Myths of Babylonia and Assyria. The Gresham Publishing Company. London. Madsen, T. 1978: Perioder og periodeovergange i neolitikum. Hikuin 4: 51-60. Magnus, B. & Myhre, B. 1986: Fra jegergrupper til hvdingesamfunn. Forhistorien. In: Mykland, K. (ed), Norges Historie, I. J.W. Cappelens Forlag AS. Malafouris, L. 2004: The Cognitive Basis of Material Engagement: Where Brain, Body and Culture Conflate. In: DeMarrais, E., Gosden, C. & Renfrew, C. (eds), Rethinking materiality. The engagement of mind with the material world: 53-62. McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge. Malmer, M. P. 1989. Frdrup-yxornas metrologi och korologi - ett preliminart meddelande. In: Poulsen, J. (ed), Regionale forhold i Nordisk Bronzealder. 5. Nordiske symposium for Bronzealderforskning pa Sandbjerg Slot 1987: 19-28. Jysk Arkologisk Selskabs Skrifte. Mandt Larsen, G. 1972: Bergbilder i Hordaland: en underskelse av bildenes sammensetning, deres naturmilj og kulturmilj. rbok (Universitetet i Bergen), Humanistisk Serie. Bergen. Mandt, G. 1983: Tradition and diffusion in West-Norwegian Rock Art. Mjeltehaugen revisited. Norwegian Archaeological Review 16 (1): 14-32. Mandt, G. 1991: Vestnorske ristninger i tid og rom. Kronologiske, korologiske og kontekstuelle studier, 1-2. Unpublished thesis (Dr. art). Universitetet i Bergen. Mandt, G. & Lden, T. K. 2005: Bergkunst: helleristningar i Noreg. Samlaget. Oslo.

381
Marinis, R. C. de 1998: Chalcolithic Stele-Statues of the Alpine Region. In: Jensen, J. (ed), Gods and heroes of the Bronze Age: Europe at the time of Ulysses, Council of Europe Art exhibition: 145-152. Nationalmuseet. Kbenhavn. Marstrander, S. 1950: Jylland - Lista. Viking XIV: 63-85. Oslo. Marstrander, S. 1963: stfolds jordbruksristninger: Skjeberg. Institutt for sammenlignende kulturforskning Serie B, 53. Oslo. Marstrander, S. 1977: Bronze Age Gold Finds in Norway. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings rbok 1975/1976: 41-57. Marstrander, S. 1979: Zur Holzschnitzkunst im bronzezeitlichen Norwegen. Acta Archaeologica 50: 61-88. Marstrander, S. & Sognnes, K. 1999: Trndelags jordbruksristninger. Vitark 1. Acta Archaeologica Nidarosiensia. Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU. Trondheim. Martin, J. 1986: Treasure of the Land of Darkness: The Fur Trade and Its Significance for Medieval Russia. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge/New York. Martinn-Torres, M., Rehren, T., & Freestone, I. C. 2006: Mullite and the mystery of Hessian wares - Crucibles popular in the Middle Ages owed their success to an ingredient used in modern ceramics. Nature, Vol. 444 (23. november 2006): 437-438. Mathieu, J. R. & Meyer, D. A. 1997: Comparing Axe Heads of Stone, Bronze, and Steel: Studies in Experimental Archaeology. Journal of Field Archaeology 24: 333-351. Mauss, M. 1970 [1954]: The Gift. The Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Routledge & Kegan Paul. London. Mayer, E. F. 1977: Die xte und Beile in sterreich. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.9. Mnchen. Meinander, C. F. 1954: Die Bronzezeit in Finnland. Finska fornminnesfreningens tidskrift. Helsinki. Meinander, C. F. 1969: Dvits. En ess om frromersk jrnlder. Finskt Museum 1969: 27-69. Meinander, C.F. 1985: Akozino, Achmylovo och Mlaryxorna. Finskt Museum 1985: 15-34. Melheim, L. 2006: Gjennom ild og vann: graver og depoter som kilde til kosmologi i bronsealderen i st-Norge. In: Prescott, C. (ed), Myter og religion i bronsealderen: studier med utgangspunkt i helleristninger, graver og depoter i Sr-Norge og Bohusln: 7-194. Oslo arkeologiske serie 5. Oslo. Melheim, L. 2008: Metallteknologi og metamorfose. Nikolay 104: 31-39. Melheim, L. 2009: Kobberimport eller kobberproduksjon? In: Grnnesby, G. & Henriksen, M.M. (eds), Det 10. nordiske bronsealdersymposium: Trondheim 5.-8. okt. 2006: 20-25. Vitark. Trondheim. Meller, H. 2002: Die Himmelscheibe von Nebra ein frhbronzezeitlicher Fund von aussergewhnlicher Bedeutung. Archeologie in Sachsen-Anhalt 1: 7-21.

382
Menghin, W. 1998: The Berlin Gold Hat: A Ceremonial Head-dress of the Late Bronze Age. In: Jensen, J. (ed), Gods and heroes of the Bronze Age: Europe at the tme of Ulysses, Council of Europe Art exhibition: 172-175. Nationalmuseet. Kbenhavn. Miller, R. M. 1987 (reprint edited by Miller, G. B.): Figure sculpture in wax and plaster. Dover Publications. New York. Moberg, C-A. 1941: Zonengliederungen der vorchristlichen Eisenzeit in Nordeuropa. C. W. K. Gleerup. Lund. Montelius, O. 1885: Om tidsbestmning inom bronsldern med srskildt afseende p Skandinavien. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antiqvitets Akademien Handlingar 30, ny foljd, 10. Stockholm. Montelius, O. 1900: Die Chronologie der ltesten Bronzezeit in Nord-Deutschland und Skandinavien. Friedrich Vieweg. Braunschweig. Montelius, O. 1916: Guldarbeten frn bronsldern, funna i Sverige. Fornvnnen 1916: 1-62. Montelius, O. 1917: Minnen fr vr forntid. P.A. Nordstedt & Sners Frlag. Stockholm. Moosauer, M. & Bachmeier, T. 2005: Bernstorf Das Geheimnis der Bronzezeit. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart. Mozsolics, A. 1967. Bronzefunde der Karpatenbeckens. Depothorizonte von Hajdsmson und Kosziderpadlas. Budapest. Mller, S. 1877: Bronzealderens Perioder: en Undersgelse i forhistorisk Archologi. Aarbger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1876. Kbenhavn. Mller, S. 1891: Ordning af Danmarks oldsager, bnd. II, Bronzealderen. Librarie Renouard C.A. Reitzel. Paris/Kbenhavn. Mller, S. 1909. Bronzealderens Begyndelse og ldre Udvikling i Danmark, efter de nyeste fund. Aarbger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1909: 1-119. Mller-Karpe, H. 1980: Handbuch den Vorgeschichte, Band IV. Bronzezeit. Beck. Mnchen. Mller-Karpe, A. 1994: Anatolische Bronzeschwerter und Sydosteuropa. Marburger Studien zur Vor- u. Frhgeschichte 16: 373-394. Munch, J. S. 1966: Et nytt bronsealdersfunn fra Troms. Viking XXX: 61-76. Myhre, B. 1972: Bronsealders jordhauger i Etne i Sunnhordaland. Arkeo 1: 12-17. Bergen. Myklevoll, L.B.H. 1997: Bergartskser i Nord-Norge. Forslag til klassifisering, kronologi og tolkning. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag, Stensilserie B nr. 50). University of Troms. Mllenhus, K. R. 1959: Steinalderen i Sndre Helgeland. Det Kongelige Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Skrifter, 1958: 1-112. Mllerop, O. 1963: Fra Rogalands eldre bronsealder. Stavanger Museums rbok 1962: 5-57. Needham, S. 2000: Power Pulses Across a Cultural Divide: Cosmologically Driven Acquisition Between Armorica and Wessex. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 66: 151-207.

383
Nerman, B. 1954: Yngre bronsldern en frsta svensk vikingatid. Fornvnnen 1954: 257-285. Nordn, A. 1925: stergtlands bronslder. Henric Carlssons bokhandelns frlag. Linkping. Nordenborg Myhre, L. 1998: Historier fra en annen virkelighet. Fortellinger om bronsealderen ved Karmsundet. AmS-smtrykk 46. Stavanger. Nordenborg Myhre, L. 2004: Trialectic archaeology: monuments and space in Southwest Norway 1700-500 BC. AmS-skrifter 18. Stavanger. Novk, P. 1975: Die Schwerter in der Tschechoslowakei I. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.4. Mnchen. Novotn, M. 1970: Die xte und Beile in der Slowakei. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.3. Mnchen. Nyland, A. 2003: finne noe kjent ved det ukjente ytre, nordre Sunnmre i neolitikum. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Nry, A. J. 1993: Chronological and technological changes in Western Norway 6000-3800 BP. Acta Archaeologica 63: 77-95. Oldeberg, A. 1933: Det nordiska bronslderspnnets historia. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien 38:3. Stockholm. Oldeberg, A. 1943: Metallteknik under frhistorisk tid, del I-II. Hkan Ohlssons Boktryckeri. Lund. Oldeberg, A. 1952: Studien ber die schwedische Bootaxtkultur. Kungl. vitterhets historie och antikvitetsakademien. Stockholm. Oldeberg, A. 1974: Die ltere Metallzeit in Sweden, I. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. Stockholm. Oldeberg, A. 1976: Die ltere Metallzeit in Sweden, II. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. Stockholm. Olsen, A. & Alsaker, S. 1984: Greenstone and diabase utilization in the Stone Age of Western Norway. Technological and socio-cultural aspects of axe and adze production and distribution. Norwegian Archaeological Review 17 (2): 71-103. Olsen, B. 1991: Kjelmyfunnenes (virknings) historie og arkeologi. Viking 1991: 65-87 Olsen, B. 1994: Bosetning og samfunn i Finnmarks forhistorie. Universitetsforlaget. Olsen, B. 1997: Fra ting til tekst: teoretiske perspektiv i arkeologisk forskning. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Olsen, B. 2003: Material Culture after Text: Re-Membering Things. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36 (2): 87-104. Olsen, B. 2004: Momenter til et forsvar av tingene. Nordisk Museologi 2004 (2): 25-36. Olsen, B. 2006: Scenes From a Troubled Engagement: Post-structuralism and Material Culture Studies. In: Tilley, C., Keane, W., Kchler, S., Rowlands, M. & Spyer, P. (eds), Handbook of material culture: 85-103. Sage Press. London.

384
Olsen, T. B. 2004: Egger av tid og rom. Transformasjonen av steinalderens fangstsamfunn i VestNorge. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Osgood, R., Monks, S., & Toms, J. 2000: Bronze Age Warfare. Stroud. Sutton. Ottenjann, H. 1969: Die nordischen Vollgriffschwerter der lteren und mittleren Bronzezeit. Rmisch-Germanische Forschungen 30. Walter de Gruyter & Co. Berlin. Parzinger, H. 1997: Sejma-Turbino und die Anfnge des sibirischen Tierstiels. Eurasia Antiqua 3: 223-247. Pszthory, K. & Mayer, E. F. 1998: Die xte und Beile in Bayern. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.20. Steiner. Stuttgart. Peregrine, P. 1991: Some political aspects of craft specialization. World Archaeology 23 (1): 1-11. Pernicka, E. & Wunderlich, C-H. 2002: Naturwissenschafliche Untersuchungen an den Funden von Nebra. Archeologie in Sachsen-Anhalt 1: 24-31. Petersen, H. C. 1986: Skinboats of Greenland. Ships and Boats of the North. Vol. 1. Roskilde. Petersen, J. 1941: Et ungarsk bronsesverd fra Sokndal. Stavanger Museums rshefte 50 (1939-40): 31-34. Petersen, J. 1946: Det eldste Talgje og den gamle ydegarden p Murane. Stavanger Museums rshefte 55 (1945): 51-72. Pil, L. 1990: Early soapstone vessels in Norway from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Roman Iron Age. Acta Archaeologica 60: 87-100. Popham, M. 1994: The Collapse of Aegean Civilization at the End of the Late Bronze Age. In: Cunliffe, B. (ed), Prehistoric Europe. An illustrated history: 277-303. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Poulsen, M. E. 2009: De monumentale midtsulehusene fra senneolitikum og tidligste bronzealder i Sydskandinavien. In: Grnnesby, G. & Henriksen, M.M. (eds), Det 10. nordiske bronsealdersymposium: Trondheim 5.-8. okt. 2006: 156-168. Vitark. Trondheim. Prescott, C. 1988: Skrivarhellaren i rdal i Sogn. In: Indrelid, S; Kaland, S. & Solberg, B. (eds), Festskrift til Anders Hagen: 68-79. Arkeologiske skrifter nr. 4. Historisk Museum, Universitetet i Bergen. Prescott, C. 1991a: Kulturhistoriske underskelser i Skrivarhelleren. Arkeologiske rapporter 14. Historisk Museum, Universitetet i Bergen. Prescott, C. 1991b: Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Developments on the Periphery of Southern Scandinavia. Norwegian Archaeological Review 24 (1): 35-48. Prescott, C. 1994: Paradigm gained - Paradigm lost? 150 years of Norwegian Bronze Age research. Norwegian Archaeological Review 27 (2): 87-109. Prescott, C. 1995a: From Stone Age to Iron Age. A Study from Sogn, Western Norway. BAR International Series 603. Oxford.

385
Prescott, C. 2000: Symbolic Metallurgy Assessing Early Metallurgical Processes in a Periphery. In: Olaussen, B. & Vandkilde, H. (eds), Form, Function and Context. Material culture studies in Scandinavian archaeology: 213-226. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia serie 8, nr. 31. Lund. Prescott, C. 2006: Copper production in Bronze Age Norway? In: H. Glrstad, Skar, B. & Skre, D. (ed), Historien i forhistorien. Festskrift til Einar stmo p 60-rs dagen: 183-190. Kulturhistorisk museum Skrifter 4. Oslo. Prescott, C. 2008: Lista der norgeshistorien skiftet retning. Nicolay 104: 4-10. Quillfeldt, I. von 1994: Die Vollgriffschwerter in Sddeutschland. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.11. Steiner. Stuttgart. Ramstad, M. 1999: Brytningen mellom nord og sr. En faghistorisk og lokalkronologisk studie over Mre i yngre steinalder. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Randsborg, K. 1968: Von Periode II zu III. Chronologische Studien ber die ltere Bronzezeit Sdskandinaviens und Norddeutschlands. Acta Archaeologica 39: 1-142. Randsborg, K. 1972: From period III to period IV. Chronological studies of the Bronze Age in Southern Scandinavia and Northern Germany. The National Museum of Denmark. Kbenhavn. Randsborg, K. 1993: Kivik: archaeology and iconography. Acta Archaeologica 64 (1). Kbenhavn. Randsborg 2006: Opening the Oak-Coffins. New dates New Perspectives. In: Randsborg, K. & Christensen, K. (eds), Bronze Age Oak-coffin graves. Archaeology & dendro-dating: 1-162. Acta Archaeologica 77. Blackwell, Munksgaard. Kbenhavn. Randsborg, K. & Christensen, K. (eds) 2006: Bronze Age Oak-coffin graves. Archaeology & dendrodating. Acta Archaeologica 77. Blackwell, Munksgaard. Kbenhavn. Rasmussen, M. 1993: Gravhje og Bopladser. En Forelbig Undersgelse af Lokalisering og Sammenhnge. In: Larsson, L. (ed), Bronslderns gravhgar: 171-185. University of Lund. Institute of archaeology. Report Series no. 48. Lund. Ray, A. J. & Freeman, D. 1978: Give Us Good Measure. An economic analysis of relations between the Indians and the Hudsons Bay Company before 1763. University of Toronto Press. Toronto/London. Reitan, G. 2005: Neolitikum i Buskerud: skikk, bruk og erhverv i et langtidsperspektiv. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Oslo. Renfrew, C. 1972: The Emergence of Civilization. The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C. Menthuen & Co Ltd. London. Rieth, A. 1936: Anfnge und Entwicklung der Tauschiertecknik. Eurasia Septentrinalis Antiqua X: 186-198. Rhovsk, J. 1992: Die xte, Beile, Meiel und Hmmer in Mhren. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.17. Mnchen. Risbl, O. 1996: En 3000 r gammel stpeform fra Kvelde. Vestfoldminne 1996: 52-57. Vestfold Historielag. Tnsberg.

386
Roaf, M. 2004: Mesopotamien og den Nre Orient i oldtiden. Samlerens Forlag. Kbenhavn. Roesdahl, E. 1996 [1994]: Vikingernes verden. Vikingerne hjemme og ude. 5th edition. Gyldendal. Oslo. Rowlands, M. 1998 [1980]: Kinship, alliance and exchange in the European Bronze Age. In: Kristiansen, K. & Rowlands, M. (eds), Social transformations in archaeology: global and local perspectives: 142-183. London/New York. Rygh, K. 1885: Norske Oldsager ordnede og forklarede. Christiania. Rygh, K. 1906: En gravplads fra broncealderen. Det Kongelige Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Skrifter. No. 1. Aktietrykeriet i Trondhjem. Rnne, P. 1987: Stilvariationer i ldre bronzealder. Aarbger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1986: 71-124. Rnne, P. 1989: Early Bronze Age Spiral Ornament - the Technical Background. Journal of Danish Archaeology 8: 126-143. Rnne, P. 1993: Problemer omkring bronzealderens metalhndvrkere. In: Forsberg, I & Larsson, T.B. (eds), Ekonomi och nringsformer i nordisk bronslder: 71-92. Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Umensis 3. Ume. Rnne, P. 1996a: Bronse for kleber. Spor 1: 14-17. Rnne, P. 1996b: Flydende bronze i digler og forme - Forsg med bronzealderens stbeteknik. In: Meldgaard, M. & Rasmussen, M. (eds), Arkologiske eksperimenter i Lejre: 97-112. Rhodos forlag. Lejre. Rnne, P. 1998: Bronsealderens stiler slik de er representert i Midt-Norge. Spor 1: 22-24. Sandvik, E. 1987: Levangermarknaden. Fornvrdaren 21. Schanche, K. 1986: Utgravning av en yngre steinalders hustuft i Karlebotn, Nesseby kommune, Finnmark. Tromura, kulturhistore 6: 23-32. Schanche, K. 1989: Nye funn fra yngre steinalder i Varanger. Viking 52: 53-71. Schauer, P. 1971: Die Schwerter in Suddeutschland, sterreich und der Schweiz I. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.2. Mnchen. Schauer, P. 1984: Spuren minoisch-mykenischen und orientalischen Einflusses im atlantischen Westeuropa. Jahrbuch des Rmish-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 31: 137-186. Scheen, R. 1979: De norske flintdolkene. Unpublished thesis (mag.art). University of Oslo. Scheub, H. S. 2002: A Dictionary of African Mythology. Oxford Reference Online. Schlosser, W. 2002: Zur astronomischen Deutung der Himmelsscheibe von Nebra. Archeologie in Sachsen-Anhalt 1: 21-23. Schmitt, L., Larsson, S., Schrum, C., Alekseeva, I., Tomczak, N & Svedhage, K. 2006: Why they came; The colonization of the coast of western Sweden and its environmental context at the end of the last glaciation. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 25 (1): 1-28.

387
Schmitt, L., Larsson, S., Burdukiewicz, J., Ziker, J., Svedhage, K., Zamon, J. & Steffen, H. 2009: Chronological insights, cultural change, and resource exploitation on the west coast of Sweden during the Late Paleolithic/Early Mesolithic transition. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 28 (1): 1-27. Schwartz, W. 1996: Bronzezeitliche Hausgrundrisse von Hesel im Landkreis Leer. Die Kunde 47: 21-50. Schwenzer, S. 2002: Zur Frage der Datierung der Meltzer-Stabdolche. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 77 (1): 76-83. Selnes, A. 1995: Vandring langs gamle veifar fra sagatid til nr fortid. Tapir forlag. Trondheim. Sherratt, A. 1994: The Emergence of lites: Earlier Bronze Age Europe, 2500-1300 BC. In: Cunliffe, B. (ed), Prehistoric Europe. An illustrated history: 244-276. Oxford University Press. Sherratt, A. 1995: Electric gold: re-opening the amber route. Antiquity 69: 200-203. Shetelig, H. 1936: En stpeform til bronsesverd fra Mre. Naturen 1936: 265-278. Bergen Museum. Simonsen, P. 1963: Varanger-funnene III. Fund og utgravninger i Pasvikdalen og ved den stlige fjordstrand. Troms Museums Skrifter VII, hefte III. Skauen, I. 2005: Oppland. In: stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. (eds), Norsk arkeologisk leksikon: 278-283. Pax Forlag. Oslo. Skr, . 2003: Rituell kommunikasjon i seinmesolitikum. En analyse av hakker og kllers symbolske betydning. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. SM: Stavanger Museums rshefte. Sderberg, A. 2002: Metalliska spr efter gjuteriverksamhet - en skiss till en arkeologisk fltmetod. Fornvnnen 97: 264. Sognnes, K. 1987: Bergkunsten i Stjrdal 2. Typologi og kronologi i Nedre Stjrdal. Gunneria 56. Trondheim. Sognnes, K. 1993: The role of rock art in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in Trndelag, Norway. Acta Archaeologica 63: 157-188. Sognnes, K. 1994: Engravings found at rockpainting sites in Trndelag, Norway. In: Clottes, J. (ed), International Newsletter on Rock Art, 1994 no. 9: 4-5. Foix. Sognnes, K. 1999: Det levende berget. Tapir Forlag. Trondheim. Sognnes, K. 2001a: Prehistoric imagery and landscapes: rock art in Stjrdal, Trndelag, Norway. BAR international series 998. Oxford. Sognnes, K. 2001b: Verdens strste skilper? Spor 2: 47. Sognnes, K. 2003: On shoreline dating of rock art. Acta Archaeologica 74: 189-209.

388
Sognnes, K. 2006: En flyndre svmmer stille omkring helleristningene i Kvennavika, NordTrndelag. In: Barndon, R., Innselset, S.M., Kristoffersen, K. K., & Lden, T. K. (eds), Samfunn, symboler og identitet Festskrift til Gro Mandt p 70-rsdagen: 551-62. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Nordisk 3. Bergen. Solberg, O. 1909: Eisenzeitfunde aus Ostfinmarken. Chr. Vidensk. Selsk. Skr. 7: 1-145. Oslo. Soltvedt, E-C., Lken, T., Prsch-Danielsen, L., Brsheim, R. & Oma, K. 2007: Boplass-, jordbruksog landskapsutvikling gjennom 6000 r p Jren, SV Norge. AmS Varia 47. Stavanger. Spyer, P. 2006: The body, materiality and the senses. Introduction. In: Tilley, C., Keane, W., Kchler, S., Rowlands, M. & Spyer, P. (eds), Handbook of material culture: 125-129. Sage Press. London. Stafseth, T. 2006: Sirkler, linjer og punkter: en analyse av veideristningenes kulturlandskap gjennom de indre deler av Trondheimsfjorden. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU. Trondheim. Standal, R. 1996a: Farleier over fjell og bre i Nordfjord. Vegar fr vegar var, 1. Volda. Standal, R. 1996b: Fjelleier p Sunnmre og i Romsdal. Vegar fr vegar var, 2. Hjrundfjord sogelag. Stuiver, M., Reimer, P.J., Bard, E., Beck, W., Burr, G.S., Hughen, K.A., Kromer, B., McCormac, G., van der Plicht, H. & Spurk, M. 1998: INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24.000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40 (3): 1041-83. Svestad, A. 1995: Oldsakenes orden. Om tilkomsten av arkeologi. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. Svestad, A. 2003: Finn din egen filosof. Konfrontasjoner og kontradiksjoner i den arkeologiske teoridebatten. Unpublished thesis (Dr. art). University of Troms. Syvertsen, K. I. J. 2003: Ristninger i graver graver med ristninger. Om ristningers mening i gravminner og gravritualer. En analyse av materiale fra Rogaland. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Bergen. Szpunar, A. 1987: Die Beile in Polen I. Prhistorische Bronzefunde IX.16. Mnchen. Sborg, H. C. 1986: Skiferkniver sr for polarsirkelen i Norge. Unpublished thesis (Mag.art). University of Bergen. Srensen, M.L.S. 1996: Identifying or including: approaches to the engendering of archaeology. K.A.N. (Kvinner i arkeologi i Norge) 21: 51-60. Srensen, M. L. S. 1997: Reading dress: The construction of social identities in Bronze Age Europe. Journal of European Archaeology 5 (1): 93-114. Taffinder, J. 1998: The allure of the exotic: the social use of non-local raw materials during the Stone Age in Sweden. Aun 25. Uppsala. Tallgren, A.M. 1911: Die Kupfer und Bronzezeit in Nord- und Ostrussland I: Die Kupfer- und Bronzezeit in Nordwestrussland. Die ltere Metallzeit in Ostrussland. Finska Fornminnesfreningens Tidskrift XXV: 1-229.

389
Tallgren, A.M. 1912: Die bronzecelte von sog. Ananino-typus. Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen 12: 76-85. Tallgren, A.M. 1913: Die bronzenen Speerspitzen mit zwei Ausschnitten im blatt. Opuscula archaeologicae Oscario Montelio septuagenario dicata: 115-123. Stockholm. Tallgren, A.M. 1914: Den steuropeiska bronslderskulturen i Finland. Finskt Museum XXI: 11-22. Tallgren, A.M. 1915a: Pronssikautisia valimia It-Venjlt ja Siperiasta. Finskt Museum XXII: 6778. Tallgren, A.M. 1915b: Ett viktigt fornfynd frn mellersta Ryssland. Finskt Museum XXII: 73-86. Tallgren, A. M. 1926: Et viktigt bronsldersfynd frn Lappmarken. Finskt Museum 1926: 78-88 Tallgren, A.M. 1936: Archaeological Studies in Soviet Russia. Eurasia Septentrinalis Antiqua X: 129-170. Tallgren, A.M. 1937a: The method of prehistoric archeology. Antiquity 11: 152-161. Tallgren, A.M. 1937b: The Arctic Bronze Age in Europe. Eurasia Septentrinalis Antiqua XI: 1-46. Tarde, G. 1999 [1895]: Monadologie et sociologie. Les empcheurs de penser en rond. Paris. Tarde, G. 2000 [1899]: Social laws: An Outline of Sociology. Translated by Warren, H. C. Batoche Books. Kitschener, Ont. Teran, B., Mihovili, K., & Hnsel, B. 1999: Eine protourbane Siedlung der lteren Bronzezeit im istrischen Karst. Prhistorische Zeitschrift 74: 154-193. Thomas, G. 1995: Bronze Casting. A Manual of Techniques. The Crowood Press. Ramsbury, Wiltshire. Thrane, H. 1962: The earliest bronze vessels in Denmarks Bronze Age. Acta Archaeologica XXXIII: 109-163. Thrane, H. 1965/67: Hoards of the Danish Late Bronze Age (Mont. IV). Inventaria archaeologica, Denmark; 1.-2. set. Habelt. Bonn. Thrane, H. 1971/1983: Hoards of the Danish Late Bronze Age (Mont. V). Inventaria archaeologica, Denmark; 6.-7. set, 9.-11. set. Habelt. Bonn. Thrane, H. 1975: Europiske forbindelser: bidrag til studiet af fremmede forbindelser i Danmarks yngre broncealder (periode IV-V). Nationalmuseets skrifter, Arkologisk-historisk rkke 16. Kbenhavn. Thrane, H. 2005: Svrd i tal og tolkning. In: Goldhahn, J. (ed), Mellan sten och jrn. Del II: 621-26. Rapport frn det 9:e nordiska bronslderssymposiet, Gteborg 2003-10-09/12. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter No 59. Gteborg. Thrane, H. 2006: Figurinen fra Pryssgrden et alternativt tolkningsforslag. Fornvnnen 101: 268273. Tilley, C., Keane, W., Kchler, S., Rowlands, M, & Spyer, P. (eds) 2006: Handbook of material culture. Sage Press. London.

390
TMT: Det Kgl. Norske Videnskabers Selskab Museet. Antikvarisk avdeling. TM: Trondheim Museums rbok. Tomasello, M. 1999: The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Harvard University Press. Cambridge (US)/London. Torgersen, L. 1999: Hva myrene skjulte. Skiforeningens rbok 1999. Oslo. Townsend, P. 2000: The Aztecs. (Revised edition). Thames & Hudson. Treherne, P. 1995: The warriors beauty: the masculine body and self-identity in Bronze-Age Europe. Journal of European Archaeology 3 (1): 105-144. Trigger, B. 1996: Arkeologiens idhistorie. Pax Forlag. Oslo. Tudela, J. (transcriber) 1977: Relacion de las ceremonias y ritos y poblaci6n y gobierno de los indios de la provincia de Michoacan (1541). Balsal Editores. Morelia. Tylecote, R. F. 1987: The early history of metallurgy in Europe. Longman. London/New York. TVS: Det. Kgl. Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Skrifter, Trondheim. UB: Universitetet i Bergen. rbok. Uenze, O. 1938: Die frhbronzezeitlichen triangulren Vollgriffdolche. Vorgeschichtliche Forchungen 11. Undset, I. 1886: Nordische Bronzen in Italien. Zeitschrift fr Ethnologie. UOT: Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Tilvekst, Oslo. UO: Universitetets Oldsaksamling rbok, Oslo. Valbjrn 2003a: A hypothetical Hjortspring skinboat. In: Crumlin-Pedersen, O. & Trakadas, A. (eds), Hjortspring. A Pre-Roman Iron-Age Warship in Context: 137-140. Ships and boats of the north. Vol. 5. Roskilde. Valbjrn 2003b: Boatbuilding. In: Crumlin-Pedersen, O. & Trakadas, A. (eds), Hjortspring. A PreRoman Iron-Age Warship in Context: 70-83. Ships and boats of the north. Vol. 5. Roskilde. Valen, C. R. 2007: Jordbruksimpulser i neolitikum og bronsealder i Nord-Norge? : en revisjon av det arkeologiske gjenstandsmaterialet og de naturvitenskapelige underskelsene. Unpublished MA Thesis (hovudfag). University of Troms. Van Gennep, A. 1960: The Rites of Passage. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Vandkilde, H. 1992: A Late Neolithic Hoard from Vigerslev, North Sealand. - An archaeological and Metal Analytical Classification. Journal of Danish Archaeology 9, 1990: 103-113. Vandkilde, H. 1996: From Stone to Bronze. The Metalwork of the Late Neolithic and Earliest Bronze Age Denmark. Jutland Archaeological Society. Moesgrd.

391
Vikshland, L. H. & Sandvik, P. U. 2007: Molteberg Nordre. Lok. 24 og 25. In: Brdseth, G. A. (ed), Hus og gard langs E6 i Fredrikstad og Sarpsborg kommunar. E6-prosjektet i stfold, Vol. 3. Varia 67. Oslo. Vinjum, E. 2004: Aurland. Stadnamn og kulturhistorie. Valdres Trykkeri. Wegner, G. 1996: Bildstein von Anderlingen. In: Wegner, G. (ed), Leben Glauben Sterben vor 3000 Jahren Bronzezeit in Niedersachsen: 411-12. Niedersachsische Landesmuseum, Hannover. Wels-Weyrauch, U. 1978: Die Anhnger und Halsringe in Sudwestdeutschland und Nordbayern. Prhistorische Bronzefunde XI.1. Mnchen. Werner, A. & Barth, R. 1991: Versuche zu prhistorischen Bronzegusstechniken. Experimentelle Archologie, Bilanz 1991. Archaeologischen Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland. Beiheft 6: 299-304. West, M.L. 2007: Indo-European poetry and myth. Oxford University Press. Oxford. White, R. 1991: The Middle Ground: Indians, empires, and republics in the Great Lakes region, 1650-1815. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Whitehead, A. N. 1920: Concept of Nature. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Wik, B. 1993: Bronsekniv fra Dromnes - sjeldent gravfunn. Spor 1: 19. Willerslev, R. 2007: Soul Hunters: Hunting, Animism, and Personhood among the Siberian Yukaghirs. University of California Press. Willroth, K-H. 1996: Landschaft, Besiedlung und Siedlung. In: Wegner, G. (ed), Leben Glauben Sterben vor 3000 Jahren Bronzezeit in Niedersachsen: 37-53. Niedersachsische Landesmuseum, Hannover. Woodmann, P. C. 1999: The Early Postglacial Settlement of Arctic Norway. In: Cziesla, E., Kersting, Th. & Pratsch, St. (eds), Den Bogen spannen... Festschrift fr Bernhard Gramsch: 297-312. Beitrge zur Ur- und Frhgeschichte Mitteleuropas 20. Weissbach. Wstemann, H. 1995: Die Dolche und Stabdolche in Ostdeutschland. Prhistorische Bronzefunde VI.15. Mnchen. Zimmer, G. 1990: Griechische Bronzegusswerksttten. Zur Technologieentwicklung eines antiken Kunsthandwerkes. Verlag Philipp Vo Zabern. Mainz am Rhein. Zimmermann, U. 1988: Nordeuropa whrend der lteren Bronzezeit. Untersuchungen zur Chronologie and Gruppengliederung. Frankfurt am Main. Zinsli, C. 2007: Samfunn og bosetning p Vestlandet i senneolittikum: en analyse av gjenstander og bosetningsspor. Unpublished MA Thesis. University of Bergen. stigrd, T. 1999: Cremations as transformations: When the dual cultural hypothesis was cremated and carried away in urns. European Journal of Archaeology 2(3): 345-364. stigrd, T. 2007: Transformatren. Ildens mester i jernalderen. In: Goldhahn, J. & stigrd, T. (eds), Rituelle spesialister i bronse- og jernalderen (Vol. II). Gotar Serie C. Arkeologiske Skrifter No 65.

392
stigaard, T. & Goldhahn, J. 2006: From the dead to the living. Death as transactions and renegotiations. Norwegian Journal of Archaeology 397(1): 27-48. stmo, E. 2000: Elleve trndske steinkser. Primitive tider 2000: 80-101. stmo, E. 2005a: Over Skagerak i steinalderen. Noen refleksjoner om oppfinnelsen av havgende fartyer i Norden. Viking 68: 55-82. stmo, E. 2005b: Husdyr. In: stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. (eds), Norsk arkeologisk leksikon: 189-190. Pax Forlag. Oslo. stmo, E. 2005c: Flint. In: stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. (eds), Norsk arkeologisk leksikon: 112-13. Pax Forlag. Oslo. stmo, E. 2005d: Ski. In: stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. (eds), Norsk arkeologisk leksikon: 326-27. Pax Forlag. Oslo. stm, E. 2005e: ks (Steinks). In: stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. (eds), Norsk arkeologisk leksikon: 456-468. Pax Forlag. Oslo. stmo, E. 2008: Auve. En fangstboplass fra yngre steinalder p Vesterya i Sandefjord. I. Arkeologisk del. Norske Oldfunn XXVIII. Kulturhistorisk Museum Universitetet i Oslo. Oslo. stmo, E. & Hedeager, L. 2005 (eds): Norsk arkeologisk leksikon. Pax Forlag. Oslo. berg, N. 1915: Kalmar lns bronslder. Meddelanden frn Kalmar lns fornminnesfrening. Kalmar. gotnes, A. 1984: De plydde jorda og bodde ved keren. In: Indrelid, S. & Larsen, S. U. (eds), Sunnmres forhistorie fra de frste fotefar: 52-60. Sunnmrspostens Forlag. lesund gotnes, A. 1986: Nordvestnorsk asbestkeramikk. Karform, godsstruktur, utbredelse og datering. Arkeologiske skrifter, Historisk Museum 3: 86-118. stveit, L. 2008a: Mellommesolittisk tid (MM) 8000-6500 BC. In: Bjerck, H. (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 571-578. Tapir. Trondheim. stveit, L. 2008b: Mellomneolittisk tid (MN) 3300-2300 BC. In: Bjerck (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 592-595. Tapir. Trondheim. stveit, L. 2008c: Lokalitet 67 Selneset. In: Bjerck (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 383-392. Tapir. Trondheim. stveit, L. 2008d: Lokalitet 68 Sndre Steghaugen. In: Bjerck (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 393-434. Tapir. Trondheim. stveit, L. 2008e: Seinmesolittisk tid (MM) 8000-6500 BC. In: Bjerck, H. (ed), NTNU Vitenskapsmuseets arkeologiske underskelser Ormen Lange Nyhamna: 576-587. Tapir. Trondheim.

A.1

Appendix I: Copper, bronze and gold artefacts

Geography: M (Municipality); C (County). Museums: B (Bergen Museum); S (Archaeological Museum of Stavanger); T (Vitenskapsmuseet in Trondheim); C (Oldsaksamlingen in Oslo); Ts (Troms Museum); (lesund Museum).

1. Brooches
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Holen; Time M., Rogaland C. From burial 85. Round-headed brooch (B 5000). Svany; Flora M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From burial 26. Flat-headed brooch with hourglass shape (B 448). Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Flat-headed brooch with hourglass shape (S 1267). Lunde; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. From burial 60. Flat-headed brooch with hourglass shape (S 6870). Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 50 (Sola I). Flat-headed brooch with hourglass shape (B 449). Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 5 (T-H I). Flat-headed brooch with large, almost cross shaped head (T 2205). Srheim; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 77. Flat-headed brooch with cross shaped head (B 3322). Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 75 (Anda III). Flat-headed brooch, with fragmented, probably hourglass shaped head (C 4928). Storesund; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 36 (Storesund I). Flat-headed brooch, with fragmented, probably hourglass shaped head (B 5765). Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 76 (Anda IV). Flat-headed brooch, with crutch shaped head and basket-ornate bow (C 4930). Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 38 (Gunnarshaug I). Flat-headed brooch with discshaped head (B 5952). Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 21 (Rykkja II). Flat-headed brooch, fragmented (T 2238). Tjtta; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 80. Spiral termination from brooch, fragmented (S 4265). Ristesund; Sande M., Mre & Romsdal C. From burial 25. Spiral termination and part of pin from brooch, fragmented (B 3678). Kleppe; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 70 (Kleppe II). Fragmented pin, probably from brooch (B 2845). Nedre Hauge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Fragmented brooch (C 570a). Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 92. Large round-headed brooch with flat bow and double spirals in one end (possibly in both ends originally) (B 4320 and C 13457). Lom; Lom M., Oppland C. From hoard 11. Spectacle brooch (C 16615). Lom; Lom M., Oppland C. From hoard 11. Spectacle brooch with large oval discs (C 16616). Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Spectacle brooch with large oval discs (B 7000).

2. Pins
21. Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 20 (Rykkja I). Spiral-headed pin. 22. Indre Hoem; Frna M., Mre & Romsdal C. Spiral-headed pin. 25.6 cm long. Discovery: at 1.2m depth in bog (T 17917). 23. Gjrv; Indery M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 4. Double spiral-headed pin. 11 cm long (T 4403). 24. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 9 (T-H V). Spiral-headed pin with swan neck (T 2444). 25. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 54 (Sola V). Disc-headed pin (B 3333). 26. Vespestad; Bmlo M., Hordaland C. From burial 31. Disc-headed pin. 13.1cm long (B 5962c). 27. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Disc, probably from disc-headed pin (B 7000). 28. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Disc, probably from disc-headed pin (T 2138). 29. stre Hauge, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 104. Disc, probably from disc-headed pin (B 3209). 30. Ullandhaug; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: in the museum, provenance uncertain. Disc-headed pin, three discs arranged in triangle. Pin missing (S 4849; SM 1925-28). 31. Vikedal; Kvam M., Rogaland C. From hoard 21. Disc-headed pin, four discs arranged in rectangle with a fifth in the centre (B 6877d).

A.2
32. Vikedal; Kvam M., Rogaland C. From hoard 21. Disc-headed pin, four discs arranged in rectangle with a fifth in the centre. Fragmented (B 6877e). 33. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Large T-shaped pin with loops with flat fittings (T 252). 34. Vlebru; Ringebu M., Oppland C. From hoard 12. Bar-headed pin (in private possession). 35. Skjeggesnes; Alstahaug M., Nordland C. From burial 2. Fragmented pin with round cross-section, flattening at the top. 11.9cm long (T 18383b).

3. Tweezers
36. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 10 (T-H VI). Tweezers, undecorated with thick lips (T 2411). 37. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 15 (T-H XI). Tweezers, undecorated (T 7840). 38. B; Steigen M., Nordland C. From burial 1. Tweezers, undecorated (T 7581). 39. Vespestad; Bmlo M., Hordaland C. From burial 31. Tweezers, undecorated, with vertical grooves on the insides (B 5962). 40. Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 38 (Gunnarshaug I). Tweezers, decorated with wolftooth pattern (B 5952e). 41. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 56 (Rege II). Tweezers, decorated with hatched double-lines (S 1270-71). 42. Storesund; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 36 (Storesund I). Tweezers, decorated with wavy hatched double-lines and three bosses (B 2772). 43. Sele; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 59. Tweezers, decorated with triple-lines, dot-C) paterns and three bosses (B 2597). 44. Finny; Finny M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available, exact provenance unknown. Tweezers, decorated with band of five-lines, S-patterns and three circles with sun-rays (S 1844; Ab.1893). 45. Aust-Bore; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 64 (Bore II). Tweezers, decorated with group of simple lines (S 1389; Ab. 1881).

4. Studs and buttons

46. L vre; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 16 (L). Double-stud, decorated (T 15624). 47. Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 38 (Gunnarshaug I). Double-stud, decorated (B 5952). 48. B; Steigen M., Nordland C. From burial 1. Double-stud with extremely long central boss, decorated (T 7582a). 49. Nedre Hauge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Double-stud, decorated (C 569). 50. Vest-Hassel; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 99. Double-stud, decorated (B 3875d). 51. Utvik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 43 (Reheia IV). Double-stud, with central boss and disc at termination (B 546). 52. Vespestad; Bmlo M., Hordaland C. From burial 31. Double-stud, undecorated (B 5962b). 53. Nedre Hauge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Double-stud, fragmented (C 569). 54. Nedre Hauge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Double-stud, decorated, fragmented (C 569). 55. Hananger; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 96 (Hananger II). Double-stud, fragmented (C 22158a). 56. Jsund; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 48. Double-stud, lost (S 7425, formerly C 1045). 57. Jsund; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 48. Double-stud, lost (S 7425, formerly C 1045). 58. Lunde; Sgne M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 100. Bar-stud with straight bar and crossed loop (B 3603). 59. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Bar-stud with straight bar, parallel loop, and additional loops at each end (T 253) 60. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 9 (TH V). Bar-stud with straight bar, parallel loop, and additional loops at each end (T 2443). 61. Njlstad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 88. Bar-stud with curved bar and parallel loop (S 4630a). 62. Austre Bore, Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 64 (Bore II). Bar-stud (lost), like R 123 (=T 253 from Gunnesyan above). Since Rygh only included one bar-stud in his plate-section, we might suspect that the referance R 123 was to bar-studs in general, and not the depicted variant in particular (S 1389) 63. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 9 (TH V). Round button with loop at the back (T 2442). 64. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Round button with loop at the back (T 3818b).

A.3
65. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Round button with loop at the back (T 3818b). 66. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Round button with loop at the back (T 3818c).

5. Bracelets, arm and finger rings

67. Steine; Aurland M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 16. Small ribbed bracelet with pointed ends (B 3295c). 68. Tjelta; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 57. Ribbed bracelet, broad with 13 equal ribs (var. I) (S 1262). 69. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 74 (Anda II). Ribbed bracelet, broad with 13 ribs, protruding upper and lower ribs (var. II) (S 3672a). 70. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 74 (Anda II). Ribbed bracelet, broad with 11 ribs, strongly protruding upper and lower ribs (var. III) (S 3672a). 71. Srheim; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 77. Ribbed bracelet, broad with 11 ribs, strongly protruding upper and lower ribs (var. III) (B 3322). 72. Srheim; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 77. Ribbed bracelet, broad with 11 ribs, strongly protruding upper and lower ribs (var. III) (B 3322). 73. Kjrrefjord; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 101. Ribbed bracelet, broad, fragmented (likely var. III). 74. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Ribbed bracelet, narrow (S 1266). 75. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Ribbed bracelet, narrow (S 1266). 76. Nord-Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 71 (N-Braut). Ribbed bracelet, narrow (S 4227b) 77. Nord-Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 71 (N-Braut). Ribbed bracelet, narrow (S 4227c) 78. vestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 93. Ribbed bracelet, narrow (Larsen 1997). 79. Kvamme; Rady M., Hordaland C. From hoard 20. Coiled spiral arm ring (B 3426). 80. Kvamme; Rady M., Hordaland C. From hoard 20. Coiled spiral arm ring (B 3426). 81. Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 21 (Rykkja II). Probably coiled spiral arm ring, fragment (T 2237). 82. Overgrd; Vikna M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: at 120 cm depth in bog. Disfigured coiled spiral arm ring with four coils made from a thread 129 cm long, hooked termination at one end (T 14259; TMT 1930). 83. Sr Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 72 (S-Braut). Simple massive arm ring (S 1272). 84. Sr Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 72 (S-Braut). Simple massive arm ring (S 1272). 85. B; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 41 (Reheia II). Arm ring with D-shaped cross-section, decorated with metope-pattern (B 4504). 86. Madla; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From burial 47 (Madla II). Arm ring, massive oath-ring (S 2357). 87. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Arm ring, fragmented (T 3817). 88. Velle; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 103. Fragmented arm ring, hollow (C 26787). 89. Avlund; Gausdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 13. Arm ring, fragmented oath-ring (C 25621e). 90. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring made from thin bronze sheet (T 2135). 91. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring made from thin bronze sheet (T 2135). 92. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring made from thin bronze sheet, fragmented (T 2135). 93. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring made from thin bronze sheet, fragmented (T 2135). 94. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring made from thin bronze sheet, fragmented (T 2135). 95. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Simple arm ring with square cross-section (T 2133). 96. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Simple, thin arm ring with square crosssection (B 7000d). 97. Vere; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 98. Massive arm ring with D-shaped cross-section (C 20830b). 98. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Arm ring, miniature wendel ring (T 2134). 99. Hodne; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 65 (Hodne I). Gold arm ring made from twisted bar with square cross-section. 25g (S 4091). 100. Utvik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 44 (Reheia V). Gold, arm ring made from twisted bar with square cross-section (B 1893). 101. Hemnskjel; Leikneset, Snillfjord M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: Among pile of small stones, probably secondary position. Gold, arm ring made from gold-sheet, with double-spiral terminations (T 18204; TM 1961).

A.4
102. Strand; Hitra M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: maintenance of old road-ditch. Gold, arm ring made from gold-sheet, with double-spiral terminations (T 14490; TMT 1932). 103. Sandnesenget; Sandnes, Nry M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: at 155cm depth in bog, to the immediate west of the location of finding nr. 154. Gold, arm ring with bowl terminations made from goldsheet (T 14556; TMT 1932). 104. Hodne; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath stone-fence, probably from the Iron Age (gardfar). Gold, arm ring with bowl terminations made from gold-sheet (S 7190; SM 1946). 105. Langli vre; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from drained and cultivated bog. Gold, arm ring with bowl terminations, massive (T 15619; TMT 1938). 106. Julnes; Aukra prestegrd, Aukra M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 9. Gold, massive arm ring with square cross-section (T 17813a; TM 1957). 107. Berge; Forsand M., Rogaland C. Discovery: in fissure in crag by the sea, now 6-7 m above the ground. Gold, massive arm ring with round cross-section, fragmented. 8.8cm, 30gram (S 8523; SM 1959: fig. 1). 108. Stange; Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cultivated soil. Gold, massive arm ring with round cross-section, fragmented and disfigured (S 6960; SM 1942-43; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 216). 109. Vikse; Sveio M., Rogaland C. Discovery: under steep hillside. Gold, massive arm ring with spiral terminations. 73.778g. (B 11088; Hinsch 1954; ) 110. Lista; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: exact provenance unknown. Gold, coiled spiral arm ring with twisted terminations. 22g. (B 4513; Johansen 1986: 71, fig. 47; Marstrander 1977: fig. 6). 111. Nord Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bog. Gold, small coiled spiral arm ring. 4 cm in diameter (S 3585; SM 1913; Mllerop 1963: 56, note 5; Marstrander 1977: 43, fig. 4). 112. Sele; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 58 (Sele I). Gold, coiled spiral finger ring (B 2598). 113. Sele; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 58 (Sele I). Gold, coiled spiral finger ring (B 2598). 114. Hkonsdal, Fusa M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Bronze, coiled spiral finger ring (B 6458; BM 1911). 115. Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 20 (Rykkja I). Bronze coiled spiral finger ring, fragment (T 2559). 116. Julnes; Aukra prestegrd, Aukra M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 9. Gold, arm ring, lost (T 17819b). 117. Vlebru; Ringebu M., Oppland C. From hoard 12. Bronze finger ring (in private possession).

6. Neck collars and neck rings

118. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55. Neck collar, ribbed (S 1263). 119. Sr Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 72 (S-Braut). Neck collar, ribbed (S 1272). 120. Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 92. Neck collar, ribbed (B 4320). 121. Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 20 (Rykkja I). Neck collar, smooth (T 2558). 122. Tennevik; Sknland M., Nordland C. From hoard 3. Neck collar (Ts. 160). 123. Tennevik; Sknland M., Nordland C. From hoard 3. Neck collar (Ts. 160). 124. Trondenes; Harstad M., Nordland C. From hoard 2. Neck collar (Ts. 11373). 125. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (T 2129). 126. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (T 2130). 127. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (T 2131). 128. Avlund; Gausdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 13. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (C 4141). 129. Avlund; Gausdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 13. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (C 25671). 130. Avlund; Gausdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 13. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (C 25671). 131. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (B 7000a) 132. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, four large fragments (B 7000b) 133. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 14. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, two small fragments (B 7000c) 134. Erdalen; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 15. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, fragment (B 5793a). 135. Erdalen; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 15. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, fragment (B 5793a). 136. Erdalen; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 15. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, fragment (B 5793a). 137. Erdalen; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 15. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, fragment (B 5793a). 138. Vikedal; Kvam M., Hordaland C. From hoard 21. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (B 6877). 139. Vikedal; Kvam M., Hordaland C. From hoard 21. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (B 6877). 140. Vikedal; Kvam M., Hordaland C. From hoard 21. Wendel ring, sharp flanges, thin (B 6877). 141. Vge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: between stones 2m from centre in a small cairn, 7m in diameter. Possible burial. Wendel ring, sharp flanges (S 3779; SM 1915: fig. 2). 142. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 8. Wendel ring, broad flanges (T 15138a).

A.5
143. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 8. Wendel ring, broad flanges (T 15138b). 144. Vre; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From hoard 23. Wendel ring, broad flanges (C 1952). 145. Vre; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From hoard 23. Wendel ring, broad flanges (C 1953). 146. Rennstein; Levanger M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: during cultivation of area under former cairn. Possible burial find. Wendel ring, broad flanges (T 12896; TVS 1924). 147. Salte; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bottom of ditch. Wendel ring, broad flanges, fragment (S 4248; SM 1921-24; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 79, note 18). 148. Buene; Leikanger M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: no information available. Wendel ring, broad flanges, forged into measuring device by finder. Kept at Heibergske Samlingar, Sogn & Fjordane (Lange 1912: 45). 149. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Neck ring, flat, undecorated (T 2132). 150. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 8. Neck ring, flat, undecorated (T 15138d). 151. Stle; Etne M., Hordaland C. Discovery: in bog underneath crag. Neck ring, twisted with large oval plates and spiral terminations (B 9097; BM 1939/40). 152. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Neck ring, twisted with large oval plates and spiral terminations, fragments (T 255-56). 153. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 8. Neck ring, twisted with separate lock-piece (T 15138c). 154. Brudal; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: underneath funnelshaped formation of stones in the ground by the riverside. Neck ring, massive with disc terminations (T 11984; TVS 1920; Gaustad 1965:F.1 nr. 2).

7. Belt plates and tutuli

155. Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 92. Belt plate, with spiral decoration in three zones. 18.8 cm diameter (B 4320b). 156. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Belt plate, with spiral decoration in three zones. 18.8 cm diameter (S 1264). 157. Srheim; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 77. Belt plate, with spiral decoration in two zones. 14 cm diameter (B 3322). 158. Orre; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 78. Belt plate, with spiral decoration in two zones. 10 cm diameter (S 859). 159. Tjtta; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 82. Belt plate, with spiral decoration in two zones. 15.9 cm diameter (S 4265a). 160. Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 92. Belt plate/tutulus, with spiral decoration in one zone. 7.5 cm diameter (C 12350). 161. Rykkja; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 20 (Rykkja I). Belt plate/tutulus, traces of simple decoration (circles). 7.5 cm diameter (T 2557). 162. Gjrv; Indery M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 4. Belt plate, decorated with running arches. 10 cm diameter (T 4402). 163. Kleppe; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 70 (Kleppe II). Belt plate, decorated with bosses in repousstechnique. 14 cm diameter (B 2844). 164. Pollestad; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 81. Tutulus, flat with low central boss (S 3361). 165. Nese; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 67. Tutulus, flat with low central boss (B 3874). 166. Hananger; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 95 (Hananger I). Tutulus, flat with low central boss (C 25633a). 167. Nord Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 71 (N-Braut). Tutulus, slightly raised profile with long central boss (S 4227a). 168. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Tutulus, with long central boss (S 1265). 169. Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 92. Belt plate/tutulus, flat with low central boss (C 12349) 170. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 14 (T-H X). Tutulus, medium raised profile (T 7580). 171. Jren; Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Tutulus, medium raised profile (B 2873; Ab. 1873). 172. Sr Braut; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 72 (S-Braut). Tutulus, completely raised profile, missing boss (S 1274). 173. Nese; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 67. Tutulus, completely raised profile (B 3578). 174. Vasshus; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 61. Tutulus, completely raised profile (B 4098). 175. Tjtta; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 82. Tutulus, completely raised profile (S 4265b). 176. Austre Bore; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 63 (Bore I). Tutulus (lost), completely raised (S 6020).

A.6
177. Erga; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 79. Tutulus, raised profile, long central boss with disc (S 406). 178. Vere; Farsund M. Rogaland C. From burial 98. Tutulus, raised profile, central boss with disc (C 20830b).

8. Knives
179. Sola; Sola M.; Rogaland C. From burial 50 (Sola I). Razor (B 908). 180. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 10 (T-H VI). Razor (T 2412). 181. Skjeggesnes; Alstahaug M., Nordland C. From burial 2. Razor (T 18383a). 182. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 12 (T-H VIII). Razor (T 7587). 183. Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 38 (Gunnarshaug I). Razor (B 5952). 184. Hysstad; Stord M., Hordaland C. From burial 29. Razor (B 11184). 185. Leirbekken; Sr-Varanger M., Finnmark C. Reported finding of razor near the site Leirbekken 2. Also in the vicinity were two stone constructions, platforms or cairns with a 1m thich layer of sand and a layer of ash and charcoal. Possibly Nordic style burials (Simonsen 1963: 257; Gaustad 1965: nr 140) 186. Grindheim; Etne M., Hordaland C. From burial 33. Razor (B 7656). 187. Sola; Sola M.; Rogaland C. From burial 54 (Sola V). Razor (B 3333). 188. Sola; Sola M.; Rogaland C. From burial 53 (Sola IV). Razor (S 1261). 189. Rege; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 56 (Rege II). Razor (S 1271). 190. Vespestad; Bmlo M., Hordaland C. From burial 31. Razor (B 5962). 191. Storasund; Haugesund M., Rogaland C. From burial 35. Razor (B 5875a). 192. B; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 90 (B II). Razor (lost) (B 5003a). 193. Storesund; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 36 (Storesund I). Frame-hafted knife (B 5765b). 194. Sola; Sola M.; Rogaland C. From burial 52 (Sola III). Frame-hafted knife (S 2882). 195. Skren; Smna M., Nordland C. From burial 3. Frame-hafted knife (T 13602a). 196. Kleppe; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 69 (Kleppe I). Frame-hafted knife (S 1638). 197. Kjrrefjord; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 101. Frame-hafted knife (C 20991c). 198. Ryen; Kristiansand M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 107. Frame-hafted knife (C 32493a). 199. Dromnes; Aure M., Mre & Romsdal C. From burial 23. Frame-hafted knife (T 21623a). 200. Jren; Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Frame-hafted knife, oval frame (B 4913; Ab. 1892). 201. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 8 (T-H IV). Metal-hilted knife (T 2209). 202. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 76 (Anda IV). Metal-hilted knife (C4929). 203. Sola; Sola M.; Rogaland C. From burial 51 (Sola II). Tanged knife (S 2950). 204. Skadberg; Eigersund M., Rogaland C. From burial 94. Tanged knife (B 4466). 205. Tjora; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 49. Tanged knife (S 1569). 206. Nyheim; Sndre Kleppe, Vg M., Oppland C. Discovery: no information available. Knife with perforated tang. 13.2 cm (C 30928; UO 1965-66). 207. Leirbukt; Kvalsund M., Finnmark C. Guttorm Gjessing mentions having received an oral report in the summer of 1938, of a curved bronze knife. Children had been playing with it on the sea-shore, and it was never delivered to the museum. It had a somewhat curved blade, and in the haft-end was a complete, small animal-figurine, - not just the head of the animal (my translation; Gjessing 1942: 257). 208. Bringsjord; Lyngdal M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 105. Knife, fragment (C 33195a). 209. Skren; Smna M., Nordland C. From burial 3. Knife, fragment (T 13602b). 210. Myr; Verdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 17. Knife, fragment (T 331). 211. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 5 (T-H I). Knife, lost. 212. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 9 (T-H V). Knife, fragment (T 2445). 213. Vevelstad; Vevelstad M., Nordland C. Discovery: picked up along with flint and fragments of thin-walled soapstone vessel on Rissen. Four small bronze fragments, two of them fitting together to a 3.7 cm long piece. Probably part of knife (T 13065d; TVS 1925; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 214. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Sickle (C 22107d). 215. Holen; Time M., Rogaland C. From burial 86 (Holen II). Sickle, fragment with ridged front and flat back (B 4998). 216. rsland; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 91. Sickle, fragment with ridged front and flat back (S 4475a).

9. Double-edged blades
217. Blindheim; lesund M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 10. Metal-hilted sword (B 11599). 218. Madla; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Metal-hilted sword (B 1007; Lorange 1875). 219. Eia; Sokndal M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath crag. Metal-hilted sword (S 6660; SM 1939-40 = Petersen 1941).

A.7
220. Nrland; H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Pommel for sword or dagger (S 2059; Ab. 1898). 221. Hognestad; Time M., Rogaland C. From burial 87. Riveted dagger with pommel (S 6400). 222. B; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 89 (B I). Metal-hilted dagger (S 3410). 223. Pollestad; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Metal-hilted dagger (S 7034; SM 1944). 224. Holen; Time M., Rogaland C. From burial 85 (Holen I). Riveted dagger with pommel (B 5000). 225. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: No information available. Pommel (B 6311; BM 1909). 226. Vik; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 80. Metal-hilted sword (S 7620, 7020). 227. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 5 (T-H I). Riveted sword with pommel (T 2204). 228. Hodne; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 65 (Hodne I). Metal-hilted sword (S 1022). 229. Sola; Sola M. Rogaland C. From burial 50 (Sola I). Riveted dagger with pommel (B 906, 909). 230. Jsund; Sola M. Rogaland C. From burial 48. Metal-hilted sword (S 7475, formerly C 1045). 231. Meberg; Farsund C., Rogaland C. From burial 102. Metal-hilted sword (C 27790a). 232. B; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 40 (Reheia I). Sword with lamellar hilt and pommel (B 5046). 233. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 6 (T-H II). Metal-hilted dagger (T 1266). 234. Rimbareid; Fitjar M., Hordaland C. From burial 28. Tanged sword with guard and pommel (B 1825). 235. Nedre Hauge; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Tanged sword with pommel (C 566). 236. Sola; Sola M. Rogaland C. From burial 51 (Sola II). Riveted sword with pommel (B 1009; previously confused with B 1011, nr. 259). 237. Nordhuglo; Stord M., Hordaland C. From burial 30. Metal-hilted dagger (B 4299). 238. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 12 (T-H VIII). Flange-hilted sword (T 7501a). 239. Hyland; H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the bottom of lake Hylandsvatnet. Flange-hilted sword (S 2969; SM 1907). 240. Storesund; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 36 (Storesund I). Flange-hilted sword (B 5765c). 241. Vinje; B M., Nordland C. Discovery: from bog. Flange-hilted sword (Ts 4318; Bakka 1976: 26p.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 242. Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 38 (Gunnarshaug I). Dagger with tendency for flanges (B 5952a). 243. Gunnarshaug; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 39 (Gunnarshaug II). Dagger with tendency for flanges (B 5310). 244. Hodne; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 66 (Hodne II). Dagger with tendency for flanges, parts of wooden haft preserved (B 4716). 245. Lekve; Ulvik M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from scree in hillside. Tongue-hilted sword (B 1008; Lorange 1875). 246. Vg; Dnna M., Nordland C. Discovery: from bog. Tongue-hilted sword (C 3930; Ab. 1866; Bakka 1976: 26p., Pl.6). 247. Sndre-Holme; Verdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: found standing in clay at the estuary of river Verdalselv; probably secondary position as a result of erosion of the river-bank. Riveted sword with short tang (T 7500; TVS 1905). 248. Vanvik; Suldal M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath stones in scree. Tanged sword, with complex cross-section (S 3817; SM 1915: fig. 19). 249. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 75 (Anda III). Tanged dagger, with complex cross-section (C 4927). 250. Skeie; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. From burial 34. Tanged sword, with complex cross-section (B 1011; previously confused with B 1009, nr. 236). 251. Friestad; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 68. Tanged sword, with rivets and simple cross-section (B 1010). 252. Bore; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: standing in the ground by river Figgjo. Tanged dagger, with simple cross-section (S 4563; SM 1925-28). 253. Ulstein; Ulstein M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from scree underneath mountain Ulsteinhetta. Tanged sword with simple cross-section (B 11333; UB 1959/2). 254. Sandnesenget; Nry M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground beneath a stone. Tanged sword with simple cross-section (T 12328; TVS 1921; Bakka 1976: 26p., fig. 21). 255. Tomsvik; Nesna M., Nordland C. Discovery: from the ground in sand/gravel quarry. Tanged sword with simple cross-section (T 19976; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 256. Lista fyr (Lista lighthouse); Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from the ground near the lighhouse. Tanged sword with simple cross-section, fragment (B 4570; AB. 1889).

A.8
257. Haugesund; Haugesund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Tanged dagger with simple cross-section, fragment (S 1771; Ab. 1890). 258. Aursjen; Lesja M., Oppland C. Discovery: from the eastern shore of lake Aursjen. Tanged dagger with simple cross-section (C 34057; UOT 1973-76). 259. Vest-Hassel; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 99. Small, tanged double edged blade (B 3875). 260. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 54 (Sola V). Small, tanged double edged blade (B3333c) 261. Karlebotn; Nesseby M., Finnmark C. Discovery: professional excavation of remains of a rectangular, partly subterranean house construction of Gressbakken type. Dagger discovered in midden in front of the house. Other findings comprice projectiles and debris of slate, quartzite and quartz, slate miniature knives of the boot-shaped type, pot-sherds as well as well preserved bone artefacts and fragmented bones and shells. Three radiocarbon dates made on samples from fire-place, floor and midden (cf. App. VII). Metal: Tanged double edged blade with perforated tang, copper (Ts. 8458bg; Schanche 1986; 1989; Huggert 1996). 262. Pitsusmurust; Utsjoki, Lappi C., Finland. Discovery: no information available. Small, tanged double egded blade with perforation in blade, copper. (Hackman 1900: fig. 8; Bakka 1976: 21). 263. Skotnes; Vestvgy M., Nordland C. Discovery: from bog. Small, tanged double edged blade with complex cross-section, copper. 14.3 cm (Ts 2194; TsM 35-36; Gjessing 1942: 254; Gaustad 1965: 24pp.; Bakka 1976: 21; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 264. Lebesby; Lebesby M., Finnmark C. Discovery: from prehistoric house-ground, professionally excavated by G. Gjessing. Findings located in and by the fireplace and along the walls. Metal blade reported to have been found near fireplace, before Gjessings excavation. Associated findings: two quartzite arrowheads, two slate arrowheads (Sundery type) and quartzite, quartz, flint and slate debris. Metal: Small, tanged double egded blade, bronze. 8.2 cm (C 24484a; UO 1929; Gjessing 1929; 1935: 39; 1942: 256; Gaustad 1965: 25; Bakka 1976: 21). 265. Geite; Levanger M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 18. Tanged double egded blade. 16.5 cm (T 8390; TVS 1907; Gaustad 1965: 24p.; Bakka 1976: 21). 266. Bogen; Karlsy M., Troms C. Discovery: found on cattle trail. Tanged double edged blade, copper. 9.4 cm (Ts 4375; Gaustad 1965: 24; Bakka 1976: 21). 267. Kvesmesnes; Hatten, Storfjord M., Troms C. Discovery: no information available. Tanged, double edged blade, copper. 11.7 cm (C 20948; Oldtiden XI; Bakka 1976: 21). 268. Bentsjord; Troms M., Troms C. Discovery: from the ground. Tanged, double edged blade, bronze. 13 cm (Ts 5758; Bakka 1976: 21). 269. Lista; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From hoard 25. Riveted sword (B 5469a). 270. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 73 (Anda I). Riveted sword (S 1457). 271. Svoll; Bmlo M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from bog. Riveted sword (B 4954; Ab. 1893). 272. Haugesund; Haugesund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Riveted sword, fragments (S 1700; Ab. 1889) 273. ri; Lrdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from gravel in hillside. Riveted dagger (B 5212; Ab. 1896; Bjrn 1936: 8; Mandt 1991: 401; Aakvik 2000: 40) 274. Stjerny; Finny M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Dagger (S 1630). 275. Eggesb; Hery M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog (B 6082; BM 1908). 276. Lunde; Sgne M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 106 (Lunde II). Riveted dagger (C 6143). 277. Rege; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Riveted dagger (S 1268). 278. Utne; Ullensvang M., Hordaland C. From burial 27. Riveted dagger. 17.6 cm (B 8088). 279. Lura; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Riveted dagger (B 2646; Ab. 1871). 280. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 7 (T-H III). Riveted dagger (T 2207). 281. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 50 (Sola I). Riveted dagger (B 907). 282. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 13 (T-H IX). Riveted dagger (T 7822). 283. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 11 (T-H VII). Riveted dagger (T 7823). 284. Myr; Verdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 17. Riveted dagger (T 330). 285. Nord Sunde; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From burial 45 (N-Sunde). Riveted dagger (S 400). 286. Srheim; Etne M., Hordaland C. From burial 32. Riveted dagger, very similar to nr. 284 (B 12690, formerly S 2849). 287. Srheim; Etne M., Hordaland C. From burial 32. Riveted dagger, very similar to nr. 283. 12.8 cm (S 2849). 288. Gruda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 62. Sword blade with complex cross-section, haft-section missing. 52.5 cm (S 3967). 289. Madland; Gjesdal M., Rogaland C. Discovery: at the north bank of the drained lake Kvitlavatnet, originally deposited in the lake. Sword blade with complex cross-section, fragments (S 7340; SM 1948)

A.9
290. Revheim; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Sword blade with complex cross-section, fragments (S 1631; Ab. 1887) 291. Hogstad; probably in Rogaland C. Discovery: No information available. Blade with complex crosssection, fragments (B 4658; Ab. 1890). 292. Madla; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From burial 46. Sword blade with simple cross-section, fragments (B 4152). 293. Brastadvatnet; Farsund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the bottom of the drained western end of lake Brastadvatnet. Sword blade with simple cross-section, fragments (C 21943; Oldtiden VIII). 294. Re; Time M., Rogaland C. From burial 84. Sword blade with simple cross-section, fragments (B 5002). 295. Undheim; Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Dagger/sword blade with simple cross-section, fragments (S 2620; SM 1904).

10. Spearheads
296. Hol; Meldal M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: underneath large stone. Spearhead (T 12112; TVS 1920). 297. Vigrestad; H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Spearhead, decorated, with wooden remains in socket (S 4387; SM 1924-25). 298. Kaldafjell; Voss M., Hordaland C. Discovery: on the ground, during grouse hunting (B 8888; BM 1937). 299. Smme; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Spearhead, fragment (S 428; Ab. 1870). 300. Haugvaldstad; ygarden, Mostery, Rennesy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound along with burned bones and a flint scraper, possibly a burial. Spearhead, fragment (S 4975; SM 1928-30). 301. Fosse; Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from sand quarry. Spearhead, fragment (S 427; Ab. 1879). 302. Srnesje; Molde M., Mre & Romsdal C. From burial 24. Spearhead (T 3930). 303. Utvik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: possibly from a mound. Spearhead (B 999; Lorange 1875). 304. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 326). 305. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 352). 306. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 356). 307. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 372). 308. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 894). 309. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 895). 310. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 10556). 311. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 10557). 312. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 22107a). 313. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 22107b). 314. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (C 22107c). 315. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (In private possesion). 316. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. From hoard 17. Spearhead (In private possesion). 317. Fiskvik; Verdal M., Nord- Trndelag C. Discovery: from gravel in hillside, during road-construction. Spearhead (T 3461; Ab. 1886). 318. Orre; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Spearhead. Part of haft made of ash preserved. (S 6100; SM 1933-34: fig.6) 319. Hiksdal; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bog. Spearhead (B 12196; HMT 1969-70). 320. Nestb; Fitjar M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from bog. Spearhead (B 6759; Oldtiden VII). 321. Orre; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: at the bottom of Lake Orrevatn, near its outlet. 19.2cm (S 3885; SM 1916: fig. 3). 322. Skeime; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: during maintenance of canal from lake Neseimsvatn to the sea. Spearhead (C 22609; Oldtiden X). 323. Tjelflot; Etne M., Hordaland C. Discovery: in gravel in steep hillside during quarrying. Spearhead (B 5940; BM 1905). 324. Selevatnet; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bottom of lake Selevatn, point down in the sandy bottom. Spearhead (S 3953; Oldtiden VIII: 145, fig. 9). 325. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Spearhead (T 254). 326. Hoddy; Namsos M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: between large stones (T 12452; TVS 1922). 327. ygarden; Nesset M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from a small mound, possibly a burial. Spearhead (T 4012; Ab. 1889). 328. Giskeydgarden; Giske M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Heavily resharpened by the finder. Spearhead (B 5425; BM 1904). 329. Reve; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Spearhead. 10.2cm (S 4913; SM 1928-30: fig. 6).

A.10
330. Snsa; Snsa M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: no information available. Spearhead (C 490). 331. Jamkre; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from the ground. Spearhead (B 10219; UB 1950). 332. Srheim; Luster M., Sogn & Fjordane. Discovery: on the ground in the high alpines. Spearhead, fragment (B 10938; UB 1955/3).

11. Miscellanea
333. Revheim; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From hoard 24. Bronze trumpet, lur (S 1880). 334. Revheim; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From hoard 24. Bronze trumpet, lur (S 1880). 335. Re; Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the site Austb, no further information available. Other findings from the site are pottery and flint (e.g. S 5101, 5705). Bronze, four legged animal figure. 9.2 cm long (S 5100; SM 1930-32: fig. 4). 336. Tu; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from small mound. End-piece with tang and rivet holes. Possibly from the Bronze Age (B 2558; Ab. 1870; Mllerop 1963: 23; Gaustad 1966: 55pp). 337. Revlan; Frosta M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 19. Belt-hook, spiral decoration (T 11934). 338. Nedre Hauge, Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 42 (Reheia III). Ferrule for sword sheath (C 568). 339. Aust Bore; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 63 (Bore I). Bronze tube (S 6020). 340. Rege, Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Bronze tube (lost) (S 1269a) 341. Rege, Sola M., Rogaland C. From burial 55 (Rege I). Spiral tube, fragment (S 1269b) 342. Tjtta; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 82. Spiral tube (S 4265b). 343. Tonnes; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: no information available. Small bronze ring with denticular outer perimeter (T 9821; TVS 1911; Bjrn 1936: 4, 10; Gjessing 1942: 369p.; Gaustad 1965: 61pp.) 344. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Ring with loop, fragment (T 3820b). 345. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Spiral pendant (T 2136). 346. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Spiral pendant (T 2136). 347. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 348. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 349. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 350. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 351. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 352. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Spiral pendant, fragment (T 3821). 353. Vlebru; Ringebu M., Oppland C. From hoard 12. Spiral pendant (in private possession). 354. Mla, Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag. From burial 22. Bronze, coiled spiral, fragmented (T 13673). 355. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 5. Pendant (T 3820a). 356. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Massive chisel (T 257). 357. Drpping Indre; Sunndal M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovered along with flint blade and grinding stones. Possibly a massive chisel (T 16201; TMT 1943; Gaustad 1965: 82p.). 358. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. From hoard 7. Part of bronze chain, 10cm. Original lenght was c. 40cm (T 2966; Ab. 1883, Gaustad 1965: 78p.). 359. Dving; Norddal M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: underneath large stone in field. Awl (B 1012; Lorange 1875). 360. Vest-Hassel; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 99. Designated as a broken awl, but reclassified in this study as part of the arrowhead nr. 259 (B 3875e). 361. Urutlekri; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: professional excavation of open-air site lok. 47. Needle shaped fragment, possibly from an awl. Associated findings: asbestos-tempered pottery, thinwalled soapstone ware and pressure flaked lithics. Radiocarbon dates indicate LBA (Bjrgo et. al. 1992; Prescott 1995: 68; 2006: Tab. 1). 362. Lavik; Hyanger M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from a field. Miniature sword (B 9886; UB 1948/1). 363. Byberg; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Fragment of tube or socket, possibly from a spearhead (S 4839; SM 1925-28). 364. B; H M., Rogaland C. From burial 90 (B II). Folded sheet of bronze, possible sheath for razor (B 5003b). 365. Laland; Klepp M., Rogaland C. From burial 83. Pieces of thin bronze sheet (S 4769b). 366. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Piece of metal sheet (T 258; Gaustad 1965: 79). 367. Utvik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 43 (Reheia IV). Pieces of gold foil (B 548). 368. Utvik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. From burial 44 (Reheia V). Pieces of gold foil (B 1616). 369. Hananger; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 97 (Hananger III). Bronze fragment (C 22156).

A.11
370. Kjrrefjord; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 101. Bronze fragments (C 20991c). 371. Skrivarhellaren; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rockshelter. Bronze fragment, possibly a rivet (B 14186/25; Prescott 1991: nr. 187). 372. Skrivarhellaren; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rockshelter. Bronze fragment (B 14186/26; Prescott 1991: nr. 189). 373. Skrivarhellaren; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rockshelter. Bronze fragment (B 14186/24; Prescott 1991: nr. 190). 374. Skrivarhellaren; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rockshelter. Bronze fragment (B 14186/38; Prescott 1991: nr. 948-49). 375. Ruskenesset, Fana M. Hordaland C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rock-shelter. Bronze fragments (Brinkmann & Shetelig 1920: 31,39; Prescott 2000: 215). 376. Kirkhellaren, Sanna, Trna M., Nordland C. Discovery: archaeological excavation of deposits in rockshelter. Casting debris, drops of copper alloy. (Jrgensen 1988: App.1, nr.8) 377. Lvsen, Frna M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog. Casting debris. Composition: Copper 90.64%, tin 5.35%, lead 1.41%, iron 2.58% (T 11543; TVS 1916; Gaustad 1965). 378. Karasjokk, mountains east of Valjokk chapell; Finnmark C. Casting debris, drops of copper alloy (Ts 4607; Gaustad 1965: 83) 379. B 4523, Gansel, Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Plate of copper alloy, possibly a raw casting (B 4523; BM 1904). 380. Vik; Fitjar M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Casting debris, congealed copper alloy. (B 6896; UB 1948/1)

12. Flanged axes

Type Oldendorf-Underre: 381. Idse; Strand M., Rogaland C. Discovery: on top of mountain with one side rising steeply from the sea. Flanged axe (S 424; Ab. 1879). 382. Haugesund; Haugesund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground near Haugesund. Flanged axe (S 1648; Ab. 1888). 383. Line, Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Flanged axe (B 4911; Ab. 1892). 384. Thune; Gjesdal M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Flanged axe (C 1645). 385. Hole; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Flanged axe. (C 6342; Ab. 1873) 386. Trland, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Flanged axe (S 4370; SM 1924-25). Type Extreme Oldendorf: 387. Indergrd; Agdenes M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground. Post-discovery excavation brought to light flint, quartz and quartzite debris. Possibly a settlement. Flanged axe (T 19145; TMT 1972). 388. Heggdalsvik; Midsund M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: under turf, along with flint debris. Possible settlement. Flanged axe (T 8929; TVS 1909) 389. Gravh; Rondane (between Grimsdalen and Haverdalen); Dovre M., Oppland C. Discovery: found uncovered in the highlands during a reindeer hunt. Flanged axe (C 27951; UO 1949-50). 390. Voll; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the bottom of the drained lake Skassvatnet, by the channel at Voll. Flanged axe (S 4211; SM 1921-24). Type Hheim-Steine: 391. Steine; Aurland M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 16. Flanged axe (B 3295a). 392. Steine; Aurland M., Sogn & Fjordane C. From hoard 16. Flanged axe (B 3295b). 393. Fevg; Rissa M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from bog, at 1.5m depth. Flanged axe (T 7852; TVS 1906). 394. Hheim; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: underneath a stone. Flanged axe (B 4191; Ab. 1883). 395. Kvle; Sogndal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: no information available. Flanged axe (B 7952; BM 1928). 396. Blindheim; lesund M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 10. Flanged axe (B 12125). 397. Blindheim; lesund M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 10. Flanged axe (B 13373). Other flanged axes: 398. Bersagel; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: at 10 masl., c. 70m from the sea, underneath a low and wide cairn. Possibly a burial. Flanged axe (S 7825; SM 1951). 399. Vevang; Eide M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: deep in a bog. Flanged axe (C 21411; Oldtiden VI) 400. Veen; Tynset M., Hedmark C. Discovery: in sloaping terrain. Flanged axe (C 4386; Ab. 1886). 401. Stokka, Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bog. Fragment of flanged axe (S 857; Ab. 1879). 402. Lomen, Vestre Slidre, Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Edge fragment from axe, possibly a flanged axe (C 15067; Ab. 1890).

A.12
13. Paalstaves
Group 1: 403. Lista; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From hoard 25. Paalstave (B 5469b). 404. Hauge; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: between two stones in a bog. Paalstave (B 2684; Ab. 1871) 405. Hove; Lund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath some stones in a field. Paalstave (B 6019; BM 1906). Group 2: 406. Jren; Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Paalstave (B 3219; Ab. 1877). 407. Orty; Midsund M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Paalstave (B 1005). 408. Helleve; Voss M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Paalstave (B 14483). 409. Time; Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Paalstave (B 5308; Ab. 1896). 410. Skjrestad; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cultivated soil. Paalstave (S 5030; SM 1928-30: fig. 5). Group 3: 411. Tu; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from bog, at 1.75m depth. Paalstave (B 1001; Lorange 1875). 412. Randaberg; Randaberg M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Paalstave (B 2726; Ab. 1872). 413. Vge; Bokn M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Paalstave (S 8220; SM 1956). 414. Reins; Levanger M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: in a potato field. Paalstave (T 15926; TMT 1940).

415. Tjelta; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground during ploughing. Shaft-hole axe. Patina removed by finder. 885.4g (S 3664; SM 1913: fig. 12; Johansen 1984) 416. rekol; Ullensvang M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground underneath the mountain Brynefjell. Shaft-hole axe. 1250g (B 3389; Ab. 1879; Johansen 1984). 417. Kvanngardsnes; Volda M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from the ground. Shaft-hole axe. 980g (B 5921; BM 1905; Johansen 1984). 418. Lgsand; Indery M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground, standing with edge upwards. Shafthole axe. 890g. (T 14733; TNT 1933; Johansen 1984). 419. Viset; Sunndal M., Mre & Romsdal C. Shaft-hole axe. 1731g (T 20754; Rnne 1998). 420. Hofset; Hemne M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: during clearance of foundation for old house. Shaft-hole axe, fragment (T 14102; TNT 1930; Johansen 1984).

14. Shaft-hole axes Type Faardrup:

Other shaft-hole axes:

421. Lunde; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. From hoard 22. Shaft-hole axe, partially hollow cast. 29cm. 935g (B 10300a). 422. Lunde; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. From hoard 22. Shaft-hole axe, neck missing. Massive. 24.5cm. 1027g (B 10300b). 423. Lunde; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. From hoard 22. Shaft-hole axe, edge missing. Massive. 21cm. 945g. (B 10999). 424. Rimbareid; Fitjar M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from bog, at 1m depth, by strong underground water current. Shaft-hole axe. 34.5cm. 2248g (B 7364; BM 1922-23; Johansen 1984: 131). 425. Raknes nedre; Midsund M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: between two large stones. Shaft-hole axe: 26.8cm. 1300g (C 7951;Ab. 1877; Johansen 1984).

15. Socketed axes Group 1:

426. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 5 (T-H I) Socketed axe. 8cm (T 2206). 427. Tonnes-Holan; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 6 (T-H II) Socketed axe. 8.2cm ( T1265). 428. Auran; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: in gravel quarry. Socketed axe. 9cm. 145g (T 1866; Ab. 1977). 429. Fisk; Vanylven M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe. 7.7cm (B 7001; Oldtiden IX). 430. Austrtt; rland M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: in cultvated field. Socketed axe. (B 1406; Lorange 1875). 431. Simonnes; Sande M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog. Socketed axe. 7cm. (B 4216; Ab. 1883). 432. Vedvika; Eid M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: during work with ditch. Socketed axe. 7.4cm (B 4588; Ab. 1889).

A.13
433. Revheim; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: in the ground by bedrock behind the crag with rock-art panels. 10.8cm. 140g (B 3332, Ab. 1879). 434. Grafts, Brdshaug; Merker M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground, near an old road by River Gaula 11.6cm (T 13600; TMT 1927). 435. Eikrem; Aukra M, Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog, at 0.55m depth. Socketed axe. 7.4cm. 61g (T 12849; TVS 1924).

Group 2:

436. Tonnes-Holan; Stenkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. From burial 7 (T-H III). Socketed axe. 10.8cm (T 2208). 437. Overvik Nordre; Movollen, Selbu M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe. 10.6cm. 211g (T 18211; TM 1961). 438. Volden; Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. 194g (T 21525). 439. Indre Oppedal; Gulen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from a mound. Socketed axe. 8.9 cm. 119g (B 4729; Ab. 1890). 440. Orre; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe. 9.1cm. 156g (C 21498; Oldtden VI). 441. Knivsland; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe. 10.5 cm (C 25796; UO 1933-34). 442. Svik; Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe. 11.6cm. 231g (S 7160; SM 1946). 443. Smme; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: by bedrock in the ground. Socketed axe. 10.8cm. 233g (B 3334; Ab. 1879). 444. Grude; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe. 10.4cm. 138g (B 4935; Ab. 1892). 445. Nes; Kvinnherad M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from seashore, possibly secondary position. 8.1cm (B 11662; HMT 1962-66). 446. Hagen; Vik M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: no information available. 7.7cm (B 8328; BM 1932).

Related specimens with loops or rivets

447. Midtre Vere; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from bog. Socketed axe; with loop. 9.6 cm (C 22274; Oldtiden X). 448. Syland; H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: by bridge over swamp terrain. Socketed axe, with loop. 12.3 cm. 242g (S 7310; SM 1947). 449. B; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppdal C. From hoard 18. Socketed axe, with hole for rivet. 14.5 cm (C 28628).

Group 3:

450. Nypan; Melhus M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from bottom of a 1m deep ditch dug into clay ground. Socketed axe with faset C and Y-ornament, without loop. Part of wooden haft (spruce) preserved. 11cm (T 17351; TMT 1953). 451. Bjrnes; Nesset M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with faset C and Yornament, without loop. 8.1cm. 102g (T 13565; TMT 1927). 452. Seim; Odda M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from a burial mound. Socketed axe with faset C and Yornament, without loop. 10.6cm. 192g (B 1006; Lorange 1875).

Group 4:

457. Bjrgan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: deep in bog. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian-variant. No internal haft support. 10.2cm (T 3809; Ab. 1888). 458. Vlan; Rissa M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from a field. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support. 12cm. 241g (T 9995; TVS 1912). 459. Farstad; Frna M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support (T 1264; Ab. 1874).

Group 5: Norwegian variant

453. Midtre Vere; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From burial 98 (Vere). Socketed axe with straight rectangular depressions (4) and loop. Internal haft support (C 20830a). 454. Fryland; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with straight rectangular depressions (3 and 4) and loop. No internal haft support. 8 cm. 89g (S 8524; SM 1959: fig. 2) 455. Nesheim, Bergy, Nedstrand M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with straight rectangular depressions (6) and loop. No internal haft support. 6.2 cm. 62g (S 6260; SM 1935-36: fig.1). 456. Norway, Unknown provenance. Socketed axe with straight, rectangular depressions (4), and damaged loop. No internal haft support (B 1003; Lorange 1875).

A.14
460. Ulla, Haram M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: in bog at 1m depth, near a rock called Eldsteinen. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. ( 1425; BM 1928). 461. Sln; Voss M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support. 13cm. 374g (B 5311; Ab. 1896). 462. Mlster; Voss M., Hordaland C. Discovery: on path, probably secondary position. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support. 11cm. 299g (B 10957; UB 1955/3). 463. Rosendal; Kvinnherad M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. Internal haft support present. 12.8cm. 297g (B 5929; BM 1905). 464. vre Berge; Hery M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from the ground at the edge of a bog. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support. Damaged (B 12124; HMT 1969-70) 465. Kasset; Rissa M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: in brickyard; went through two rolls and was discovered as it blocked a third roll. Probably from the nearby clay-source of the brickyard. Socketed axe with loop and ornamental schema of Norwegian- variant (without extended neck). No internal haft support. Damaged. 7.5 cm (T 9716; TVS 1911; Gaustad 1965: 44).

Related variants

466. Ystines; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with ornamental schema probably of Norwegian- variant. No internal haft support. Damaged. Lost (T 544; Gaustad 1965). 467. Vemestad; Lyngdal M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from a mound along with a metal-haft for scimitar; possibly a burial. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema related to the Norwegian- variant. Internal haft support present. Fragment (C 5769; Ab. 1871; Johansen 1986: 29p.). 468. Hovde; rland M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: underneath pine-root in bog, at 1m depth. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema related to the Mlar-variant. Internal haft support present. 10.8 cm. (T 19563) 469. Nyhus; Midtre Gauldal M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema related to the Norwegian/Mlar-variants. No internal haft support. 10cm. 181g (T 2887; Ab. 1882) 470. Sekkenes; Molde M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during removal of tree-roots close to a large burialcairn. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema related to the Norwegian/Mlarvariants. Heavily corroded. Remnants of organic material, possibly bone, in the socket. No internal haft support. 10.5 cm. 230g (T 14537; TMT 1932). 471. Sylte; Vanylven M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog at 85cm depth. Lower part of socketed axe with ornamental schema related to the Norwegian/Mlar-variants. No internal haft support. 7.5cm (B 9315; BM 1943). 472. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. From hoard 8. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and ornamental schema related to the Norwegian/Mlar/Scanian-variants. Internal haft support present. 9.9 cm (T 15138e). 473. Skatval; Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with extended neck and loop, of the Scanian-variant. No internal haft support. 9.4 cm (T 13101; formerly Ts. 778; TVS 1925; Gaustad 1965: 46). 474. Frisvoll; Nesset M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during ploughing of drained bog. Socketed axe with extended neck and loop, of the Scanian-type. Internal haft support present. 7.1 cm. 154g (T 13566; TMT 1927). 475. Brve; Ullensvang M., Hordaland C. Discovery: found in old smithy. Socketed axe with extended neck and loop, of the Scanian-variant. No internal haft support. Distorted, probably flawed casting. 10cm (B 10671; UB 1952/6). 476. Anda; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from a mound, between stones during construction work. Found along with a bone and a tooth from predator. Possible burial. Socketed axe with extended neck and loop, of the Scanian-variant. Internal haft support present. 9.7 cm. 252g (S 3593; SM 1913: fig. 5). 477. Idse; Strand M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with loop and facet A. Distorted socket, possibly originally an extended neck. Internal haft support present. 6.9 cm. 116g (S 6463; SM 1937-38: fig. 1).

Scanian variant

A.15
Group 6:

478. Mren; Hyanger M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with extended neck, damaged loop and facet A. Internal haft support present. 6.7 cm (B 3232; Ab. 1878). 479. Sakstad; Meland M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from a mound. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and facet B. Internal haft support. 6 cm (B 4587; Ab. 1889). 480. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 7.5cm (T 2140). 481. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 8.0cm (T 2139). 482. Lom; Lom M., Oppland C. From hoard 11. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 5.8 cm (C 16617). 483. Srb; Rennesy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with extended neck, loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 7.4 cm (S 4010; Oldtiden IX: 71, fig. 1). 484. Kvamsy; ystese M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 5.6cm (B 10262; UB 1950/4).

Group 7:

485. Trondheim Museum; unknown provenance. Socketed axe with loop and facet A. 5.6 cm (T 120). 486. Ingdalen; Agdenes M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: in a scree. Socketed axe with loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 4.7cm (T 3424; Ab. 1886). 487. Hyland; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. (S 4459; SM 1924-25). 488. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: near the burial mounds Melhaugane. Socketed axe with loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 4.6 cm (S 5000, SM 1928-30: fig. 4). 489. Skeibrok; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: no information available. Socketed axe with loop and indistinct facet. Internal haft support present. 5.7cm (C 22076; Oldtiden VIII). 490. Hegreberg; Vestre my, Rennesy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cultivated soil. Socketed axe with loop and facet B. Internal haft support present. 4.8cm (S 9337; SM 1967: fig. 3).

Group 8:

Group 9:

491. Eggjan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. No internal haft-support. (T 21454). 492. Erstad; Strm, Avery M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. Internal haft support present. 5.5 cm. (T 9673; TVS 1906). 493. Sola; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. Internal haft support present. 5.6 cm (S 1657; Ab. 1888). 494. Myklabust; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. Internal haft support present. 6.0cm (C 13818; Ab. 1887). 495. Hana; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. Internal haft support present. 4.4 cm (S 854; Ab. 1879). 496. Hananger; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with facet B. Internal haft support present. 5,1 cm (C 26609; UO 1937). 497. Krokan; Velfjord prestegard, Hillstad, Brnny M., Nordland C. From hoard 4. Loopless socketed axe. 3.9 cm (T 17168b). 498. Bergen Museum, unknown provenance. Loopless socketed axe with facet A. Internal haft support present. 5.3 cm (B 4713; Ab. 1890).

499. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Loopless socketed axe with volut-ornament. (T 251). 500. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 6. Loopless socketed axe with volut-ornament. 5 cm (T 1773). 501. Rindary; Aukra M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from the ground. Loopless socketed axe with volutornament. 7.2 cm (T 18708; TM 1966). 502. Hustad; Avery M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with volut-ornament. (T 1019; Ab. 1872) 503. Trondenes, Harstad M., Nordland C. From hoard 2. Socketed axe. (Ts. 11434.5). 504. Lundset; strt, rland M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: during peat cutting in bog. Loopless socketed axe with volut and fringe-ornaments. No internal haft support. 4.5cm (T 16022; TMT 1941). 505. Liland; Nry M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: during peat-cutting in bog, at 1m depth. Loopless socketed axe with volut and fringe-ornaments (T 20183).

A.16
506. Krokan; Velfjord prestegard, Hillstad, Brnny M., Nordland C. From hoard 4. Loopless socketed axe with fringe-ornament. 7.0 cm. (T 17168a). 507. Tustervatn; Hemnes M., Nordland C. Loopless socketed axe with double fringe-ornament. 5.3 cm long (T 23513; Johansen 2007; Rnne 2008ab). 508. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Socketed axe with ornament, damaged loop. 7.0cm (T 2141) 509. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. From hoard 7. Loopless socketed axe with ornament. 5.0cm (T 2142) 510. Noggva; Haram M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from bog, at 1.5m depth. Loopless socketed axe with ornament. Internal haft support present. 5.8 cm (B 12099).

Other socketed axes:

511. Bergen Museum, unknown provenance. Large socketed axe with loop and Y-ornament made up by broad rib. No internal haft support. (B 1004; Lorange 1875). 512. B; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppdal C. From hoard 18. Large loopless socketed axe with facet C and broad rib. Lost (C 7043) 513. vrebust; Stordal M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during ploughing. Loopless socketed axe with depressions at the broad faces. No internal haft support. 9.7 cm (B 13295; HMT 1978-82). 514. Skorgen; Vestnes M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during ploughing in Smibakken (forge/smithysloap) in 1918.. Loopless socketed axe with facet C and decorative curved ribs. No internal haft support. 10.4 cm. 245g (T 20506). 515. Gar; Talgje, Finny M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Loopless socketed axe with curved, rectangular depressions (4). No internal haft support. 12.4 cm (S 4572; SM 1925-28: fig. 1; Petersen 1946). 516. Hiksdal; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath large stone in a mound on a bog. Loopless socketed axe with net-ornament. No internal haft support. 11.3 cm (B 11805; HMT 1962-66) 517. Sunndalen; Levanger M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: in rocky terrain beneath scree. Socketed axe with loop and facet C. Internal haft support present. 6.0cm. (T 7763; TVS 1906). 518. Storfosen; rland M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe with narrow mouth relative to edge. 6.5 cm (T 9721; TVS 1911). 519. rnes; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: in marshy area, underneath stone-slab. Socketed chisel. 13.5 cm. (B 7267, BM 1921/22). 520. Myklebust; Selje M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from bog. Socketed axe/chisel. 2.9 cm wide edge. 3.2 cm (B 12002; HMT 1969-70). 521. Skorpen; Dnna M., Nordland C. Discovery: from bog. Socketed axe, edge-section. 3.4 cm wide edge. (T 14992; TMT 1934; Gaustad 1965: nr. 124; Bakka 1976: 26p.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 522. sjorda; Steigen M., Nordland C. Discovery: from the ground. Socketed axe, edge section. 3.5 cm wide edge (Ts. 4225; Ab. 1894; Gaustad 1965: nr. 129; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). 523. Hannasvik; Aure M.; Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: in gravel quarry. Socketed axe, edge section (T 13893; TMT 1929; Gaustad 1965: nr. 22).

A.17

Appendix II: moulds

Double edged blades: 1. Olset; Askvoll M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from the ground. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: double-edged blade with complex cross-section (B 12189; HMT 1969-70; Bakka 1973: 181). 2. Slottsvik; lesund M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from the ground, 30cm deep by a large stone (liftable). Both valves for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Total length of complete valve is 59.6 cm. Cavity: two variants of tanged swords with simple cross-sections. Each valve carries mould cavities on both sides, thus a total of four cavities (B 8757; BM 1935; Shetelig 1936; Jantzen 2008: E.162-63). 3. Bremsnes; Avery M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: on Bnekra, no further information available. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: double-edged blade with simple crosssection (T 18099; TM 1959). 4. Ullensvang; Ullensvang M., Hordaland C. Discovery: no information available. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: small double-edged blade with simple cross-section (B 11616; HMT 1962-66). 5. Skrivarhellaren; rdal M., Sogn & Fjordane. Discovery: professional excavation of rock-shelter by Christopher Prescott. Found in layer IV dated through two radiocarbon dates to BA V-Roman Iron Age (cf. chapt. 5.6.3, App. IX). Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: small double-edged blade with simple cross-section (B 14186/21; Prescott 1991a). 6. Jarfjord; Sr-Varanger M., Finnmark C. From hoard 1. Both valves for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: large broad-tanged dagger. Total length of complete valve is 35.3 cm, mould cavity 32 cm long without tang (Ts. 816). 7. Jarfjord; Sr-Varanger M., Finnmark C. From hoard 1. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: tangless dagger. Total lenght of valve is 19.2 cm (Ts. 817). 8. Vektarlia; Ryrvik, Ryrvik M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: during ploughing close to lake Vektaren, along with fragments of slate spearhead. Single valve for bi-valve mould, chlorite-slate. Cavity: broadtanged dagger. Valve 14.3 cm long. (T 16451; TMT 1944-45; Gaustad 1965: 80; Jantzen 2008: E.184) 9. Kolvika; Vestvgy M., Nordland C. Discovery: along with a second fragment (mould 30). Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: tangless dagger (comparable to mould 7) (Ts. 1771; Ab. 1907; TsM 30; Jrgensen 1986). Socketed spearheads: 10. Gullvika; Namsos M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cultivated soil. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed spearhead. Valve 11.6 cm long (T 18069; TM 1959: 109f.; Gaustad 1965: 80; Bakka 1976: Pl.7.24; Jantzen 2008: E.169). Socketed axes: 11. Grtavr; Harstad M., Troms C. Discovery: underneath turf, 2m from a large stone. One complete and one fragmented valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, small looped with facet B (Ts 6361; Ab. 1907; TsM 30; Bakka 1976: Pl. 7.23; Jrgensen 1986; Jantzen 2008: E.168). 12. Foss; Meldal M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: from the ground during ploughing. Single valve for bivalve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: socketed axe, large with facet A. Valve 13.7 cm long (T 15924; TMT 1940; Gaustad 1965: 80; Jantzen 2008: E.166). 13. Litleb; Vanylven M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: no information available. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, small loopless with ornament. Valve 7.1 cm long (B 9419; BM 1943). 14. Eide; Selje M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from bog by a rock crag. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, small loopless with facet B. Valve 8.5 cm long (B 9910; UB 1941/1; Jantzen 2008: E.178). 15. Skjeldestad; Sogndal M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: In old storehouse, no further information available. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, looped with straight rectangular depressions (4). Valve 10.0 cm long (B 8163; BM 1931; Jantzen 2008: E.181). 16. Nyhamar (A); Gulen M., Sogn & Fjordane. From hoard 19. Both valves for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, large looped with facet B. Valves 17.2 cm long (B 11924a) 17. Nyhamar (B); Gulen M., Sogn & Fjordane. From hoard 19. Both valves for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, large looped with curved vertical depressions (2). Valves 17.7 cm long (B 11924b).

A.18
18. Eide; Granvin M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, looped with extended neck and facet A. Valve 10.9 cm long (B 9124; BM 1941; Jantzen 2008: E.167). 19. Opedal; Ullensvang M., Hordaland C. Discovery: in garden at 0.5 m depth. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe. Valve 13.4 cm long (B 8903; BM 1937; Jantzen 2008: E.175). 20. Gar; Talgje, Finny M., Rogaland C. Discovery: no information available. Single valve for bi-valve mould, chlorite-slate. Cavity: socketed axe with double loops, the second loop is possibly a repair. Valve 7.7 cm long (S 4585; SM 1925-28: fig. 4; Petersen 1946:57pp.; Jantzen 2008: E.182). 21. Forssand; Forssand M., Rogaland C. Discovery: professional excavation of settlement by Trond Lken. From post-hole in a three-isled house (House 57). Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, looped with facet B and potentially extended neck (S 10497; Lken 1987: 239, fig.4; Lken 1998; Jantzen 2008: nr. E.165). 22. Tjesseim; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cairn and from cultivated soil, at two different occasions. Two valves for bi-valve mould. Cavity: socketed axe; with loop, extended neck and ornamental schema of Norwegian-variant. Valves 14.8cm long (S 4660, S 7090; SM 1925-28: fig. 10; 1945: fig. 4; Jantzen 2008: E.183). 23. Stangeland; Sandnes M; Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Single valve for bi-valve mould. Cavity: socketed axe, loopless with volut-ornament (B 4521; Ab. 1887; Jantzen 2008: E.177). 24. Brualand; Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the ground. Single valve for bi-valve mould. Cavity: socketed axe, loopless with volut-ornament (S 3000; SM 1908; Jantzen 2008: E.164). 25. Randaberg; Randaberg M., Rogaland C. Discovery: inside large vitrified rock, cleaved into three parts. Single valve for bi-valve mould. Cavity: socketed axe; with loop, extended neck and ornamental ribs. Valve 17.5 cm long (S 7950; SM 1953). 26. Vestre Goa; Randaberg M., Rogaland C. Discovery: excavation of the remnants of one of two mounds Tvihaugane on Vestre Goa. The valve was found among stones c. 30cm above the bottom of the mound, which consisted of a 4cm thick layer of ash and charcoal. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone. Cavity: socketed axe, loopless with facet B. (edge 3.2cm broad) (S 2083; Ab. 1898: fig. 1; Jantzen 2008: E.176, mistakenly designated Randaberg). 27. Dysjaland; Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from ditch. Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: lower section of socketed axe (S 4734; SM 1925-28; Jantzen E 180). Paalstaves: 28. Voile; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: during construction of canal between Prestevatn and Nesheimvatn. Both valves for bi-valve mould. Cavities: Paalstave of Norddeutsche type, as well as a cavity for a bar, possibly for an awl, at one of the narrow sides. Soot from casting in the axe-cavities and extending out on the parting faces. Valves 18.7cm long (C 21853; Oldtiden VI; Johansen 1986; Jantzen 2008: E.185). Fragments: 29. Kjelmy; Sr-Varanger M., Finnmark C. Discovery: archaeological excavation. Single valve for bi-valve mould, fragment. Cavity: for a rather flat artefact, possibly a Ananino type socketed axe or a broad dagger (Solberg 1909: 81; Gjessing 1935: 14, Pl. IIIc; 1942: 256; Gaustad 1965: nr.138; Jantzen 2008: E.173). 30. Kolvika; Vestvgy M., Nordland C. Discovery: along with a second fragment (mould 9). Single valve for bi-valve mould, soapstone, fragment. Cavity: difficult to decide (Ts. 1771; Ab. 1907; TsM 30; Jrgensen 1986). 31. Sandvika (Storjordene); Kvalya, Troms M., Troms C. Discovery: archaeological registration, test-pit. Along with pumice, burned stones, flakes of flint, chert, quartzite, quartz; sherds of soapstone vessels, sherds of asbestos tempered ceramics, sherds of vessel with ornamentation (Textile- or Kjelmy?). Soapstone fragment, possibly from a mould for a socketed axe (Ts. 11767) 32. Virdnejavri; Kautokeino M., Finnmark C. Discovery: excavation of settlement (lok. 112). Two possible fragments of ceramic moulds (Ts. 8406).

A.19

Appendix III: Burials

The use of Burial I and II does not indicate that they come from same mound, it is merely to avoid confusion in similar farm-names. Arranged from north to south. 1. B; B, Steigen M., Nordland C. Discovery: From cairn. No coffin or bones reported. Metal: undecorated tweezers (nr. 38, T 7581); double-stud with extremely long central boss (nr. 48, T 7582). (Nr. 38, 48; T 7581-82; TVS 1905; Bakka 1976: 26p.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). Skjeggesnes; Skjeggesnes, Alstahaug M., Nordland C. Discovery: from burial mound (c. 20 m diameters), professional excavation by Harald E. Lund. Large coffin, lid from single slab c. 2 x 0.8 m. Two complete skeletons, a 176cm long male 35-50 years of age, and a 157cm long female 30-40 years of age (d), sherds of asbestos-tempered vessel (c), and skeletal remains of small rodents (e). Metal: razor with horse-head termination (nr. 181, (a)); fragments of long shaft of pin (nr. 35, (b)). (Nr. 35, 181; T 18383a-e; TM 1963; Bakka 1976: 26p.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1; Fyllingen 2003: tab. 3) Skren; Smna M., Nordland C. Discovery: from cairn by the strait Vennesund. Report of large coffin, and burnt bones and sea mussels (c); the contextual relationship between bones, coffin and bronzes insecure. Bronze: frame-hafted knife (nr. 195, (a)) and fragments of another curved knife (nr. 209, (b)) (Nr. 195, 209; T 13602a-c; TMT 1927; Bakka 1976: 26p.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1). Gjrv; Gjrv, Indery M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Report of coffin, well over 1.5 m long, c. 0.6 m broad. Skeleton intact, cranium crushed. Bronzes in anatomic position. Metal: small decorated belt plate (nr. 162, T 4402), pin with double-spiral termination (nr. 23, T 4403) (Nr. 23, 162; T 4402-3; Ab. 1892). T-H I; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Large coffin reported. Metal: sword with pommel (nr. 227, T 2204), brooch (nr. 6, T 2205), socketed axe (nr. 426, T 2206), and a knife (lost, nr.211) (Nr. 6, 211, 227, 426; T 2204-6; Ab. 1879; Rygh 1906: 5p.). T-H II; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn, unprofessional excavation in 1873. Coffin with extended skeleton reported. Parts of unburned skeleton, 173cm long, possibly female 25-50 years of age (T 1267, sexing based only on the gracile appearance of the bones). Metal: Socketed axe (nr. 427, T 1265), bronze-hilted dagger (nr. 233, T 1266) (Nr. 233, 427; T 1265-7; Ab. 1874; Rygh 1906: 4p., Cairn II; Fyllingen 2002: 29; 2006: 323). T-H III; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (17m x 2.5m), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 2.5m long 0.45-0.6m wide. Bone remains reported. Metal: riveted dagger blade (nr. 280, T 2207) and socketed axe (nr. 436, T 2208) (Nr. 280, 436; T 2207-8; Ab. 1879; Rygh 1906: 6p.). T-H IV; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 9m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 1.9m long, 0.57-0.65m wide. Skeletal remains, possibly two persons lying in opposite directions (lost). Metal: metal-hilted knife (Nr. 201; T 2209; Ab. 1879; Rygh 1906: 8). T-H V; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 15m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Remains of coffin and burned bones reported. Fragment of bone pin (T 2446). Metal: round button (nr. 63, T 2442), bar-stud (nr. 60, T 2443), pin (nr. 24, T 2444), fragment of a knife (nr. 212, T 2445) (Nr. 24, 60, 63, 212; T 2442-6; Ab. 1880; Rygh 1906: 8p.).

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10. T-H VI; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (17m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 2.2m long, 0.5m wide. Skeletal remains of 185 cm male 25-35 years of age (T 2413). Metal: tweezers (nr. 36, T 2411) and razor (nr. 180, T 2412) (Nr. 36, 180; T 2411-2; Ab. 1880; Rygh 1906: 10p., Cairn X; Fyllingen 2002: 30). 11. T-H VII; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (13-14m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 1.95m long, 0.32-0.55m wide, rather well preserved skeleton (lost). Metal: riveted dagger (Nr. 283; T 7823; TVS 1906; Rygh 1906: 18p.). 12. T-H VIII; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Unprofessional clearance by railroad workers. Coffin 2m long c. 0.5m wide. Sword found in coffin while the razor came from the same cairn. Relation between the two bronzes is insecure. Metal: flange-hilted sword (nr. 238, T 7501), razor (nr. 182, T 7587) (Nr. 182, 238; T 7501, 7587; TVS 1905; Rygh 1906: 13p.).

A.20
13. T-H IX; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 6-7m diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 1.6m long, 0.45-0.56m wide. Metal: riveted dagger (Nr. 282; T 7822; TVS 1906; Rygh 1906: 16). 14. T-H X; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 6-7m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 1.5m long, 0.45m wide. Metal: tutulus (Nr. 170; T 7580; TVS 1905; Rygh 1906. 16p.). 15. T-H XI; Tonnes-Holan, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 9m in diameter), professional excavation by K. Rygh. Coffin 1.7m long, 0.5m wide. Metal: tweezers (Nr. 37; T 7840; TVS 1906; Rygh 1906: 20p.). 16. L; L vre, Steinkjer M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Metal: double stud (Nr. 46; T 15624; TMT 1938). 17. Myr; Myr, Verdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from large mound, along with artefacts from the Iron Age. Metal: riveted dagger blade (nr. 284, T 330); fragments of small, curved blade (nr. 210, T 331) (Nr. 210, 284; TVS 1874/2). 18. Geite; Geite, Levanger M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: construction work. Coffin, 2m long, 1.5m wide. Fragmented bone, charcoal and pottery reported. Metal: arrowhead with long, narrow tang (Nr. 265; T 8390; TVS 1907). 19. Revlan; Revlan, Frosta M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 8m x 1m). Coffin 2m long, 0.6m wide. Two unburned human teeth (b). Metal: (a) belt-hook (Nr. 337; T 11934; TVS 1919). 20. Rykkja I; Rykkja, Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Reported coffin, 2.3m long; two complete skeletons arranged head to toe. Asbestos tempered vessel (T 2560) placed by the larger skeleton, bronzes arranged on the smaller skeleton. Metal: spiral-headed pin (nr. 21, T 2556); belt plate (nr. 163, T 2257); neck collar (nr. 121, T 2558); fragmented spiral finger ring (nr. 115, T 2559) (Nr. 21, 115, 121, 163; T 2556-59; Ab. 1879, 1881). 21. Rykkja II; Rykkja, Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from cairn. Findings located by standing slab, bones, probably burned. Metal: fragments of coiled spiral arm ring (nr. 81, T 2237), fragmented flatheaded brooch (nr. 12, T 2238) (Nr. 12, 81; T 2237-38; Ab. 1879). 22. Mla; Mla, Stjrdal M., Nord-Trndelag C. Discovery: from mound. Bronze, coiled spiral, possibly a spiral-pendant, fragmented (Nr. 354; T 13673; TMT 1927). 23. Dromnes; Dromnes, Aure M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from small cairn. Professional excavation by Birgitta Wik in 1992. Discovered under insignificant cairn beneath 1m turf. Metal: frame-hafted knife, fragment (Nr. 199; T 21623a; Wik 1993). 24. Srnesje; Srnesje, Molde M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: from cairn. Reported coffin 1.66m long, 0.46-0.52m wide. Metal: spearhead type Ullerslev (Nr. 302; T 3930; Ab. 1889). 25. Ristesund; Ristesund, Sande M., Mre & Romsdal C. From cairn. Reported small coffin, with burned bones. Metal: brooch, fragmented (Nr. 14; B 3678; Ab. 1881). 26. Svany; Svany, Flora M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from cairn. Reported coffin, remnants of textiles and 20 small marble-stones, egg-sized. Metal: brooch (Nr. 2; B 448; Lorange 1876: 42). 27. Utne; Nesjarysa, Utne, Ullensvang M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 15m diameter). Coffin c. 2m long. Metal: riveted dagger (Nr. 278; B 8088; BM 1930). 28. Rimbareid; Rimsvarden, Rimbareid, Fitjar M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from cairn (now 28-30m x 1.54m). The sword B 1825 is probably identical to the copper-sword found in the large cairn Rimsvarden sometime between 1785-1795, reported coffin with cap-stone 1.9m x 0.6m. Metal: tanged sword with pommel and metal guard (Nr. 234; B 1825; Ab. 1866; Fett 1973). 29. Hysstad; Hysstad, Stord M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from cairn (c. 14m x 2m). Coffin 0,5m x 0,4m. Burned bones (c) and fragments of wood and birch bark (b). Metal: razor with stylized horse-head termination (Nr. 184; B 11184; UB 1958/6). 30. Nordhuglo; Hmanneneset, Nordhuglo, Stord M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from cairn (12-15m diameter x 2m high). Coffin 2m long, 0.4-0.5m wide. Reported jaw-bone. Metal: bronze-hilted dagger (Nr. 237; B 4299; Ab. 1885).

A.21
31. Vespestad; Kalveidet, Vespestad, Bmlo M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from cairn (25m x 3.5m). Professionally excavated by Eyvind de Lange. Coffin 1x0,6m, with ashes and burned bones; peripherally placed in relation to central coffin, 2m. long. Metal: disc-headed pin (nr. 26, (a)), double-stud (nr. 53, (b)), fragment of tweezers (nr. 39, (c)), razor (190, (d)) (Nr. 26, 39, 52, 190; B 5962; BM 1905). 32. Srheim; Garahaugen, Srheim, Etne M., Hordaland C. Discovery: found in small chamber with burned bones in a mound at Srheim before 1906. This was probably the mound Garahaugen that was later professionally excavated by Bjrn Myhre in 1969: a central cairn (5.5m x 1.3m) within earthen mound with two building phases (mound 1: 15m x 2.5m; mound 2: 20m x 2.5m). An old trench led down to a primary coffin (burial 3), 0.75m x 0.35m with charcoal and burned bones. Both the north wall and capstone was missing, strengthening the idea that the dagger came from this coffin. A radiocarbon date from the coffin yielded 3380+/-20 BP (T858; App. VII.8). Metal: riveted dagger (only one dagger was reported, but there are two very similar but not identical blades in the museum, both marked with relevant numbers (B 12690 and S 2849) (Nr. 286-87; B 12690 formerly S 2849; SM 1906; HMT 1970-77; Bjrn 1935b: 5; Myhre 1972; Fett 1963). 33. Grindheim; Kyrkjehaug, Grindheim, Etne M., Hordaland C. Discovery: from mound (12-14m x 1.5m). Coffin 0.5m x 0.25-0,30m. Ceramic vessel with single handle/loop (a), charcoal and burned bones (c). Metal: razor with spiral termination (Nr. 186; B 7656b; BM 1924/25). 34. Skeie; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Large coffin reported. Metal: tanged sword with complex cross-section, fragmented (nr. 250, B 1011; previously confused with B 1009 nr. 236) (Nr. 250; B 1011; Loranges 1876). 35. Storasund; Storasund, Haugesund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (22m diameter). Coffin 0.85m long, 0.4m wide. Burned bones (b) and fragment of sea shell (ucino undatum (c)). Metal: razor (Nr. 191; B 5875a; BM 1904; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 218). 36. Storesund I; Storesund, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 2.5m). Coffin 1.9m x 0.45m. Remains of moss and insignificant amounts of charcoal, fragments of unburned human bones. Findings (a-b) from inside coffin, (c) above coffin. Metal: fragments of brooch (nr. 9, (a)), frame-hafted knife (nr. 193, (b)), flange-hilted sword (nr. 240, (c)) (Nr. 9, 193, 240; B 5765; BM 1903, NordenborgMyhre 1998: 214p.). 37. Storesund II; Storesund, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: possibly from a mound. Metal: tweezers (Nr. 42; B 2772; Ab. 1872, Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 214). 38. Gunnarshaug I; Kubbhaug, Gunnarshaug, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from small cairn (3.5m x 2.7m), inside large, earthen mound (13-17m x 2.7m). Professionally excavated. Coffin 1.8m x 0.6m, unburned human bones, fragments of birch-bark. Metal: dagger blade (nr. 242, (a)), razor with horse-head termination (nr. 183, (b)), disc-headed brooch (nr. 11, (c)), double-stud (nr. 47, (d)), tweezers (nr. 40, (e)) (Nr. 11, 40, 47, 183, 242; B 5952; BM 1905; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 211p.). 39. Gunnarshaug II; Kirkehaug, Gunnarshaug, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (25m x 3.4m, estimated volume: 856m3, with seven small internal cairns). Metal: dagger blade (Nr. 243; B 5310; Ab. 1896; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998; 212p.). 40. Reheia I; Knaghaug, B, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (16.5-19m x 2.3m, estimated volume 331m3, with ship-setting), under stone slab. Metal: lamellar-hilted sword with pommel (Nr. 232; B 5046; Ab. 1894; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 207p.). 41. Reheia II; B, Karmy k., Rogaland County. From small cairn. Reported coffin, c. 0.5m long, with ceramic vessel containing burned bones. Two more small bronzes lost. Bronze: arm ring with metopepatterned decoration (Nr. 85; B 4504; Ab. 1887; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 207). 42. Reheia III; Nedre Hauge, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (30m x 6m, estimated volume 2218m3). Coffin 9 feet long. Double layer of birch-bark, fragments of sword-sheath (C567), fragments of wool textiles (C570b), and complete skeleton. Metal: sword with button (nr. 235, C566); ferrule (nr. 338, C568); fragments of three double-studs (nr. 49, 53, 54, C569); bronze fragments, probably brooch (nr. 16, C570a). Sample of wooden scabbard radiocarbon dated: 3145+/-60 (TUa-1682, cal. 1540-1260 2 Sigma). (Nr. 16, 49, 53, 54, 235, 338; C566-70; Bendixen 1877: 114pp.; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 208pp.). 43. Reheia IV; Utvik, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Reported burned bones (B 547). Metal: double-stud (nr. 51, B 546), and fragments of gold leaves (nr. 367, B 548) (Nr. 51, 367; B546-8; Lorange 1887; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 210).

A.22
44. Reheia V; Utvik, Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (30m x 7.5m, estimated volume 2853m3). Coffin 1.98m long, 0.83m wide. Metal: twisted gold ring (nr. 100; B 1893), fragments of gold foil (nr. 268, B 1616), sword (lost) (Nr. 100, 368; B 1616, B1893; Lorange 1887; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 210p.) 45. N-Sunde; Nordre Sunde, Stavanger M., Rogaland C. From mound (6m x 1.4m). Coffin 1.5m long, 0.7m wide. Metal: dagger (Nr. 285; S 400; Ab. 1879; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr. 33). 46. Madla I; Madla; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Coffin c. 2.5m long. Metal: fragment of sword blade (Nr. 292; B 4152; Ab. 1882; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr. 32). 47. Madla II; Madla, Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Small coffin reported. Metal: arm ring (Nr. 86; S 2357; SM 1901) 48. Jsund; Sote Jarls haug, Jsund, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (37m x 5m, estim. vol. 2531m3). Coffin c. 2m long, c. 0.6m wide; unburned skeleton, textiles. Metal: metal-hilted sword (nr.230), 2 double-studs (lost, nr. 56-57) (Nr. 56-57, 230; S 7425, formerly C 1045; SM 1948; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.31). 49. Tjora; Tjora, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from a mound, possibly a burial. Metal: tanged knife (Nr. 205; S 1569; Ab. 1885; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.30). 50. Sola I; Sola, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. No coffin or bones reported. Metal: riveted dagger (nr. 229, B 906); pommel (nr. 229, B 909); riveted dagger (nr. 281; B 907); horse-headed razor (nr. 179, B 908); brooch (nr. 5, B 449) (Nr. 5, 179, 229, 281; B 449, 906-9; Lorange 1876; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.27). 51. Sola II; Sola, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (24m x 3m, estim. vol. 635m3). Coffin 1.12m long, 0.47m wide. Bone fragments reported. Metal: riveted sword with button (nr. 236, B 1009 the provenance of this sword has previously been confused with B 1011 from Skeie); tanged knife (nr. 203; S 2950). Relationship between sword and knife insecure (Nr. 203, 236; B 1009, S2950; S Lorange 1876; SM 1907; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.29). 52. Sola III; Nordre Melhaug, Sola, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Found in the wall for a stone-built coffin. Metal: frame-hafted knife (nr. 194; S 2882; SM 1906; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.28). 53. Sola IV; Nordre Melhaug, Sola, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Coffin 0.3 x 0.3m, with burned bones. Metal: broken razor (nr. 188; S 1261; Ab. 1881). 54. Sola V; Store Melhaug, Sola, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (25m x 3.5m, estim. vol. 960m3), professionally excavated by A. Lorange. Coffin, 0.58m long 0.49m wide, placed in the stone wall around the perimeter of the mound. Burned bone fragments. Metal: razor (nr. 187, (a)), disc-headed pin (nr. 25, (b)) and arrow-head (nr. 260, (c)) (Nr. 25, 187, 260; B 3333a-c; Ab. 1879: 144pp., Pl. IV.19-21). 55. Rege I; Rege, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 3m, estim. vol. 484m3), with two large stone coffins/chambers. Coffin/chamber: 2.15m long, 0.6m wide and 1.3m high, west end made up by a large slab with rock-art. Metal: neck collar (nr. 118, S 1263), belt plate (nr. 160, S 1264), tutulus (nr. 169, S 1265), two ribbed bracelets (nr. 74-75, S 1266), brooch (nr. 3, S 1267), dagger (nr. 277, S 1268), fragments of a spiral-tube and a sheet-tube (nr. 340-41, S 1269) (nr. 3, 74-75, 118, 156, 168, 277, 340-41; S 1265-69; Ab. 1881; Lund Egens 1936; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.26). 56. Rege II; Rege, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 3m, estim. vol. 484m3), with two large stone coffins/chambers. Coffin/chamber: 2.36m long, 0.6m wide, 1m high. Metal: tweezers (Nr. 41, S 1270) and fragment of razor (nr. 189, S 1271) (Nr. 41, 189; S 1270-71; Ab. 1881). 57. Tjelta; Tjelta, Sola M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (19m x 2.5m). Large coffin. Metal: ribbed bracelet (Nr. 68, S 1262; Ab. 1881; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.25). 58. Sele I; Sele, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Found underneath stone-slab with potsherds and burned bones. Metal: two gold spiral finger rings (Nr. 112-13; B 2598; Ab. 1870; Mllerop 1963; Marstrander 1977: fig. 5; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.23) 59. Sele II; Tangerhaugen, Sele, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (31m x 5m, estim. vol. 1948m3). Small coffin with burned bones. Metal: tweezers (Nr. 43; B 2597; Ab. 1870).

A.23
60. Lunde; Lunde, Sandnes M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (15m x 2-2.5m/17m x 3m). In the centre of the mound was a large rock, 3m x 3.1m, on which the brooch lay. No coffin or bones reported. Metal: brooch (Nr. 4; S 6870; SM 1941-42; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.24). 61. Vasshus; Vasshus, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. No coffin or bones reported. Metal: tutulus (Nr. 174; B 4098; Ab. 1882; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.22). 62. Gruda; Litle Grudehaugen, Gruda, Klepp M.; Rogaland C. Discovery: from cairn (14m x 1.8m) with thin earth cover. Coffin 2.1m long, 0.4-0.5m wide. Two unburned bones, likely inhumation. Metal: sword (Nr. 288; S 3967; Oldtiden VIII: 147p., fig. 12; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.17). 63. Bore I; Molkhaug; Austre Bore, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 1.8m, estimated volume 278m3). Professionally excavated by Harald Egens Lund in 1933. Coffin: 1.5x0.4m. Unburned bones, probably female. Sea mollusc (Littorina littorae), bones and teeth from sheep, calf, dog and mouse, potsherds and flint. Metal: Tutulus (nr. 176, lost), bronze tube (nr. 339) (Nr. 176, 339; S 6020; SM 1932-33; Lund Egens 1934; SM 1933-34; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.21; Goldhahn 2007: 202pp.). 64. Bore II; Austre Bore, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Large coffin with urn with cremated bones and two bronzes inside. Metal: tweezers (nr. 45) and bar-stud (lost) (nr. 62) (Nr. 45, 62; S 1389; Ab. 1881). 65. Hodne I; Hodne, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound built from earth and stone (17.2m x 2.3m). Cleared by farmers and inspected first by Buch in 1880 and later by Eyvind de Lange. Coffin: 1.94m long, 0.6-0.5m wide. Slab with carved concentric circles stood within the mound (S 4158). Metal: metal-hilted sword (nr. 228, S 1022) within the coffin, and twisted gold ring (nr. 99; S 4091) from underneath the floor in the coffin. The coffin stood on the original surface of the terrain (Nr. 99, 228; S 1022, 4091; Ab. 1880; Oldtiden IX: 96, fig. 5; SM 1918-19: 15pp., fig. 8, 12, 13; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.19). 66. Hodne II; Hodne, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (27m in diameter). No coffin or bones reported. Metal: dagger with parts of wooden haft preserved (Nr. 244; B 4716; Ab. 1890; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.20). 67. Nese; Nese, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (25m x 3.5m, estimated volume 960m3). Coffin 2.2m with partly preserved skeleton; small, circular stone disc with perforation and pointed flint artefact. Metal: tutulus (nr. 173, B 3578) and another tutulus (nr. 165, B 3874) (Nr. 165, 173; B 3578, 3874; Ab. 1880, 1881; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.15). 68. Friestad; Friestad, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. No coffin or bones reported. Metal: tanged sword (Nr. 251; B 1010; Lorange 1876; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.16). 69. Kleppe I; Kleppe, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound, no further information available. Metal: frame-hafted knife (Nr. 196; S 1638; Ab. 1887; Mllerop 1963). 70. Kleppe II; Hybakk, Kleppe, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from central cairn within mound (15m x 1.7m). Coffin 5 feet long, burned bones. Metal: belt plate (nr. 161, B 2844), brooch, fragment (nr. 15; B 2845 ((Nr. 15, 163; B 2844-5;Ab.1873; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.18). 71. N-Braut; Nord-Braut, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cairn built from large stones. Coffin under one slab 1.6m long and 1.1m wide and a second smaller slab. Unburned bones, likely inhumation (d). Metal: tutulus (nr. 168, (a)), two ribbed bracelets (nr. 76-77, (b-c)). (nr. 76-77, 167; S 4227a-d; SM 192124: fig. 1-2; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.10). 72. S-Braut; Grimshaug, Sr-Braut, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (17m x 3m). Large coffin. Metal: neck collar (nr. 119, S 1272), two simple arm rings (nr. 83-84, S 1273), tutulus with broken boss (nr. 172, S 1274). (Nr. 83-84, 119, 172; S 1272-74; Ab. 1881; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.9). 73. Anda I; Anda, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (17m x 4m, estimated volume 917m3). Coffin 2.8m long, 0.62m wide. Birch bark and bones reported. Metal: riveted sword (Nr. 270, S 1457; Ab. 1882; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.12). 74. Anda II; Anda, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from small mound made of stones and earth. Coffin under cap-stone 1.32m long and 0.65m wide. Cremated bones. Metal: two ribbed bracelets (nr. 69-70; S 3672a-b; SM 1913: fig. 13; Brgger 1913; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.13).

A.24
75. Anda III; Anda, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from large mound built mostly from boulders, in larger coffin underneath the smaller coffin with bur. 76. Coffin 1.9m long, 0.6m wide. Metal: dagger (nr. 249, C 4927), brooch (nr. 8, C 4928) (Nr. 8, 249; C 4927-28; Ab. 1869; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.14). 76. Anda IV; Anda, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from large mound built mostly from boulders, in smaller coffin above the larger coffin with bur. 75. Coffin 0.9m long, 0.6m wide. Metal: metal-hilted knife (nr. 202, C 4929) and brooch (nr. 10, C 4930) (Nr. 10, 202; C 4929-30; Ab. 1869; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.14). 77. Srheim; Srheim, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (21m x 2.5m, estimated volume 442m3), professionally excavated by B.E. Bendixen in 1879. Coffin 1.9m long, 0.58-0.65m wide. Artefacts in anatomical position, likely inhumation. Burned bone fragments reported. Metal: brooch (nr. 7), belt plate (nr. 156), two ribbed bracelets (nr. 71-72) (Nr. 7, 71-72, 157; B 3322; Ab. 1979: 72pp, Taf. III,12-15; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.11). 78. Orre; Ljoshaug, Orre, Klepp M.., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (30m x 4m, estimated volume 1444m3). Large coffin (six feet) reported. Metal: belt plate (Nr. 158; S 859; Ab. 1879; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.6). 79. Erga; Erga, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Small coffin reported. Metal: tutulus. (Nr. 177; S 406; Ab. 1879; Mllerop 1963; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.7). 80. Vik; Lynghaug, Vik, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (18.5m x 2m) built from earth and stone. No coffin or bone reported. Metal: metal-hilted sword, fragments (Nr. 226; S 7020, 7620; SM 1944, 1950; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.5). 81. Pollestad; Pollestad, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from hill, possibly the remains of a burial mound. Fragmented ceramic urn (a) with burned bones and flint (d), a flint arrowhead with concave base (c). Not entirely clear which findings were inside the urn. Metal: tutulus (Nr. 164; S 3361b; SM 1910: fig. 4-5 Mllerop 1963). 82. Tjtta; Kaasen, Tjtta, Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Coffin 1.9m long 0.56m wide. Unburned bone, likely inhumation. Metal: belt plate (nr. 158 (a)), tutulus (nr. 175 (b)), brooch (nr. 13 (c)), and spiral-tube (nr. 342) (nr. 13, 159, 175, 342; S 4265a-c; SM 1921-24: fig. 11; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.8) 83. Laland; Klepp M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from burial under natural surface. Small coffin. Urn (a), burned bones (c). Metal: pieces of thin bronze sheet (b) (Nr. 365; S 4769b; SM 1925-28). 84. Re; Re, Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 1.8m, estimated volume 278m3). Professional excavation by G. Gustafson. Coffin 2,5m x 0,5m, no bones, cup-mark on one of the stoneslabs. Metal: dagger blade (Nr. 294; B 5002; Ab. 1893; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.3). 85. Holen I; Holen, Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 2.5m). Professional excavation by G. Gustafsson. Coffin 2.15m long, 0.45-0.50m wide. Potsherds (c) remnants of unburned bones, a few small burned bones and charcoal. Metal: round-headed brooch (nr. 1, (a)), riveted dagger with pommel (nr. 224, (b)) (nr. 1, 224; B 5000a-c; Ab. 1893; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.4). 86. Holen II; Holen, Time M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (11m x 1.5m), professional excavation by G. Gustafsson. Coffin 1.1m long, 0.55-0.75m wide. Burned bones (b). Metal: fragment of sickle (a) (nr. 215; B 4998a; Nordenborg-Myhre 2004: 78p., note 13). 87. Hognestad; Hognestad, Time M., Rogaland C. From mound (19m x 2m). Professional excavation by Arne Bang Andersen and Harald Egens Lund. Coffin 2m long, 0.53-0.70m wide, cap-stone with cup-marks. Two pot sherds (b), pieces of charcoal (c), bone substance (d), unworked flint (e). Metal: riveted dagger with pommel (a) (nr. 221; S 6400a-d; SM 1936-37: fig. 5a-b; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.2). 88. Njlstad; Njlstad, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (at least 17m in diameter). Coffin 0.7m long 0.37m wide, placed at the bottom of the mound. Slab with cup-marks found in the vicinity of the coffin. Five urns (b-f) with cremated bones (g). Metal: bar-stud (a) (Nr. 61; S 4630a-g; SM 1925-28: fig. 7a-c).

A.25
89. B I; B, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from the remains of large stone-built cairn. Cleared with permission and after inspection by A.W. Brgger. No coffin or bones reported, artefact discovered near the centre and the bottom of the cairn, by a large round stone in the ground. Metal: metal-hilted dagger, fragmented (nr. 222; S 3410; SM 1910: fig. 13; Mllerop 1963; Larsen 1996: Tab. E9:3, nr.1). 90. B II; Dyrshaug, B, H M., Rogaland C. From mound (22m x 3.5m, estimated volume 744m3) with central cairn (11-12m x 2.5m). Professional excavation by G. Gustafson in 1882. He placed a trench into the centre of the mound and found a large empty coffin. As the trench collapsed the following year, a secondary smaller coffin came to light. This coffin, 0.45m long 0.35m wide, contained two urns (c-d), one of them with a pair of holes, or eyes (face urn), a ceramic lid (e), burned bones and two bronzes. Metal: razor (nr. 192, (a), lost), narrow folded bronze sheet, possibly sheath for razor (nr. 364, (b)) (nr. 192, 364; B 5003a-b; BM 1893/7). 91. rsland; rsland, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound (20m x 2.6m, estimated volume 419m3). Coffin: 0.55m x 0.24-25m. A few burned bone fragments (b). Metal: sickle (a) (Nr. 216; S 4472). 92. Vigrestad; Vigrestad, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: burial, no further information. Metal: neck collar (nr. 120, B 4320a), belt plate (nr. 155, B 4320b), bow for brooch (nr. 17, B4320c). Probably from the same burial comes: pin for brooch (nr. 17, C 13457). This pin was discovered in a mound and clearly belongs with the bow. Two more findings from the ground on the same farm, are less likely to be part of the assemblage: belt plate (nr. 160, C12349) and tutulus (nr. 169, C 12350) (Nr. 17, 120, 155, 160, 169; B 4320a-c, C 12349-50, 12457; Ab. 1885; Undset 1886; Oldeberg 1933: 12, fig. 10); Mllerop 1963: 19, fig. 8; Gaustad 1965: 68p.; Aakvik 2000: 60p.). 93. vestad; vestad, H M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from cairn. Professional excavation and restoration of damaged cairn in 1996. Flint, pottery and burned bones. Metal: ribbed bracelets, fragmented (nr. 78; Larsen 1997). 94. Skadberg; Skadberg, Eigersund M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from mound. Coffin 0.75m x c. 0.6-7m. Burned bones. Metal: tanged knife (nr. 204; B 4466; Ab. 1887 Mllerop 1963). 95. Hananger I; Hananger, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from mound. Small coffin reported. Metal: tutulus (Nr. 167; C 25633a; UO 1933-34; Johansen 1986). 96. Hananger II; Karlshaug, Hananger, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from mound made from earth and stone (21m x 2.6m). Coffin 1.35m long, 0.5-7m wide. Pot sherds, charcoal, flint and burned bones (Ia). Metal: likely double-stud, corroded (Nr. 55, C 22158 Ia; Oldtiden VIII; Johansen 1986: 69pp., 81). 97. Hananger III; Ringhaug, Hananger, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from mound (14m x 1m). Fragmented ceramic vessel with lid (a), cremated bones (e). Metal: piece of perforated bronze sheet (Nr. 369; C 22156; Oldtiden VIII; Johansen 1986: 70p.). 98. Vere; Midtre Vere, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: during work with ditch, at 0.6m depth. Arm ring found 25m away from the other two artefacts. Unlikely burial context. Metal: socketed axe (nr. 453, (a)), arm ring (96, (b)), tutulus (178, (c)) (Nr. 96, 178, 453; C 20830 a-c; Oldtiden VI; Johansen 1986: 24p., 63p. fig. 7, 41). 99. Vest-Hassel; Vest-Hassel, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from long mound. Small coffin with fragmented urn (a), and a possible lid (b). Metal: small tanged double edged blade (nr. 259, (c)), doublestud (nr. 50, (d)), awl reclassified to tang for the blade (nr. 360, (e)) (Nr. nr. 50, 259, 360; B 3875; Ab. 1881). 100.Lunde I; Lunde, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from mound. Cremated bones and charcoal reported. Metal: bar-stud (Nr. 58, B 3603; Ab. 1880; Johansen 1986: 68, fig. 45). 101.Kjrrefjord; Kjrrefjord, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from the ground underneath former mound. Metal: ribbed bracelet (nr. 73, (a)), frame-hafted knife (nr. 197, (b)) and small bronze fragments (nr. 370, (c)) (Nr. 73, 198, 370; C 20991a-c; Oldtiden VI). 102.Meberg; Meberg, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from cairn (originally at least 25m in diameter). Professional excavation by Sverre Marstrander. Coffin 2m long, 0.2-0.4m wide. Pottery (b) and charcoal (c) from underneath the floor of the coffin. Metal: metal-hilted sword (Nr. 231; C 27790a; UO 1945-48; Johansen 1986: 35pp., fig. 16).

A.26
103.Velle; Velle, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. From small mound (c. 4m diameter). Charcoal and ashes reported. Metal: fragmented arm ring (Nr. 88; C 26787;UO 1938-1940; Johansen 1986: 61p.). 104.stre Hauge; Sverreshaug, Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from large mound (84m x 6m). At two meters depth along with burned bones. The mound also contained a likely Iron Age burial higher up. Metal: pin head from disc-headed pin (Nr. 29; B 3209; Ab.1877). 105.Bringsjord; Bringsjord, Lyngdal M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from cairn built from earth and stone (86m x 0.75m). Professional excavation by Trond Lken. Top layer containing charcoal (i), cremated bones (g) and pottery (c,d,e) from higher levels in the cairn. Urn (b) with cremated bones (f) found underneath this layer, and bronze fragment from the centre of the cairn. Metal: knife, fragment (Nr. 208; C 33195a; UOT 1970-71; Johansen 1986: 46pp., fig. 28). 106.Lunde II; Paalshaugen/Roshavshaugen, Lunde, Sgne M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from mound (c. 14m x 1.8m). Coffin c. 2.1m long, 0.6m wide. Bone fragment reported. Metal: riveted dagger (Nr. 276; C 6143; Ab. 1872; Johansen 1986: 43p.; 2000: 144pp.) 107.Ryen, Elverhi; Elverhi, Kristiansand M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: from damaged mound. Professional excavation by Karl Vibe-Mller. Pottery (b,d) and flint (c). All findings from disturbed layers around the coffin. Metal: frame-hafted knife (a) (Nr. 198; C 32493a-c; UO 1969; Johansen 1986: 44pp., fig. 26.).

A.27

Appendix IV: Hoards (two or more bronzes/moulds)

(Arranged north to south). Jarfjord; Sr-Varanger M., Finnmark C. Discovery: no information available. Contents: one complete mould for broad-tanged daggers (mould 6, Ts. 816) and one valve for tangless daggers (mould 7, Ts. 817). (Ts. 816-17; Ab. 1887; Gjessing 1935: Pl. IX; 1942: 256; Simonsen 1963: 244p.; Bakka 1976: fig 5-6 Jantzen 2008: E.171). 2. Trondenes, Harstad M., Troms C. Discovery: at rock-shelter Prekestolen. Relation between findings uncertain. Contents: neck collar (nr. 124, Ts. 11373) and axe (nr. 503, Ts. 11434.5). 3. Tennevik, Sknland M., Nordland C. Discovery: no information available. Contents: two neck collars (nr. 122-123; Ts. 160a-b; Ab. 1875; Bjrn 1935; Gjessing 1942; Munch 1966; Jrgensen 1986; Johansen 1993: nr.188). 4. Krokan; Velfjord prestegard, Hillstad, Brnny M., Nordland C. Discovery: during construction work, 0.5 deep under flat stone. Contents: two socketed axes (nr. 497, 506, T 17168a-b; Munch 1966; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 69; Bakka 1976: 27.; Jrgensen 1986: App.1 Johansen 1993: nr.184). 5. Storsandan; Skaun M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: the artefacts were found lying in a ring underneath stones of a cairn that contained an iron horse-bit and a iron knife. Contents: arm ring (nr. 87, T 3817), three round buttons with loops (nr. 64-66, T 3818-19), a pendant with loop (nr. 355, T 3820a), fragmented ring with loop (nr. 344, T 3820b), two complete and four fragmented spiral pendants (nr. 347-352, T 3821) (nr. 64-66, 87, 344, 347-52, 355; T 3817-21; Ab. 1881; Bjrn 1935a; Moberg 1941: 77; Gaustad 1965; Johansen 1988; 1993: nr.155). 6. Gunnesyan; Rennebu M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: during ploughing in a field, insecure context. Contents: two socketed axes (nr. 499-500, T 251, 1773), a bar-headed pin (nr. 33, T 252), a bar-stud (nr. 59, T 253), a spearhead (nr. 325, T 254), parts of a twisted neck ring with oval plates and spiralterminations (nr. 152, T 255-56), a massive chisel (nr. 356, T 257), and a piece of thin metal sheet (nr. 366, T 258) (nr. 33, 59, 152, 325, 356, 366, 499-500; T 251-8, 1773; TVS 1874/2; Ab. 1876; Bjrn 1935a; Moberg 1941: 70pp.; Gaustad 1965; Johansen 1993: nr.150; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 68). 7. Stav; Oppdal M., Sr-Trndelag C. Discovery: found at the edge of a former river bed of the river Stav. Contents: three neck rings type sharp flanged Wendel (nr. 125-27, T 2129-31), a flat neck ring (nr. 149, T 2132), arm ring with square cross-section (nr. 95, T 2133), an arm ring type wendel (nr. 98, T 2134), five sheet arm rings (nr. 90-94, T 2135), two spiral pendants (nr. 345-46, T 2136-37), a disc for disc-headed pin (nr. 28, T 2138), four socketed axes (nr. 480-81, 508-09, T 2139-42), and part of bronze chain (nr. 358, T 2966) (nr. 28, 90-95, 98, 125-27, 149, 345-46, 480-81, 508-09; T 2129-2142, T 2966; Ab. 1879; Bjrn 1935a; Moberg 1941: 70pp.; Baudou 1960: hort 205; Gaustad 1965; Johansen 1993: nr.152; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 67) 8. Gyl; Tingvoll M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during ploughing in former bog. Contents: two neck rings type broad flanged Wendel (nr. 142-43, T 15138a-b), a twisted neck ring with separate lock-piece (nr. 153, T 15138c), a flat neck ring (nr. 150, T 15138d), a socketed axe (nr. 472, T 15138e). (nr.142-43, 150, 153, 472; T 15138a-e; TMT 1935; Baudou 1960: hort 203; Gaustad 1965; Johansen 1993: nr.145; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 66). 9. Julnes; Aukra prestegrd, Aukra M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: during road construction. Contents: two gold arm rings, one of them lost (nr. 106, 116). (T 17819a-b; TM 1957; Gaustad 1965; Johansen 1993: nr.146). 10. Blindheim; lesund M., Mre & Romsdal C. Discovery: a metal-hilted sword was discovered after the use of explosives in construction work for a road (nr. 217, B 11599), a flanged axe was found in a cleavage in bed-rock (nr. 396, B 12125) and a very similar axe was found in the ground during construction work for a house (nr. 397, B 13373). The contextual relations of the three artefacts are insecure; especially the larger axe seems to have been discovered away from the other findings (nr. 217, 396-97; B 11599, 12125, 13373; HMT 1962-66, 1969-70, 1978-82; Bakka 1966; Johansen 1993: nr.140,143; Engedal 2005). 11. Lom; unknown provenance in Lom M., Oppland C. Discovery: insecure context with no information. Contents: two spectacle brooches (nr. 18-19, C 16615-16), and a socketed axe (nr. 482, C 16617) (nr. 1819, 482; C 16615-17; Ab. 1892; Johansen 1993: nr.35; Jensen 1997: 315, hoard nr. 61). 12. Vlebru; Ringebu M., Oppland C. Discovery: among stones by the riverside, findings in private possession. Contents: bar-headed pin (nr. 34), bronze finger ring (nr. 117) and a spiral pendant (nr. 353) (nr. 34, 117, 353; Johansen 1981: 77p; 1993: nr.46). 1.

A.28
13. Avlund; Gausdal M., Oppland C. Discovery: from the ground at two separate occasions. Contents: three neck rings type sharp flanged Wendel (nr. 128-30, C 4141, 25671a-d,f) and an arm ring (nr. 89, C 25671e). (nr. 89, 128-30; C 4141, 25671a-f; Ab. 1867; UO 1933-34; Bjrn 1935b: 10pp.; Johansen 1993: nr.41; Jensen 1997: 315, hoard nr. 60). 14. Skjerdalen; Gloppen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from the ground during cultivation of new land, by large boulder. Contents: three neck rings type sharp flanged Wendel (nr. 131-133, B 7000a-c), an arm ring with square cross-section (nr. 96, B 7000d), a disc from a disc-headed pin (nr. 27, B 7000e) and a spectacle brooch (nr. 20, B 7000f) (nr. 20, 27, 96, 131-133; B 7000a-f; Oldtiden IX; Lange 1920; Bjrn 1935a; Moberg 1941: 70,78; Fett 1960; Johansen 1993: nr.125; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 65). 15. Erdalen; Stryn M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: from the ground during cultivation of rocky terrain beneath crag. The artefacts were found, lost and rediscovered in the same area. Contents: fragments of four neck rings type sharp flanged Wendel (nr. 134-137, B 5793a-d; BM 1903; Lange 1912; Johansen 1993: nr.124; Jensen 1997: 316, hoard nr. 64). 16. Steine; Aurland M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: in a scree. Contents: two flanged axes (nr. 391-2, B 3295a-b), and a bracelet (nr. 67, B 3295c). (B 3295a-c; Ab. 1879; Montelius 1900: 58p, nr. 68, fig. 173-4; E. Fett 1963; Johansen 1993: nr.121). 17. Svenes; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppland C. Discovery: underneath a large stone after demolishing it with explosives. Findings associated with charcoal. Contents: originally 20-20 spearheads and a sickle (nr.214, C 22107d). 10 spearheads are now in the museum, while two are in private possession. Those in the museum all seem to be of type Ullerslev (nr. 214, 304-316; C 226, 352, 356, 372, 894-95, 10556-57, 22107a-c). (Ab. 1882, Oldtiden VIII; Johansen 1981; 1993:nr.29). 18. B; Nord-Aurdal M., Oppdal C. Discovery: the first axe was discovered at the edge of a soil-mixed stone cairn, the other axe was found in the ground at 0.5m depth while clearing a soil-mixed cairn. There are doubts as to whether this was one and the same cairn, and whether these were burials or hoards. Contents: two socketed axes, one now lost (nr. 512, C 7043). (nr. 449, 512; C 7043, C 28628; Ab. 1874, UO 195153; Johansen 1981; 1993:nr.32). 19. Nyhamar; (Tobbenvika), Gulen M., Sogn & Fjordane C. Discovery: two valves were discovered in pile of gravel after road-construction in wet, sloaping terrain. Archaeological excavations in two phases brought the rest of the findings to light. Contents: two soapstone moulds for socketed axes and a pointed retouched piece of flint (B 11924c). (Moulds 16-17 (Nyhamar A and B); B 11924a-b; HMT 1967; Bakka 1964). 20. Kvamme; Rady M., Hordaland C. Discovery: at c. 120cm depth in peat bog. Contents: two coiled bronze spiral arm rings (nr. 79-80; B 3426; Ab. 1879/1880; Johansen 1993: nr.110). 21. Vikedal; Kvam M., Rogaland C. Discovery: underneath stones in rocky terrain under mountain. Contents: two disc-headed pins (nr. 31-32, B 6877e-f) and three neck rings type sharp flanged Wendel (nr. 138-40; B 6777a-c) (nr. 31-32, 138-40; B 6877a-f; Oldtiden VIII; Lange 1918; Johansen 1993: nr. 114; Jensen 1997: 315, hoard nr. 63) 22. Lunde; Vindafjord M., Rogaland C. Discovery: in a natural well underneath scree at two different occasions. Contents: three heavy shaft-hole axes (nr.421-23; B 10300a-b, 10999; UB 1950/4, 1955/3; Johansen 1984: 131p. 137; 1993:nr.117). 23. Vre; Karmy M., Rogaland C. Discovery: from a bog. Contents: two neck rings of type broad flanged Wendel (nr. 144-45; C 1952-53; Nordenborg-Myhre 1998). 24. Revheim; Stavanger M., Rogaland C. Discovery: found unassembled in bog. Contents: two lurs, i.e. bronze trumpets (nr. 333-334; S 1880; Ab. 1894; Johansen 1993: nr.86). 25. Lista; Farsund M., Vest-Agder C. Discovery: no information available. Contents: riveted sword (nr. 269, B 5469a) and paalstave axe (nr. 403, B 5469b) (nr. 269, 403; B 5469a-b; BM 1904; Johansen 1986: 30p.; 1993:nr.74).

A. 29

Appendix

V:

Selected

findings

outside

Nortwestern

Scandinavia

1. Daggers comparable to B I 1. Albertsdorf, Ditmarschen C., Germany. Metal hilted dagger with waisted hilt with octangular crosssection, round pommel decorated with 8 running spirals, two rivets and strait transition to blade; roundheaded brooch, lenticular ferrule and decorated gold finger ring (AK XVII: 9005C). 2. Tanged pommels comparable to Hognestad 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Ridders, Steinburg C., Germany. Tanged pommel with wolf-tooth decoration. Single finding (AK XVIII: 9398 E). Dybbl, (below) Dybbl, Snderborg C., Denmark. Tanged pommel, bracelet, belt-hook, paalstave and spearhead. Male burial (AK VI: 3302). Blans, Snderborg C., Denmark. Tanged pommel, dagger blade, tutulus, sickle, and socketed pointed weapon. Male burial (AK VI: 3324). Schuby, Schleswig-Flensburg C., Germany. Tanged pommel decorated with concentric circles, riveted dagger blade, paalstave, tweezers. Male burial (AK IV: 2414 E). Skarrild Overby, Ringkbing C., Denmark. Tanged pommel decorated with running arches, weapon paalstave and fragmented fibula. Male burial (AK X: 4717 B). None of the above pommels were found in assemblages that yield more than a general BA II date. The socketed pointed weapon from Dybbl and the running arches on the pommel from Skarrild Overby point to an early BA II date. Four of the above assemblages are male, while the fifth from Ridders and the sixth from Hognestad are single findings. Compared to the five assemblages from Denmark and Germany, the pommel and blade from Hognestad are of relatively better quality and have more elaborate designs. 3. Assemblages with narrow ribbed bracelets comparable to Rege I and N-Braut (Only assemblages of chronological significance are included.) 1. Mjallerup, lborg C., Denmark. A pair of narrow, ribbed bracelets, bronze-hilted dagger with lamellar-hilt and fully closed lower haft, belt plate, simple neck ring, simple arm ring, square ferrule, two fragments of brooches, and two coiled gold finger rings (Broholm nr. 1862; Randsborg 1968). 2. 3. 4. Skivum, lborg C., Denmark. Narrow ribbed bracelet, cross-headed brooch, pin with double-conical head, two coiled finger rings and two pieces of amber (Kersten 1935. 128, C2 nr. 17; Broholm I: nr. 1820). Spejlsgrd, Hvidberg, Thisted C., Denmark. Narrow ribbed bracelet, bronze hilted dagger with rhomboid pommel, lenticular ferrule, neck ring, two coiled gold finger rings. (AK XI: 4974) Snderh, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets and a bronze-hilted knife (AK XI: 5038).

A. 30
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Bobl, Ribe C., Denmark. Narrow ribbed bracelet, curved horse-headed razor, damaged brooch and bronze-hilted knife (AK VIII: 3909). Ldderup, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets, belt box, two daggers, rhomboid pommel, lenticular ferrule, fragment of conical tutulus, and slate-pendant (AK XI: 5367). Visby, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets, neck collar, pin with double-coned head, and three neck rings (AK XI: 5054B). Aldershvile, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets and lenticular ferrule (AK XI: 5216). Villers, Viborg C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets, two double-studs with central bosses with discs, three tutuli, one massive neck ring, two massive arm rings, awl and four coiled bronze finger rings (Broholm I: nr. 2057; Randsborg 1968) 10. Trinderup, Randers C., Denmark. Pair of narrow ribbed bracelets, cross-headed brooch, awl, coiled bronze finger ring and fragment from brooch (Kersten 1935: 128, C2 nr. 24; Broholm I: nr. 2071) 11. Lille-Almstok, Ribe C., Denmark. Narrow ribbed bracelet, coiled gold finger rings, special pin, and damaged brooch (AK IIX: 4133). 12. Bornhved, Segeberg C., Germany. Narrow ribbed bracelet, pair of coiled gold finger rings, three arm rings, neck ring and a belt-box (Kersten 1935: Taf. XXV) 13. Schoolbek, Rendsburg-Eckernfrde C., Germany. Narrow ribbed bracelet, unribbed decorated bracelet, riveted dagger blade, rhomboid ferrule, pin with double-conical head, tutulus with central boss with disc, 5 blue glass pearls, 3 coiled gold rings, and fragmented brooch (Kersten 1935: 128, C2 nr. 10; AK IV: 2519D) 14. Wrack, Steinburg C., Germany. Narrow ribbed bracelet, two tutuli with central bosses with discs, twisted arm and neck rings, fragmented knife and brooch. (AK XVIII: 9462 A). 15. Arnitlund, Haderslev C., Denmark. Narrow ribbed bracelet, cross-headed brooch and neck ring (AK VII: 3561A). In addition a hoard near Holbk, Holbk C., Denmark (AK II: 701), contain a pair of narrow ribbed bracelets, 2 ribbed and spiral decorated neck-collars, 3 coiled arm rings, 13 tutuli, and belt-hook. The assemblage was bought abroad and may not be as secure as the others above. This seems to be the only clear BA II context and the best parallel to the find combinations seen at Rege. 4. Assemblages with broad ribbed bracelets comparable to Srheim and Anda II (Only assemblages of chronological significance are included.) 1. Torsted, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of broad ribbed bracelets with hatched decorations (not chess-board), belt plate with central boss with disc, metope decorated arm rings, neck ring and two coiled gold finger rings ( AK XI: 5238B). 2. Torsted, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of broad (relatively narrow) ribbed bracelets with hatched chessboarddecoration, stud with central boss with disc (tendency), brooch with cross or pointed head, and fragmented button (AK XI: 5233A; Randsborg 1972: find 71). 3. Aldershvile, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of extra broad ribbed bracelets, tutulus/belt-plate with central boss with disc, ring-headed fibula, coiled bronze finger ring, fragment of twisted arm ring (AK XI: 5214 A),

A. 31
4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Nors-Havreland, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of broad ribbed bracelets, star-decorated brooch and coiled bronze finger ring (AK XI: 5087), Lille-Hillerslev, Thisted C., Denmark. Pair of extra broad ribbed bracelets with chess-board decoration, and ring-headed brooch (AK XI: 5075). Nim, Skanderborg C. Denmark. Pair of broad ribbed bracelets, ring-headed brooch, bronze hilted knife, two tutuli with central bosses with discs, twisted bronze rings, and two coiled gold finger rings. Bstad, Skne C., Sweden. Broad ribbed bracelet, frame-hafted knife, and reposs-decorated belt plate (Old. 108). Skyttegrd, Bornholm C. Pair of ribbed bracelets of medium width, undecorated, large spiral decorated unribbed collar, Bornholm type brooch, spiral decorated belt plate with tendency for disc at central boss (AK III: 1474). 5. Reposs decorated belt plates 1. Lav Bro, Fredriksborg C., Denmark. 2 zones (AK I: 53). 2. Prestegrdsmark, Fredriksborg C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK I: 243). 3-4. Rye, Holbk C., Denmark. Both single zones (AK II: 669). 5-6. Kongsted, Holbk C., Denmark. Both single zones (AK II: 708). 7. Svenstrup, Sor C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK II: 1160). 8. Vesterborg, Maribo C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK III: 1668). 9. Torhuse, Odense C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK III: 1777). 10. Skydebjerg Lunger, Odense C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK III: 1781). 11. Sandgrd, Thisted C. 2 zones (AK XI: 4955C). 12. Bustrup, Viborg C., Denmark. 2 zones (Broholm I: nr. 741). 13. Kirkehj, Skanderborg C., Denmark. 1 zones (Broholm I: nr. 867). 14. Lin, Skanderborg C., Denmark. 1 zone (Broholm I: nr. 794). 15. Dollerup, lborg C., Denmark. 1 zone ? (fragmented) (Lomborg 1960: 136-137). 16. Skrydstrup, Haderslev C., Denmark. 1 zone (AK VII: 3530A). 17. Stadt Schleswig, Schleswig-Flensburg C., Germany. 1 zone (AK IV: 2402). 18. Bstad, Skne C., Sweden. 2 zones (Old. 108; Minnen 955, mistakenly noted as Halland in Minnen). 6. Belt plates with raised rope-style boss-collars comparable to Kleppe II 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Langstrup, Fredriksborg C., Denmark. Spirals in 4 zones (AK I: 201). Svrdborg, Prst C., Denmark. Spirals in 4 zones (AK II: 1295). Asige, Halland C., Sweden. Spirals in 4 zones (Old. 1700). Jgersborg Hegn, Kbenhavn C., Denmark. Spirals in 3 zones (AK I: 426). Hjby, Holbk C., Denmark. Spirals in 3 zones (AK II: 845). Eskebjergsgrd, Holbk C., Denmark. Spirals in 3 zones (AK II: 974).

A. 32

Appendix VI: Notes to simulations and trials

Experiences from simulations and trials have probably shaped my perspectives and interests in a profound manner, and this process is too extensive to be accounted for here. However, experiments with bronze casting are the direct source of several arguments in the thesis, and this appendix aims to elaborate on some of these issues. 1. Learning bronze casting I have no metallurgical or chemical formal education. I learned how to cast bronze from other sources: overviews of prehistoric metallurgy (e.g. Tylecote 1987), accounts of experimental prehistoric bronze casting (e.g. Drescher 1957; Liebel 1985; Jantzen 1991; 2008; Werner & Barth 1991; Fasnacht 1995; 2001; Rnne 1996b; Hirsch & Graf 1999; Hirsch & Ltjens 2001; Hirsch & Trachsel 2001), ethnographic accounts of recent and historical non-industrial casting (e.g. Johanson 1986; Horne 1995; Anfinset 1996), handbooks and guides to small-scale traditional bronze casting (e.g. Ammen 1979; 2000), and the advice of experienced founders and dealers in casting equipment. From the very start these readings went parallel to simulations, trials and experiments. These were basically of two different kinds although often hybrids between the two ideal forms. One involved sand moulds, modern crucibles and a furnace made from steel, industrial refractory material, a diesel burner and an electric fan. The other involved soapstone moulds, Bronze Age style crucibles made from clay/sand, a clay/sand furnace built in the ground and a pair of skin-bellows. This duality was a reflection of the two basic motivations behind the investigation into bronze casting: the desire to produce Bronze Age replicas for exhibitions and education effectively on the one hand, and the desire to explore and experience Bronze Age casting procedures on the other. While the high-tech projects were hardly high-tech in all respects, the low-tech projects were rarely completely insulated from the high-tech sphere. Both types of projects are strikingly similar to the novice when it comes to troubleshooting: who among the involved entities and agents was the source of the flaw: those involved in melting or those in casting, those related to bronze or those related to the mould? The most important difference was the stability in the high-tech sphere: one and the same crucible can be used for more than a hundred castings, diesel is diesel, and the electric fan runs at whatever speed it is tuned to. I realised that for learning in general and for troubleshooting in particular, repetition, replication and stability is crucial. And in this respect I believe the low-tech projects were facilitated by being made in close proximity to high-tech projects and equipment. Hence, to make bronze artefacts the Bronze Age way is to participate in a complex web of entities. These entities are to a novice unstable: clay dug from the ground, sand dug from the ground, fuel from diverse species of trees growing at diverse locations, entities that are consumed and have to be constantly replaced. Typically, a trial produces a flawed casting and one suspect that the reason was oxidized bronze, and one wishes next to do everything the same except for increasing the height between crucible and tuyere an inch. But there is no more fuel of this specific batch, or the crucible, tuyere or mould broke during the trial. The next trial is thus far from an exact replication of the first, and there might now have entered a different culprit in the web. This is difficult only to the unskilled: through long series of such trials one learns of even more entities within each of the above: there are grains of clay, sand and dung that must lie the right way, be of the right size and of

A. 33
the right species. The tuyere must have nozzle of a specific size, a gate and a specific angle. There is not a single right combination that can bring a specific result, but each bronze caster must learn each agent and find one specific combination that works. And in the same way as we do not fundamentally rely on a cognitive map when we navigate in the world, but rather find our way as we go (cf. chapt. 11.4.1), so does the founder have to find his way within the web of entities around bronze anew for each casting. On the other hand, series of successful castings do not implicate that the founder know every relevant feature of these webs, it means that he has managed to stabilize the web. His teachings (formulations of recipes etc.) might in this way be incomplete in the sense that they might not work when tried in another setting. Interestingly, Ammen reports that secrecy and even misinformation were central features of the education of the novice in the USA in the late 40s and 50s (1979: 12pp.). Thus, Barths conjurer-model (1990) was at work even in this modern setting just before bronze casting was thoroughly mechanized. Ammen even suspect this phenomenon to be present in written tutorials as they often present incomplete recipes or operational chains (1979: 13). I am inclined to agree with him. The result is that even for the novice with access to comprehensive libraries and internet, written accounts on how things used to be done and things are done today, here and other places in the world, as well as the true nature and qualities of bronze, clay, fire etc., is still very much on his own in real-world encounters with molten bronze. As my investigations became more structured, I used a hermeneutic procedure of exploring sections of Bronze Age casting: 1. A first phase focused on the melting of bronze and the handling and pouring of a crucible of authentic design in a top-down melting procedure (cf. Fig. 7). Problems of bellows and crucible material were isolated by using a modern, refractory material for the crucible and eliminating the bellows by attaching an electric fan to an authentic tuyere. This eliminated eventualities linked to uneven airstream, size of bellows, and bellow rhythm; as well as the heat capacity of the crucible-mix, and having to constantly deal with crucible damage and crucibles of different shapes. In this setting the following issues could be explored: charcoal qualities, the arranging and refilling of charcoal, the placing of tuyere, nozzle sizes, as well as the handling and pouring of the crucible: taking it out and moving it with different kinds of thongs, removing charcoal from the surface of the crucible, and pouring. For this phase a rough, simple, stable and durable mould was used, so that any mishap would not disable it. I used a simple bi-valve mould of soapstone for a flat axe as well as simple depressions in a modern sand-medium. 2. When problems related to melting, crucible handling and pouring procedures had been eliminated issues related to moulding procedures were explored. Casting flaws would now with a higher degree of probability be a result of moulding procedures. Now, more complex and expensive moulds could be tested, and issues of cores, their material, making, use and removal, as well as clay-moulding techniques and template making, investigated. 3. When both melting and casting procedures were relatively stable, I introduced authentic crucible compounds as well as authentic skin bellows. And only at this time I got a sense of the total web of entities and variables involved in Bronze Age casting. Arriving at this point do not implicate that I am more than a novice to Bronze Age casting procedures. There is a host of mould materials and types of

A. 34
castings that I have not attempted. Most importantly, when bronze does not melt or even a simple casting comes out flawed, I am not confident when pointing out the culprit. There were a few problems that haunted the simulations and trials for a long time, and I believe these are important to include as they have contributed to the argumentation in the main thesis.

2. Reaching the necessary temperature/getting bronze molten I had unstable results while using much the same procedures: sometimes bronze melted within 15 minutes, sometimes it did not melt within the hour, and often it became molten but did not reach proper fluidity. Air stream, tuyere and nozzle were constant in these trials. My conclusion was that charcoal quality and how it was arranged in the furnace, was the source of this problem. To get hold of high-quality charcoals was not easy, and both stone-coal for blacksmithing and barbeque-fuel was attempted. Although the declaration on the bags of charcoal promised high-quality charcoal made from deciduous trees, these batches gave highly unstable results. These might have contained fuels made from branches from low-energy species, moist and other waste materials. Attempting to eliminate this issue I made fuel from scratch. Dry birch logs were distilled to charcoal in a large oil-barrel. The specific procedure should not produce charcoal of radically different character than a Bronze Age pit-procedure. This charcoal gave much more stable results. In combinations with refined procedures of arranging the charcoal, and blocking the loss of heat with stones and wooden pieces; this resulted in stable meltings of loads of 250g within 15-25 min. 3. Surface finish on soapstone castings For a while the finish on soapstone castings was very unstable. I got the impression that the first castings in a new mould often attained good finishes, but after that they deteriorated. This was so also in the simple flat-axe mould. The finish was light yellow, orange and pitted throughout, indicating an aggressive, oxidised bronze. This never happened when casting in sand-moulds, and there was a clear difference when metal was poured from the same load into both soapstone and sand moulds. I suspected that this had to do with gasses: 1. 2. 3. gasses arising from the soapstone when it was hit by molten bronze gasses within the metal from improper melting procedures (improper relative to the type of mould used) the air in the cavity simply not managing to escape There is one significant indisputable difference between a sand mould and a soapstone mould: the soapstone wall is airtight while the sand wall is porous and let gasses through. A careful pouring procedure, i.e. with a thin stream enabling air to pass out beside the in-coming bronze, did not improve the results. A mishap led to a revelation in this case. A wax-casting was made in a soapstone paalstave-mould for a different project. As the wax was too hot and the mould to dry, the wax stuck to the cavity. In order to make the mould ready in a hurry for a direct bronze casting, I heated it and dried of as much wax as I could with a cloth. I had not high expectations for this casting, as it was clear that the insides of the mould were still discoloured by wax. The great surprise was that the casting was successful, and came out with a smooth, shining finish. I tested this new procedure with several more castings, and the finish was of the same quality. I concluded that: wax in the

A. 35
mould creates a shining even surface in need of only minor polishing. Ample waxing, i.e. smearing the entire cavity, seems to create some deformations. Only minor waxing to a lower spot in the cavity, removes the pitted surface, but do not result in the mirroring, bluish surface. I suspect that molten bronze in contact with wax creates an instant burn-off, and properly calculated this reaction removes the air in the cavity as well as air trapped in the bronze. Too much wax creates more gasses, and these typically make large, smooth depressions on the casting. Bees-wax as well as sheep-tallow and pig-fat was tried with equal results. Accordingly, wax-inmould is a degassing procedure aimed at the final phase of the casting. Further simulations, indicated that a careful melting, without excessive air-bronze contact, also solves the problem. Anfinset notes that founders in Nepal threw a small lump of wax into the red-hot moulds before pouring (1996: 86pp.). Simulations with clay moulds indicate that this have positive effects. But why were some soapstone castings, especially castings in new moulds, successful without wax? It could be that soapstone is not absolutely airtight. Only when a few castings have been made, the internal pores of the walls are filled with soot. It could also be that repeated castings make the soapstone produce gasses of its own. There are some indications that similar problems were encountered by Bronze Age founders, e.g. the moulds from Sllerd, Kbenhavn C. and Rbelf, Skne C. On the parting faces of these valves channels had been cut as paths for the gasses to escape (Jantzen 2008: nr. 140; Montelius 1917: nr.1183). The great majority of soapstone moulds do not have these channels, and we might assume that they are not absolutely necessary. This might have been an attempt to solve a problem of poor finish, in an initial, experimental phase of soapstone moulding. I also made such channels in order to remedy the problem with the finish on soapstone casting, without noticeable effect. 4. Flawed sockets on socketed axes Especially large sized socketed axes like KAM axes and EBA types were difficult to master (group 1-3, 5, cf. chapt. 4.4). It seems clear that the thin-walled sockets necessitate perfect bronze of high temperature, not oxidized. Still, I suspected that the core was the real problem. The function of the core-prints became obvious, as high precision in core suspension is absolutely necessary. This is particularly evident on long cores: a tiny slack on top enables the tip of the core to move towards the mould wall. This is not merely an issue of coreprints, but also of core material and procedures of making. Any core mix will shrink through curing, and the core that fitted the core-pints exactly during making, may no longer fit when it has been cured. This would necessitate a core-mix that minimizes shrinkage. Still, when making cores that should yield ample socket-walls, and taking extreme care when assembling them; the casting of socketed axes in soapstone moulds was an unstable business. Reading up on Ammens tips on sand-casting procedures gave a clue for a solution. It seems that when making cores for sand-moulds, these are always vented. Although the same porous mix is used for the core as for the rest of the mould (although cores are burned to harden them), the core presents particular challenges when it comes to the escape of gasses: if the core is to dense and thus airtight, gasses are forced to escape through the molten bronze. For this reason, thin rods of wax are often embedded in cores used in sandmoulding. When the core is burned, these rods melt and leave channels leading gasses through the core to the outside (Ammen 2000: 152). These procedures highlight the need for porosity in cores. With this in mind, I attempted to include more organic substances, even including large straws running from the tip of the core to the funnel, improving the results. This is somewhat at odds with information presented by Jantzen (2008). Most

A. 36
of the preserved cores were made from Finelehm corresponding to the inside layer of clay moulds. This is in accordance with the smooth surfaces of the insides of most socketed axes and spearheads. It must also be taken into account that these preserved cores were probably used with clay moulds, which would have been more porous than soapstone moulds. It is possible that the use of soapstone necessitated the use of different corematerial. Moreover, Finelehm and Formlehm do not really indicate the amount of sand or organic substances, but rather the size of the grains and substances included. As the amount of temper rise, the plasticity of the mix decreases, and this brings problems to the manufacture of the core. Thus, one has to strike a balance between the easily shaped, but shrinkable, clayish core-mix and the difficult to shape, non-shrinkable, sandy core mix. The many flawed sockets from the Bronze Age of NW Scandinavia indicate that these problems were encountered. 5. Shrinkage defects on socketed axes Particularly on large socketed axes I experienced one distinct defect: on the lower section on both sides there were significant depressions. I realised that these stemmed from shrinkage and that they appeared just below the end of the socket/core. That such shrinkage actually occurred in the Bronze Age as well, can be seen on the Hiksdal axe. Whether this was a common problem, and how this actually can be solved is difficult to assess. Relevant variables are the thickness of the axe below the core, the thickness of the walls, the precise shape of the core-tip, the heat distribution and probably also the temperature of the bronze, the mould and the core, and finally the ability of mould and core material to conduct heat. How rapidly bronze enters the mould, and thus the in-gates and pouring motion, might also be relevant. I experimented with some of these variables without really arriving at a conclusion. What was particularly interesting in light of these problems was the discovery of the depressions in the cavities on the Nyhamar A valves. These are likely to have been a very direct approach to counteract such depressions (cf. chapt. 7.8.2).

Appendix VII: Radiocarbon dates*

Age, cal.BC yr (1 sd) 1700-1500 1890-1600 2030-1900 2040-1740 1950-1740 1430-1300 600-400 Year 1987-91 65.1% 64.8% 67.2% charred oak nut/charcoal bone cereal cereal cereal bone bone bone bone bone bone bone 93.0% 95.4% 95.4% 95.4% 95.4% 95.4% bone bone T-747 T-881 charcoal T-925 birch 3/4 birch, 1/4 pine pine 1440-1050 95.4% bone/charcoal T-859 1780-1430 1520-1110 93.4% 95.4% bone/charcoal T-858 T-860 1969-72 1969-72 1969-72 * (all dates calibrated with OxCal version 3.10 (Bronk Ramsey 2005) Probability Age, cal.BC Probability (1sd) yr (2 sd) (2sd) Material Lab.ref. 65.7% 1780-1410 91.3% pine T-7833 61.7% 2150-1400 95.4% pine T-7832 68.2% 2140-1870 92.3% pine T-7686 68.2% 2200-1600 95.4% pine T-7831 68.2% 2040-1630 94.3% rowan T-7830 68.2% 1460-1250 91.8% birch T-7685 43.6% 850-350 91.5% pine T-7829 Ref. Prescott 1991: 36p. Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Myhre 1972; HMT 1969-70 Ibid Ibid Nordenborg-Myhre 1998: 168p.,181, note 8). 2001 Tua-3399 Tua-3398 Tya-3400 2001-07 2001-07 2001-07 2004-05 2004-05 2002-06 2002-06 2002-06 2002-06 2002-06 1968-74

Nr. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1700-1510 1440-1250 1400-1190

Site Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren Skrivarhellaren

Age, 14C yr BP 3320+/-90 3420+/-130 3610+/-50 3550+/-110 3520+/-80 3090+/-50 2440+/-120

8 9

Structure Layer VIII Layer VIII Layer VI/VIII Layer VI Layer V Layer XV Layer IV Burned bones from SRHEIM (bur. 32) central coffin SRHEIM (bur. 32)

3330+/-80 3080+/-80

10 SRHEIM (bur. 32) Secondary burial REHEIA III (bur. 42) 1500-1370 1120-970 1750-1620 1750-1620 1880-1690 930-830 1050-900 1390-1290 1390-1290 1400-1290 1495-1415 1455-1395 62.7% 64.1% 68.2% 59.7% 60.5% 61.5% 1830-1390 1400-800 1410-920 2000-1400 2500-1650 3400-2900 66.7% 68.2% 67.1 67.1 65.8 68.2% 61.2% 1000-810 1130-830 1420-1250 1420-1250 1430-1210 1540-1370 1500-1370 95.4% 95.4% 91.6% 91.6% 95.4% 92.9% 91.4% 68.2% 68.2% 68.2% 1830-1600 1780-1520 1930-1620 82.8% 89.3% 95.4% 68.2% 1200-920 95.4% 63.1% 1540-1260 95.4% TUa-1682 Beta-159023

3030+/-70

11

sword scabbard

3145+/-60

"Kongshaugen", 12 Reheia

unburned bones from burial A

2870+/-40

13 Kvlehodlen 14 Kvlehodlen 15 Kvlehodlen

house 3 house 3 house 3

3395+/-50 3390+/-50 3455+/-60

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Njlstad Njlstad Frset Frset Frset Frset Frset

bone from urn bone from urn cairn nr. 3 cairn nr. 3 cairn nr. 3 cairn nr. 4 cairn nr. 6

2750+/-45 2820+/-55 3055+/-35 3055+/-35 3060+/-40 3174+/-45 3150+/-35

23 Sund 24 Sund 1300-1020 1780-1530 2210-1870 3340-3080

crania thigh bone

3300+/-100 1690-1490 2900+/-90 1220-970

Nordenborg-Myhre 2004: 159p. Soltvedt et. al. 2007: tab.8 Ibid Ibid Goldhahn in Aasb 2006:8 Ibid Grnnesby 2009: Fig.6 Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid Farbregd et. al. 1975: 7 Ibid 1987-88 1987-88 1987-88 Ibid Schanche 1989: Tab.3 Ibid Ibid

25 26 27 28

Sund Karlebotn Karlebotn Karlebotn

charcoal from pit fireplace floor midden

2950+/-90 3390+/-110 3640+/-140 4480+/-90

A. 37

Contents: maps & plates

Maps
Map 1 Map 2 Map 3 Map 4 Map 5 Map 6 Map 7 Map 8 Map 9 Map 10 Map 11 Map 12 Map 13 Map 14 Map 15 Map 16 Map 17 Map 18 Map 19 Map 20 Map 21 Map 22 Map 23 Map 24 Map 25 Map 26 Map 27 Map 28 Map 29 Map 30 NW Scandinavia geography Counties in Northwestern Europe EM (9500-8000 BC) MM-LM (8000-4000 BC) EN-MN a (4000-2800 BC) MN b (2800-2350 BC) LN I (2350-1950 BC) LN II (1950-1700 BC) Northern prelude (c. 2000-1700 BC) BA Ia (1700-1600 BC) BA Ib (1600-1500 BC) BA II early (1500-1340 BC) BA II late (1340-1300 BC) BA III (1300-1100 BC) BA IV (1100-900 BC) BA V (900-700 BC) BA VI (700-500 BC) The Central Swedish Water System (CSWS) The North Way The fur-trade 800-1100 AD Triangular metal-hilted daggers in Europe The Ster- Ripatransone Network The Vester Skjerninge Byblos Network The Vevang-Mycenae Network The Svanekjr Mose S-Alpine Network First Swords (1700-1500 BC) Early BA II (1500-1340 BC) Late BA II (1340-1100 BC) Scandinavia Volga Networks Jren, 1700500 BC

ii

Plates

Copper, gold and bronze artefacts (nr. 1-523)* ..................................................... Pl. 1-45 Moulds (mould 1-32)* ........................................................................................... Pl. 46-53 Parallels for the Vigrestad brooch from Zealand and Lneburger Heide ............. Pl. 54 Parallels for the Tennevik & Trondenes collars ..................................................... Pl. 55 Parallels for the B dagger: the Albertsdorf burial ................................................ Pl. 56 Parallels for the bracelet and axes from Steine and Vevang .................................. Pl. 57 The Rishaug-slab and the Anderlingen burial ........................................................ Pl. 58 Selected rock-art motives ....................................................................................... Pl. 59 Parallels for Jarfjord, Vektarlia and Leirbukt (Seima-Turbino) ............................. Pl. 60 Slate harpoon heads, copper arrowheads, and early Arctic socketed axes ............ Pl. 61 Parallels for the moulds from Tjesseim and Randaberg: Luusuavaara and Kemi .. Pl. 62 Seima, Nordic, Hittite: figurines, spearheads, axes and blades .............................. Pl. 63 Axes and moulds of Ananino and related types in the west .................................. Pl. 64
* Images drawn by the author except for the following: nr. 11 Gunnarshaug is adapted from Randsborg 1972; nr. 18 Lom is adapted from Ab.1892; nr. 19 Lom from Oldeberg 1933; nr. 31-32 from Lange 1918; nr. 33, 79, 100, 113, 144, 171, 245-46 from Rygh 1885; nr. 303-305, 320-324, 326 from Jacob-Friesen 1967; nr. 333 from Ab.1894)

Map 1
Tanafjord Laksefjord Porsangerfjord
Pasvik R.

Varangerfjord
Kola Peninsula

Altafjord
L. Inari

. oki R Kemij

Vgsfjord Tjeldsund

R. Torne

Lule

R.

Trna Rana
Ume R.

Lo fo

ten

ngerman

R.

Namsfjord Fosen Trondheimsfjord Frya Hitra Smla Halsafjord Tingvollfjord Hustadvika Moldefjord Storfjord Stadt Nordfjord
Beg na

Inda lslv

Beitstadfjord

R.

BOTTEN SEA

Ljusn

an R

Dal

lv R.

L g

en

R.
Gl om m aR

Mlardal
Try s
.

il/K

lar

lv .R

Gotland
.

Ha

R.

lln g

Nu

Sognefjord

da l R. me da lR .

L. Vnarn

L. Vttern

land Hardangerfjord Bmlo Karmy Boknafjord Jren

Ot

Oslofjord Langesundfjord
R ra

Gta R.

AG ER A

Lista NORTH SEA

Limfjord Jutland Zealand

SK

KATTEGAT Scania

Bornholm

BALTIC SEA

Map 2 Counties in Northwestern Europe

Finnmark Murmansk

Troms Karelia Lappi

Oulu

Norrbotten

Eastern Finland

Nordland Vsterbotten Western Finland

NordTrndelag

Vsternorrland Jmtland

SrTrndelag Gvleborg

Mre & Romsdal Hedmark Oppland Vrmland Sogn & Fjordane Akershus Dalarne

Uppsala

Stockholm

rebro

Sdermanland stergtland Gotland

Buskerud

Telemark Hordaland

Vstra Gtaland Jnkping

Kalmar

AustAgder Rogaland VestAgder Halland Hjrring lborg FredriksRanders borg Holbk Thisted Viborg Odense Ringkbing rhus Skanderborg Ribe Haderslev Tnder benr Snderborg Vejle Sor

Kronoberg Blekinge

Skne

Kbenhavn Prst

Svendborg Maribo

Mecklenburg-West Pomerania

SchleswigHolstein Niedersachsen

Brandenburg

Map 3

EM (9500-8000 BC) - Clusters of sites - Interior sites Varangerfjord

Nordvestlandet

ICE CAP
0 00 BC

10 000 BC

Bohusln Boknafjord

North Sea Continent

Map 4

MM-LM (8000-4000 BC)

- Rock-art - Slate - Stakanes-axes north of the Central Axe Zone - Hespriholmen-axes north of the Southern Axe Zone - Mattock and Club network
Comb-ceramics c. 5000 BC

NORTHERN AXE ZONE

Rock-art innovation zone

Slate innovation zone

Suomusjrvi slate-industry

CENTRAL MATTOCK ZONE

HUSTADVIKA

CENTRAL (STAKANES) AXE ZONE

SOUTHERN (HESPRIHOLMEN) AXE ZONE (and southern Mattock-Club Zone)

SOUTHERN DIABAZE ZONE

SOUTHEASTERN MATTOCK ZONES A & B

Map 5

EN-MNa (4000-2800 BC )
- point-butted flint axe - thin-butted flint axe - polygonal battle axe - double edged battle axe - burials in small cairns - megalithic burials in Norway - slate knives outside the main slate complex

SLATE COMPLEX

Nyhamna lstadstra

CENTRAL (STAKANES) AXE ZONE

Ertesprang Rnnegvammen

SOUTHERN (HESPRIHOLMEN) AXE ZONE

FBC COMPLEX

Map 6

MNb (2800-2350 BC )
Decorated slate projectile Transversal lines across mid-ridge Transversal lines on facets Edge-notches Zig-zag Cross Rhombus

Large single notches on mid-ridge

Selected battle axes

Battle axe, type Hurva (and "Hurva-like") Battle axe, type South Swedish Battle axe, type Danish Single Grave Battle axe, type Finnish and related Battle axe, East Swedish/Continental

CORDED WARE COMPLEX

Map 7

LN I (2350-1950 BC )
- Flint dagger type ID - Flint dagger type IIIB - Ground axe type Sandshamn - Slate spearhead with fluted base (Sandtorg) - Slate arrowhead with fluted base (Sundery) - Sundery main zone
Bellss sele Hlla

- Slate harpoon-projectile without agnora, single perforation - Slate harpoon-projectile with agnora and single perforation - Slate harpoon-projectile with double perforation - Rock-art "halibut"-motive
Nmforsen Ringet

( )

Main distribution of flint daggers

Map 8

LN II (1950-1700 BC )
- Flint dagger type IV - Flint dagger type V

Main distribution of flintdaggers

Map 9
Karlebotn (nr. 261)

Northern prelude c. 2000-1700 BC

- Tanged metal projectiles - Tanged metal projectiles with perforation - Other early copper artefacts in the north - Slate spearhead with fluted base (Sandtorg) - Slate arrowhead with fluted base (Sundery) - Sundery main zone - Slate harpoon-projectile without agnora, with single perforation

Lebesby (nr. 264) Pitsusmurust (nr. 262)

Bogen (nr. 266) Kvesmesnes (nr. 267) Bentsjord (nr. 268)

Tor n

Kukkosaari
e ri ver

Skotnes (nr. 263)

Forselv

Lillberget

- Slate harpoon-projectile with agnora and single perforation - Slate harpoon-projectile with double perforation - Rock-art "halibut"-motive
Bellss sele Hlla
Norrfors

- Rock-art boats type 1a - Burial coffins

Varris
Ringet

Billsta

Nmforsen

Geite (nr. 265)

( )

Tierp

Map 10 1700-1600 BC, Nordic BA Ia

- Flanged axe, Hheim-Steine type - Flanged axe, Bersagel and related specimens - Flanged axe, Rmlang type - Ribbed bracelet - Blades with socketed hilts - Slate pendants, type 4 - Slate pendants, type 3 - Bronze axe-pendant - Flint dagger type VI, north of the Trondheimsund-Dalaelv line

Fevg (nr. 393)

Vevang (nr. 399)

Blindheim (hoard 10) Hheim (nr. 394) Lomen (nr. 402) Skrivarhellaren (nr. 371-74) Kvle (nr. 395)

ri (nr. 273) Steine (hoard 16)

Bersagel (nr. 398)

Kvlehodlen (House 3)

( )( )

Map 11 1600-1500 BC, Nordic BA Ib

- Shaft-hole axe, Faardrup type (total distribution) - Flanged axe, Underre type (only Norway mapped) - Flanged axe, Oldendorf type (Norway and Denmark mapped) - Oldendorf main zone - Spearhead, Bagterp (total distribution) - Spearhead, Bagterp, decorated (total distribution) - Boat type 1b (burial slabs from Mjeltehaugen and Skatval excluded) - Boat type 1c - Asbestos pottery south of Rana dated before 1500 BC - Flint dagger type VI, north of the Trondheimssund-Dalalv line - Wohlde type blades of sword's length - Northern border of Nordic artefacts

Lgsand (nr. 418)

Hol (nr. 296) Hofset (nr. 420) Veen (nr. 400) Viset (nr. 419)

Kvanngardsnes (nr. 417)

rekol (nr. 416)

"Haugesund" (nr. 382) Idse (nr. 381) "Thune" (nr. 384) Tjelta (nr. 415) Hole (nr. 385) Line (nr. 383) Trland (nr. 386)

Map 12 1500-1340 BC, Nordic BA II early

- Flanged axe, Extreme Oldendorf type - Paalstave, "Weapon"/Nordic type - Paalstave, flat (group 3) - Sgel-type blades of sword-length - Daggers, type B-Albertsdorf - Tanged pommels - Moulds for Seima-type daggers - Cremations - Rock-art in burial

Jarfjord (moulds 6-7)

Leirbukt (nr. 207)

Kolvika (mould 9)

Lngudden

Vektarlia (mould 8)

Frset Reins (nr. 414) Rishaug Indergrd (nr. 387)

Gravh (nr. 389) Heggdalsvik (nr. 388)

Lien Srheim (bur.32) Vge (nr. 413) Randaberg (nr. 412) Voll (nr. 390) Tu (nr. 384) Hauge (nr. 404) Hognestad (bur.87) Nrland (nr. 220) B I (bur.89) Hove (nr. 405) Lista (hoard 25) Lunde II (bur.106)

Dybbl Blans Schuby Albertsdorf Anderlingen Ridders

Map 13
Jarfjord (moulds 6-7)

1340-1300 BC, Nordic BA II late

Leirbukt (nr. 207)
- Paalstave, "Norddeutsche" type - Shaft-hole axes, "Ceremonial" type - Spearhead, Ullerslev type - Spearhead, Smrumovre type (NW Scand. only) - Double-spiral pin/brooch - Single-spiral pin - Paalstave mould, soap-stone (tot. dist. mapped) - Paalstave mould, bronze (tot. dist. mapped) - Seima moulds and related - Selected rock-art imagery - Rock-art boat type 2 (N-W Scand. mapped) Lngudden

Kolvika (mould 9)

Kaskeloukte Lappvallen

Vektarlia (mould 8)

Gjrv (bur.4) Rykkja I (bur.20) Skjervoll Fiskvik (nr.317) Rishaug Byneset

Srnesje (bur.24) I. Hoem (nr.22) Raknes (nr.425) "Orty" (nr.407) Mjeltehaugen Kyrkje-Eide Svenes (hoard 17) Urnes Unneset Kaldafjell (nr.298) Helleve (nr.408) Utne (bur.27) Rimbareid (nr.424) Lunde (hoard 22) Utvik (nr.303) Haugvaldstad (nr.300) Smme (nr.299) Skjrestad (nr.410) "Jren" (nr.406) Time (nr.409) Fosse (nr.301) Orre (nr.318)
2

mot

stebosjn Sagaholm

Kivik

Vigrestad (bur.92 & nr.297) Voile (mould 28)

3 7 7

Map 14 1300-1100 BC, Nordic BA III

- Socketed axe, group 1 (with and without V-ornament, not mapped outside Norway) - Socketed axe, group 2 (and related specimens with loop or rivet, not mapped outside Norway) - Socketed axe, group 3 (with faset A and C) - Axe mould, soap-stone - Gold (not mapped outside Norway) - Flange-hilted sword (not mapped outside Norway) - Horse-headed razor (not mapped outside Norway) - Frame-hafted knife (not mapped outside Norway)

Skjeggesnes (bur.2)

Lappvallen

Skren (bur.3)

Volden (nr.438) Tonnes-Holan I-III, VI, VIII (bur. 5-7,10,12) Auran (nr.401) Austrtt (nr.428) Overvik N. (nr.437) Nypan (nr.450) Grafts (nr.434) Dromnes (bur. 23) Foss (mould 12) Bjrnes (nr.451) Eikrem (nr.435) vrebust (nr.513) B (hoard 18) Simonnes (nr.431) Fisk (nr.429) Vedvika (nr.432)

Hagen (nr.446) I. Oppedal (nr.439) Seim (nr.452) Nes (nr.445) Vikse (nr.109) Svik (nr.442) Smme (nr.443) Utvik (nr.100) N Braut(nr.111) Stange (nr.108) Hodne I (bur.65) Storesund I (bur.36) Sele I (bur.58) Grude (nr.444) Revheim (nr.433) Orre (nr.440) Sola I (bur. 50) Sola III (bur. 52) Kleppe I (bur. 69) "Jren" (nr.200) Hyland (nr.239) Syland (nr.448) "Lista" (nr.110) Knivsland (nr.441) Kjrrefjord (bur. 101) Midtre Vere (nr. 447) Ryen (bur. 107)

Map 15 1100-900 BC, Nordic BA IV

- Burial with razor/tweezers/double studs - Socketed axe Baudou A2a with 2 depressions (moulds in circles) - Mould for socketed axe, Baudou A1 with 4 depressions - Socketed axe, Baudou A1 (all variants) in Norway (moulds in circles) - Socketed axe with Textile-pattern (Hiksdal) - Flange hilted sword with 6 rivets in hilt section - Metal hilted sword, Dreiwulst, type Illertissen - Other swords of the Dreiwulst category - Other sword blades (moulds in circles) - Double stud type Kubbhaug - Disc-headed brooch - Early ship-settings - armrings variant Madla-Lusmasaari Vinje (nr. 241) Leirbekken (nr. 185)

Rock-art centre Apana Grd Lusmasaari

B (bur. 1)

Bremsnes (mould 3) Haga Slottsvik (mould 2)

Blia Skjeldestad (mould 15) Olset (mould 1) Nyhamar A (mould 16)

Kat K tt t

Grindheim (bur. 33) Hysstad (bur. 29) Vespestad (bur. 31) Hiksdal (nr. 516) Vanvik (nr. 248) Nesheim (nr. 455) Gunnarshaug I (bur. 38) Storesund II (bur. 37) Fryland (nr. 454) Madla II (bur. 47) Sola V (bur. 54) Rege II (bur. 56) Sele II (bur. 59) Anda IV (bur.76) Eia (nr. 219) Vere (bur. 98)

Plitz

Map 16 900-700 BC, Nordic BA V

- Axes with extended neck, "Norwegian" variant (moulds in circles) Lusmasaari - Axes with extended neck, "Mlar" variant (moulds in circles) - Axes with extended neck, variants related to "Norwegian" and "Mlar" variants (moulds in circles) - Gold sheet double-spiral arm rings - Other gold arm rings (not mapped outside the area) - Neck collars of Tennevik-Grnhult type (moulds in circles) - Gndlingen type swords produced in the Nordic Zone - Tanged swords (not mapped outside Norway) - Various other findings - Norwegean face-urns and their southeastern paralells - Lures variant Revheim-Ulvkr Grtavr (mould 11) Trondenes (hoard 2) Tennevik (hoard 3) Luusuavaara Kemi Suomusalmi Petkula

Tomsvik (nr. 255) Vg (nr. 246)

Stndar Sandnesenget (nr. 103, 254) Hoddy (nr. 326) Langli . (nr. 105) Bjrgan (nr. 457) Ystines (nr. 466) Hovde (nr.468) Vlan (nr. 458) Kasset (nr. 465) Bjrgan (nr. 457) Hemnskjel (nr.101) Strand (nr.102) Nyhus (nr.469) Farstad (nr.459) Sekkenes (nr.470) Aursjen (nr.258) Ulla (nr.460) Ulstein (nr.253) vre Berge (nr.464) Sylte (nr.471)

Decorated dagger

Sln (nr. 461) Mlster (nr. 462) VISTAD Rosendal (nr. 463) Tjesseim (mould 22) Randaberg (mould 25) Revheim (nr. 333-34) Hodne (nr. 104) Ulvkr Vemestad (nr. 467) Lista fyr (nr. 256) Vilsted (mould) Balsmyr

Map 17 700-500 BC, Nordic BA VI

- Sharp-bladed Wendel ring - Broad-bladed Wendel ring (plotted in Norway only) - Twisted neck ring with large oval end-plates and spirals - Flat, undecorated neck rings - Jutish neck rings - Gold rings (Julnes-Besseberg group) - Spectacle brooch, Hrnavi-variant - Swan-necked pins with small spiral heads - Disc-headed pins of Hrnevi type - Disc-headed pin, three discs arranged in triangle - Disc-headed pin, five discs arranged in rectangle - Sword type Mindelheim - Fringe-ornament - Volut-ornament - Eye-ornament - Axe type Ananino - Axe related to the Ananino-type - Loopless, ornated axe - Looped axe with ornament - Spearheads variant GunnesyanOskarshamn - Spearheads type Ananino Liland (nr. 505) Tonnes-Holan (bur.9) Rennstein (nr. 146) Lundset (nr. 504) Storsandan (hoard 5) Dusnsbcken Hotingsjn Maaria Tustervatn (nr. 507) Rstrand Bgatrsket Busjn Vadsjbcken Isalmi sn. Sandudden Valtimo sn Srbyn Sraisniemi sn. Trondenes (hoard 2) Pajala Krunniniva, Ylitornio Muhos sn. Kemijrvi Akonlahti

Krokan (nr. 506)

Stav (hoard 7) Gunnesyan (hoard 6) Gyl (hoard 8) Hustad (nr. 502) Rindary (nr. 501) Julnes (hoard 9)

Brudal (nr. 154) "Lom" (hoard 11) Erdalen (hoard 15) Skjerdalen (hoard 14)

( )
Avlund (hoard 13) Srheim (nr.332) Lekve (nr. 245) Vikedal (hoard 21) Eide (mould 18) Stle (nr. 151) Tjelflot (nr. 323) Vge (nr. 141) Vre (hoard 23) Ullandhaug (nr. 30) Stangeland (mould 23) Brualand (mould 24) Selevatnet (nr. 324) Salte (nr. 147) Berge (nr. 107) VISTAD

()

( )

Map 18
NE AN CH L RN NE TA AN T -V CH RN EN KE AR T TIS NXE GS RO IN P
K NY

Gta Kanal

No ssa n

ga n

ta Vre bo/ H ar

Kolbcksn

Arbo

sj

fsfjord

ste

bo

et-Gla

lv-St lp

ng

en

-Fo xe n

Vran gs

Ma

. Dalalv

Glom

ma

lv

L. M

js

de

din

L. LesjaskogsO rk

Stj

rd a

smj Vang

ins -V

tri

si-Sli

rd drefjo

L.

Fe m

un

Begna

L. S

per ille

L. Tyin
Ty a

M L J -H AR LM AR
ri Fy

AN CH NE L
n s
n

So h ut

L
ng St

ish ed Sw

Nis

san

L.

Ro xe n

L.

ke r

n Svart

s nd la gh Hi

an tr
Viskan

l a M n re
Ny k p in

Hj lm

gs n

ern tt

ar en

Sve n

Svartn

Dallv

Vnarn

ta

The Central Swedish Water System

Axes type Faardrup Spearheads type Ullerslev Alpine flanged axes Mlar axes Figurative rock-art

Fetsund Vormsund
L. Tyrifjord

Nea

la Gau
la

Rauma

Map 19

Sandneseng Overgrd

The North Way

Bostad Gullvika Hoddy Tjeldsund Bardal Hammer Frset Gjrv Sund Lgsand Volden L TodnesHolan Langli

Vevang Farstad Hustad Bud Lvsen Eikrem Julnes

Nam sen

Nrysund

I. Hoem

rlandet

Eggesb Litleb Ristesund Simones Strand Sylte Eide Myklebust Vanylvgapet Sildagapet Julsund Kornstadfjord

Atly

Jren Reef

J r e n Eia Eigery Hove

Tittelnes
Sira

Sandeid

Karmsund Tungeneset

Orrelagoon

Eigery

Lista

Map 20

The fur trade 800-1100 AD

The Hleygje The Vareg/Rus The Kvene The Bulgar
Ob

L. Balkash

Irt y

sj

STEPPE ZONE

Tobol

Ob

Ural M.
Kama

Bulgar Kazan Ustiug

Volg a

800-1050 BC

Southern Biarmia

Northern Biarmia

?
Kvene

L. ga Lado

Novgorod

Kiev d from Bjarky Hlogaland

NO RT H AY W

Black Sea

Birka

Cau cas us

M.

Dv

ina

Map 21

AEGEAN SEA

BLACK SEA

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Central Appenine

Gulf of Venice Gulf of Genova

S-Alpine

Gulf of Lyon

NW-Alpine Rhne
Danub

Od er

e
Ga ro nn e

Wa rt

Upper Elbe-

Ma

ine

e Rhin

Vis tul a

Oder-Warta
Meckl.Vorp.
Elb e

Elbe-Saale
Loire

ne Sei

BALTIC SEA

se We

Kattegat

Triangular, metal-hilted daggers

Skagerak NORTH SEA

Primary Unetice Zone Oder-Elbe type Malchin type Unetice type Saxon type Italian type Rhne type Swiss type

Map 22

AEGEAN SEA

BLACK SEA

TYRHENIAN SEA SEA

sone

Gulf of Genova

Gulf of Lyon

( )
e on Rh

Danub

Od er

e
Ga ro nn e

Ma
le Saa

ine

e Rhin

Vis tul

Ster
Skagerak NORTH SEA

a
Loire

e Elb

ne Sei

BALTIC SEA

se We

Kattegat

Ster-Ripatransone Network
Daggers type Malchin Daggers with socketed-haft Triangular daggers with multi-ribbed blades Metal-hilted halberds of Wsteman's "Norddeutsche" type, var. 3 senringe in Scandinavia Stone axe of Hagebyhga type (Cederlund's var. 1-2)

Map 23
Vester Skjerninge - Byblos network
Byblos
AEGEAN SEA

Saxon type dagger Oder-Elbe type dagger

SEA

Halberd-blade of Bartelheim's type N5.2 Burial with metal-hilted dagger of Swiss- or Rhne type

Cyprus

Dagger blades with pontill-decoration Long daggers/swords of Quimperle type Cycladian "slotted" spearheads Silver "senring" Cypriotic pin
ADRIATIC SEA TYRHENIAN SEA

Troy

AEGEAN SEA

Gulf of Venice

BLACK SEA

Gulf of Genova

Gulf of Lyon

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Danub e
Rh

on

Ga

Ma
Saa le

ine

e Rhin

ro nn e

Gulf of Venice
Elb e

( )
Gulf of Genova
Loire

BALTIC SEA

Gulf of Lyon

Hilterfingen Th

Contey o

Rh

on

Danub
Ma
Dieskau Kynha Baalberge
SEA

Od er
Kattegat

e
hine

Gar onn
R

ine

Vis a tul
BALTIC SEA

Wa rta
Skagerak

Saa

le

GaubickelLoire

e Elb

Sei

se We

ne

Vester Skjerninge Kattegat

NORTH SEA

Skagerak

Map 24
Mycenae

AEGEAN SEA

BLACK SEA

Lipari Islands

SEA

( )
Venice Genova

Felsberg Thun

Ga

Ma
le Saa

ine

e Rhin

ro nn e

Vis tul a

Meissenheim

Trassem

( )
Nebra

Loire
Marais de Nantes

e Elb

ne Sei

BALTIC SEA

se We

Priziac Karlevi

Olovsborg Oppeby Vreta Kloster Kattegat

Frommestad Skagerak NORTH SEA

Vevang - Mycenae Network

flanged axe type Lausanne flanged axe type Rmlang flanged axe type Bevaix daggers type Trassem-Felsberg bronzes with copper/gold inlay "written"-symbols
Vevang

Map 25

AEGEAN SEA

BLACK SEA

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Gulf of Venice Gulf of Genova

Gulf of Lyon

e on Rh

Danub

Od er

e
Ga ro nn e

Ma
le Saa

ine

e Rhin

Vis tul a
e Elb
NeuRatjendorf Tinsdahl BALTIC SEA

Loire

ne Sei

se We

Kattegat

r Mose Skagerak NORTH SEA

Svanekjr Mose - S-Alpine Network

senring collars senring collars, decorated variant Triangular blades with "halbeswinkelkreuz"-motive

Map 26
Mycenae AEGEAN SEA

Troy

BLACK SEA

Pella

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Zivalji

Vajska Oradea Hajdusamson

Donja Dolina

Apa

Monkodonja

Teglas

( )
Nitriansky Hrdok Spisk tvrtok

Gulf of Venice "Hungary" Borche de Solferino Gemeinlebarn Maiersdorf Mitterberg Perjen Cascina Ranza Gulf of Lyon Gulf of Genova

Rh
Bernstorf

e on

Goldberg

Ga

Ma
le Saa

ine

e Rhin

ro n

ne

Vis tul a
Rosenfelde Nebra Eschwege Alt-Suhrkow Rastorf

Loire

Elb e

ne Sei

BALTIC SEA Balkkra

se We

r Frotheim

Hochenlockstedt

Ssdala

First swords
Kattegat Mosstugan Bragby Roum

Sun-thrones Battle-axe type Ssdala-Gemneinlebarn

Post-triangular blades with "halbeswinkelkreuz"-motive

Skagerak NORTH SEA

Var. "Hajdusamson" Var. "Apa" Var. "Nebra - Rastorf" (third generation socketed hilts) Var. "Cascina Ranza - Donja Dolina" Var. "Torupgrde - Mostugan" Ungrouped specimens Mycenaean rapier type A, and related Rapier type Sauerbrunn

"hanging concave triangle with striation"-motive "Plaited, striated triangles"motive "C-scroll"-motive "Line & dots flower"-motive

Steine

Bracelet of Steine-type Curved swords and trojan curved ferrule

Blindheim

AEGEAN SEA

BLACK SEA

Map 27

AEGEAN SEA

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Gulf of Venice Gulf of Genova

Mitterberg

Bernstorf
Gulf of Lyon

Rh

on

Danub

Od er

e
Ga ro n

Ma
Saa le

ine

e Rhin

ne

Vis tul a

Rhi

ne
Loire

Elb e

ne S ei

Albertsdorf

BALTIC SEA

Kattegat

Early BA II - 1500-1340 BC
Skagerak

NORTH SEA

Rock-art imagery in burial: "human with axe" Early cremation burial Daggers of B-Albertsdorf type Daggers with tanged pommels Mychenaean "Camp-stools"

Hognestad

Rishaug Frset

Map 28

AEGEAN SEA

Adriatic Sea

TYRHENIAN SEA ADRIATIC SEA

Monkodonja

Mitterberg

Bernstorf
Gulf of Lyon

Rh

on

Danub

Od er

e
Ga ro n

Ma
Saa le

ine

e Rhin

ne

Vis tul a

Rhi

Gyldengrd Kivik

ne
Loire

ne S ei

Stockhult
SEA

Kattegat

LATE BA II; 1340-1300 BC

Skagerak NORTH VigrestadSEA

Paalstave mould, bronze Paalstave mould, soap-stone Cult-axe Octagonal hilted swords outside main clusters "Brimmed hat" symbolism Complex reposse-work, bronze

Kleppe

Gjrv

Complex reposse-work, gold Double spiral pins/brooches

Map 29

Scandinavia & Volga-Kama 1500-500 BC

Seima sites/findings Ananino sites/findings Seima-network Bronze human figurines

Ob

L. Balkash

Rostovka

Irt y

sj

STEPPE ZONE

Tobol

Ob

y Cave

Achmylovo Reshnoye Volosovo

Caspian Sea
Volg a

Onega copper deposits

L.

Dni

epr

L Cernai Rrvik

"Ukraine"

Black Sea
Borodino

Ganovche

Cau ca

sus

M.

a vin

Map 30

1700 - 1340 BC
Bersagel Nag

Idse

( )
Boknfjord
Gandsfjord
Stokka my
Sk as sva tn

a Varh

a n H

"Thune" Holen

na ug

Hognestad

Kvlehodlen Line Hole

Trland

o gj Fig

Revheim Bru

Hafrsfjord

Tjelta

Voll
Orre L.

Nrland BA I: BA IIa: Boat 1: axe, other axe, other

burial,

1340 - 1100 BC
Nag

Boknfjord

Skjrestad

Gandsfjord
Lunde Anda Kleppe my Madla Revheim Haugvallstad Smme Tjora Jsund Sola Haga Tjelta Rege Sele Vashus Srheim Braut

Holen Time

Fos

Vigrestad vestad

Tu Tjtta Re Hauge

Syland Hyland Pollestad Vik

burial, burial, axe, spear, dagger/sword oth.

Grude Bore

Friestad Nese

Erga

Bru

N.Sunde Randaberg

Hodne

Orre BA IIb:
BA III: Rock art:

axe, spear, dag/swrd, boat 2

boat 1, ,

1100 -500 BC
Idse
Fryland Hyland Hana

Tjesseim

Gandsfjord
ngeland
Ullandhaug Revheim Mostery Rege

Holen

Frylandsvatn

Njlstad B

rsland

aland

And liesen
Bore Salte

Sola

Dysjaland Sele

Selevatn Hodne

BA IV: BA IV-V: BA V: BA V-VI: BA VI:

burial, burial burial, axe, burial,

axe,

other

V. Goa
Randaberg Myklebust

other mould axe, other

Pl. 1

Nr. 1 Holen

Nr. 2 Svany

Nr. 3 Rege

Nr. 4 Lunde

Nr. 5 Sola

Nr. 6 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 7 Srheim

Nr. 8 Anda

Nr. 9 Storesund

Nr. 10 Anda

Nr. 12 Rykkja

Nr. 13 Tjtta

Nr. 11 Gunnarshaug

Nr. 14 Ristesund

Nr. 15 Kleppe

Nr. 17 Vigrestad

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 2

Nr. 18 "Lom" Nr. 20 Skjerdalen

Nr. 19 "Lom"

Nr. 24 TonnesHolan

Nr. 25 Sola

Nr. 23 Gjrv Nr. 26 Vespestad

Nr. 21 Rykkja

Nr. 22 Indre Hoem

Nr. 27 Skjerdalen Nr. 28 Stav Nr. 29 stre Hauge

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 3

Nr. 30 Ullandhaug

Nr. 31 Vikedal

Nr. 32 Vikedal

Nr. 35 Skjeggesnes

Nr. 33 Gunnesyan

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 4

Nr. 36 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 37 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 38 B

Nr. 39 Vespestad

Nr. 40 Gunnarshaug

Nr. 41 Rege

Nr. 42 Storesund

Nr. 43 Sele

Nr. 44 Finny

Nr. 45 Aust-Bore /Bore II

(Scale 1/1)

Pl. 5

Nr. 47 Gunnarshaug

Nr. 46 L

Nr. 48 B Nr. 49 Nedre Hauge Nr. 50 Vest-Hassel Nr. 51 Utvik

Nr. 54 Nedre Hauge Nr. 52 Vespestad Nr. 58 Lunde

Nr. 59 Gunnesyan

Nr. 60 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 61 Njlstad

Nr. 62 Tonnes-Holan Nr. 66 Storsandan

Nr. 65 Storsandan

Nr. 64 Storsandan

(Scale 1/1)

Pl. 6

Nr. 67 Steine

Nr. 68 Tjelta

Nr. 69 Anda

Nr. 71 Srheim

Nr. 74 Rege

Nr. 76 N. Braut

Nr. 75 Rege Nr. 70 Anda Nr. 72 Srheim

Nr. 77 N. Braut

Nr. 83 S. Braut

Nr. 84 S. Braut

Nr. 79 Kvamme

Nr. 85 B

Nr. 87 Storsandan

Nr. 89 Avlund Nr. 88 Velle Nr. 90 Stav

Nr. 96 Vere Nr. 96 Skjerdalen

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 7

Nr. 101 Hemnskjel

Nr. 99 Hodne

Nr. 100 Utvik

Nr. 102 Strand

Nr. 103 Sandnesenget

Nr. 104 Hodne

Nr. 105 Langli

Nr. 106 Julnes

Nr. 107 Berge

Nr. 108 Stange

Nr. 109 Vikse

Nr. 113 Sele Nr. 111 N. Braut

Nr. 114 Hkonsdal

(Scale: arm 1/2, finger 1/1)

Pl. 8

Nr. 118 Rege

Nr. 119 S. Braut

Nr. 120 Vigrestad

Nr. 121 Rykkja

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 9

Nr. 124 Trondenes

Nr. 122 Tennevik

Nr. 123 Tennevik

Nr. 125 Stav

Nr. 144 Vre

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 10

Nr. 151 Stle

Nr. 149 Stav

Nr. 153 Gyl

Nr. 154 Brudal

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 11

Nr. 157 Srheim

Nr. 155 Vigrestad

Nr. 158 Orre

Nr. 156 Rege (Scale 1/2)

Pl. 12

Nr. 159 Tjtta

Nr. 160 Vigrestad

Nr. 161 Rykkja

Nr. 162 Gjrv

Nr. 163 Kleppe

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 13

Nr. 164 Pollestad

Nr. 167 N. Braut Nr. 165 Nese

Nr. 168 Rege

Nr. 169 Vigrestad

Nr. 170 Tonnes-Holan

(Scale 1/1)

Pl. 14

Nr. 171 "Jren"

Nr. 173 Nese Nr. 172 S. Braut

Nr. 174 Vasshus

Nr. 175 Tjtta

Nr. 177 Erga (Scale 1/1)

Pl. 15

Nr. 179 Sola

Nr. 180 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 181 Skjeggesnes

Nr. 182 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 183 Gunnarshaug

Nr. 184 Hysstad

Nr. 185 Leirbekken

Nr. 186 Grindheim

Nr. 187 Sola

Nr. 188 Sola

Nr. 189 Rege

Nr. 190 Vespestad

Nr. 191 Storasund

(Scale 1/1)

Pl. 16

Nr. 193 Storesund

Nr. 196 Kleppe Nr. 195 Skren

Nr. 194 Sola

Nr. 197 Kjrrefjord

Nr. 198 Ryen

Nr. 199 Dromnes Nr. 200 "Jren"

(Scale 1/1)

Pl. 17

Nr. 201 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 202 Anda Nr. 208 Bringsjord Nr. 205 Tjora

Nr. 209 Skren Nr. 204 Skadberg Nr. 203 Sola

Nr. 206 Nyheim

Nr. 214 Svenes

Nr. 215 Holen

Nr. 216 rsland (Scale 1/1)

Pl. 18

1/2 Nr. 218 Madla

1/4

1/2 Nr. 217 Blindheim 1/2 Nr. 219 Eia

1/2 Nr. 220 Nrland

Pl. 19

Nr. 222 B

Nr. 221 Hognestad

1/2 Nr. 223 Pollestad

1/2

1/2 1/2 Nr. 224 Holen 1/2 Nr. 226 Vik

Nr. 225 Sola

1/4

1/2

Pl. 20

1/2 Nr. 227 Tonnes-Holan

1/2 Nr. 230 Jsund 1/2 Nr. 228 Hodne

1/2 1/2

1/2 1/4 Nr. 229 Sola

1/4 1/4

Pl. 21

Nr. 234 Rimbareid

1/2 Nr. 231 Meberg

1/2 Nr. 232 B

1/2 1/4 Nr. 233 Tonnes-Holan

1/4

1/2

Pl. 22

1/2

1/4 1/2 Nr. 243 Gunnarshaug 1/4 /Gunnarshaug I 1/4 Nr. 242 Gunnarshaug /Gunnarshaug I Nr. 244 Hodne /Hodne II

1/4 Nr. 240 Storesund /Storesund I 1/4

Nr. 241 Vinje 1/2 Nr. 237 Nordhuglo

1/4 Nr. 238 Tonnes-Holan/ T-H VIII

1/4 Nr. 239 Hyland

1/4

Nr. 235 Nedre Hauge /Reheia III

1/4 Nr. 236 Sola/ Sola II

Pl. 23

1/2

1/4 Nr. 249 Anda /Anda III

1/4 Nr. 248 Vanvik

1/4 Nr. 251 Friestad

1/4

1/4
Nr. 246 Vg

1/4 Nr. 247 SndreHolme

Nr. 250 Skeie

1/4
Nr. 245 Lekve

Pl. 24

Nr. 257 "Haugesund

Nr. 252 Bore

Nr. 258 Aursjen

Nr. 256 Lista Fyr

Nr. 255 Tomsvik

Mould 2b Slottsvik

Mould 2a Slottsvik

Nr. 253 Ulstein

Nr. 254 Sandnesenget

(Scale 1/4)

Pl. 25

Nr. 260 Sola /Sola V

Nr. 262 Pitsusmurust

Nr. 259/360 Vest-Hassel

Nr. 261 Karlebotn

Nr. 264 Lebesby Nr. 266 Bogen Nr. 263 Skotnes (Scale 1/1) Nr. 265 Geite

Pl. 26

Mould 7 Jarfjord Mould 6 Jarfjord

Mould 8 Vektarlia

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 27

1/4 Nr. 270 Anda /Anda I

1/4 Nr. 269 Lista

1/2 Nr. 274 Stjerny

1/4 1/2 Nr. 273 ri

1/4 Nr. 271 Svoll 1/2 Nr. 272 Haugesund

1/1 Nr. 275 Eggesben

1/1 Nr. 276 Lunde/Lunde II

Pl. 28

Nr. 277 Rege /Rege I

Nr. 278 Utne

Nr. 281 Sola /Sola I

Nr. 279 Lura Nr. 280 Tonnes-Holan /T-H III

Nr. 282 Tonnes-Holan /T-H IX

Nr. 285 Nord Sunde /N Sunde

Nr. 286 Srheim

Nr. 287 Srheim

Nr. 283 Tonnes-Holan /T-H VII

Nr. 284 Myr

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 29

1/2 Nr. 290 Revheim 1/2 Mould 1 Olset

1/4 Nr. 288 Gruda

1/4 Nr. 289 Madland

1/2 Nr. 295 Undheim

1/2 Mould 4 Ullensvang 1/2

1/2 Mould 5 Skrivarhellaren

1/2 Nr. 291 Hogstad 1/2 Nr. 292 Madla 1/2 Nr. 293 Brastadvatnet 1/2 Nr. 294 Re

Mould 3 Engvik

Pl. 30

Nr. 299 Smme

Nr. 296 Hol

Nr. 297 Vigrestad

Nr. 298 Kaldafjell

Nr. 300 Haugvaldstad

Nr. 301 Fosse

Nr. 318 Orre

Nr. 302 Srnesje

Nr. 303 Utvik

Nr. 304 Svenes

Nr. 305 Svenes

Nr. 317 Fiskvik

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 31

Nr. 319 Hiksdal

Nr. 320 Nestb

Nr. 321 Orre

Nr. 322 Skeime

Nr. 326 Hoddy Nr. 323 Tjelflt Nr. 324 Selevatnet (Scale 1/2, nr. 326 1/4) Nr. 325 Gunnesyan

Pl. 32

Nr. 327 ygarden

Nr. 328 Giskeydgarden

Nr. 329 Reve

Mould 10 Gullvika

Nr. 330 Snsa

Nr. 331 Jamkre

Nr. 332 Srheim

(Scale 1/2, nr. 332 1/1)

Pl. 33

Nr. 333 Revheim

Nr. 335 Re

1/2 Nr. 336 Tu

1/1 Nr. 337 Revlan

1/1
Nr. 343 Tonnes

2/1 Nr. 339 Aust Bore/ Bore I

2/1 Nr. 342 Tjtta

1/1 Nr. 345 Stav

Pl. 34

1/1 Nr. 355 Storsandan

1/1 1/1 Nr. 356 Gunnesyan Nr. 364 B /B II

1/1 Nr. 359 Dving

2/1 Nr. 372 Skrivarhellaren

2/1 Nr. 371 Skrivarhellaren

2/1 Nr. 373 Skrivarhellaren

Pl. 35

Nr. 381 Idse

Nr. 382 "Haugesund"

Nr. 383 Line

Nr. 384 "Thune"

Nr. 385 Hole

Nr. 386 Trland Nr. 387 Indergrd

Nr. 388 Heggdalsvik

Nr. 389 Gravh

Nr. 390 Voll

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 36

Nr. 391 Steine

Nr. 392 Steine

Nr. 393 Fevg

Nr. 394 Hheim

Nr. 395 Kvle

Nr. 396 Blindheim

Nr. 397 Blindheim

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 37

Nr. 400 Veen Nr. 398 Bersagel

Nr. 402 Lomen

Nr. 403 Lista

Nr. 404 Hauge

Nr. 405 Hove

Nr. 399 Vevang

Mould 28 Voile

Nr. 406 "Jren"

Nr. 407 "Orty"

Nr. 408 Helleve

Nr. 409 Time

Nr. 410 Skjrestad

Nr. 411 Tu

Nr. 412 Randaberg (Scale 1/2)

Nr. 413 Vge

Nr. 414 Reins

Pl. 38

Nr. 415 Tjelta

Nr. 416 rekol

Nr. 417 Kvanngardsnes

Nr. 418 Lgsand

Nr. 420 Hofset

Nr. 419 Viset (Scale 1/2)

Pl. 39

Nr. 421 Lunde

Nr. 425 Raknes

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 40

Nr. 426 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 427 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 428 Auran

Nr. 429 Fisk

Nr. 430 Austrtt

Nr. 431 Simonnes

Nr. 432 Vedvika

Nr. 433 Revheim

Nr. 434 Grafts

Nr. 435 Eikrem

Mould 12 (and reconstruction)

Nr. 436 Tonnes-Holan

Nr. 437 Movollen

Nr. 438 Volden

Nr. 439 Indre Oppedal

Nr. 440 Orre

Nr. 441 Knivsland

Nr. 442 Svik

Nr. 443 Smme (Scale 1/2)

Nr. 444 Grude

Nr. 445 Nes

Nr. 446 Hagen

Pl. 41

Mould 16 Nyhamar (A)

Nr. 447 Midtre Vere

Nr. 448 Syland

Nr. 449 B

Nr. 450 Nypan

Nr. 451 Bjrnes

Nr. 452 Seim

Nr. 453 Midtre Vere

Nr. 454 Fryland

Nr. 455 Nesheim

Nr. 456 "Bergen Museum

Mould 15 Skjeldestad

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 42

Nr. 457 Bjrgan

Nr. 458 Vlan

Nr. 459 Farstad

Nr. 460 Ulla

Nr. 461 Sln

Nr. 462 Mlster

Nr. 463 Rosendal

Nr. 464 vre Berge

Nr. 465 Kasset

Mould 22 Tjesseim

Nr. 466 Ystines

Nr. 467 Vemestad

Nr. 468 Hovde

Nr. 469 Nyhus

Nr. 470 Sekkenes

Nr. 471 Sylte (Scale 1/2)

Mould 25 Randaberg

Nr. 472 Gyl

Pl. 43

Nr. 473 Skatval

Nr. 474 Frisvoll

Nr. 475 Brve

Nr. 476 Anda

Mould 18 Eide

Nr. 477 Idse

Nr. 478 Mren

Nr. 479 Sakstad

Nr. 480 Stav

Nr. 481 Stav

Nr. 482 Lom

Nr. 483 Srb

Mould 21 Forsand

Mould 20 Gar

Nr. 484 Kvamsy

Nr. 485 "Trondheim Museum"

Nr. 486 Ingdalen

Nr. 487 Hyland

Nr. 488 Sola

Nr. 489 Skeibrok

Nr. 490 Hegreberg

Mould 11 Grtavr

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 44

Nr. 491 Eggjan

Nr. 492 Erstad

Nr. 493 "Sola"

Nr. 494 Myklabust

Nr. 495 Hana

Nr. 496 Hananger

Mould 14 Eide

Mould 26 Vestre Goa

Nr. 497 Krokan

Nr. 498 "Bergen Museum"

Nr. 499 Gunnesyan

Nr. 500 Gunnesyan

Nr. 501 Rindary

Nr. 502 Hustad

Nr. 503 Trondenes

Nr. 504 Lundset

Nr. 505 Liland

Mould 24 Brualand

Mould 23 Stangeland

Nr. 506 Krokan

Nr. 507 Tustervatn

Mould 13 Litleb

Nr. 508 Stav

Nr. 509 Stav

Nr. 510 Noggva

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 45

Nr. 511 "Bergen Museum"

Nr. 512 B

Nr. 513 vrebust

Nr. 514 Skorgen

Mould 17 Nyhamar (B)

Nr. 515 Gar

Nr. 516 Hiksdal

Nr. 517 Sunndalen

Nr. 518 Storfosen

Nr. 519 rnes

Nr. 520 Myklebust

Nr. 521 Skorpen

Nr. 522 sjorda

Nr. 523 Halsa

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 46

1/4 Mould 2 Slottsvik

1/2 Mould 1 Olset

1/2 Mould 3 Bremsnes

Pl. 47

Mould 4 Ullensvang

Mould 5 Skrivarhellaren

Mould 6 Jarfjord (A)

Mould 7 Jarfjord (B)

Mould 8 Vektarlia

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 48

Mould 11 Grtavr

Mould 10 Gullvika

Mould 13 Litleb

Mould 12 Foss

(reconstruction)

Mould 15 Skjeldestad Mould 14 Eide (Scale 1/2)

Pl. 49

Mould 16 Nyhamar (A)

Mould 17 Nyhamar (B)

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 50

Mould 18 Eide Mould 20 Gar

Mould 19 Opedal

Mould 21 Forsand

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 51

Mould 22 Tjesseim

Mould 23 Stangeland

Mould 24 Brualand

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 52

Mould 25 Randaberg

Mould 26 Vestre Goa

(Scale 1/2)

Pl. 53

1/1 Mould 28 Voile

1/1 Mould 29 Kjelmy

Pl. 54

1. Tjrnemark, Holbk C., Denmark (from AK 988); 2. Manhorn; 3. Brockhfe; 4-6. Bleckmar; 7. Ripdorf (2-7 all from Niedersachsen, from Laux 1972: nr. 112, 120, 125, 128; 1976: 225, 345); 8. Vigrestad (scale 1/2)

Pl. 55

3 5

1-2. Tennevik (nr. 122-23), 3. Trondenes (nr. 124); 4. Torstorp, Kalmar C. (from Minnen 1274); 5. Grnhult, Skne C. (from Hildebrand 1891); 6. Vilsted, lborg C. (from Janzen 2008: Taf. 8) (scale 1/2).

Pl. 56

Nr. 222 B

Left: artefacts from burial C at Albertsdorf, Ditmarschen C., Germany (from AK XVII: 9005C). Right: dagger from B (nr. 222, bur. 88) (scale 1/2).

Pl. 57

1. "Skne" (from Old.1127), 2-3. Steine (nr. 391-92); 4. Nitriansky Hradok (from Mller-Karpe 1980:Taf.294), 5. "Skne" (from Old.1359), 6. Steine (nr. 67), 7. Frommestad, rebro C., 8. Olofsborg, Kalmar C. (7-8 from Minnen 796,800), 9. Vevang (nr. 399) (scale 1/2, exept nr.4 not to scale)

Pl. 58

Above: Slab and bronze assemblage from Anderlingen (reworked from Laux 1974: Taf. 100A and Wegner 1996: p.412). Below: slab from Rishaug, Sr-Trndelag C. (reworked from Marstrander & Sognnes 1999: Fig. 4). 9) (not to scale)

Pl. 59

1 2

11

10

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

1, 3,13, 19. Fiskeby; 5,7. Leonardsberg, stergtland C., (reworked from Norden 1925: Pl. LXV, XCII, LXXXIV); 2. Urnes, 18. Unneset, Sogn & Fjordane C. (reworked from Mandt 1991: fig. 4.4, 12.29); 4 and 12. my IV.1-2; 6. Nag I , Rogaland C. (reworked from Fett & Fett 1941); 8 and 11. Rkke (Rykkja) XI (reworked from Sognnes 2001: Fig. 72); 9-10. Evenhus, Nord-Trndelag C., (reworked from Gjessing 1936: Pl. LXXVII); 14 . Herrebro, stergtland C. (reworked from Norden 1925:Pl. CXXII); 15. Villfara, 16. Kivik, Skne C. (reworked from Marstrander 1963: fig. 45); 17. Hmsta, Uppsala C. (reworked from Coles 1994: fig. 18b).

Pl. 60

4 5

10 8 6 7 9

15

16 14 17

11

13 12

18

1,6-7,10-13. Seima; 2,14-15. Turbino, 3. Rostovka, 4. Elunino, 5. Dzumba, 8. Galich, 9. Perm; 16. Mould 8; 17-18. mould 6-7; (1-5, 7-9 reworked from Parzinger 1997; 6,13-15. reworked from Chernykh 1992: fig. 73-4; 10-12 reworked from Tallgren 1915b: fig. 1, 10-11) (scale 1/4).

Pl. 61

6 2 3 4 5 7 8

10

13 11 12

14

1-6, slate projectiles. 1. Vge, Mre & Romsdal C. (B 12840); 2. Nordpoll, Sogn og Fjordane C. (B 10334); 3. Bud, Mre & Romsdal (T 10394); 4. Tingvoll, Mre og Romsdal C. (T 6640); 5. Mykletun, Hordaland C. (B 8948); 6. Solasanden, Rogaland C. (B 3960); 7. Pitsusmurust (nr. 262); 8. Tierp, Uppsala C., Sweden (from Ekholm 1921: fig. 10); 9-10. Seima, Russia (from Chernykh 1992: fig. 73); 11. Laukaa, Finland (from Meinander 1954: Taf.11a); 12. Pielavesi, Finland (from Meinander 1954 : Abb. 25); 13. Hesselby, Uppsala C. , Sweden (from Ekholm 1921: fig. 138); 14. Lusmasaari, Finland (from Meinander 1954: nr.93). (Drawings 1-7 . Engedal). Scale 1/2.

Pl. 62

Soapstone moulds. 1. Kemi, Finland (from Meinander 1954: Abb.10); 2. Randaberg (M 25); 3. Tjesseim (M 22); 4. Luusuavaara, Rovaniemi, Finland (from Bakka 1976: 12, Pl. 13). Scale 2/5.

Pl. 63

10

11

12

13

14

1-2. Galich, Russia (from Tallgren 1911); 3-4. Stockhult, Skne C. (from Montelius 1917: nr. 981); 5. Scheren., Poland (from Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: fig. 120C); 6. Dvlek, Turkey (from Mller-Karpe 1982: Taf.176) ; 7. Skne, Sweden (from Old 2149) ; 8. Rostovka, eastern Russia (from Kohl 2007: fig. 2.26); 9. Falkping, Sweden (from Jacob-Friesen 1967: nr. 221); 10-12. Borodino, Ukraine (from Hachmann 1957: Taf. 67); 13. Kaskeloukte, Sweden (from Bakka 1976: Pl. 2.7); 14. Bogazky, Turkey (from Mller-Karpe 1994: Abb.3b). Not to scale.

Pl. 64

1 2

9 8 10 11

1. Srbyn; 2. Valtimo; 3. Isalmi; 4. Vadsjbcken, Norsj; 5. Rstrand; 6. Sandudden; 7. Hotingsjn; 8. Bgatrsket; 9. Gammle Uppsala; 10. Maaria, Finland; 11. Akonlahti, Russian Karelia. (1-3 reworked from Meinander 1969; 4,5,7 redrawn from images and sketches at SHM internet database; http://www.historiska.se/ (visted on 23.05.09); 6. redrawn from Christiansson 1973: fig.2; 8-9. from Bakka 1976: Pl. 3; 10. from Meinander 1954: Taf. 11c; 11. reworked from Tallgren 1936: fig.22.6). Scale 1/2.