I went to meet the vikings exhibition and it was bad...

Recently one of my favorite museums - the National Museum in Copenhagen had rearranged its Viking age exhibition. Unfortunately the result is really just designed to entertain tourists and is reinforcing the wrong stereotypes about the Viking age.

Starting with the name witch quite lose use the word “Vikings” without any thought put into who they are showcasing ending with the selection of items on display this four room gallery is a disaster from a point of view of an archaeologist. Visually stunning but devoid of any true meaning photos dominate the gallery, accompanied by short texts in which curators try to smuggle some knowledge but are clearly loosing to do so. The disappointment is greater since the same museum at the time houses a genuinely more informative and educational exhibition about 20th c. Mongolia than it manages to pull off trying to present the last period of Danish prehistory. The fact that the museum arranged the start of the exhibition with the premier of quite frankly quite bad show “Vikings” is really just adding an insult to injury, as the show had in my opinion pushed the public awareness and research scope of new project at least 15 years back.



Starting with the world “Vikings” – it is a term without the meaning, it does not describe an ethnicity or the occupation. Material culture of Scandinavia, as well as burial rituals clearly point to large regional differences. It is a blanket term used to grab attention.

Then on the way in you see a large photo of a seer – reconstructed on a basis of the content of a grave with presumable staff for sorcery. These graves are highly problematic in my opinion – in short, their content does not match to the Icelandic sources describing semi nomadic life style of the presumable seeress, housing a large number of tools for domestic craft activates, items related to elite aristocratic spheres, not to mention their usually quite prominent position in the cemeteries. I am not going to write about the bersekers in horned helmets who are also there.



Than we can progress into more rooms filled with gold and inaccuracy quite well described by S.Sindbeak (https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/A40E54491325BC2E3951F975F6452708/S0003598X19000012a.pdf/meet_the_vikingsor_meet_halfway_the_new_viking_display_at_the_national_museum_of_denmark_in_copenhagen.pdf). Reinforcing the focus on the Vikings as the warrior aristocracy, which is just one facet of the quite diverse and dynamic society. There is no chronological progression, no description of processes taking place during this quite turbulent times.Artifacts and photos of artifacts from different places are just mixed to provide the most impact on audience. It is just a fan service for reenactors and Viking fanatics, however it resonates well with what dominates the current research agenda, that focuses on sensational, sacrificing the necessary ground work that should go into reanalysis of older excavations and towards developing more source critical approaches to the work with material culture. 



I am sure that these very fake images will sale very well but the damaged they do is probably not possible to fix. For years there were many attempts towards produce more nuanced picture of the Late Iron Age that are now in my opinion in serious trouble – from one side “sabotaged” by such a flashy uninformative exhibition, from other thwarted by the very sensationalist research that currently seems to have it center in universities in Central Sweden – what is surprising, taking into consideration the very moderate and highly theoretical approach that was characterizing the Swedish archaeology in late 90’ and early 00’. I hope that the strong reaction of scientific community will be enough to save the studies of the Late Iron Age in Scandinavia because right now we are catering to the lowest ideas of public imagination instead of trying to present new content in responsible and more "scientific" way. We should not try to create a "Viking" Disneyland which seems to be the idea behind the majority of recent viking themed exhibitions.

Finally, an article published.

I managed to finally published an article -  Pyre-Related Material in Inhumation Graves: Investigating Traces of Viking Age Biritualism in South-Western Scania. Here is the abstract:

The article discusses and briefly describes the inclusion of cremated remains in the inhumation burials dating to the Viking Age discovered in six locations in south-western Scania. Previous interpretations, linking the material to human funerary sacrifice and the cult of Odin, are discussed. A new perspective is proposed, focusing on the transformative nature of the burial and on its role in establishing the identities of the mourners, with special attention directed towards New Kinship studies. Ideas for further research are presented.

If you are interested in the subject, just pick up Lund Archaeological Review 22 (2016) or follow this link https://www.academia.edu/35785549/Pyre-Related_Material_in_Inhumation_Graves_Investigating_Traces_of_Viking_Age_Biritualism_in_South-Western_Scania

some comments on: A female Viking warrior confirmed by genomics

After a long break of not publishing new content I think I should return to share my thoughts about the recent results of DNA analysis of the skeleton form the grave 581 from Birka. I am disregarding the part of the discussion related to fact that there seem to be a bit of the mess with the bones bags, as I am quite sure that no one would publish an article if they would not have been 100% sure that they have the right bones.

I am quite thrilled by the results and I am hopeful that they will have a positive impact on the field of viking age mortuary studies but I am quite far from reaching the conclusions presented in the paper A female Viking warrior confirmed by genomics. 

To quickly present my views about it I have to say that its hard scientific part seems to be ok, with the description of methods and good presentation of the results with assorted graphs and tables as well as comprehensive additional materials that provide even more detail. 

The part that is in my opinion surprisingly weak, taking in to account that Neil Price, Torun Zachrisson and Charlotte Hedenstierna - Jonson are the co-authors, is the social archaeological part. Prof. Hedenstierna - Jonson is an expert on Birka and on weapon graves and for some people prof. Price might be considered a leading authority on viking age burial customs, what is a source of my confusion regarding following:

1. WHY ON EARTH EVERYONE ASSUMES THAT BURIAL GOODS ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED? In 2017?? :D To elaborate a bit, what is found in the grave is always a selection of items that organisers of the funeral seem fit for some reason to be included in the burial and also sometimes tools required for the success of the ritual. They might not be related to the occupation of the dead Person. For example, in eastern Denmark there is not many graves with weapons, but as archaeologist we don’t assume that there were not many warriors there. There seem to be quite a lot of weapons in burials around Birka, and they seem to play important part of local burial ritual, it is still really impossible to say that all of that people were warriors. I am not employing a double standard here, I am against connecting straightforwardly weapon graves to warrior graves in cases of every sex. There is a lot of research about weapon graves in Anglo Saxon England and sometimes individuals to young to fight are buried with weapons. I think that possibly taken the whole early medieval Europe into perspective weapons should be viewed more as a status symbol - they were after all quite expensive.
2. Why gaming pieces mean proficiency in strategy and point to being a high ranking officer, if again, they might not belong to the poor buried person and also really what is the connection to playing games and being an officer and how it is visible in archaeological record, because this is really far beyond my reasoning?
3. Why there is no plan of the burial, just reconstructions, when the same plan is used as the argument to claim that there was only one skeleton in the grave? This is simply not fair :) I don’t know if I am a researcher anymore at this point, but probably people who are would appreciate a plan on which the position of the burial goods is visible, because maybe, the of the items meaning is in some way connected to where they were found in the grave. In the case of Kilnta grave or graves from Kaupang described on this blog the position of weapons might point to conclusion that they are not directly associated with the deceased individuals. In Birka some spears were found plunged into the burial chamber walls, suggesting their performative use during funerals. Some horses skulls were smashed, also pointing towards a dynamic ceremony that involves a sacrifice making a horse more of a ritual tool than an item. How without a description where what was found can we reach any interpretation on our own?
4. If there would be no weapons in the grave would the isotope analysis end up interpreted as a result of marriage with a non local man? I mean that how people usually look at female mobility in the Viking age :)
5. No information how is the burial dated, what happened at that time in the general area and how that events might have played a role in the burial and the choice of burial furnishings.
6. Two horses seems like a big deal, but horses are found in female burials in central Sweden (please don’t force me to go and search my bookshelf for references)

Probably the things that I am now making a bit fun of will be rectified in another article in a journal devoted more to archaeology. Both science and archaeological interpretation are equally important and require space and time to reach a good outcome, here archaeology got too neglected. I think that when the space is to little to discus in detail a controversial idea, it might be smarter to stick to publishing the Genomic and Osteological results, without going to far in to their social consequences. 

Maybe the conclusion should be that two hypothesis are possible: a) This is a female warrior buried with weapons or b) because it is a woman buried with weapons, possibly having a sword in a grave does not signify a warrior (ekhem - lack of physical trauma in weapon graves around the site mentioned in the article - ekhem).

However the positive side of the article is that it challenges the popular believe of very mainstream and modern division of labour between sexes and maybe will force people to think about the sex in the past in more constructivist terms. I would like to point out the fact that in some cultures it is ok for example for only daughter to perform social duties of a son. Maybe if we like to think about “vikings” (whatever they are) as forefathers of at least a part of european population, it is not necessary to think that their ideas of sex and kinship had to be exactly same as ours. Generally I believe that the article provides valuable data that can be used to reach much better conclusions in the future, if more factors are taken into account. I am quite sure that there will be a much bigger positive outcome from this publication, than just a media hype that it was causing couple of weeks ago.

Literature:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.23308/full

The trauma of popular science continues

Couple of weeks ago news story was published on popular scientific website:

http://sciencenordic.com/vikings-abused-and-beheaded-their-slaves

An interesting study of an interesting subject where bioarchaeology had proven not to show the expected results.  The research question probably was: does the individual interpreted as slaves present evidence of non local origin and mistreatment and/or peri mortem trauma? The answer is mostly not. :) Does it challenge the interpretation of burials as funerary sacrifice of a slave? Not really since according to the researchers slaves might be local and just shoved a little bit :). The problem of funerary sacrifices is more complex as it is connected to pretty much most of the controversial subjects in Viking age research. Here are some of the subjects that are not so obvious as presented in the article:

1.        We don’t know if we should treat Rus’ as phenomenon purely “Viking” and as such use ibn Fadalan and others as text to which we later find archaeological illustrations in Scandinavian material. The idea that the group consisted of people of different background is thought provoking and has been presented many times (among others: Hedenstierna – Jonson 2006; Urbańczyk 2014) and perhaps this should be mentioned in the short press release as…

1.       Accounts of Arab travellers form the majority of the written sources we have for the phenomena human funerary sacrifice (also mentioning wives and lovers as people who die during the funeral) and there a problem of translation of term Jaria arises, which can mean a young girl or a slave girl and it is both used in Ibn Fadalan’s account to describe the position of the sacrificed girl as well as the women who was performing the sacrifice (Petrukhin 2007). This creates a bit of a problem for interpreting their social position, even more since…

1.       We should not expect burials to mirror the social standing of the buried individual. Some people had this idea before, it didn’t worked out well, possibly we should start thinking in this way in Viking studies – we will have less witches, warriors and sacrificed slaves, possibly as well as blacksmiths but maybe we will have some  more interesting theoretical perspectives and present some thoughts that are more valid. To remind everyone once again, burial context is a result of a group effort of establishing and fixing the social identities of both the deceased and the participants (Oestigaard 2000; Ekengren & Nilsson Stutz 2009; Williams 2006; Graham 2009) – the identities are changed because of the event. And what complicates thing even more…

1.        According to some researchers we should not trust the narrative in Rigsthula (Simek 2006) – it is a late description and possibly not entirely applicable. The Viking age societies should be viewed as more complex with many other forms of dependency other than slavery.

1.        There are no criteria of how to recognize a slave in the grave presented in the text – this is just sad – since the text is about the burials with a slave. No clear definition makes the reasoning hard to understand. For my research minimal conditions for considering burial context as a result of funerary sacrifice is presence of remains of more than one individual, deposited as a result of primary rite in which one of them bears the traces of intentional violence that might have lead to his or hers demise. This is still not enough to make a solid claim but at least it is starting point.

1.             And the whole Scandinavia is treated as a homogenic area in which – if the sacrifices occur – they are all of the people of the same social standing and in similar context as in the ibn Fadalan narrative from the steeps by the Volga river. With the highly diversified burial customs across the peninsula, and with the recognition of the more local character of the pagan “religions” this seem highly unlikely.

Sadly this study seems to write itself in to the new narrative that claims that Viking age was presented as too gentle time period, a narrative that is in my opinion a reactionary approach to the critical studies that recognized the roots of the Viking age related scholarship in national romanticism and took adequate approach to modernise the subject and tried in some aspect to bring it up to date. In this research  stand a substantial effort is taken to prove the mistreatment of slaves and it is based at speculations at best. An example can be found here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/12/151228-vikings-slaves-thralls-norse-scandinavia-archaeology/  or  http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140926-vikings-norse-raiding-berserkers-scandinavia-winroth/ . This work is unfortunately plagued with source critical errors which were I hope the result of journalist writing something hip and short and not archaeologist looking for hype subject. I would never claim that people in medieval Scandinavia did not beaten their slaves or not mistreated them as they were not considered as persons in understanding of possessing an identity of a group member, but I at this date there is no evidence for any of the situations described in the popular scientific texts. Good research would rather look for the root of the problem – why the double burials discovered in Scandinavia so often are presented as the result of human sacrifice? What is the relation between the archaeologist, material sources and ancient text? When compared to other parts of Iron Age can we claim that Viking age was specially brutal?

In conclusion someone was beheaded and abused but we don't know if it was a slave or not, further we can't really tell with the currently aviable sources.

Literature

Ekengren, F. & Nilsson Stutz, L. 2009. I tillvarons gränsland. In: Ekengren, F. & NilssonStutz, L. (eds.). I tillvarons gränsland: perspektiv på kroppen mellan liv och död. Lund

Oestigaard, T. 2000. Sacrifices of raw, cooked and burnt humans. Norwegian Archaeological Review vol. 33 (1), 41–58

Graham, E-J..2009. Becoming person, becoming ancestors. Personhood, memory and the corpse in Roman rituals of social remembrance, Archaeological Dialogues vol 16(1), 51-74

Hedenstierna – Jonson Ch.  2006 Birka Warrior, Stockholm

Petrukhin, V. 2007 Viking Woman in Rus’: Wives, Slaves or ‘Valkyries’? In: Fransson, U., Svedin, M., Bergerbrant, S. Androshchuk, F. (eds.) Cultural interaction between east and west. Archaeology, artefacts and human contacts in northern Europe, Stockholm, 66 - 69

Urbańczyk, P. 2014 Bliskie spotkania wikingów, Wodzisław śląski

Williams, H. 2006. Death and memory in early medieval Britain. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Vikings Beyond Boundaries - Conference in Oslo – an overview from subjective perspective

In a couple of past days I was extremely lucky to attend a conference held at University in Oslo, dealing with the Viking influence outside the area perceived at their traditional homelands. I am very glad that I could participate in such a well organised event that brought together many top names in the “Viking” studies.

I am finally feeling that the way in which the “Vikings” are studied is changing in the directions that I find congruent with the ethical and theoretical approaches I try to keep in my research. I am quite sure that these ideas had been present in the academia for much longer period that I have probably initially expected and they are now taking the stage after a generational change. Here I would like to humbly present my opinions about the change I can see taking place in the research agenda

I agree  to some extent with views expressed by Dagfinn Skre in his presentation when he urged for more abandonment of the ideas of uniqueness of the “Vikings” and called for placing them in wider reference frames. I can observe that quite often research about the “Vikings” exist in a certain form of “bubble” in which only few processes are compared to similar developments taking place on a global sphere. I agree also that “Vikings” form now a part of a wider pop culture. The consequence is profound as this popular image that is formed on a base of research influenced by the idea of uniqueness and certain essentialistic qualities through mass media, makes its way to the mind of the people, from which some become later archaeologist and further strengthen “the mental boundaries” of the Viking age. This can be only challenged by certain self-awareness of the historical conditions in which the subject emerged and the present conditions in which it is currently analysed.

On a more general level I can see that there is a visible rise in the subjects connected to archaeology of identities. This is extremely pleasing as in my opinion social archaeology forms one of the most fascinating branches of research. Interesting concept was introduced by Neil Price, as he somewhat separated the pirates from the farmers, maybe placing the term “Viking” finally in its proper context. However, I must say it is very hard to evaluate his observations, due to the fact that detailed perspective is hard to present in short 20 minutes presentation, and large part of his concepts is based on interpretations of several sites which might be more problematic than could be presented. Another positive development is the turn towards observing the importance of the process of the burial rituals in the construction of the society and recognition of the “artificial” nature of genealogies. I am sure that this points to the necessity of new studies of the concepts of the old Norse idea of Kinship, possibly looking for its more “social” than “biological” aspects and its role in establishing social networks. A view that places family “blood” relations in a larger reference framework of other social bonds, not necessarily drawing a sharp distinction between those two categories seem now to be a paper we all need.

Clearly an interesting development is integrating the phenomena happening in the East with those happening in the West, since it was rather problematic in the past. Now the situation is more balanced and allows for more global observation and for tracing connections between the process taking place on both of the areas, that are just divided probably only by our contemporary mental boundaries. The only concerning observation is the small amount of papers about the Western side of the Southern Baltic, but this is probably due to the difficult research situation in the region, facing the language barrier and research tradition boundaries (also mental in their essence). However, as Hauke Jöns and Anna Kowalska presented they can be overcome, resulting with extremely interesting research.

To sum up, the whole event has left a very positive impression on me. Only two problems that I would like to see addressed did not appear: the class restricted nature of the most of the evidence from the Viking age period that results in certain predominance of descriptions small elite was not mentioned, as well as the applicability of the term “Viking” as a taxon that seems not to correspond with the situation in the past societies. However this subjects might not be regarded as falling into the scope of the conference, and as so, their omission cannot really be considered as problematic.

Repeat and Reheat - discussing the origins of the Viking age — once again from the British perspective.

It seems that year 2015 is the year in which British early medieval archaeologists decided to finally adres ideas put forward by Barnett (2008). I have to say, it is about time to wave good bye to the based on circumstantial evidence ideas of shortage of wives as a cause of Viking age rides. However I am concerned still concerned about how does the other British researchers question that concept.

A newest example is What really caused the Viking Age? The social content of raiding and exploration by the co-author of previously discussed article - S.P Ashby (2015). He discusses the powers of forgein objects in the process of creation of elite social identity and a mean of gaining status as a proof of bravery related to raiding and traveling activities. Utilizing a fashionable turn towards object agency (which is a very problematic issue in archaeology since it is very rarely defined in anyway in articles that utilize it) and object biographies in my view he recycle the concept that the Viking age was mainly caused by the need of young generation of warriors to prove themselves and gain status. It is not a new idea by any means but what had to be said, it is nicely repacked in some theoretical concepts. A lack of theory (except the topics of urbanization and emergence of states) is what plagues the Viking age research and introducing concepts well known in prehistory seems to be a good way forward.

What I find very much necessary to point out is that forgein exotic objects (but also transformed practices) made their way to Scandinavia before the Viking age, often ending up in burials. They attest that elites were well connected to their insular and continental counterparts. Inhabitants of the peninsula were not a band of savages that waited until 793 to pop up and introduced themselves to the civilized world. The key question is the scale of those contacts before the final decades of the 8th c. In my opinion the answer to that question does not lie in the Births Isles, but it is buried in archaeological store houses in Scandinavia, were results of many years of excavation awaits a careful examination. A key issue is identification of the fragmented glass material from so-called Central Places of south Scandinavia. Another important area in which origins of the Viking age, inexplicably defined as time of riding and extensive traveling could be sought are the southern and eastern coast of Baltic that seem to be witnesses to earliest example of different expeditions, both peaceful or warlike.

Ashby seems to finally recognize the elitaristic focus of viking age research, writing about warrior elite and their means of producing their social status. In my opinion the whole research that is connected to the viking age is biased towards the members of social elite. The definition of Viking Age as period of rides and trade expedition further places the focus on the prominent members of the population, that were able to afford an expense of going abroad and on the members of the costal urban communities that usually were the target of those travels. With this developments taking place the Viking age studies will further exclude the majority of the population. In my studies of rural burial grounds of South Western Scania - one of the most populated regions in early medieval Denmark, I have found out that there is no change in the burial customs during the transition from Late Vendel to the Viking age. What is even more puzzling - there aren’t much finds that might have derived from riding activities in western Europe. This would suggest a limited impact of the social changes brought by the Viking expeditions. This stands in strong contrast to areas of western Norway, most often discussed in research. The true changes starts to take place in South Western Scania in the 10th c. due to the creation of the Danish state by the Jelling dynasty - and then the Insular connections become more prominent, however still not on the cemeteries. Also the older central places, with a pre-Viking age continuity are abandoned and new centers rise to power. Viking age, defined as a time of raids and travels, with a strict chronological boundaries, have a very limited applicability in archaeology.

A source critical concern of mine is also the fact that author utilized mainly english or written in english literature. Also worrying is the time depth of the article, operating around the well established as the beginning of the Viking age, final decades of 8th that in my opinion seriously limits the potential for new discoveries.

literature: 

Ashby S.P 2015. What really caused the Viking Age? The social content of raiding and exploration, Archaeological dialogues 22 (1)

Barnett J. 2008. What caused the Viking Age?, Antiquity 82

Moving the non-existing brackets – comments on the reception of “Urban Networks and Arctic Outlands”

I have stated in the introduction to my master thesis that appeal to public is a very strong trait of the Viking age research. This can be an advantage but it sometimes contributes to clouding of judgement and over emphasizing the unimportant over the truly interesting in the eye of experienced researcher. I personally believe that it is the case with the public reception of STEVEN P. ASHBY’s, ASHLEY N. COUTU’s and SØREN M. SINDBÆK’s  article.

The paper presents the results of analysis of horn and bone material from three Danish sites of Ribe, Aarhus and Aggersborg. I cannot comment on the scientific part of the paper and discuss the issues of using the mass spectronomy, since I simply lack of knowledge to do so. I can however comment on how results are presented to the public and what seems to be over emphasised in the interpretation. Further I can question the sense of discussing certain issues.

The results of mass spectronomy had revealed that among other raw materials, the reindeer antler, non-local to the area of Southern Jutland was used in comb production in the early phases of the settlement at Ribe. This points towards the fact that the material had to be imported probably from Norway. The authors rightfully stress the importance of the discovery towards a shift of looking at the Viking age urban sites and their relation with the hinterland, pointing that it might have been less important than the longer connections (although I have to say that the reindeer related material seems not to form the majority of the materials used). It is also important that Ribe’s importance as a trading site is attested not only on the local but also non-local level. This discovery could point towards the discussion about the organisation of the supply chain and collection of the raw material in the comb production (partially touched upon in the conclusion), the status of the craftsmen (attached or independent?) or the level of the specialisation (although a lot of other data would be needed). Instead what we get is a discussion about the beginning of the Viking age and what was the impulse for it. Immediately the attention is shifted towards maritime travel and gathering the experience and expertise in it before the famous Viking expedition known from the historical sources. The pop cultural image takes over a relevant subject leading towards web headlines like here:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-05/uoy-st050715.php (“TRADE STARTED THE VIKING AGE!”)

http://sciencenordic.com/viking-age-began-denmark (My personal favourite: “VIKING AGE BEGAN IN DENMARK!”)

The big news suddenly is that now the Viking Age begins around 725. It is very problematic to present this kind of statement as a relevant discovery. First problem is that Viking Age is not an event – it is a modern category, quite frankly, it will begin whenever we decide to put it and will be triggered by whatever factor a person will chose. There are no objectively defined traits of the period, it all depends on how far into the past tracking origins of certain process we wish to go.  Here, authors point towards establishment of long over regional networks as probably decisive factor. I don’t see any reason why to focus on these particular craft remains as the proof that people were able to make long distance voyages by sea – Authors themselves point toward earlier Iron Age context, such as bog weapon offerings of non-local origin as a prove that people were able to move around. Researchers dealing with older parts of Iron Age point to the fact that Scandinavia was not isolated from the developments taking place in the continent, as people served as mercenaries within Roman legions and came into contact with the Huns. Ulf Näsman had argued for a regional and long term perspective on studying the Viking age already 15 years ago (2000). Sadly, most of his reservations still holds. Mhyre had argued (among other more controversial things) that petty kingdoms, existing before the Viking age were well integrated into continental political and trade system, pointing out that trade was conducted not only with luxury items, but also commodities (2000). Placing the historical narrations in opposition to archaeological remains to prove the earlier start of the Viking age seems to be unnecessary, as anyone interested in the subject probably already is aware of the discovery of the boat grave of Scandinavian origin at Salme in Estonia, that was dated to the beginning of 8^th c. (Allmäe 2011). Additional, there is early evidence of establishing of trading places in the eastern Europe with a substantial influence people of Scandinavian origin (Lind 2011; Lind 2012). The whole debate centres in the west, ignoring evidence from the other side of the Baltic.

This is a result of kind of Anglo-centric view which Scandinavian researchers must shed away, in which Viking age begins when the raids on the British Isle become possible or important. It is puzzling how easy we forget about the imports that pre-date the Viking age from that area, such as  claw beakers (Ljungkvist 2009) or ignore possible Scandinavian connections visible for example in Sutton Hoo burial (Woolf 2014). Additionally bigger control should be exercised over what do the journalists publish. There is a lot of evidence for mobility of people before the end of the 8^th century and probably it is necessary to place Ribe in a larger network of so called Wics (Näsman 2000) and also acknowledge that Franks, Anglo Saxons and Frisians were able to sail in good enough way to maintain connections between those sites already in the earlier period of the iron Age.

Literature:

Most important of all:

Ashby, S., Coutu, A., Sindbӕk, S. 2015 Urban Networks and Arctic Outlands: Craft Specialists and Reindeer Antler in Viking Towns, European Journal of Archaeology (online early access)

And:

Allmäe,  R. 2011. Human bones in Salme boat-grave I, the Island of Saaremaa: Estonia, Papers on Antrophology XX

Lind, J. 2012. “Vikinger”, vikingetid og  vikingeromantik, Kuml 2012

Lind, J. 2011. «Vikings» and the Viking Age, In: Gvozdetskaja, N., Konovalova, I., Melnikova, E., Podossinov, A. (eds) Stanzas of friendship: Studies in Honour of Tatjana N. Jackson

Ljungkvist, J. 2009. Continetal imports to Scandinavia: Patterns and changes between 400-800 AD, In: Quast, D. (eds) Foreigners in Early Medieval Europe: Thirteen International Studies on Early Medieval Mobility

Mhyre, B. 2000. The early Viking age in Norway, Acta Archaeologica 71

Näsman, U. 2000. Rides, Migrations and Kingdoms - The Danish Case, Acta Archaeologica 71

Woolf, A. 2014. Sutton Hoo and Sweden revisited. In: Gnasso, A., Intagliata, E., MacMaster, T., Morris, B. The Long Seventh century: continuity and discontinuity in the age of transition.

Full version of the thesis on Academia.edu - let the job hunt begin

Here is the link to my profile at Academia.edu, with full version of my master thesis and my cv. The thesis will be published soon online through official university pages as well. Enjoy.

https://independent.academia.edu/FranciszekSatalecki

Master Thesis abstract

Today I uploaded my master thesis for review. I have followed the usual a pattern. Step 1: use a pretentious titlle unrelated to the content: Death as an architect of societies. Step 2: add informative subtitle: Burial and Social identity during Viking Age in South-western Scania. Step 3: Profit.

Here is the abstract:

In this thesis I explore the subject on how burial was used by Viking Age population of South-western Scania to express their social identity. As opposed to most earlier research concerning Viking Age burials I utilise regional, mourner-centred and practice-based approach. I am following observations conducted for burials in Denmark by J. Ulriksen (2011), focused on traces of deposition of burned and unburned human remains in the grave fills, the practice of opening the burial and tracing the intersection and overlays of the graves. I have selected the graves from a catalogue of burials in South-eastern Scandinavia compiled by F. Svanberg (2003b) on a basis of displaying possible signs of those practices. In effect, burial grounds at Önsvala, Ljungbacka, Stävie, Norrvidinge, Trelleborg and Råga Hörstad were selected.

As I perceive social dimension as the most important in this thesis, introduction chapter starts with the definition of social identity as processual in nature, fluent and contextual. Identities are perceived as displayed through performance, following development in gender studies. I understand rituals as a privileged practice, following the theories of ritualisation. Graves are seen as a result of action, and as such, are analysed with

stratigraphic observations and observations derived from field anthropology. In the analysis of burial context, the written sources possess only limited significance. They are, however, employed to create a model of social relations in the Viking Age emphasising the importance of social connections for the perception of an individual as a person and his social significance. In the first chapter, I present the analysis of selected sites, their settlement context and highlight their importance as places, in which society is constructed during funeral

ceremonies. In the second chapter of the analysis, I explore the subject of deposition of cremated human remains in inhumation burials. Differences in practice are observed and its intentionality is attested. In the third chapter, I examine the intersections of graves and re-use of burial pits. The practice is viewed as intentional and its possible explanation – as related to the importance of certain areas of the burial grounds, or as the way of displaying social connection, is proposed. In the following fourth chapter, I analyse the deposits of unburned human remains in the fills of inhumation burials. I review critically the evidence for possible human sacrifice and present problems related to reliance on narrations provided by written

sources. In the last chapter, I describe the evidence for post-funeral interaction with burial context.

The conclusion, reached in the closing chapter of the thesis, is that the dead were, in fact, in an ongoing relation with the population of the living and through that interaction identities for both were created. The living benefited from possessing a genealogy and the dead were perceived as existing in altered state, as long as social memory of them prevailed. The graves should not be perceived as passive reflections of identities of the deceased and rather viewed in relation to living identities they supported, as they are phenomenons that

were subjected to change during the on-going process of identification. Final parts of the conclusion are devoted towards considerations about the practice-based theoretical approach for the excavation methodology and towards highlighting limitations of the thesis and problems that need further research

The thesis it self is far to long, and this can lead to it being a possible failure. I went at least three times over conventional page limit, but the problem was quite complex and I enjoy writting. Link to full thesis will appear when I will get my grade. Thruth be told, at this stage I don't even mind possible failing.

Stuff that I praticipated in when I was not writting about burials

A link to universitie's blog about digital archaeology, every student had to do something, this is our's group project:

http://nico-digitalarchaeology.blogspot.se/2013/07/amanda-sjobeck-franciszek-satalecki.html

Investigating the remains of “viking age” human sacrifices – on the example of Ljungbacka cemetery, Oxie hundred, Scania

Fascinating asigment for archaeology of religion course, from this version all footnotes are gone. You can grive for your lose in silience, because all additional examples listed there will remain a mystery until I figure out how to use blogger. This day may never come. The asigment is due on tuesday, so if you have any coments that might ifluence the paper, pleas do not restrain yourself.

Investigating the remains of “viking age” human sacrifices – on the example of Ljungbacka cemetery, Oxie hundred, Scania

In this paper interpretation of double burials, mass burials and depositions of human remains in viking age graves as human sacrifices will be critically examined, taking as a starting point of the discussion the cemetery at Ljungbacka. Theoretical approaches, focused on burial ceremony as a complex transforming process, where new identity for the dead is created (Beck - Danielsson 2007, 250; Ekegren 2006, 109; Mansurd 2006; 133; Oestigaard 2000, 42; Oestigaard 2006, 17; Williams 2008, 240) will be used, and focus will be placed on the descendants as agents, as well as on a social group as the overseer of the norms and structure (Ekegren 2006, 112; Nilson Stutz 2006, 96; Nilson Stutz 2008, 19ff, Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 27).

Structuring and legitimizing role of rituals and memories embodied through performance and materialized in monuments will be stressed as well (Hållans - Stenholm 2006, 431; Nilson Stutz 2008, 25; Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 37; Pedersen 2006, 351; Svanberg 2003a, 145). However, monument will not be perceived as a static resting place for the corpse (Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 2), but as an active spot, where different actions directed towards different outcomes took place (Beck - Danieslsson 2007, 269f).

Sacrifice is defined as an act of symbolic action that transforms the relationship of sacrificer, gods and the community by consecration of the victim (Oestigaard 2000, 42). The presence of the victim, that actually needs to be dispatched, will be the main difference between the sacrifice and other forms of ritual deposition (Berggren 2006, 303f). Funeral will be analyzed here as possessing both social and “religious” dimension (Fhalander & Oestigaard 2006, 5). Rituals will be understood in a manner characteristic for practice theory - as a social action that differentiate itself strategically from other social action, being a privileged practice (Svanberg  2003a, 146ff). Funerary rites will be understood as directed towards the certain outcome, in both social and religious dimensions. In the first case they will be seen as a mean to recreate and reestablish, or establish and create new social order (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 29) and in the second to transform the dead (Beck-Danielsson 2007, 250) to an ancestor and deliver the new being in his best condition to an optimal destination in the afterlife (Kristoffersen & Oestigaard 2006, 113ff).

Archaeological record will be considered here as the primary source, most accurate, since it can be viewed upon as materialization of the ritual practices (Nilson Stutz 2006, 95ff; Carlie 2006, 206). This record will be treaded as a basis for building a hypothesis based on the theoretical assumptions and models (Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 5). Written sources will be considered a source of secondary importance.

The main reservation towards this kind of record are drawn from the nature of the old norse religion. The term “religion” was an foreign concept for old norse society, matters of belief were a part of term forn siđr that encapsulated legal customs, ownership marks and general rules of behavior (Andrén et al. 2006, 12). These ideas probably were highly differentiated on levels of chronology, regionally, social hierarchy and individual concepts (Schjødt 2009, 10ff). The written sources, such as eddaic poems and sagas, written down on Iceland after conversion to christianity probably reflect the ideology of the upper-class of society (Schjødt 2009, 15) and are definitely male biased (Beck - Danielsson 2007, 30). Probably the same can be stated about the other category of used written evidence - the medieval scandinavian law codes, that might have posses some evidence about older legal customs (Sawyer 2000, 19). Third category of written evidence used in this paper are the relations of the arabic travelers and traders that encountered norseman, mostly in the area of present day Russia. The main problem with these account except the general distance from the area in question, is the fact that most probably all the writers had to use interpreters, what could lead to obscuring of the meaning of the witnessed action (Sawyer 2000, 28). Also they were focused on behaviors that they found strange and amusing.

Written accounts of human sacrifices

Researchers investigating the act of sacrificing humans at the “viking age” funerals most often use the relation of Ibn Fadalan, who described in detail the killing of a young girl on a funeral of Rus chieftain to interpret the double inhumation graves (Anderson 1960; 26; Hemmendorf 1984, 7; Ramskou 1965, 86; Samuelsson 1998, 15). Other arabic authors writing about the events of human sacrifices at the funeral ceremonies most often mention woman being burned on a pyre or buried alive (Jesch 1994, 118f).

From sources regarding the western part of Europe the description of god’s Baldr funeral in Snorri’s Strulusson Gylfaginning can be mentioned, when his wife, Nanna joins him at his funeral ship and dies and is later burned funeral pyre. After that Thor kicks a dwarf named Litr in to it. Another work done by the Icelnadic author was used to interpret the victims as parts of burial goods - the Ynglingasaga. where the Law of Odin describes that goods placed on the funeral pyre and the ones placed in the ground will be among the possession of the deceased when he reaches Valhalla (Ulriksen 2011, 162). In eddaic poem Sigurđarkviđa in skamma on the pyre with Sigurd and Brynhild five slave girls and seven high born servants are placed. The whole ceremony can be described as similar to a wedding (Petrukhin 2007, 68). There are many accounts of human sacrifices taking place out of funerary context, written down by christian authors. Thietmar of Merssburg describes sacrifices taking places in Ljere and Adam of Bremen writes about similar events at Gammla Uppsala. Saxo Gramaticus wrote about Norwegian jarl Hakon sacrificing his sons to ensure a positive outcome of a battle (Oestigaard 2000, 53).

I would like to focus on the evidence of ancestor worship in the written evidence, since it is often neglected, and the heroic and war related topics are stressed in archaeological interpretations. In Landnámabók and Erbyggja saga, where two settlers Thorlof Mostrar-skegg and his son Thorsteinn Torskabitr believed that after their death they will enter a special mountain, where they will leave and feast among their ancestors (DuBois 1998, 76). Landnámabók also describes the descendants of Aud the Deep Minded that began worshiping her, believing that they will join her in the hill in which she was buried. They made sacrifices and build temples for her (DuBois 1998, 76). From East Scandinavian context a similar case of a dead leader, who becomes worshiped was recorded by Rimbert in Vita Anskarii. The former subjects of a King Erick, living in the vaccinates of Birka, began building the temples and honoring him with the sacrifices, claiming that gods that own the land has elected him to join them (Sawyer 2000, 113). In the description of the funeral written by Ibn Fadalan, when the girl is lifted over a special construction she sees her dead master and her forefathers calling her to join them.

Studying of medieval law codes provides evidence of people using the grave to establish contact with the dead (Beck - Danielsson 2007, 249; Zacharisson 1994, 222) and many sagas the dead are described as active, living inside the burials (DuBois 1998, 77; Gansum 2008, 141). This can point to a conclusion that ancestorised dead played an important part in the pre-christian word view and were still integrated in the world of “living” (Beck-Danielsson 2007, 249; Carlie 2006, 209; Svanberg 2003a, 136). It will be argued that on this basis, human social identity was established in a relation to the dead, and the acts of deposition of human remains, among others at the Ljungbacka cemetery, can be viewed as ritualized materialization of a bond between a living descendant and an ancestor.

Being a free man in the viking society

Belonging to a family was a crucial aspect of social identity during the “viking age”, since the communities were composed of family groups (Varenius 2002, 249). The low social position of slaves was in fact caused by the fact that they were not protected as a part of the family (Brink 2008, 50) and act of freeing a slave was connected to publicly acknowledging him as a part of kin group on a ting site or later at the church (Sawyer 2000, 39). Because of the weak central administrative power, all legal matters were dealt by communities on a daily basis, and an individual had to really on his family group for protection and execution of his rights (Klamring 2010, 281).

This emphasis on community as a guardian of order is proven by the fact that the old Icelandic word for society in fact translates to “our law” (Svanberg 2003a, 130f). The law regulated matters like inheritance, marriage and penalties, but because community possessed also a spatial dimension, also matters like access to commons and outland resources. A piece of property that legitimize person as a member of the community and free person was Ođal (Svanberg 2003a, 131; Zacharisson 1994, 222). It is a complex term, that can be described as ancestral land, that have been inherited in the family for generations. It is regarded to be one of the most fundamental concepts in the mentality of the old norse people (Zacharisson 1994, 219ff). From medieval norwegian laws we can deduce that it was inherited mostly in a male line, daughters were supposed to inherit other part of the property, and always the oldest son was expected to receive the main family farm. The act of receiving the ođal was symbolized by son taking his father high seat, that was empty since his death and drinking a special “inheritance ale” (Zacharisson 1994, 220ff).

Site description

Ljungbacka cemetery lays in the northern part of Locarp, in the Oxie Hundred in Scania, 8,5 km from the current shore line, next to an ancient road and close to an older bronze age burial mound (Samuelsson 1998, 4; Samuelsson 2001, 81). Road was probably used since neolithics, connecting among others Lund and Uppåkra with the area of Trellborg (Samuelsson 2001, 90). Locating cemeteries near roads and older burial mounds was quite common custom during the late iron age in the southern Scandinavia (Pedersen 2006, 348ff). The visibility of the burial place seems to be of great importance (Svanberg 2003,5).

Cemetery was excavated on the rescue basis in four excavation campaigns between 1976 and 1987 however it was never excavated completely. It has been transformed into park that is protected archaeological area. (Samuelsson 1998, 4; Samuelsson 2001, 90). It should be noted that the site was a cultivated area  before the excavation campaigns took place and that could be seen as a factor limiting the preservation the cemetery. The fact that excavations were not conducted as a one project have lead to inconsistencies in reports that surely affected the interpretations (Samuelsson 2001, 90).

There are no well preserved “viking age” cemeteries in south-western Scania (Svanberg 2003b, 85). In case of Ljungbacka, even though conditions of preservation were far from perfect, many interesting observations have been made. In total 191 graves were excavated in which 31 were inhumations and 160 cremation burials, all of them were located around the burial mound, but only on the western part of the old road. The graves seems to form at least five small groups (Samuelsson 1998,8; Samuelsson 2001, 100). In case of Ljungbacka an idea was proposed to connect the groups with nearby settlements, by correlating chronologies of sites (Samuelsson 2001, 100ff). This seems to correspond to the normal practice in south Scancinavia, where cemeteries were supposed to be used by communities larger than family groups or single farms (Svanberg 2003a, 148). Another tempting interpretation, not excluding the idea of cemetery groups reflecting the spatial relations of society, would be the idea of groups of burials as a reflection of family groups.

The Ljungbacka cemetery on a basis of a small number of discovered artifacts and the presence of the hearth graves can be dated from the Vendel period to the end of the 10th century, with majority of the graves belonging to the “viking age” (Samuelsson 2001, 94-100).

Speaking about burial rites in south-west Scania one need to remember that only 44 inhumations can be dated to this period on basis of artifacts found in graves and another 2 have been dated using the radiocarbon dating. This means that there are no cremation graves that can be easily associated with the “viking age”. This fact may lead to the conclusion that the inhumation was a dominant burial custom in this area during this time period (Svanberg 2003a, 165-167)

In the case of Ljungbacka some of the cremation burials can be dated to the “viking age” because of their stratigraphic relation with the inhumation burials dated to this period (Svanberg 2003b, 87).

Another distinctive feature of the west Scanian burial custom according to F. Svanberg is the use of human sacrifices (Svanberg 2003a, 165-167). Ljungbacka cemetery seemed to be a proper choice to investigate that question with six graves showing sings of burial of more than one person (Samuelsson 1998, 14; Samuelsson 2001, 91ff) and thirteen showing traces of burned bones and of the funeral pyres residue either as mixed part of the burial pit fills or as distinguishable deposits (Samuelsson 1998, 16-18). To understand relation that occurs in the feature identified as a double burial it is crucial to make a distinction between simultaneous interment and accidental cutting of a newer grave in to older structure (Skaarup 1989, 4-8; Ulrikssen 2011, 187-188). Another category may be an intentional overlay of graves that may carry some religious and socio-symbolic significance. On the Ljungbacka cemetery there is no evidence of graves that are intersecting in way that could be explained as an accidental cutting in to the older structure, damaging older burial. This careful planing seems mysterious since no external monuments above the burials were recorded (Samuelsson 1998,18; Samuelsson 2001, 91).

Both cremations and inhumations could be double burials (Hemmendorf 1984, 11), but the focus in this paper will be placed on inhumations, since this type of burial was used most extensively when discussing the problem of “slave sacrifices in the viking age”. Moreover, detecting double cremation burials is extremely difficult (Randsborg 1984, 155). Some remarks on the interpretation of overlaying cremations over inhumations and burned human bones found in the fillings of burial pits will be presented. The closer examination of the graves, connected with hypotheses on the structure of past society might provide other interpretations than just slave sacrifice, that might be valid in a wider context of burial traditions of Scania and prehistoric Denmark.

Inhumation burials containing unburned human remains

As perviously mentioned, six inhumation burial was identified as mass grave or double grave (Samuelsson 1998, 14).

The inhumation no. 7 contained remains of an adult individual with remains of child’s teeth (Samuelsson 1998, 14). The remains were placed in a rectangular pit, from which 1,35 long and 0,60 m width trace remained. The pit was 12 cm deep when it was excavated. The grave was oriented on a line northeast - southwest. The skeleton of the adult was probably placed in the grave with bent legs. A spindle wholre was found in the grave (Samulesson 1998, 59).

The grave 21 was damaged during the excavations but it probably contained bodies of two adults aged from 18-25 and 25-35. The outline of the grave pit was 2,6 x 1.25 m and 10 cm deep. In the fill small stones were found and a black colored patch of earth with dimensions 50x30 cm in which burned bones were found. The bones of the skeletons were spread all over the pit, because of the disturbance during the excavation work. The grave contained relatively large number of grave goods: a bronze penannular brooch, two iron knifes, iron nail, a whole ceramic vessel, a whetstone of slate and an unidentified iron object (Samuelsson 1998, 60).

Another damaged during the initial stage of excavation grave - grave no. 23 contained two bodies placed one over another in an oval pit 1,65 x 1 m and 90 cm deep. The fill of the grave contained large amounts of charcoal and burned bones. One of the bodies, located in the upper part of the fill was decapitated and his head was placed between his legs. Body was oriented on axis southeast - northwest. The man placed in the bottom of a grave was oriented on axis northwest - southeast. That deceased was around 30-40 years old at the time of death. The body was placed on back. Near the skeleton, in the upper part of the fill two iron knifes and a whetstone were found. The man in the lower part of grave was equipped with iron spurs, iron buckles, a knife, two unidentified iron objects and an animal tooth (Samuelsson 1998, 60)

Similarly positioned skeletons were discovered in grave no. 24, that was destroyed by the latter digging activity. In the upper layers of the fill of the grave pit of a shape of rectangle with rounded edges and dimensions 1,65 x 1,05 m and 90 cm deep, parts of at least one skeleton were found, together with two concentrations of soot, charcoal and burned bones, from which some were human. Near the bottom of a pit another skeleton was found, lying on back with folded arms, probably it was a middle aged man. The grave was oriented on axis north - south, and in the higher parts of the fill a knife and two iron mounts were found (Samuelsson 1998, 60; Svanberg 2003b, 291).

The grave number 26 was considered to be a mass grave since it contained more than two corpses. In an irregularly shaped pit measuring 2,05 x 1,80 m and 80 cm deep, oriented southwest - northeast two bodies were found. One of a man buried on his stomach with spread hands and his head to the east in the eastern part of the grave. The other of partially preserved skeleton belonged to man buried on his back, probably with the head to the north. The first deceased died at age of 50-60 years and the second one was over 20 years old. Next to the older man a key, a knife and a whetstone were found, together with two fragments of unidentifiable iron object. Next to the skeleton of the younger man another partially preserved iron artifact was found. A small amount of burned human bones was found in the grave (Samuelson 1998, 61).

Below this irregular pit another feature, named 26b was found - it was a rectangular pit oriented east-west, measuring 2,05 x 1 m, and around 1 m deep. The discoloring signalizing the fact that the coffin was used, together with skeleton of a woman, aged 45-55, were found. Remains indicated that she was buried on her back. The coffin measured probably 1,65 x 0,65. An iron hair pin, knife, a white opaque glass bead, whetstone, spindle wholre and a bone needle were found in the grave (Samuelsson 1998, 61)

Grave 28 consisted of a rectangular pit oriented in direction of northeast - southwest with dimensions 2 x 0,9 m and around 1,1 m deep. In the fill which consisted of black colored humus earth, four stones measuring from 40 to 60 cm and pieces of burned bones, including belonging to human were found. In the upper part of the fill pieces of skeleton of a man older than 20 years where found. Under a packing of stones another skeleton, positioned on its back with head towards northeast was found. It belonged to a man who was 35 to 40 years old. Two unidentifiable iron artifacts, a knife and a whetstone were found in the grave (Samuelsson 1998, 61).

Originally only graves 7, 23 and 26 were described as simulations burials, and other three examples were described as later deposition of human remains or secondary burial (Samuelsson 1998, 16). However author does not explain reasons for this classification. Only way of solving this questions would be to re-examine the excavation reports, because alternative interpretations are possible in the light of a lack of good description of the stratigraphy of the burials in easy accessible publications. It is possible to argue that graves 23, 24 and 28 are of similar type, since they display similar features, as positioning of bodies on different levels, mixing of human bones in their fills and very similar pit dimensions, including depth.

At least eleven similar graves with one dead placed over another, are known from Denmark, with large concentrations on the Islands of Zealand and Langeland (Nielsen 1991, 261). From Scanian examples a similar grave was found in Fjälkinge, were in a burial upper part a decapitated skeleton was found (Samuelsson 1998, 14).

Traditionally, inspired by the description of funeral ceremony witnessed by Ibn Fadalan in the area of present day Russia, graves of this type were interpreted as a burial of master with a slave to accompany him to the afterlife (Anderson 1960; 26; Hemmendorf 1984, 7; Ramskou 1965, 86; Samuelsson 1998, 15) The slave in that case supposed to signify the wealth of the family that was able to afford such extravagant act as a human sacrifice (Samuelsson 1998, 15). There are very convincing arguments against this interpretation. In arabic sources a term that describes the girls who are sacrificed at the funeral ceremonies is jaria, what can mean a concubine, servant or a slave. To complicate the matter further, the same therm is used to describe the old woman who kills the girl in the Ibn Fadalans account of Rus funeral (Petrukhin 2007, 67). The graves are located at rural cemeteries, that might be interpreted as belonging to peasant communities, and as such are not a fitting place for a burial of chieftain but it must be noted that there are no burials found that indicate a large demonstration of wealth in south west Scania (Nielsen 1991, 261). It is possible that Scanian upper class disposed of their dead in a way that is untraceable by archaeological methods or the rank was displayed without the use of lavish burial goods. Samuelsson stressed the fact that the burials with the probable human sacrifice are among the best equipped at the Ljungbacka cemetery (1998, 15). The burials are still quite modestly equipped comparing to surrounding regions, and examining them as a part of a broader horizon, together with the danish examples might point to conclusion that the difference of status between the upper deceased and the lower (who is most often interpreted as the “master”) is not really big. Nielsen proposed an interpretation of the burials as the ones of ritual specialist, buried with their assistants, however he did not produced convincing evidence to support his idea (1991, 261).

Low status of the accompanying lower burial can be also questioned, paradoxically on a basis of the new research that claims to confirm it. In two double burials from Falkstad on Lofoten in Norway a complete skeleton and a decapitated one were found. All the artifacts retrieved from the burials were very modest. The analysis of stable isotopes from the remains found in before mentioned burials, as well other eight found on the site has been conducted. It is established that seven individuals, including the decapitated ones were living on diet that included mostly marine source of protein. Same diet was confirmed for two samples taken from a dog remains. Three individuals buried in two double and one mass grave displayed different dietary history, with higher terrestrial protein intake, with one individual showing a change towards marine diet at later stages of his life (Nauman et al.  2014, In press). The results were interpreted as displaying a difference in a rank between the people buried intact and the decapitated ones. This seems as a reasonable interpretation, however the researchers have clearly stressed a lack of difference between the decapitated people and people buried in single burials that contained some grave goods, what did not stopped them form labeling the decapitated individuals as slaves, on a basics of the questionable evidence of their intentional killing during the burial ceremony (Nauman et al. 2014, in press). The fact that the slave status is not necessary to be sacrificed or executed was observed by many scholars, and seems to contradict the research results (Randsborg 1984, 155; Wilson 2008, 34).

One way of escaping those problems it to acknowledge the theoretical developments in the mortuary archaeology. All the interpretations above still have a tendency to try to “read” the graves in a futile chase of individual social persona displayed through graves goods and burial methods, continuing the ideas of Lewis Binford (Ekegren 2006, 109; Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 7; Oestigaard 2006, 10f) or sometimes acknowledging the agency of the descendants but treating it only in lines of expression of wealth and social rank. Shift towards more dynamic approach can be  observed – shift that reads the burial as an outcome of a funeral which consisted of set of rituals, probably treated as a necessity (Fahlander & Oestigaard 2008, 6) to help the dead achieve a desired state and the destination (Ekegren 2006, 109; Kristofersson & Oestigaard 2006, 113). During this ceremonies a new being is created, that dissolves the boundaries between objects, animals and humans used in the burial (Beck-Danielson 2007, 267ff; Wiliams 2001, 206). This idea can solve the problem with interpretation of the burials. In light of these conceptions, the human sacrifice is just a part of a larger event, that can be viewed as propitory sacrifice, where the actual deceased, after the transformation can be seen as the thing or person actually received by gods or ancestors (Oestigaard 2000, 43). Following this theory, the “additional” body should be viewed as a materialization of a ritual practice, a part of “spiritual technology” (Beck-Danielson 2007, 265), not a grave good expressing the status. The meaning of the ritual is far beyond the reach of archaeologist (Nilsson Stutz 2006, 95) but focusing on what actually happened might provide researchers with useful ideas. In case of the inhumation graves from Ljungbacka, two scenarios can be proposed. One in a case if the grave can be regarded as a result of simultaneous deposition of two bodies from which one bears traces of intentional killing, and another that involves deposition of the human remains in the older grave some time after burial. Due to the lack of access to any kind of stratigraphical records both hypothesis are possible in case of all double burials.

If the the funeral ceremony contained an element of killing someone, his post-mortem status as a person of a lower standing might be assumed, since this person could be seen as being objectified, however this event alone do not convey any evidence about the person’s social standing during its life. Looking at the grave through the ideas of it being the outcome of intentional, ritualized, but at the same time directed towards an outcome, process it can be doubted if ranks should be discussed as new identity for the dead is created. The second hypothesis, discussing the other ideas about the “ritual deposition” of the human remains will be discussed further with ideas about the possible interpretation of the burned human remains in graves from Ljungbacka cemetery.

Burned human remains in the fills of the inhumations

Interesting phenomena was encountered in thirteen burials at Ljungbacka cemetery - different quantities of burned human bones were encountered in thirteen burials. In most cases the weight of human bones excavated from the fill is smaller than 10 g (Samuelsson 1998, 16). In the cremation graves found on the cemeteries this amount varied from less than one gram to 53,6 g (Samuelsson 1998, 32). Most of the burials that display that features are simply equipped inhumations. In some other cases there are least one cremation grave overlaying the inhumation. All of the overlaying graves are cremation pits, defined as a cut filled with humus, burned bones, soot, charcoal and in some cases grave goods. Burned bones were also noticed in the fills of the graves containing supposed human sacrifice (Samuelsson 1998, 16).

In couple of cases the burned bones were found in concentrations. The concentrations in grave no. 6 were very peculiar since they were rectangular, what might point to the usage of some sort of organic container for the remains. Similar features, but without identified human burned bones were found in grave no. 17 (Samuelsson 1998, 16). In cases where the secondary burial is unobservable the interpretation is the intentional deposition during filling the grave.

Often this kind of mixed material in the grave fill was interpreted as remains of older cremations destroyed by the inhumation grave (Samulesson 1998, 16; Ulriksen 2011, 189) and this is possible interpretation, but not in case of cemeteries without cremation graves or grave groups on the cemeteries that do not have cremation graves within them - as it is in case of Ljungbacka (Samulesson 1998, 16).

F. Svanberg in his work discussing the burial rituals in south-eastern Scandinavia proposed that the difference in status between cremation burials and inhumation burials in Scania is observable. Further he assumed that “lower” status of cremated individual is evident if the burial is situated in the fill of the inhumation grave, and that probably it was a slave cremated during its master funeral ceremony (Svanberg 2003, 89). It is a possible interpretation, but in my opinion unlikely, if more modern theoretical approach is used to the study of cremation burials.

The lack of esthetic appeal of inhumation remains, and the idea of cremations as an evidence of low scientific value had convinced numerous archaeologist that it is a “poor man burial” (Williams 2008 239-240). This focus on modest, empirically experienced remains fail to recognize them for what they really are - an evidence of a complex process, that occurs on a technological, social and spiritual level and has to be viewed as an act of transformation and probably creation of a being (Oestigaard 2000, 42; Williams 2008, 252f). Archaeologist focused on a burial have just access to a final step of a funeral, that consisted of series of rituals (Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 6), that could take place at different times and at different places, making the parts of ritual display even more efficient (Williams 2008, 246). In the case of cremations at least three stages can be proposed: cremation, intermediate period of varied length and the burial of the remains (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 44). Encountering the final stage of deposition of the remains, in his interpretation, Svanberg fails to recognize this temporal span that was probably tied to construction of the cremation burial, and focuses on its modest appearance and general lack of burial equipment. The difference between so called “pyre goods” and “grave goods” is well known to archaeologist, some artifacts were excluded from the deposition in the cremation graves. As concerning the lack of monumentality in the burial - the pyre can be considered as a temporary monument allowing the display of the deceased (Williams 2008, 246) in his “staged” appearance, that might have possessed some even more dramatic, interactive features. Another weakness of judging the burials according to the number and quality of grave goods is the fact that in his categories of burial equipment F. Svanberg focused on most durable goods like jewelry, weapons and riding gear, tools etc - mostly objects made of metal. This way of thinking excludes the idea that in some cases the burned earth and stone from the cremation site might have been considered as a grave good (Williams 2008, 243), as well as ignores the importance of perishable goods like i.e food (Beck-Danielson 2007, 271ff). This all indicated that the rank can not be judged on a basis of a choice between cremation or inhumation. There are however even more problems if we want to address the issue of simultaneous deposition of cremation remains and the creation of the inhumations.

Cremation can be viewed as a process that speeds up the natural transformations occurring in the cadaver (Nilsson-Stutz 2006, 23), removing the flesh, often considered as impure (Oestigaard 2000, 43), and bringing the remains to a state in which further transformation is unnoticeable, what can create a sense of transformed bones being ethereal (Beck-Danielson 2007, 252). Cremated remains in this state could have been kept without depositing them in the ground for long periods of time. The idea about the simultaneous deposition of the inhumations and cremation remains in their fills can be based on a fact that in most cases at Ljungbacka burned bones are deposited with the pyre remains (Samuelsson 1998, 13) and spread loosely in the pit. However, in the case of two burials - nr 6 and nr 17 the regular shape of cremation patches suggests that they were placed in the graves in a container (Samuelsson 1998, 16). It might be possible that remains of the pyre, as well as cremated bones were kept for later deposition in inhumation graves.

It is possible to question the idea of looking at the cremation remains deposited in the inhumations fills as a type of burial, or even to question interpretation of the “cremation graves” as the place where the dead body was deposited. Cremation of the human body produces from 1,500 to 2,500 g of remains, and in Scandinavia amount from around half of that weight to 10 g is found in graves. There is no clear definition of a cremation burial but the necessary items in distinguishing one are usually grave goods and burned human bones (Ulriksen 2011, 190). Archaeologist are pointing now days to many cases when human burned bones were excavated from other contexts than burials, mentioning cooking pits, hearths, property boarders, postholes and the thresholds of houses (Beck-Danielson 2007, 245). Since in newer approach towards mortuary archaeology transformative role of funeral is stressed I would argue that instead of looking for the individual with a status in a small amount of deposited cremation remains, it is necessary to turn the researchers attention to its probable other function than creating final resting place for the dead. Ethnographic research supports this idea with evidence of cremation remains being drowned in water, displayed above ground, kept at home, used to build statues and create portable artifacts or even being consumed (Wiliams 2008, 243).

On a basis of evidence of bones of unidentifiable species being used as a temper in ceramic vessels, (for example at Gudme) and the idea that bones, including human, might have been used in the process of carbonization of iron to create steel it is possible to argue that they might have been viewed upon as possessing transformational qualities or even regenerative power (Beck-Danielson 2007, 242ff). Two stories form Old Norse mythology comes to mind –first is the idea of world being created from the bones of Ymir and second the story of god’s Thors goats that regenerate themselves from their bones after being eaten. If the funeral should be viewed as implementation of “spiritual technology” with an outcome of incorporating the transformed dead to the society and a creation of special place of contact between the two worlds, usage of items with such powerful properties might have been necessary.

In the light of written sources two interpretations of the phenomena were proposed - a symbolical following of the Odin’s law or a faster way to after life. Another interpretation is looking at animal bones as remains of helping spirits (Ulriksen 2011, 191). Traces similar to described above were also interpreted as residues of cult connected to ancestors (Nielsen 1991, 251). I would like to  extrapolate this idea to propose different interpretation of the phenomena, proposing a function for it that might have been important for the social understanding of the funeral ceremony. It is beyond doubt that it carried cosmological meanings, however they might be beyond reach of archaeology. In the light of my hypothesis, deposition of burned, but as well unburned human remains in grave can be seen as legitimization of inheritance rooted in ancestral cult.

Performance of Kinship

The one of the most important ideas about ancient Scandinavian societies is the idea that being a part of it was a highly desired state. The idea of belonging seemed to have its spatial equivalent in the concept of Ođal, which possession made a person being counted among the free man (Svanberg 2003a, 132). Discussing the elaborate “ridders graves” from Denmark Nielsen introduced a concept that the ceremonies were used to stressed passing of a chieftains property to one person, who inherited it as a whole to prevent splitting of land (1991, 246-257). I would argue that element of stressing the inheritance and creating a traceable linage might be observable in less elaborately equipped burials from Denmark and Scania.

When a person dies it ceases to exist as a social being (Nilsson Stutz 2006, 23), and because its identity was created as a dynamic relation between the people (Mansurd 2006, 133; Oestigaard 2006, 14) a new relation between the new, transformed being created by the funeral ceremony and the society must be established in order to rebuild and restructure the society (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 29). By the rituals executed in a right way the new order gains a divine legitimation (Beck-Danielson 2007, 278; Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 10; Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 31, Savnberg 2003a, 145), and by experiencing participation an embodied memory could be created, that could help to internalize the recreated structure (Nilsson Stutz 2006, 25).

As living body do not posses an essential nature, only qualities created by culture and language (Nilsson Stutz 2006, 19) and qualities as gender have to been seen as a performance and I would argue that non essentialistic approach towards kinship is also needed. For it to be recognized, the bodies have to act according to social norms tied to a particular relation. Since the cadaver has a very limited abilities to “perform” his role as a kinsman this relation has to be stressed by the descendants. Cemeteries, as places occupying a visible position in the landscape connected to roads could be perceived as a perfect stage for this kind of “performance”. Funerals, as ceremonies that  probably gathered large part of community, could be used by descendants to play out the relations with the deceased (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 32).

Ownership of the land was probably tied to and marked by location of the grave (Zacharisson 1994, 220). This could been marked by overlaying one grave on the other, as a mean to construct the memory (Hållans - Stenholm 2006, 341), and this phenomena is known from central Sweden, where it occurs in burial mounds (Zacharisson 1994, 229), but also from “flat” cemeteries in Denmark (Ulriksen 2011, 186). This can provide a straightforward explanation for the cremation graves that were created in the fillings of inhumations as a later cuts at cemetery at Ljungbacka. A more nuanced approach is needed to theorize about the placing of burned remains in the fills of burial.

Since the “viking” society can be generally viewed upon as non-literate society a performance significance in creation of cultural boundaries and institutions must be stressed (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006, 37). Ritualization of certain places in the landscape and charging them with meaning might also be perceived as a mean to create a mnemonic device that can help to recall the   parts of the structure of society, including genealogy. In kinship based societies often the collective identity of the group is the most important (Mansurd 2006, 133). Genealogical links between the dead could have been stressed by deposition of cremation remains or body parts in the graves during the inhumation burials, materializing the bond between them and an agent performing the ritual. The bones might have been kept at homes, or might have been retrieved from the burials, since signs of opening of the graves have been found (Beck-Danielson 2007, 247). Monument created in the process could have been used as an evidence in judicial context, since later medieval sources describing the the conflicts over the inheritance of the Ođal describe people having to trace their genealogy back to the “burial mounds and paganism” (Zacahrisson 1994, 221). In this context remembering where who is buried was crucial.

Genealogies are often repeated in a sagas, when a new hero is introduced, his family connections are often described, also on rune stones the relation with the deceased is often stressed. In that context in can be clearly seen, that cadaver, transformed in some sort of ancestral being, forms a part of the framework that helps an individual to locate himself in the social structure (Beck-Danielson 2007, 267). The graves from Ljungbacka cemetery can be viewed as materialization of that framework.

Conclusion

By focusing on the funeral as a complex process (Fhalander & Oestigaard 2008, 6), abandoning the modern, “western” approach towards personhood and identity as autonomous and individual (Mansurd 2006, 133) and stressing the fact that trough burial rites a new being and place is created (Beck - Danielsson 2007, 269f) a new interpretations for set of burials from Ljungbacka can be proposed. It proves that the double burials can be interpreted differently than a sign of human sacrifice connected to the displays of status. The attempts to rank the buried men according to their position during their life might be misleading (Svanberg 2003b, 93f). Concentrating on the identity maintaing and creating actions that are done by descendants produces a possibility to create a model populated by the living, not staged buried beings that are the dead.

The model presented in this paper focused around the idea of inheritance of ođal and performing kinship should be viewed as preliminary. There are many shortcomings that needs to be addressed, starting from better examination of the archaeological records and reports to analyze the stratigraphy of the burials. A methodological reflection here is needed, and more attention should be paid to careful excavations of the inhumation fills in the future. The new studies have shown that in Denmark the burial ritual and cult of the dead might have left traces such as deposition of burned and unburned human and animal bones, re-opening of the graves to add more dead or to take something from the grave and creating overlaying burials (Ulriksen 2011, 200). Only detail documentation and careful and skillful excavation can illuminate those rites in more detail.

The new interpretation, since it is created on a basis of a model of social relations based on written sources shares their gender and social bias. Hopefully in the future it will be possible to created more multi voiced narration. The ideas proposed in this paper are focused on analyzes of rural communities, and since during the late iron age urban environments started to emerge the question of relation of their occupants to their dead and land would be a most interesting research subject to consider. In many cases the trading centers started as places occupied only seasonally, but as place visited by a large number of people they might have been consider a better “stage” to perform relations.

The paper can be view as a-chronological and not descriptive enough, but to provide description or a chronology was not my purpose. The arguments were directed towards creating alternatives in interpretations, that I believe are more established in modern approaches towards the mortuary archaeology, than the previous interpretation. Hopefully by recognizing complexity of funerary rites the oversimplifying approach will be replaced with an idea of presenting multiple narrations.

Bibliography:

Andersen, H. (1960) Hovedstaden i Riget. Nationalmussets arbejdsmark 1960, Copenhagen, 13-35

Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C.(2006) Old norse religion. Some problems and prospects. In Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds) Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 11 - 14

Beck-Danielsson, I. M. (2007) Masking moments. The transition of bodies and beings in Late Iron Age Scandinavia, Stockholm

Berggren, Å. (2006) Archaeology and Sacrifice - a discussion of interpretations. Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 303-306

Brink, S. (2008) Slavery in the Viking age. In: Brink, S. & Price, N. (eds). The Viking world, 23-31

Brønsted, J. (1936) Danish inhumation graves of the Viking age. Acta Archaeologica 7, Copenhagen, 81-228

Carlie, A. (2006) Ancient Building cults. In Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 206 - 211

Christiansen, E. (2002) Norseman in the Viking age, Oxford

DuBois, T. (1998) Nordic religions in the Viking age, Philadelphia

Ekegren, F. (2006) Performing death: the function and meaning of Roman drinking vessels in Scandinavian mortuary practices. In: Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 109-113

Fhalander, F. & Oestigaard, T.(2008) The materiality of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs.In: Fhalander, F. & Oestigaard T. (eds). The materiality of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs, Oxford, 1 - 16

Gansum, T. (2008) Reproduction and relocation of the Death in Iron Age Scandinavia. In: Fhalander, F. & Oestigaard T. (eds). The materiality of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs, Oxford, 141 - 146

Gräslund, A. S. (1980) Birka IV: The Burial Customs: a study of the graves on Björkö. Stockholm

Hemmendorf, O. (1984) Människooffer. Et inslag i järnålderns gravritualer, belyst av ett fynd i Bollstanäs, Uppland. Fornvännen 79. 4 - 12

Hållans-Stenholm, A. M. (2006) Past memories - Spatial returning as ritualized remembrance. In: Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 341 - 345

Jesch, J. (1994) Woman in the Viking age, Woodbridge

Klamring, S. (2010) Of Thieves, Counterfeiters and Homicides. Crime in Hedeby and Birka. Fornvännen 105, 281 - 290

Kristofersson, S. & Oestigaard, T. (2006) “Dødsmyter” - regissering av ritualer og variasjon i likbehandling i folkevandringstid. In: Oestigaard, T. (ed). Lik og ulik, Bergen, 113 - 131

Mansurd, A.(2006) Flytende identiteter - dyrebein i graver og førkristne personoppfatning. In: Oestigaard, T. (ed). Lik og ulik, Bergen, 133 - 158

Naumann, E. Krzewińska, M. Götherström, A. Eirksson, G. (2014) Slaves as burial gifts in Viking Age Norway? Evidence from stable isotope and ancient DNA analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science vol. 41, 533-540 (in press)

Nielsen, L. Chr. (1991) Hedenskab og kristendom. Religionsskiftet afsejlet i vikingetidens grave. In: Mortensen, P. & Rasmussen, B. (eds.) Høvdingesamfund og Kongemagt, Århus, 245-268

Nilson Stutz, L.(2006) Escaping the allure of meaning. Towards new paradigms in the study of ritual in prehistory. In: Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8, Lund, 95 - 98

• (2008) More Than a Metaphor: Approaching the Human Cadaver in Archaeology. In: Fhalander, F. & Oestigaard T. (eds). The materiality of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs, Oxford, 18 - 28

Oestigaard, T. (2000) Sacrifices of raw, cooked and burnt humans. Norwegian Archaeological Review vol. 33 (1), 41- 58

• (2006) Lik og ulik - introduksjon til vriasjon i gravskikk. In: Oestigaard, T. (ed). Lik og ulik, Bergen, 9 - 44

Oestigaard, T. & Goldhahn, J.(2006) From the Dead to the Living: Death as Transanctions and Re-negotations. Norwegian Archaeological Review vol. 39 (1), 27-48

Pedersen, A. (2006) Ancient mounds for new graves - an aspect of Viking age burial customs in souther Scandinavia. In: Andrén, A. Jennbert, K. Raudvere, C. (eds).  Old Norse Religion in Long term perspectives. Origins, changes, interactions. Vägar till Midgård 8. Lund. 346-353

Petrukhin, V. (2007) Viking Woman in Rus’: Wives, Slaves or ‘Valkyries’? In: Fransson, U., Svedin, M., Bergerbrant, S. Androshchuk, F. (eds.) Cultural interaction between east and west. Archaeology, artefacts and human contacts in northern Europe, Stockholm, 66 - 69

Ramskou, Th. (1965) Vikingerene ofrede mennesker. Nationalmussets arbejdsmark 1965, Copenhagen, 79 - 86

Randsborg, K. (1984) The study of Slavery in Norther Europe. An archaeological perspective. Acta Archaeologica 55, 155 - 160

Roesdahl, E. (1977) Fyrkat. En Jysk Vikingeborg II. Oldsagerne og gravpladsen. Copenhagen

Samuelsson, B-Å. (1998) Ljungbackagravfältet - studier av sydvästskånskt gravmaterial från sen järnålder. Seminar essay. Lund

• (2001)Ljungbacka - a Late Iron age Cemetery in South-West Scania. Lund archeaological review 7, 89 - 108

Sawyer, P. (2000) Kings and Vikings. London

Schjødt, J. P. (2009) Diversity and its consequences for the study of Old Norse religion. What is it we are trying to reconstruct? In: Słupecki, L. & Morawiec, P. Between Paganism and Christianity in the North, Rzeszów, 9 - 22

Skaarup, J. (1989) Doppeltgrave. Skalk nr. 3 (47), 4-8.

Soil, B.(2002) Seid. Myter, Shamanisme og kjønn i vikingenestid, Oslo

Svanberg, F. (2003a) Decolonizing the Viking age I, Stockholm

• (2003b) Death Rituals in South-East Scandinavia AD 800-1000. Decolonizing the Viking age II. Stockholm

Ulriksen, J. (2011) Vikingetidens gravskik i Danmark. Spor af begravelsesritualer i jordfæstegrave. Kuml. Årbog for Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab 2011. 161 - 247

Williams, H. (2001) An ideology of transformation: Cremation rites and animal sacrifice in early Anglo-Saxon England. In: Price, N. (ed). The Archaeology of Shamanism, London, 193-212

• (2008) Towards an archaeology of cremation. In: Schmidt, C. W. & Symes, S. (eds) The analysis of burned human remains, London, 239 - 269

Wilson, D. (2008) Vikings in the Isle of Man. Århus

Varenisu, B. (2002) Maritime warfare as organizing principle in Scandinavian Society 1000 - 1300 AD. In: Nørgård Jørgensen, A. Pind, J. Jørgensen, L. & Clausen, B. (eds). Maritime Warfare in Norther Europe. Technology, organization, logistics and administration 500 BC - 1500 AD, Copenhagen, 249-256

Zacharisson, T. (1994) The Odal and its manifestation in the Landscape. In: Burstrom, M. & Carlsson, A. (eds). Current Swedish Archaeology vol. 2, Stockholm, 219 - 238