The Border of Farming Shetland and Scandinavia

Home , Beitstad (municipality), Brae, Delting, Innherred, Jarlshof, North Roe

The Border of Farming Shetland and Scandinavia Neolithic and Bronze Age Farming

Papers from the symposium in Copenhagen September 19th to the 21st 2012

Edited by Ditlev L. Mahler Northern Worlds The National Museum of Denmark The Border of Farming – Shetland and Scandinavia Neolithic and Bronze Age Farming

Papers from the symposium in Copenhagen September 19th to the 21st 2012

Edited by Ditlev L. Mahler.

ISBN: 978-87-7602-222-8

Funded by the Augustinus Foundation

You may freely copy articles from this publication but the author must be acknowledged, no changes must be made and you may not sell any part of this work.

The digital version of this publication is at: http:// nordligeverdener.natmus.dk/forskningsinitiativer/ samlet_projektoversigt/shetlandsoeerne_land- brug_paa_graensen_4000_3000_fvt/

Front cover: Barley field, Scousburgh, South Mainland, Shet- land. Photo by Ditlev L. Mahler September 2011 The Border of Farming Shetland and Scandinavia

Neolithic and Bronze Age Farming

Papers from the symposium in Copenhagen September 19th to the 21st 2012

Edited by Ditlev L. Mahler

Northern Worlds The National Museum of Denmark Copenhagen 2013 2

Contents

• Foreword 4 H. C. Gulløv

• The Border of Farming – Shetland and Scandinavia 7 Fleming Kaul & Ditlev L. Mahler

• Stanydale Hall – a Gatering Site or just a large Neolithic 8 House on Shetland? Ditlev L. Mahler

• Living on the Land? 24 Val Turner

• Burnt Mounds: Transforming Space and Place in Bronze 35 Age Shetland Lauren Doughton

• Plus ça change…developments in Shetland, 47 c 2500–1800 BC Alison Sheridan

• Felsite Axehead reduction – the Flow from Quarry pit to discard/deposition 73 Torben Ballin

• Those who came before: 92 Shetland’s antiquarians and the Neolithic Jenny Murray & Carol Christiansen

• Neolithic in the Baltics. 103 From Agrarian Options to Practice Inga Merkyte At the museum Færgegården. From the excursion during the symposium. Photo D. L. Mahler 2012.

Contents

• Patterns of Agricultural Spread in Nordic Landrace Crops 117 Matti Leino

• Farmers Hunting and Hunters Farming 126 – the Expansion of Agrarian Societies during the Neolithic and Bronze Age in Scandinavia Lasse Sørensen

• Norway – Denmark. 144 Material Connections in the Early Bronze Age Karen Margrethe Hornstrup

• The One-edged Razor – Northernmost and Southernmost 156 Flemming Kaul

• The Earliest Agriculture in Central Norway – an Overview 177 of Indicators from the Steinkjer, Nord Trøndelag Frank Asprem

• The Empirical Basis for Research on Agricultural 182 Settlements in Northern Norway 1200 BC – 0 Johan E. Arntzen

• Contributors 198 4

Northern Worlds The interdisciplinary research initiative of the National Museum

Hans Christian Gulløv Coordinator, Research Professor

Ethnographic Collection, National Museum of Denmark

The National Museum of Denmark initi- Climate changes and society: ated its most comprehensive interdisci- When climatic boundaries move plinary research venture so far: Northern The focus of Climate changes and soci- Worlds. Between 2009 and 2013, the ety concerned selected periods within programme produced and communicated the last 15,000 years, during which time new knowledge on the relationship be- climate changed radically affected the tween people and environment over the lives of northern prehistoric and historic last 15,000 years in ways relevant to the peoples. This put the influence of present- present, with its notable climatic changes. day climate changes into perspective.

Northern Worlds had over 20 different Farming on the edge: sub-projects, which were led by re- Cultural landscapes of the North searchers from the various research de- The expansion of agriculture into the partments at the National Museum. The temperate and sub-arctic zones of the projects were organized within three planet represents a more than 6,000 main research areas defined to create year long narrative, characterized by re- sufficiently broad, dynamic and interdis- peated advances followed by stagna- ciplinary research environments for the tion. Farming on the edge focused on following topics: periods and areas with large potential Sunset near for the creation of new knowledge on of material culture, Networks in the Alstahaug, Helgeland, agricultural advances and their associ- North allowed the unique expertise of Nordland. ated social structures and ideologies. the National Museum to map and ex- Photo F. Kaul. The ultimate boundaries of farming com- plore the geographical extent of these munities in different parts of Scandina- northern networks. via and the North Atlantic were explored. The project Shetland – the In economical terms, Northern Worlds is Border of Farming 4000-3000 BC and the National Museum’s greatest research Farming on the Edge – the Scandinavian initiative ever. The Augustinus Founda- Expansion were parts of this initiative. tion is the main funder of Northern Worlds. It is with pleasure that it is pos- Networks in the North: Communi- sible to present the report from the sym- cation, trade and cultural markers posium held at the National Museum, The ‘marginal’ northern peoples have al- September 19th -21st 2012 as a joined ways been organized in cultural and venture between Shetland – the Border of trade-based networks that connect them Farming 4000-3000 BC and Farming on with the wider world. Through studies the Edge – the Scandinavian Expansion.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 6

Klick mill, The Croft Mu- seum, South Voe, Shetland. D.L. Mahler photo 2011. 7

The Border of Farming – Shetland and Scandinavia

The two research projects The Border of ative Northern Worlds combined and Farming – Shetland 4000-3000 BC and coordinated the expertise of the Nation- Farming on the Edge – the Scandinavian al Museum within the disciplines of ar- Expansion lasted for three years, from chaeology, history, ethnography, conser- 2010 to 2012. Together the two projects vation and science (environmental consisted of fieldwork and surveying on history). The research initiative had over Shetland and Norway, arranging and 20 different sub-projects, which were partaking in six conferences and the ed- led by researchers from the various re- iting and publishing of four books in- search departments at the museum. The cluding the present publication. Another projects were organized within three important aim for the two projects was main research areas, one of them called to establish a network of scholars, re- Farming on the edge: Cultural land- searchers and PHD students from Nor- scapes of the North, where both The way, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Ire- Border of Farming – Shetland 4000-3000 land and Shetland to meet once a year. BC and Farming on the Edge – the Scan- During the four network meetings we dinavian Expansion belonged. made tremendous progress in our understanding of the development of the During September 2012 the two projects farming societies in Scandinavia and joined forces in a symposium held at the the Neolithic on Shetland. National Museum with researchers from Scandinavia and the British Isles. The The introduction of the two projects symposium lasted for three days, and shall be seen in the light of the most this publication mirrors the papers given comprehensive interdisciplinary re- at the symposium. search venture, Northern Worlds, which lasted from 2009 to 2013 and was heavily supported by a donation from the Au- Flemming Kaul & Ditlev L. Mahler gustinus Foundation. The research initi- April 2013, Copenhagen

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 8

Stanydale Hall – a gathering site or just a large Neolithic House on Shetland?

Ditlev L. Mahler

The Shetland research project lasted for megaliths, the use of the ard, ornamented three years, from 2010 to 2012, and con- pottery, polished stone axes and ritual- sisted of fieldwork for the three sea- istic behavior as depositing artifacts in sons, partaking in six conferences and wetlands, or even ritual gathering sites editing and publishing three books in- just to mention some of the elements, cluding the present collection of papers could also be found on Shetland besides (Mahler & Andersen eds., 2011; Mahler the obvious presence of livestock and ed. 2012). cereals. The reason the Shetland Islands were the northern boundary for an agrar- The Shetland project ian expansion could possibly be due to a The object of the Shetland research maritime technological development, but project was to gather, analyse and docu- unfortunately we have no evidence of ment the Shetland Island’s Neolithic the vessels used during the expansion. material in order to deepen our under- Newer research suggests that the Shet- standing of the Neolithic process and land Islands became Neolithic by several the social impact on the societies within steps over a period of time around 3700 the period 4000-3000 BC, not at least as BC, and may be seen as a secondary ex- Shetland was at that time the northern- pansion of a Neolithic population from most area in Europe with a Neolithic the south west (Sheridan 2012: 6f.). The population. What was considered im- expansion is almost contemporary with portant was the comparison with the the dates from Orkney (Ashmore 2000: Neolithic societies in South Scandinavia 303f.). (fig. 1) in order to see if the same elements as 9

Fig. 1: The inside of the hall seen from the west. Remark the differ- Why, when the islands are surrounded ent orientations of the two traces of roof bearing posts and the entrance. D. L. Mahler 2012. by exceptional marine resources, does the population hold on to a Neolithic way of life with, amongst other pheno of an economic-ideological community mena, the cultivation of barley and with where the consumption of bread/por- domesticated animals? One of the deter- ridge, beer (?) and, on special occasions, mining elements which the research domesticated meat, was of central impor- project has taken into consideration is tance to a feeling of communal, cultural the importance of an ideological charac- identity (Dinely 2004; Hayden 2009: ter. Perhaps the desire to be a member 597f.; Braidwood 1953: 515). The skeletal

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 10

material from Sumburgh Airport – a bur- parallel on Orkney, Skara Brae. The most ial with some 18 individuals dated to ca. secure 14C dating of Neolithic structures 3.500 BC and onwards – gives us an in- fall within Late Neolithic period or Beaker teresting information: Seven of the skel- period like Ness of Gruting, and it is sug- etons show an average delta 13C ‰ of gested that the 14C dating from Scord of -19.5 indicating a very terrestrial way of Brouster should be reevaluated (Whittle life (Walsh, Knüsel and Melton 2012: et. al. 1986; Sheridan 2012: 18). The ex- Table 1; cf. Schulting and Richards isting 14C dating suggests, as mentioned, 2002:147f.).The sample size is very small, the time around 3700 BC as the Neolithic and the Sumburgh area constitutes the Landnám period (Sheridan 2012: 9). most important agrarian area on Shet- land. Unfortunately we have no 13C evi- The absence of 14C from the megaliths dence from human skeletons from e. g. except from the stone cist from Sumburgh West Mainland, which maybe would is very regretful. But besides the obvious show us a more complex picture. Bronze Age cairns there are around 50 chambered cairns on the islands, which is With the arrival of Neolithic settlers one quite dense compared with other areas gets the impression that the larger islands on the British Isles (Henshall 1963: 135f). soon became colonized with a rapidly I have previously commented on the growing population creating a specific northernmost chambered cairns on Unst cultural landscape (compare Ingold 2000, at Caldback, which is the northernmost Bender 2000: 23f.). Not alone West Main chambered cairn of Europe, still in exist- land is rich on sites, but also much of the ence (Mahler 2012: 38). east and the island of Whalsey (Calder 1964: 37 f.). The excavations on Scord of One of the characteristic elements of Brouster on West Mainland are the most the Neolithic period and especially the comprehensive excavations, and quite first half of it, is the ritual behavior recently a new type of sites have been among other things ritual deposition of surveyed, namely Pinhoulland and Trolly long unused axes of different stone ma- garth (Whittle et al.1986; Mahler 2012: terial but often made with great skill 38). There have been no excavations yet, and great care (Mahler 2002: 4f.). A very but the best preserved site, Pinhoulland, clear parallel to this phenomenon on indicate a dating to the Neolithic and Shetland is the felsite axes (see also with a cluster of seven house structures Ballin this volume). Some of them are up probably dating to the Late Neolithic and to 35 cm long, totally polished, without the older Bronze Age, like the nearest any traces of use or hafting. Until recent- 11

ly none had been excavated archaeologi cally, so the only knowledge we have is the information from stray finds telling us that they often come from wetlands. This information also supports that these axes were deposited as part of a ritual act.

In relation to the few excavations under taken on Neolithic Shetland we should not be surprised over the relative lack of knowledge about the Neolithic pottery and its ornamentation. Quite to the opposite of what we should expect no Orkney Unstan Ware is known from Shetland. The shards from Scord of Brouster are all very fragmented, and here and there one can observe some ornamentation (Whittle 1986: 60f.). One of the characteristic of the Neolithic both on Orkney and the British Isles and the Continent is the repetition of the ornaments. This we Fig. 2: Shard of a small ornamented Beaker from Ness of Gruting ex- find on some of the vessels from Ness of cavated by C.S.T. Calder (1956). The shard is in the keep of National Museums Scotland. D. L. Mahler. Gruting among other on a Beaker, and the connections point to western coastal domestic sites (Henshall in Calder 1956: as Sarup Sites, as one of the first such 383). (Fig. 2) Further excavations in the sites was excavated here dating to future will without doubt bring much more around 3400 BC (Andersen 1997). The information about Neolithic ceramics. gathering sites are part of the ritual behavior in the Neolithic period, and are The last element of “the Neolithic parcel” thus an interesting phenomenon. is the assemblage sites, and one such site will be in focus on the following Stanydale pages. Assemblage sites not at least on The site has been known for a long time the continent are not that rare, and in and is marked on the O.S. map as a South Scandinavia these sites are known “cuml”, but although rather damaged at

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 12

Fig. 3: Map of the Stanydale area. Red marks burial cairns and green house structures. M. Hoydal/C. S. Andersen 2013.

Stanydale Hill

Loch of Gruting

Hamars

oe V tta cu S of n ur B

Lardie Hill

0 0,5 1 km 13

the inventory during 1931 it became of one or more Shetland Knives, and with clear that it had parallels to the early reference to the Modesty find, this points domestic sites elsewhere on the islands to a Neolithic date, but as the fragments (Royal Commission on the Ancient and are not depicted, it leaves us unsure on Historic Monuments of Scotland 1946: this. From the Modesty find we have a 102). The archaeologist Charles S. T. Cal- 14C dating made in 2012 saying 2280- der was aware of the peculiar site, and 2000 BC cal at 2 (Sheridan 2012:18). It during 1949 got the opportunity to con- is worth stressing that both Modesty duct an excavation and further surveys and the hall at Stanydale must be con- of the surroundings, which he published sidered as open, accumulated finds! in 1951 (185-204) (fig. 3). Calder was convinced that the excavated site was a It is clear that the Stanydale hall is sur- temple, and he saw clear parallels to rounded by burial cairns, watercourses Mediterranean sites among others to and other interesting elements such as Taxien on Malta (Pessina & Vella 2005: dykes. It is also very clear that the pic- 39). The reason for this assumption was ture we have is not synchronous but the size of the building measuring roughly must represent a relatively long span of 6-9 x 13 m internally, with 3 m thick walls, time. Just above the hall, on the hill of two huge traces of roof bearing posts Hamers there are the remains of three and the heel shaped façade, he also cairns, all much destroyed as the result knew from the chambered cairns on the of 19th Century activity. The same goes islands. In the following the building will for the possible lonely cairn to the North be referred to as the hall. Many scien- East, where almost all the stones have tists and archaeologists recognize that been used to build a now abandoned the area and the building is something 19th century farm, so today we may only special, all though it has never yet been assume the former presence of the cairn. proven (Clarke 2009; Fojut 2006: 24f.). Above Stanydale village on Stanydale The whole Stanydale area – 2 km2 – was Hill there are five large cairns fairly well mapped during the field work in 2011, preserved and only one has been reused and this gives us a possibility to see new to build a krobb or kale nursery. To the lines in the landscape. We have no 14C North of at least three of the cairns there dating from the hall, but fragments of a are large stones, which could be fallen Beaker vessel suggest a Late Neolithic ortholits (fig. 4). On Lardie Hill there are date, and Calder thought that other pot- three cairns; the largest of them with a sherds indicated a Bronze Age date (Cal- nice cist, and below the cairn there is der 1951: 196). There are also fragments some 200 m of a dyke, probably a border

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 14

Fig. 4: Two of the cairns on dyke separating the land of the dead of a house structure. It is bound together Stanydale Hill. D. L. Mahler. from the world of the living. The nearest with house 4 by a dyke, which can be parallel has been surveyed in 2011 on followed at the surface or felt as stones the small island of Vementry. Below the beneath the turf. The dyke runs all the chambered cairn, there is likewise a bor- way round the hall without connecting der dyke separating the farmstead to the it, and the south east corner of the dyke south east from the tomb. is somewhat modified indicating several phases. To the west and at a figure of At Stanydale there are at least four eight dyke we have structure 3, which is house structures besides the hall which a fairly long structure measuring 8,5 x are likely to being older than the hall 4,5 m and with walls around 1,5 m thick. (fig. 5). One is a lonely structure not far to the West of the hall here called struc- To the East of the small burn, Calder ex- ture 2. It shows itself as a shallow de- cavated a fairly large house structure – pression measuring 7,5 x 5,5 m and with called “6” on the map – and dated it to a wall thickness of 1,5-2 m. To the North be at least partly contemporary with the there are two structures, where struc- hall, although we need a reevaluation of ture 4 probably is the ruins of a house the structure as well as of the artifacts measuring 7,2 x 4,5 m internal and with (Calder 1956:840 f.) (fig. 6a & b). All the a wall thickness of around 2 m. Struc- houses are surrounded by clearance ture 5 is a concentration of large stones, cairns. Across the mentioned small burn which could be the dilapidated remains North of House 6 there are clear traces 15

of a man made stone bridge leading up If we look at the hall itself, we have at to two ortholits placed in a dyke as a least two phases. The axis of the oldest kind of entrance stones to the area phase must be the one, which runs around the hall. South of the hall there through the two traces of the roof bear- are probably six ortholits, though these ing posts, see fig. 1. Then at a later stones are not among the tallest on stage, the house ground form is moder- Shetland and they do not signal any ated and the façade is turned at least clear pattern. 14° to the East represented by the mid

Fig. 5: Overview of the six main structures at Stanydale. Today the small burn east of house 6 is feeding the Burn of Scutta Voe by an excavated channel, bur originally the small burn must have fed the wetlands south of house 6. Red marks burial cairns on the Hamars, gray is clearance cairns. M. Hoydal/C. S. Andersen 2013.

5 4 1

6 2 3

0 250 500 m

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 16

axis of the present day entrance way. In a result of Calder’s reconstructions. I shall connection with this change in orienta- return to this change in orientation later. tion the heel shaped façade was proba- Concerning the function of the hall, no bly added, but unfortunately Calder’s pa finds point to a special sacral function; per gives no indication of any changes in on the contrary most of the finds reflect the stratigraphy, and we must remem- what you would expect from refuse lay- ber that most of the lay-out of the hall is ers at a settlement site. 17

Fig. 6a, left: The two entrance stones northwest A model of the relative chronology of of house 6 seen from north east. D. L. Mahler. the Stanydale area for the houses could

be that the lonely lying House 2 would Fig. 6b, below: The stone “bridge” across the be the oldest followed by the houses small burn east of house 6. All the stones seem bound together by dykes, but whether placed by human hands, and the burn must have run here for a considerable span of time judged House 3, 4 and 5 are contemporary or by the surrounding landscape. D. L. Mahler. followed each other is impossible to say.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 18

Fig. 7: House 2 seen from the West. In the background Lardie Hill and the small knoll on top of Lardie hill is the largest of the three is supported by the size of the hall, all burial cairns on the hill dated to the Bronze Age. House 2 is lying alone without any connection to the dykes and could very well be the standing stones and the many cairns, the oldest structure in the area. D. L. Mahler. and we could probably be facing a kind of gathering site or central site for the The single house structure and the three fairly densely populated West Mainland bound together by dykes – and two round (compare Clarke 2009). There are still ele field systems – are interesting parallels ments in the landscape which are inex- to the suggested relative chronology at plicable such as the circular traces of Pinhoulland (Mahler 2012: 44). In both ditches on the small peninsula in the cases only excavation may solve the rel- Loch of Gruting. They certainly look man ative chronology (fig. 7) made, but we have no educated guess of their function. If we return to the younger phase of the hall, the new axis, which passes through In search of parallels on Shetland, the the middle of the doorway, goes right valley at Burwick, North West of Scallo- between the two entrance stones or or- way on Mainland, was surveyed, as a tholits and over the mentioned stone large building of prehistoric origins has “bridge”, and this could be a procession been registered there. The valley is thick- road leading up to the hall (fig. 8). This ly covered in heather which makes field could indicate a ritual landscape which surveying very difficult, and unfortunately 19

two 19th Century farmsteads have crea bered cairns on Shetland, which is sur- ted a lot of disturbances, so today it is prisingly dense (Smith 2011: 31, Henshall very hard to give an educated guess at 1963: 135ff.). In search of the northern- the nature of the building. most chambered cairn or passage grave of Shetland and thus of Europe, I went Conclusion to Unst, and after surveying several can- In the introduction I mentioned the as- didates, which probably are of younger pect of detecting the Neolithic elements, age than Neolithic constructions, I found among them was the existence of mega that the chambered cairn of Caldback liths and thus creating a ritual land- probably is the northernmost passage scape. James Hunt wrote about his jour- grave still in existence in Europe. The ney around Shetland in 1865 “At the top of nearly every hill, we found distinct Fig. 8: The axis which comes from the middle of the entrance of traces of stone cairns”, and as men- the hall runs right between the two entrance stones and across tioned there are traces of over 50 cham- the small stone “bridge”. M. Hoydal/C. S. Andersen 2013.

0 100 200 m

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 20

cairn is heavily robbed of stones and illu gations on Orkney, but may be more an strates the sad situation that many other indication of where the prestige has cairns and structures have been lost been focused. The last 15-20 years has through the centuries. changed much both concerning publish ed excavations especially of Iron Age On Shetland all the Neolithic elements – Viking Age structures (Turner 1998; seem present although, unfortunately we Fojut 2006). And we must not forget to cannot say anything about the succes- mention the excellent exhibitions in the sion of the elements, and such as orna- new museum at Hay’s Dock in Lerwick. mented clay vessels are rather late as Hopefully Shetland shall attract scholars the beaker shard at Ness of Gruting. Of and archaeologist in the future conduct- course we do not have the variety of ce- ing scientific excavations and other in- reals and livestock as in South Scandina vestigations. via, but farming is present like the use of the ard or the primitive plough (Murray Acknowledgements 2012: 54). Among the most interesting Alison Sheridan is thanked for the in- parallels is the ritual behavior and ritual spiring discussions we have had both in deposition of axes, the Shetland Knives Edinburgh, on Shetland and latest in Co- etc. which is a common feature in the penhagen. Jenny Murray has been a Early Neolithic societies of Western Eu- great help during the field work and in rope. On Shetland there are indications Lerwick Museum and together with Lau- that even gathering sites are present rie Goodlad and John Hunter we have though the one excavated is of rather had exciting excursions among others to late date. On the other hand we can say sites Mass Hoydal and I later decided nothing about the beginning of these mapping. Val Turner from Amenity Trust gathering sites yet. has supported the project with much important information. Finally I would like Orkney has a rich and varied Neolithic to thank Susan Dall Mahler for reading Period, which among other factors is due the proof. to the intense interest from antiquarians and archaeologists in Orkney prehistory over a considerable span of time. Shet- Bibliography land on the other hand has lacked the same magnetism seen from a 19th and Andersen, N. H., 1997: The Sarup Enclo- 20th Century point of view, which is no sures – Sarup vol. 1, Aarhus Universitets criticism of the archaeological investi- forlag, Århus. 21

Ashmore, P. J., 2000: Dating the Neo- Clarke, S., 2009: The Processional (but lithic in Orkney, Neolithic Orkney in its not Processual) Approach to Stanydale European context, Ritchie, A. ed., Mc- Temple, https://communities.uhi.ac.uk/ Donald Institute Monographs, University sh01sc/weblog/3471.html of Cambridge, Cambridge: 299-308. Dinely, M., 2004: Barley, Malt and Ale in Bender, B., 2000: Investigating Land- the Neolithic, BAR International Series scape and Identity in the Neolithic, Neo- 1213, Synergie Basingstoke. lithic Orkney in its European context, Ritchie, A. ed., McDonald Institute Mono Fojut, N., 2006. A Guide to Prehistoric graphs, University of Cambridge, Cam- and Viking Shetland. Lerwick. bridge: 23-30. Hayden, B., 2009: The Proof is in the Braidwood, R. J., 1953: Did Man Once Pudding. Feasting and the Origins of Live by Beer Alone? American Anthro- Domestication, Current Anthropology pologist, vol. 55, number 1. Menasha, Vol. 50, Nu. 6: 597-601. Wisconsin: 515-516. Henshall, A. S., 1963: The Chambered Calder, C. S. T., 1951: Report on the Ex- Tombs of Scotland, Vol. 1. Edinburgh cavation of a Neolithic Temple at Stany- University Press, Edinburgh. dale in the Parish of Sandsting, Shetland. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquar- Ingold, T., 2000: The Perception of the ies of Scotland (1949-50): 185-205. Environment. Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London. Calder, C. S. T. 1956: Report on the discovery of numerous Stone Age house- Mahler, D. L., 2002: Maglehøjsvange. sites in Shetland, Proceedings of the So- Syv tyndnakkede flintøkser – et nyt of- ciety of Antiquaries of Scotland 89: ferfund fra Sørup Rende. Ledøje Smørum 340-97. Historiske Forenings Årsskrift: 4-13.

Calder, C. S. T., 1964: Cairns, Neolithic Mahler, D. L., 2012: Pinhoulland – a multi houses and burnt mounds in Shetland, period site from West Mainland, Shet- Proceedings of the Society of Antiquar- land. Some features of the Neolithic of ies of Scotland 98 (1963-64): 37-86. Shetland, The Border of Farming and the Cultural Markers, Short papers from the network meeting in Lerwick, Shetland

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 22

September 5th – 9th 2011, Mahler, D. L., Schulting, R. J. & Richards, M. P., 2001: ed., Copenhagen: 37-52. Dating women and becoming farmers, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology Mahler, D. L., ed., 2012: The Border of vol. 20: 314-344. Farming and the Cultural Markers, Short papers from the network meeting in Ler- Sheridan, A., 2012: Neolithic Shetland: wick, Shetland September 5th – 9th 2011, a view from the ‘mainland’, The Border of Copenhagen. Farming and the Cultural Markers, Short papers from the network meeting in Ler- Mahler, D. L. & Andersen, C. eds., 2011: wick, Shetland September 5th – 9th 2011, Farming on the edge: Cultural Land- Mahler, D. L., ed., Copenhagen: 6 - 36. scapes of the North. Some features of the Neolithic of Shetland. Short papers Smith, B., 2011: A racist in Bressay: from the network meeting in Lerwick, James Hunt’s anthropological expedition Shetland September 7th – 10th 2010. to Shetland in 1865, The New Shetlander, Northern Worlds. Copenhagen. Simmer Issue 2011 Johnson, L. & Smith B. eds., Lerwick: 29-38. Murray, J. 2012: Sacred Work: Cultivat- ing the soil in prehistoric Shetland, The Turner, V., 1998: Ancient Shetland. His- Border of Farming and the Cultural Mark- toric Scotland. Shetland Amenity Trust. ers, Short papers from the network D. J. Breeze ed. Historic Scotland, Shet- meeting in Lerwick, Shetland Septem- land Amenity Trust, B. T. Batsford Ltd. ber 5th – 9th 2011, Mahler, D. L. ed., Co- London: 1-127. penhagen: 53 – 61. Walsh, S., Knüsel C. and Melton, N., Pessina, A. & Vella, H. C., 2005: Luigi 2012: A reappraisal of the Early Neolithic Maria Ugolini. Un Archeologo Italiano a human remains excavated at Sumburgh, Malta, Midsea Books Ltd & Heritage in 1977, Proceedings of the Society of Malta, Malta. Antiquaries of Scotland 141 (2011): 3-17.

Royal Commission on the Ancient and Whittle, A., Keith-Lucas, M., Miles, A., Historic Monuments of Scotland. An In- Noddle, B., Rees, S. and Romans, J. C. C., ventory of the Ancient and Historical 1986: Scord of Brouster. An Early Agri- Monuments of Orkney and Shetland. cultyral Settlement on Shetland. Oxford Edinburgh, 1946. University Comitee for Archaeology, monograph No 9. 23

Part of Jarls hof, South Mainland, Shetland. Photo D. L. Mahler 2012.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 24

Living off the Land?

Val Turner

This paper summarises some of the re- house in the sequence) was con- sults arising from a wider study which used structed pastoral activity was domi- topographical survey, Shape Analysis, nant. Keith-Lucas (1986) identified two GIS, soil survey and micromorphology in periods of scrub clearance from the order to investigate location, form and pollen evidence, 4680±100 BP and function in Shetland’s Prehistoric Field 4180±100 BP, with arable activity Systems, as part of PhD studies at the between them. This timeframe was University of Stirling (Turner 2013). The associated with “House 2”, the ear- field systems within the study spanned liest house, which had an earlier Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age period to wooden structure beneath the stone Viking/Norse times: this paper focuses on built remains. the Neolithic/ Bronze Age Multiple Field Systems and Homestead Enclosures. 2. Fowler (1971) suggested that irregular fields with clearance cairns are Three models have been proposed for “circumstantial evidence” for agri- the use of the Multiple Field Systems in culture and that such areas were not the past: in long term use. This is at variance with the longevity identified at the 1. Whittle (1986) proposed on the ba- Scord of Brouster (Whittle 1986; Ash- sis of Scord of Brouster that the Mul- more 1999). The presence of clear- tiple Field Systems had an arable ance cairns on the land would have nucleus, extensive grazing and dis- hampered cross ploughing, although persed settlement. In this model bar- not spade cultivation. Bradley (1978) ley was cultivated throughout the suggested that clearance cairns were life of the site, with limited evidence not the products of initial phases of for the husbandry of cattle, sheep agriculture but only became neces- and red deer. The balance of arable sary as the result of erosion, caused to grazing altered at different peri- by either pastoral or arable activities. ods and when House 1 (the second However excavation demonstrated 25

Fig. 1a: Multi- that some clearance cairns at Broust- analysis at Pinhoulland, Ness of Grut- ple Field Sys- tem at Gallow er predate some of the boundaries ing, Troni Shun and Brunnatwatt. Hill. Photo Val (Whittle, 1986) and boundary analy- They identified only small quantities Turner. sis identified early clearance cairns of “cereal-type” pollen at each of at other sites including Pinhoulland the sites. With the caveat that the (Turner 2013). pollen in the thin mineral soils (3-4 cm) predated the formation of the 3. Edwards and Whittington (1998) pro- blanket peat, Edwards and Whitting- posed a third model for the Multiple ton drew the conclusion that the field Field Systems on the basis of pollen systems were primarily grazings.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 26

The fields are characterised by terraces to face into the enclosed areas, rather and lynchets. Terraces are most likely to than outwards. This might suggest the be created as areas for growing crops; temporary enclosure of animals but lynchets may have been either the re- equally these might arise from other sult of creating terraces or have formed uses of the site, either during its life or as a by-product of enclosing small areas at, or after, the point of abandonment. A with boundaries against which soil lower interior might represent a deliber- would build up. Had the fields been used ate attempt to increase the protective exclusively for grazing, the requirement height of the boundary, to keep either for these earthwork features would be animals or people in. Conversely, the less obvious. If it were necessary to re- addition of manure or the amendment of strict the movements of stock, small soils inside an enclosure might cause it numbers of animals (such as might have to become higher than the ground out- grazed one of these fields) could have side: this is the situation inside post- been tethered. This would have required medieval/modern plantiecrubs. If the soils far less effort than that involved in the were not amended, regular use would creation, and constant maintenance, of erode them, causing them to lose both boundaries. Tether posts were identified volume and height. Waste products, at the Sumburgh Runway House (Downes thrown over a boundary, would gradually and Lamb 2000), demonstrating that increase the height of the land outside. tethering was practiced in the Bronze This type of waste disposal may have Age. (Rope could be made from reeds occurred at the Beenie Hoose, Whalsay and grasses available in the area.) It is where the wall was gradually thickened possible that the small fields served as and refaced, incorporating midden mate- animal pens when the fields were fal- rial, during the Neolithic period (Calder low, thereby helping to manure the field 1960-61:31; Turner 2008: viii). as well as supplementing the amount of available grazing. (To date, there is no Different types of outfield vegetation evidence that animal dung was either would benefit from different styles of burnt as fuel, or used as daub, either at management. Woodland regeneration the Scord of Brouster or any other exca- and heather are vulnerable to damage in vated site in the Northern Isles.) winter when more palatable foods are in short supply (Chapman 2007). Blanket There are small internal and external bog is also more vulnerable to erosion height differences within the Multiple through trampling in winter. Managing the Field System boundaries, and these tend outfield would be as important to suc- 27

Fig. 1b: Multi- cessful farming as managing the infield more selectively. Cattle cause more ple Field Sys- tem at Gallow and protecting the outfield would provide damage due to trampling but, converse- Hill. Photo Val further good reason for containing ani- ly, cause greater levels of localised nu- Turner. mals within the arable fields during the trient enrichment through their dung winter. The type of animals husbanded (Chapman 2007). Sheep would therefore might be determined by the character of have been more suited to grazing the the land available. Cattle favour quanti- Multiple Field Systems, which included ty over quality, unlike sheep which eat fragile boggy areas and steep slopes.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 28

Fig. 2: Survey of Multiple Field Systems at Scord of Brouster (north) and Gallow Hill (south) over- lain on aerial photography. Survey: Val Turner; photography licensed to Historic Scot- land for PGA, through Next Perspectives TM. 29

To advance this argument further, it is 9.1 people during lactation. The Scottish necessary to look at the economics of Agricultural College Technical Note 586 prehistoric Shetland. Fleming (1971) con (Chapman, 2007) advises that today, a cluded that each adult in Medieval Eng- suckler cow and calf represent 1 livestock land required the grain from 1.5 acres, unit (LU). One livestock unit is defined as with another 0.5 acres required for seed the quantity of stock which can be sup- corn. Fojut (1983; 2005) used the figures ported by one hectare of grazing per an- quoted by Fenton (1978: 336) to calcu- num. Beef cattle over 24 months old are late that in pre-improvement eighteenth only 0.8 LU and so can be kept at a century Orkney the yield per hectare slightly higher density. Sheep can be kept would be approximately 1000 kg/ha for more intensively still, a ewe being rated human consumption, having set aside a at 0.12 LU (0.15 LU with a lamb). The proportion of the crop as seed corn. He Technical Note also provides guideline also suggested, perhaps surprisingly that annual average stocking rates for a the Iron Age yield in Shetland would have range of “semi-natural” habitats. Of rele- been at least comparable with, if not vance to Shetland are the unimproved better than, this. Fojut also quoted the upland grassland (e. g. Nardus) rated at requirement of an individual with a ce- 0.15-0.25 LU/ha/yr; young heather at real-based diet as approximately 210 kg 0.2 LU/ha/yr; intermediate heather (20- per year. Thus an arable hectare in early 40 cm) at 0.05 LU/ha/yr; old heather at eighteenth century Orkney would have 0.02 LU/ha/yr and blanket bog at 0.06 almost been sufficient to feed five peo- LU/ha/yr. The type of light woodland ple. There are significant differences be- which existed in early prehistoric Shet- tween the geographies of Shetland and land would fall within the category of Orkney both in terms of latitude (and Moderate (woodland) fertility, rated at therefore climate) as well as in the avail- 0.07 LU/ha/yr. (Figures can vary by 20- ability of flat, easily cultivable: land with 40% depending on soil fertility; either light sandy soils being prevalent in Ork- under or over grazed sites will reduce the ney but far more scarce in Shetland stocking levels, whereas appropriate (concentrated in the South Mainland management could improve them (ibid)). and the east coast of Unst). Fleming (1971) argued that woodland Kemp (2001) calculated that a dairy herd browsing was nutritious and that the of six cows and a bull, with a mainte- level of effort required to clear it was nance level of immature animals, would not justified if the land was solely supply the daily energy requirement for grazed. However, the stocking rates rec-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 30

ommended by the Scottish Agricultural that part of the area of the Enclosure College contradict this – even the “High was actually occupied by the house. In fertility, lowland broadleaves” woodland either model, the Enclosures were clearly only has a value of 0.15 LU/ha/yr. not the primary supply of food for their occupants. Either people grew crops and The Turner study has calculated the areas kept animals which lived outside the En- of both the Homestead Enclosures and closures, or they lived a more hunter- Multiple Field Systems (Turner 2013). If gatherer lifestyle. the Homestead Enclosures were used for agriculture they could either have sup- Whilst this may have involved a degree ported a single ewe and lamb for a year of seasonal movement, perhaps to tend (based on an optimistic assessment of animals and gather wild resources, the the quality of the grassland) or, based on size and solidity of the houses suggests Fojut’s calculations, grown sufficient grain that settlement was essentially perma- for between 0.6 and 1.25 people (at South nent. None of the Homestead Enclosures Newing and Croag Lea respectively). are far from the sea and a study of view- These calculations disregard the fact sheds indicates the importance of coastal resources: fish (including shellfish), seabirds and their eggs, supplemented Fig. 4: Micro morphlogy slide taken from Pinhoulland, showing two by the occasional seal or cetacean, must episodes of soil accumulation and associated cultivation above and have formed a significant part of the diet below – ie: before and after a period of peat growth, during which time mineral material continued to accrete, resulting from distur- (Turner 2013). bance, possibly cultivation above it. Photo Val Turner. Isotope analysis of human bone has led to the suggestion that by 5400 BP people had abandoned eating marine derived food possibly the result of a taboo (Richards and Hedges 1999: 892; Thomas 2003: 70). The sample size was small – including only three Scottish individuals, from Oronsay – and a more gradual move towards a terrestrial diet has been suggested for Southern Britain and Wales (Milner et al. 2003: 12). In a Shetland context such a taboo would be literally suicidal: this study demonstrates that it is only the 31

use of the ubiquitous resources of the Fig. 3: Stone sea which made life in the Neolithic/ tool factory discovered in Bronze Age agricultural communities the hills of economically viable. Very little early pre- the West historic skeletal material survives from Side. Photo Val Turner. Shetland, but isotope work is currently being undertaken on remains from the Sumburgh cist (Montgomery, Durham University).

Many individual fields within the Multi- ple Field Systems are smaller than the Enclosures; for most, their areas are further reduced by clearance cairns. The smaller fields were therefore too small to support a single animal for a year and, even if kept fertile, would supply as little as 14% of the grain required for an individual eating a cereal-based diet for a ing that the proportion of the diet de- year. rived from cereal was relatively low (Turner 2013). If the field systems were taken as whole, based on the visible field boundaries, The total areas enclosed by Multiple and making the assumption that the Field Systems at Sumburgh Head and fields were kept fertile and in constant the Ness of Gruting are far smaller (al- use, then four of the Multiple Field sys- though, at the Ness of Gruting, the total tems in the study could have supported area in the field system was probably a small group of adults eating a cereal- larger than the sum of the fields which based diet: four adults at each of Clevi- could be measured; other boundaries garth and Gallow Hill (1.0271 and 1.0052 were too fragmentary to estimate the ha), six at the Scord of Brouster (1.4912 ha) area which they may have enclosed with and eight very comfortably at Pinhoulland any degree of certainty). At Sumburgh (2.1458 ha). Micromorphology carried out Head farming appears to have been at Pinhoulland demonstrated that the more difficult: every small terrace or flat fields were cultivated sporadically, inter area of land was brought in to use. This spersed with periods of grazing, indicat- further indicates that the hillside was

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 32

used for arable, since animals could have “as many as ten thousand persons”, and roamed the hillside without requiring the that this represents a sophisticated pat- creation of small terraces. tern of land organisation (ibid).

Based on these calculations therefore, While these dykes may arise from a sophis the amount of grain grown in any of the ticated social phenomenon (Fojut, 1993) field systems under consideration, or the they may have been more utilitarian. The animals grazed on them, is likely to have importance of the hill land between the contributed only a limited proportion of settlements may have exceeded that of the diet of the community. Mahler (2007) its value as summer grazing: it provided described domestic animals in Norse a managed supply of tools, timber, fuel Faroe as comprising a “safe food-bank”, and wild food resources. The division and which contributed calves, lambs and ownership of the hill land may have dairy produce as well as grain, to the been as important to the inhabitants as community. He observed that while grow- were the fields themselves. Quarries for ing small amounts of grain was time stone tools and working surfaces have consuming, cereals nevertheless played been identified during the present study, a central role in the economy of Viking/ both above the Sumburgh Head field Norse Faroe. system and in sub-divided hill land on the West Side: the geology itself was Another facet in understanding the Mul- clearly of economic value to the settle- tiple Field System economy is the rela- ments. Rights to the hill may even have tionship between the field systems and determined ownership of coastal resourc- the stone dykes which project from es of the sea: fish, whales, driftwood, them, which can be traced for consider- seaweed and seabirds, all of which must able distances into the hill. These are a have contributed to the wellbeing of the feature of the Multiple Field systems of community. Interestingly the Multiple Field the West Side of Shetland, the projecting Systems of the West Side did not share boundaries often being aligned with hill the need of the Homestead Enclosure top burial cairns and ridges. Examples residents for a view of the sea, perhaps include a length running southwest from because the ownership of resources was Pinhoulland, a length west of Gallow not a matter for dispute. Hill and a third length northeast of the Scord of Brouster. Fojut suggested that Conclusions these are territorial boundaries created The evidence derived from studying the in response to the expected arrival of field boundaries of Neolithic/Bronze Age 33

Shetland field systems, supported by the ies of Scotland Monograph Series 14: micromorphological evidence, indicates 308-320 Edinburgh. that Shetland’s early farmers were prac- ticing mixed farming, but that this was Bradley, R. J., 1978: The Prehistoric Set- insufficient to supply all their dietary re- tlement of Britain. Routeledge and Ke- quirements. Given the paucity of native gan and Paul, London. wild animals in the islands, and the harsh growing environment, together with the Calder, C. S. T., 1960-61: Excavations in view shed evidence, it is clear that ma- Whalsay, Shetland 1954-5, Proceedings rine resources must have comprised a of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland vital component of the diet. 94: 28-45

Turning to Norse Faroe, it is clear from Chapman, P., 2007: Conservation Graz- the Sheep Letter that keeping sheep in ing of Semi-Natural Habitats. Scottish the outfield, held in common by several Agricultural College, Technical Note people, were central to the economy. 586, March 2007. SEERAD, Edinburgh. Rights in the outfield included peat cutting and were linked with rights to the Downes, J. and Lamb, R., 2000: Prehis- coastline (Mahler 2007). Although the toric Houses at Sumburgh in Shetland. rules and practice for Norse farming were Excavations at Sumburgh Airport 1967- brought into Shetland with the Gulathing 74. Oxbow Books, Oxford. law – applied in Norway from before 930 AD and to the North Atlantic as it Edwards, K. J. and Whittington, G., became colonised – it is possible that 1998: Landscape and Environment in similar rules were in existence in Shet- Prehistoric West Mainland, Shetland, land as much as 3,000 years earlier and Landscape History, Vol. 20: 5-17. Bir- that the dykes projecting from the field mingham. systems are evidence of this. Fenton, A., 1978: The Northern Isles: Orkney and Shetland. John Donald, Ed- Bibliography inburgh. Ashmore, P. J., 1999: Radiocarbon Dates for Archaeological Sites in Shetland. Flemming, A., 1971: Bronze Age Agricul- Owen, O. and Lowe, C., Kebister: the ture in Marginal Lands of North-east four-thousand-year-old story of one Yorkshire, British Agricultural History Shetland township, Society of Antiquar- Review, Vol. 19: 1-24. London.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 34

Fojut, N., 1983: Towards a Geography of Richards, M. P. and Hedges, R. E. M., Shetland Brochs, Glasgow Archaeologi- 1999: A Neolithic revolution? New evi- cal Journal, Vol. 9: 38-59 dence of diet in the British, Antiquity 73: 891-897. Fojut, N., 2005: Any Closer towards a Geography of Shetland Brochs, Tall Sto- Thomas, J., 2003: Thoughts on the ries: 2 millennia of Brochs, Turner, V. E., “repacked” Neolithic Revolution, Antiq- Nicholson, R., Dockrill, S. J. and Bond, uity 77 (295): 67–75. J. M. eds.: 166-171. Shetland, Amenity Trust, Lerwick. Turner, V. E., 2008: Foreword in Stewart J., An Outline of Shetland Archaeology: Fowler, P. J., 1971: Early prehistoric agri- A reprint of the series of articles first culture in Western Europe: some ar- published in August and September, chaeological evidence, Economy and 1956 in “The Shetland Times”: vii-x Settlement in Neolithic and Early Bronze Shetland Amenity Trust, Lerwick. Age Britain, Simpson D. D. A. ed.: 153- 82. Leicester. Turner, V. E., 2013: Location, Form and Function in Shetland’s Prehistoric Field Kemp, L., 2001: Preliminary Assessment Systems unpublished PhD thesis. Uni- of Iron Age Cattle Farming associated versity of Stirling. with the Brochs of Shetland. Unpub- lished Final Year Undergraduate Disser- Whittle A., Keith-Lucas M., Millies A., tation, Department of Archaeological Noddle B., Rees S., and Romans J. C. C., Sciences, University of Bradford. 1986: Scord of Brouster: An Early Agri- cultural Settlement on Shetland, Oxford Mahler, D. L., 2007: Sæteren ved Argis- University Committee for Archaeology brekka. Faroe University Press. Tór- Monograph 9, Oxford. shavn.

Milner, N., Craig O. E., Bailey G. N., Ped- ersen K. and Andersen S. H., 2004: Something fishy in the Neolithic? A reevaluation of stable isotope analysis of Mesolithic and Neolithic coastal populations, Antiquity 78: 9-22. 35

Burnt Mounds: Transforming Space and Place in Bronze Age Shetland

Lauren Doughton

A Life on the Edge? land Steatite cinerary urns in Orkney The Bronze Age of Shetland (Ritchie 1995: 92), coupled with the The Bronze Age in Britain is broadly de- adoption of cremation and cist burials fined by the arrival of copper and copper although a version of this practise has alloy materials, and a suite of continen- been present in Shetland from the early tal novelties and practises, including in- Neolithic, which hints at an awareness dividual interments with an increasing of trends elsewhere (Hedges & Parry appearance of gender and social differ- 1980). The presence of an unfinished entiation, the introduction of Beaker pot- miniature battle axe at Ness of Gruting tery, and other local developments, such (Calder 1956: 392), along with the finish as Clava cairns and recumbent stone cir- ed example from Sumburgh also sug- cles. To the uninitiated the Bronze Age of gests awareness of some of the expres- Shetland can appear under developed. sions of prestige that were in use As Kaul notes, ‘there was a rich Neolithic elsewhere in Britain (Downes & Lamb ‘full package culture in Shetland’ but ‘no 2000: 67; see Sheridan 2012 for a full Bronze-Age’ (2011: 47). Most obvious is discussion). However, these expressions the almost total lack of Bronzes, or the remain for the large part fragmentary. accompanying elaborate burial traditions Although the Bronze Age of Shetland re- that characterise the period elsewhere mains recognisably British, there is a in Europe. distinct impression that Shetland follow ed its own trajectory during this period, There is evidence for contact with the which, coupled with a continued use of outside world, in the form of a local var- stone tools and a Neolithic lifestyle iation of all over corded beaker from gives the impression of stagnation and Stanydale, and the existence of Shet- isolation.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 36

Fig. 1: Distri- lead to characterise Bronze Age Shet- bution of land as a period of regression, where burnt mound sites in Scot- the inhabitants of the island struggled land. on against adverse conditions, and can be imagine “waiting for a ship to arrive, to carry them away from these islands of depleted and overgrazed soils at the margins of agriculture” (Kaul 2011: 48). However, this does not acknowledge the use of burnt mound sites as a characteristic of the Shetland Bronze Age, and as a wider phenomenon within the period.

Burnt mounds: “Among the most boring sites with which a field Land use analysis suggests that during archaeologist must deal”? this period there was an increase in peat Burnt mounds are heaps of heat-cracked cover, leading to greater pressure on the stones found throughout the British Isles available agricultural land (Butler 1998, and some parts of continental Europe. Turner 2011, Whittle 1989). Evidence The sites themselves are predominantly from the South Nesting Paleolandscape dated to the Middle Bronze Age, although project suggests that Shetland’s Bronze examples are known from the Neolithic Age inhabitants were forced to make right through to the Middle Ages (Cam- use of shrinking patches of land on close bell-Antony 2003: 64). Fig.1. In Scotland to the shore as hill land was gradually they are among the most numerous lost to peat encroachment (Dockril et al. Bronze Age sites recorded, with over 1998); a picture which is echoed across 1900 individual records currently held the islands, such as at Scord of Brouster within the National Monuments Record, on the West Side (Whittle et al. 1986). and no doubt a great many more besides There is no indication that Shetland was residing within local Historic Environ- part of the ‘Wessex Culture’ which has ment Records. Traditionally they have been come to characterise much of prehistor- interpreted as cooking sites, following ic Britain, and which is so prevalent on the work of Irish archaeologist Michael nearby Orkney. Given the above is it O’Kelly (1954) who drew heavily on the hardly surprising that others have been works of 18th Century Irish writer Geof- 37

frey Keating. In the 1980’s a counter ar- mounds within a wider Bronze Age con- gument was offered, fuelled in part by text has had a number of repercussions. the discovery of sites in Orkney that cast Given the current focus on the dynamic doubt on their status as temporary hunt- social relationships between people, ing camps (Hedges 1975), suggesting that places and things in the past, burnt they might represent something similar mound studies can be seen to lag be- to a sauna or sweat lodge (Barfield & hind in its continued focus on technolo- Hodder 1987). While these discoveries gies as a primarily adaptive tool. The led to a temporary revival of interest in danger of this kind of approach becomes burnt mounds, the subject remains divid- immediately apparent when applied to ed between these two leading interpre- an area such as Shetland, where burnt tations (see Barfield & Hodder 1987, mounds comprise the greater body of O’Drisceoil 1988 and papers within evidence for Bronze Age activity in the Buckley 1990 and Hodder & Barfield 1991 islands. Fig. 2 for an illustration of this). Other uses, such as fulling, dying, brewing, skin Fig. 2: Distri- working, brine evaporation, boat build- bution of burnt mound ing and metalworking have all been site in Shet- suggested as possible alternatives but land. the discipline has yet to fully engage with the multiplicity of possibilities that surround the construction and use of burnt mound sites.

Despite their commonplace nature, the use of burnt mounds has, until recently been particularly overlooked by aca- demics researching the Bronze Age. Their enigmatic character and lack of diagnostic finds has led many scholars to come to the conclusion that these sites have little to offer in relation to our understanding of prehistoric life beyond a basic indication of population distribution (Barber & Russel-White, 1991). This failure to engage with burnt

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 38

Fig. 3: Stones roasting in the fire at the replica burnt mound site in Bressay, Shetland. 39

There are currently over 346 burnt ments might be, and how they might mounds recorded in the Shetland Sites relate to other activities. By abandoning and Monuments Record, including over the idea of a definitive function and ex- 30 to be found on the small island of Fair amining some of the fundamental char- Isle alone. Radiocarbon and Thermo acteristics of burnt mound we can begin luminesence dates from a number of ex- to reveal a lexicon of practises which cavated sites demonstrate a predomi- are particularly resonant with other as- nantly Bronze Age date, although many pects of Bronze Age activities. of them have long and complex histories of construction, use and reconstruction In analysing the term burnt mound itself and may even date from the Neolithic and its implications two aspects imme- onwards. Excavated examples have re- diately become obvious (fig. 3). The first peatedly revealed complex internal struc- is the act of burning, or more specifically tures that defy traditional interpretation the use of fire, and the second is the con and suggest a more complex set of prac- struction of mounds. While cremation tises than has otherwise previously been was already well established as a form perceived. This raises the question, how of mortuary ritual during the Neolithic, it might Bronze Age Shetland look if these gains particular significance and popu- practises were full integrated into our larity during the Bronze Age. In his analy understanding of life during the period? sis of cremation practises, Kaliff recog- In order to appreciate this, a revision of nises that that one of the most important the way in which we understand the factors in cremation is the destruction of role of burnt mound sites is required. the body, and it’s breaking into subsidiary parts. Symbolically it can be seen as the Burnt Mounds and wider transformation of the body into the sub- Bronze Age Cosmologies stances from which it first came. Fire can In reassessing these sites it is neces- be seen as ‘a medium for transforma- sary to move away from the preoccupa- tion and communication… “a common tion with function, and instead take a symbol of life, of metamorphoses and few moments to consider how people, communication with the divine, but also places and things interact to create of the home” (Kaliff 2007: 84). meaning. If we accept that our understanding of objects and materials stems The symbolic properties of fire would from our everyday embodied engage- have been familiar to Bronze Age metal ments with them, then it becomes nec- smiths. To early metal workers the trans- essary to explore in what these engage- formation from rock, to liquid and then

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 40

solid metal object must have seemed like magic. Likewise, it is possible to argue for the same process occurring at burnt mounds. Regardless of the functional interpretation preferred, burnt mounds are the locales where substances are transformed, through the application of heat to rock, and in combination with water, from one state to another. Human bone has been found in association with a number of sites in Sweden, suggesting a possible association between burnt mounds and mortuary practises, if not a mortuary application in itself (Kaliff 2007: 104-107; O’Neill 2009: 184-185). While it is unlikely that the Shetland mounds with their complex internal structures would have been used for a mortuary function, we must suppose that whatever She suggests that the intentional juxta- activities did take place here were car- position or replacement of materials in ried out in full knowledge of this wider the construction of mounds serves to frame of reference. Fig. 4 highlight and often invert natural strati- graphies, creating meaningful relation- While the chronology for the construc- ships between materials, and relating tion of the Shetland Chambered Tombs directly to the local worldview, and the remains uncertain (see Sheridan 2012), journey perceived to be undertaken by it is likely that during the Bronze Age the dead. they were a familiar and significant part of the islanders’ landscape. The Bronze The Late Neolithic saw a shift in focus Age in Britain sees an increase in the from a cosmological axis that favours construction of earthern burial tumuli, horizontal and linear movement to one such as those at the Knowes of Trotty in which focuses more heavily on the verti- Orkney. As Mary Ann Owac (2005) has cal axis (Fowler 2005: 120), so that by the demonstrated, the construction of burial Bronze Age a worldview is established mounds was deeply intertwined with which divides the world into three sec- Bronze Age cosmological worldviews. tions: sky, land/sea and the underworld, 41

Fig. 4: A typical looking burnt mound site on Papa Stour, Shet- land. sometimes associated with the sea (see human burials have been found within the Bradley 2000, Kaul 1998). This vertical cave itself, as well as evidence of feast- focus is played out through the construc- ing, and a stone built passageway with tion of mounds, the use of cave sites, steps leading down into the cave itself. and through the construction of souter- Evidence suggests that feasting was rians. It is also visible in rock art depic- carried out on the site and the cave may tions of the journey of the sun, in which have acted as an entryway to the ‘under the sun is taken across the sky by chariot world’. A large spread of burnt stones during the day, before sinking and re- was found on the surface at the mouth turning by boat at night (Kaul 1998). of the cave, indicating that burnt mound technologies were integral to the activi- At High Pasture Cave, Skye, the links be- ties carried out on the site. In addition, tween this cosmological worldview, and burnt stones were found within the fos- the elemental processes undertaken at silised cave deposits, suggesting that the burnt mounds are brought sharply into activity extended from the ground level focus. Work at the cave has revealed evi into the liminal spaces within the cave, dence for activity on the site throughout or that the debris from the firings taking the Bronze and Iron Age. A number of place above ground were considered to

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 42

be important enough in to be intention- Burnt mounds often represent consider- ally deposited in the cave alongside other able depths of time, and involve numer- materials such as bone and metalwork ous phases of use, construction and recon (Birch & Wildgoose 2010). struction. At Tangwick and Cruester, Shetland, the structures were built into Mounds are also closely linked to acts existing mound material, and underwent of memorial and the creation of place. In successive phases of remodelling, includ constructing a mound from the debris of ing the closure of chambers, and a con- the firing, rather than disposing of the tinual cycle of maintenance in the hearth material in discrete spreads practitioners cell (Moore & Wilson 1999, 2001, 2008). were both drawing attention to the site, Dates obtained from various locales with- creating a sense of place, and creating a in the mound at Cruester suggest that physical reference to the activities be- the mound had a life of over 1000 years ing carried out, whilst simultaneously (Campbell Antony 2003: 308-11). The role limiting access those activities by proof burnt mounds in creating and main- gressively hiding them behind a mound taining memories of past activity can be of burnt stone. At Liddle and Beaquoy in seen at Clowanstown, Co. Meath, Ire- Orkney those working the site were ac- land, where a number of burnt mounds tively engaged in maintaining the mound were located over earlier Mesolithic Fish structure itself (Hedges 1975). A retain- Traps. The decommissioning activities ing wall with paved walkways between included deposition of a wooden contain the mound and the structure walls lead- er, and the monumentalising of the site ing to the entrance of the building meant using spreads of burnt mound, material, that entry to the site was only possible and a spread of stone including cremated once inside the mound material itself. animal bone, lithic material and several At Liddle this arrangement is later al- skulls (Mossop 2006). tered and the entryway is moved to what would have been the rear of the building. The placement of the Clowanstown A paved walkway was constructed over mounds also illustrates another factor in the mound meaning users must first understanding the place of burnt mounds cross the mound before they were able within wider Bronze Age cosmologies. to gain access to the structures within Close proximity to water is often seen as (ibid 43-6, 56). At both of these sites the a defining characteristic of burnt mound mound material itself is as much a part sites. The deposition of materials in wa- of the active life of the sites as the build- tery and boggy places is increasingly ings. Fig. 5 evident from the Bronze Age onwards 43

Fig. 5: Some (Bradley 1998). Watery places take on a landers to mediate with a changing and of the complex struc- special significance, and boats and water- increasingly challenging landscape, and tures found craft hold strong symbolic and practical to ensure their continuing prosperity within the status. Water is a medium for movement, (Murray 2012). The use of burnt mounds burnt mound at Cruester, not only for the living, particularly in a can be seen as a continuation of this Bressay. island locale such as Shetland, but also process. As locales of transformative as the medium through which the dead processes by which the earth, fire and pass to the afterlife, or on which the sun water come together to create new ma- travels through the night (Kaul 1998, see terials and substances, and alter the Strang 2004 for discussion of the sym- states of existing ones, burnt mounds bolic properties of water). It may be that can be seen to fit into a wider suite of placing agricultural tools within the practises used to actively engage with foundation of houses (Calder 1956), or the landscape and negotiate a place into the boundaries of cultivatable land within the world. were active attempts by prehistoric Shet-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 44

Conclusions: Bronze Age Shetland Bibiliography – Waving, not drowning? While getting to the roots of the mean- Barber, J & Russell White, C., 1991: In- ings of burnt mound sites remains illusive troduction to the ‘Scottish Selection’, and mysterious, it is possible to under- Buckley, V.: Burnt Offerings: International stand that they formed a part of a wider Contributions to Burnt Mound Archaeol- range of beliefs and practises which ogy. Dublin, Wordwell. manifested themselves in a number of ways during the Bronze Age. While the Barfield, L & Hodder, M., 1987: Burnt technologies involved in their creation and Mounds as Saunas and the Prehistory of use have been available to prehistoric Bathing, Antiquity 61: 370-9. peoples since before the Mesolithic, their popularity during the Bronze Age can be Birch, S. & Wildgoose, M., 2010: Uamh An attributed to the way in which they en- Ard Achadh (High Pasture Cave) www.high- mesh within a wider set of worldviews, pasture-cave.org Accessed 30/01/2013. and facilitate an ongoing dialogue between Bronze Age people and the world Bradley, R., 2000: The Archaeology of around them. Therefore, which it may ap- Natural Places. London, Routledge. pear at first glance that the Bronze Age of Shetland is impoverished and stagnant, Buckley, V. ed., 1990: Burnt Offerings: a closer examination reveals a different International Contributions to Burnt scenario. The proliferation of burnt mound Mound Archaeology, Dublin, Wordwell. usage in the Islands indicates a period of ongoing activity and industry. It would Butler, S., 1998: Climate, Ecology and appear that not only were Shetlanders Land-Use since the Last Ice Age, The aware of aspects of wider Bronze Age Shaping of Shetland: Developments in culture, but that they embraced them, Shetland Landscape Archaeology Turner and incorporated them into their daily V. ed., Lerwick, Shetland Times: 3-11. lives. Rather than standing on the shore- line waiting for the boats that would Calder, C. S. T., 1956: Report on the dis- take them away to warmer climes, it is covery of numerous stone house sites in possible to imagine Bronze Age Shetland- Shetland, Proceedings of the Prehistoric ers embraced the challenges presented Society of Scotland, 84: 340-97. by their changing landscape, and faced them head on. 45

Campbell Antony, I. M., 2003: Lumines- Kaliff, A., 2007: Water, Fire, Heaven and ence Dating of Burnt Mounds: New Evi- Earth: Ritual Practise and Cosmology in dence from Shetland and Orkney Unpub- Ancient Scandinavia, an Indo-European lished PhD Thesis. Glasgow. Perspective, Riksantikvarieambetet. Stock holm. Dockril, S., Bond, J. and O’Connor, T., 1998: Beyond the Burnt Mound: The Kaul, F., 1998: Ships on Bronzes: A Study South Nesting Palaeolandscape Project, in Bronze Age Religion and Iconography. The Shaping of Shetland: Developments in Shetland Landscape Archaeology, Turner, Kaul, F., 2011: Early Agriculture at the V. ed., Lerwick, Shetland Times: 61 – 82. Border, Farming on the edge: Cultural Landscape of the North. Short Papers Downes, J. & Lamb R., 2000: Prehistoric from the network meeting in Lerwick, Houses at Sumburgh in Shetland: Excava Shetland, Sept 7 th – 10 th 2010, Mahler, tion at Sumburgh Airport 1967-74, Oxbow, D. L. & Andersen, C., eds., Copenhagen, Oxford. The National Museum of Denmark: 44-57.

Fowler, C., 2005: Identity Politics: Per- Moore, H. & Wilson, G., 1999: Food for sonhood, Kinship, Gender and Power in thought: a survey of burnt mounds of Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Britain, Shetland and excavations at Tangwick, The Archaeology of Plural and Changing Proceedings of the Society of Antiquar- Identities, Casella, E. & Fowler C. eds., ies of Scotland 129: 203 – 237. Kluwer/Plenum, New York: 109-134. Moore, H. & Wilson, G., 2001: Report on Hedges, J., 1975: Excavation of two Excavations at Cruester Burnt Mound, Orcadian burnt mounds at Liddle and Bressay, Shetland. EASE Archaeology, Beaquoy. Proceedings of the Society of Edinburgh. Antiquaries of Scotland. 106: 39-98 Moore, H & Wilson, G., 2008: Bronze Hedges, J & Parry G., 1980: A Neolithic Age Bressay! Report on a further sea- Multiple Burial at Sumburgh Airport, Shet- son of excavation at Cruester Burnt land, Glasgow Archaeology, vol.7: 15-26. Mound, Bressay, Shetland 2008. EASE Archaeology, Edinburgh. Hodder, M. A & Barfield, L., eds., 1991: Burnt Mounds and Hot Stone Technology. Sandwell: West Bromwich.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 46

Mossop, M., 2006: Clowanstown 1 http:// Sheridan, A., 2012: Neolithic Shetland: www.archaeologicalconsultancy.com/pdf a view from the ‘Mainland’, The Border _publications/Clowanstown%201.pdf of Farming and the Cultural Markers. Accessed 30/01/2013 Short papers from the network meeting in Lerwick, Shetland September 5th – 9th Murray, J., 2012: Sacred Work: Cultivat- 2011, Mahler, D. L., ed., Copenhagen, The ing the Soil in Prehistoric Shetland, The National Museum of Denmark: 6-31. Border of Farming and the Cultural Mark- ers: Short Papers from the Network Meet- Strang, V., 2004: The Meaning of Water, ing in Lerwick, Shetland, September 5th – Oxford: Berg. 9th 2011, Mahler, D. L. ed., Copenhagen, The National Museum of Denmark: 53-61. Turner, V., 2011: From Homestead Enclo- sure to Farm? Field Development in Shet O’Drisceoil, D., 1988: Burnt mounds: land in the Neolithic Period, Farming on Cooking or Bathing, Antiquity 62: 671-80. the edge: Cultural Landscape of the North. Short Papers from the network meeting in O’Kelly. M. J., 1954: Excavations and Ex- Lerwick, Shetland, Sept 7 th – 10 th 2010, periments in Early Irish Cooking Places. Mahler, D. L. & Andersen, C. eds., Copen Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquar- hagen, The National Museum of Denmark: ies of Ireland. 84: 105-55 19-31.

O’Neill, J., 2009: Burnt Mounds in North- Whittle, A., Keith-Lucas, M., Millies, A., ern and Western Europe: A Study of Pre- Noddle, B., Rees, S. & Romans, J. C. C., historic Technology and Society. Berlin, 1986: Scord of Brouster. An Early Agri- Verlag. cultural Settlement on Shetland. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Owac, M. A., 2005: From the Ground Up: Monograph 9. Agency, Practise and Community in the South Western British Bronze Age, Journal Whittle, A., 1989: Islands of History: of Archaeological Method and Theory second millennium change in the north 12: 4 257-281. of Scotland, Transactions of the British Scandinavian Colloquium in Stockholm, Ritche, A. 1995: Prehistoric Orkney, His- ay 1011 1985, H. A Nordstrom, H. A. & toric Scotland, London. Knape, A., eds., Stockholm: 163-72. 47

Plus ça change…? Developments in Shetland, c 2500–1800 BC

Alison Sheridan

Introduction Britain and Ireland, the desire for metal In The Border of Farming and the Cultur- and the concomitant need for networks al Markers, a review of developments in over which metal could circulate was to Shetland from the first appearance of have a profound effect on the nature of ‘Neolithic’ traits until 1500 BC was pre- society in some regions, leading to what sented, with the main focus being on Stuart Needham has described as a ‘sun the period c 3700 – c 2500 BC (Sheridan burst’ of activity in north-east Scotland 2012a). This contribution shifts the focus between the 22 nd and 19 th centuries BC to the centuries between c 2500 BC and (Needham 2004), and to widespread ex- c 1800 BC, in order to compare and con- amples of conspicuous consumption on trast developments in Shetland with funerary monuments and prestigious pos those elsewhere in Scotland. This period sessions by the elite (Sheridan 2012c). In encompasses the time when Beaker Shetland, however, a very different pic- pottery – a novel ceramic tradition origi- ture emerges. While, in addition to the nating on the Continent – appeared and appearance of Beaker pottery, a novel was used in Scotland, as elsewhere in funerary tradition featuring interment of Britain and Ireland (Sheridan 2012b; individual corpses in stone cists seems to Shepherd 2012; Curtis and Wilkin 2012). have appeared at some point between In many regions, the appearance of this c 2300 BC and c 1800 BC, overall no radi novel pottery type was accompanied by cal changes in lifestyle or traditions ap- a variety of other novelties, including the pear to have been occasioned by these use of metal – copper and gold (Needham novelties. This contribution asks: how, 2012). Over time, and particularly from the when and why did Beaker pottery come to 22 nd century BC when tin started to be be used in Shetland? How does its ap- alloyed with copper to make bronze in pearance here, together with subsequent

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 48

developments, compare with what hap- Key: pened elsewhere in Scotland, and how 1. Unst can we account for the similarities and 2. South Nesting (South Nesting Hall cairn) 3. Scord of Brouster differences? And can we speak of ‘Chalco 4. Stanydale ‘temple’ lithic’ and ‘Early Bronze Age’ Shetland? 5. Stanydale house 6. Ness of Gruting 7. Giant’s Grave, Hestinsetter Hill Beaker pottery in Shetland: 8. Tougs the evidential basis 9. Sumburgh Airport ” Studies of pottery from individual 10. Fraga sites to date…serve to show that the invocation of distant parallels is no substitute for a locally deduced sequence and that the reality of the situation is going to be complex.” (Hedges 1986: 30)

In comparison with some parts of Scot- land such as Aberdeenshire, Shetland appears to have very little pottery that could be regarded as belonging to the Beaker tradition. In his review of Beaker pottery from Britain and Ireland (which focused almost entirely on material from funerary contexts), David Clarke could list only three finds, all just fragments (Clarke 1970: 521): from the cist containing the skeleton of a 21-25-year old man at Fraga, Scatness (Bryce 1933); from the fill of a posthole in the non-funerary stone building – the so-called ‘temple’ – at Stanydale, Sandsting (Cal- der 1950); and from a 19 th century find on Unst, the details of which had been

Fig. 1: Distribution of definite and probable examples of Beaker pottery in Shetland. 49

lost (Bryce 1933: 35). And in his review A further find from a funerary context of Beaker domestic pottery from Britain that has been mentioned in discussions and Ireland, Alex Gibson mentioned just of possible Beaker pottery from Shetland four finds, including the sherds from the is a sherd decorated with horizontal Stanydale ‘temple’ posthole (Gibson lines of cord impressions, found together 1982: 45, 245). The others in Gibson’s with cremated bones in a disturbed con- review are from houses at Stanydale text in a chamber tomb with heel-shaped (ibid.), Ness of Gruting (ibid., 45, 207) cairn at South Nesting (Downes and and Whalsay (the ‘Benie Hoose’: ibid., Lamb 2000, 53; see also Dockrill et al. 45, 110–1, but see below). 1998). Dockrill et al. have remarked (1998: 80) that the pottery assemblage Audrey Henshall has also written about from this cairn is similar to that found at finds of Beaker or Beaker-like pottery a nearby ‘house’ and burnt mound (the from Shetland. In her catalogue and dis- latter at Trowie Loch), but no details of cussion of the assemblage from the this pottery have been published. aforementioned Ness of Gruting house (Henshall 1956), she mentioned the finds Finally, assemblages of Beaker pottery from the Stanydale ‘temple’ and house, from domestic contexts are known from and also drew attention to superficial House 2 at Scord of Brouster (Whittle et similarities between the Ness of Gruting al. 1986: 5–12, 59–64, figs. 54–55); from pottery and that from Wiltrow, Dunross- the wooden post- and stake-hole struc- ness. The Wiltrow pottery will be discuss ture underlying the stone North House ed below. In her review of Scotland’s at Sumburgh Airport (Downes and Lamb chamber tombs, Henshall mentioned a 2000: 35–65 passim and fig. 24); and in find of cord-decorated pottery, possibly and near the burnt mound at Tougs, Burra Beaker, that had been found in a ruined Isle (Hedges 1986: 19, 30, 32, fig. 9). The passage tomb, Giant’s Grave, on Hestin- pottery from Midden II at Jarlshof (Hamil setter Hill, Sandsting, along with cre- ton 1956: 16) has also been mentioned mated bone (Henshall 1963: 149, 160). in one discussion of ‘Early Bronze Age’ According to James Hunt, who investi- pottery from Shetland (Downes and Lamb gated this chamber tomb in 1865 or 2000: 53), and indeed the presence of an 1866, ‘…it is worthy of note that the intriguing bone plaque with Beaker-like pottery here found essentially differs decoration from the same midden has from any found elsewhere; the only bit been noted and discussed by the present preserved had the string pattern on it’ author (Sheridan 2012a: 26 and fig. 9); but (Hunt 1866: 310–311). see below regarding both the pottery and

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 50

the recently-obtained radiocarbon date – although this would arguably be unfor animal bone from Midden II. Whether characteristic. However, Callander’s de- any Beaker pottery was among the ma- scription makes it clear that we are deal terial recently excavated on the Hill of ing with a thin-walled, fairly fine pot with Crooksetter (Brend and Barton 2011) re- a ‘thin everted lip’ and decorated with ‘a mains to be seen; post-excavation spe- broadish band of irregularly-formed up- cialist work continues. Figure 1 shows the right zig-zags and by at least two nar- distribution of the definite and probable row bands of crossed lines showing a finds. lozenge pattern. These bands are separated by plain spaces’ (Bryce 1936: 35); So, what are the characteristics of this this description implies that the decora- ‘Beaker’ pottery in Shetland? tion had been incised. The whereabouts of the associated skeleton are unknown. Arriving at an answer to this question is hampered by the fact that some of the Notwithstanding these problems re- pottery in question is lost, much is un- garding the current location of some of published – some being illustrated here the material, several observations can for the first time – and the extant mate- be offered, as follows: rial is scattered, with some in the Natio nal Museums Scotland (NMS) collections, 1 Cord-decorated Beaker pottery some at Shetland Museum in Lerwick, The pottery which, stylistically, comes and some still with its excavator. The finds closest to a widespread Beaker style is from Giant’s Grave seem never to have the cord-decorated rimsherd from the reached a museum, while the sherds Stanydale ‘temple’ (Fig. 2) – one of three from Fraga cannot be located among the slightly weathered sherds from the up- NMS collections, despite Thomas Bryce per fill of a posthole. The other two sherds having stated that they had been sent to are undecorated belly sherds, and they the (then-named) National Museum of could well all belong to the same pot, in Antiquities of Scotland to be reported on which case the horizontal lines of twisted by Dr Callander in 1932. The fact that they cord impression did not extend all the do not appear in the NMS registers, or in way down the body. This had been a the list of acquisitions published in the small, fairly thin-walled, fineware pot Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries made using slightly micaceous clay; the of Scotland, suggests that they might estimated rim diameter is c 150 mm and never have entered the collections: Cal- the wall thickness, c 9 mm. The rim had lander could have returned them to Bryce been squared off and upright, with the 51

Fig. 2: Rimsherd line running around the rim top); Hedges of All-Over-Cord has interpreted it as coming from a splay Beaker from posthole, Stany- ing neck. The sherd from South Nesting dale ‘temple’. heel-shaped cairn is also reported to Photo: Alison have horizontal-line twisted cord im- Sheridan. pressions (Downes and Lamb 2000: 53). (Note that one other claimed example of this same design, from the Stanydale house (Calder 1956: 356; Henshall 1956: 383; NMS X.HD 1082), can be discounted decoration starting immediately below as the decoration was made by the stab- the rim. Within Shetland, the closest and-drag technique, not by impressing parallel comes from a context belonging twisted cord: see Fig. 7.) to the earliest (Phase I) activity at Tougs (Fig. 3, top left; Hedges 1986: 14, fig. 9, 42). The cord-decorated pottery from Sum- This, too, was a squared-off rimsherd of burgh (Fig. 4) is somewhat different, in- slightly micaceous clay, around 9 mm sofar as the lines are multi-directional thick, with an estimated rim diameter of (mostly diagonal, some herringbone), 140 mm and with horizontal lines of and a few sherds are decorated on both twisted cord impressions (plus a further the exterior and the interior (e.g. 2-66d).

Fig. 3: Beaker pottery from Tougs (Phase 1). From Hedg- es 1986.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 52

Fig. 4: Cord-decorated pottery from Sumburgh Airport settlement. From Downes and Lamb 2000 53

Furthermore, the shape of the vessels dates as early as the third quarter of the differs: the rims are everted (with two third millennium BC. This point will be being flanged); the overall shape of the returned to below. pots is described as ‘sinuous’. However, as at Stanydale and Tougs, the clay is 2 Similar but different: slightly micaceous, the fabric is fine, and a regional variant of the Beaker one of the pots is of comparable size to ceramic tradition? the vessels from those sites. According Many previous commentators (e.g. Bryce to Downes and Lamb, it should all date to 1936; Henshall 1956; Gibson 1982; 1984; the early phase of activity at Sumburgh, Hedges 1986; Whittle et al. 1986) have even if some of the cord-impressed sherds noted that the pottery mentioned in the had been found in later contexts. introduction to this chapter has features that are comparable with Beaker pottery As for the only other cord-impressed elsewhere in Scotland, even though it Beaker candidate known to the author – may not be identical; for this reason, the sherd/s from Giant’s Grave – unfor- some of the pottery has been described as tunately nothing is known of the design, ‘Beaker-related’ and ‘Beaker-like’ (Gibson form and fabric of this lost pottery. 1982: 45). When Audrey Henshall wrote her report on the Ness of Gruting pottery, The Stanydale ‘temple’ cord-decorated the amount of Beaker pottery in Scotland sherd has been described as belonging from non-funerary contexts was signifi- to the widespread ‘All-Over-Cord’ style cantly smaller than is the case today, and of Beaker pottery (Clarke 1970: Map 1), so – as Alex Gibson has pointed out re- which was among the earliest type of garding the large assemblage from the Beaker pottery to be used in Britain and settlement at Northton on Harris (Gibson Ireland, appearing as early as the 25 th 1984; 2006) – we are now in a much century (Needham 2005; Sheridan 2007; better position to compare and contrast 2008; 2012b; Fitzpatrick 2011). This variety the Shetland material with finds from of Beaker does, however, seem to have elsewhere. The publication of Gibson’s had a relatively long currency, having been Britain- and Ireland-wide review of non- found for example in a context dated to funerary Beaker pottery (1982) also helps between c 2250 and 1950 BC at Ewe- in drawing broader comparisons, and in ford West, East Lothian (Sheridan 2007: understanding the nature of the overall 116). This means that we cannot assume ceramic repertoire associated with the that the pottery with horizontal cord-im- ‘Beaker tradition’. pressed lines in Shetland necessarily

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 54 55

The features that have – justifiably, in • Decoration: usually abundant, some- this author’s opinion – encouraged the times zoned, often incised, frequently identification of the pottery as ‘Beaker’ featuring diagonal lines, often as her- or Beaker-related have been a combina- ringbone, chevrons, lozenges or cross- tion of traits from the following list: hatching: Fig. 5. Regarding decorative technique there are attested, in • Fabric: a fineware component in the addition to incision, the use of cockle- repertoire, sometimes reddish – and, shell impressions at Ness of Gruting in Shetland, often made using slightly and Stanydale house (fig. 6) impres- micaceous clay; but with assemblag- sions of twisted cord – as noted es from domestic contexts, a range of above – and occasional impressions fabrics, including some coarseware. made using a rectangular-toothed • Thinness of walls (among the fine- comb (e.g. at Ness of Gruting: Hen- ware vessels): under 10 mm. shall 1956: Fig. 16, X.HD 925) – all • Vessel form: flat-based, sometimes techniques known from Beaker pot- with a bipartite profile, and fineware tery elsewhere in Scotland, such as versions being fairly small to medium- at Northton (Gibson 2006) and Cala- sized; i.e. with estimated rim diame nais (Sheridan et al. in press). As not- ters in the 100–200 mm range. As- ed above, the Stanydale house assem- semblages from domestic contexts blage also includes a pot decorated comprise a wider range of forms and by stab-and-drag (fig. 7). of pot sizes, with some large jars being present. Note, in this regard, that Fig. 6: Sherd Henshall’s reconstruction of the large with cockle shell impres- jar X.HD 916 from the Ness of Gruting sions from as a round-based vessel (Henshall Stanydale 1956: Fig. 15) is not necessarily cor- House. Photo: Alison rect: this pot could have had a nar- Sheridan. row flat base.

Fig. 5: Beaker pottery from Ness of Gruting, showing incised decoration. From Henshall 1956. The author is grateful to the Society of Antiquar- ies of Scotland for permission to reproduce this illustration.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 56

of this ‘localised’ character of much of Fig. 7: Sherd with stab-and- the Shetland material is provided by the drag decoration, previously fragmentary vessel from Unst (Fig. 8). misidentified by others as being twisted cord impres- Here, the rim form, fabric and wall thick- sion, from Stanydale ness are all reminiscent of Beaker pottery House. Photo: Alison elsewhere in Britain, and indeed its Sheridan. slack profile can be paralleled at North- ton (Gibson 2006: Fig. 3.17.27), while its specific decorative design – featuring rows of impressions above horizontal incised lines – is not easily paralleled, even though its constituent elements are.

A recent discovery from the Braes of The features that lend a more ‘localised’ Ha’Breck on Wyre, Orkney (Fig. 9 and or regionalised air to some of the Shet- see Thomas 2010), suggests that there land material relate to vessel form and may have been some sharing of design decoration. Some of the large jars from ideas between the users of Beaker pot- Ness of Gruting, for example, find only tery on Shetland and Orkney – another generalised, rather than exact, parallels region with few Beaker finds and with among other Scottish ‘domestic Beaker’ its own ‘take’ on the Beaker ceramic tra- pottery, and the presence of lugs on two dition. The dense incised herringbone on vessels in that assemblage (Henshall the flat-based vessel/s echoes that seen 1956: 382) is not a characteristic of on pottery from Ness of Gruting (e.g. Beaker pottery elsewhere. Similarly atyp- Henshall 1956: Fig. 17, NMS X.HD 938) ical is the rather random arrangement of and Stanydale house. The Braes of incised lines on pot X.HD 942, and the Ha’Breck pottery is dated, by a radiocar- presence of vertical ribs on two other bon date obtained from the associated pots from the Ness of Gruting assem- carbonised hulled barley, to 3780±35 BP blage (ibid., fig. 18, NMS X.HD 1468 and (SUERC- 37960 (GU26232), 2290–2040 945. Incidentally, as noted elsewhere cal BC at 68.2% probability, 2340–2040 (Sheridan 2012a: 24), the superficial recal BC at 95.4% probability: Antonia semblance between these latter pots Thomas pers. comm.). This is closely and Grooved Ware should not be taken comparable with the radiocarbon dates to indicate any connection with that ce- obtained from the barley found within ramic tradition. A further good example the wall of the Ness of Gruting house 57

Fig. 8: Sherds of Beaker from Unst. Photo: Alison Sheridan.

Fig. 9: Sherds of one or more Beaker from Braes of Ha’Breck, Wyre, Orkney, previously misidentified by others as Grooved Ware. Photo: Antonia Thomas.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 58

(Sheridan 2012a: Table 1) and, as argued both to the pre-existing local ceramic elsewhere (ibid; and see below), there tradition/s and to the bigger picture of are reasonable stratigraphic grounds for Beaker use elsewhere in Britain. suggesting that most of the pottery from that house was roughly contemporary With the benefit of our current knowl- with the barley cache. edge about the chronology both of Hebri dean Neolithic pottery (Sheridan et al. in 3 Issues of definition: when is a press) and of British Beaker pottery (e.g. Beaker not a Beaker – specifically Needham 2005; 2012; Sheridan 2007; in the context of Shetland? Curtis and Wilkin 2012), it is easy to reject Issues of definition have long dogged Henshall’s suggestion of influence from the characterisation of the Shetland ma- both Hebridean Neolithic and Beaker pot- terial, with Henshall being decidedly tery at the Ness of Gruting, as being chron- ambivalent about the Ness of Gruting ologically impossible. The floruit of the type assemblage, choosing to foreground ap- of Hebridean Neolithic pottery with which parent similarities with Hebridean Neo- Henshall was drawing parallels lies over lithic pottery while acknowledging ‘a con a millennium earlier than the dates for the nection with beaker pottery’ (Henshall Ness of Gruting house and, as argued else- 1956: 383); and Gibson referring to Shet- where, there is no evidence for the use land pottery ‘imitating’ Beaker pottery of that type of pottery in Neolithic Shet- elsewhere (Gibson 1984: 95). While it is land, even if the farming communities who perfectly legitimate to question what established a ‘Neolithic’ lifestyle in Shet- constitutes ‘a’ or ‘the’ Beaker ceramic land may have come from the Hebrides tradition – especially since the people (Sheridan 2012a). The aforementioned who made and used the pottery were radiocarbon dating for the Ness of Gruting not doing so for the benefit of future ce- house, obtained from a cache of barley ramic taxonomy – nevertheless it is, in which must have been deposited as the the present author’s opinion, possible to house was being constructed, indicates put forward an alternative view to the that the house was built at some point ones expressed by Henshall and Gibson. between 2200 and 1980 BC. The most This view accords with Hedges’ argu- plausible interpretation of the pottery from ment, quoted above, that it is necessary this house is that it represents a locally to construct a locally-specific model of – or regionally – specific variant of the what kind of pottery was in use at a par- Beaker ceramic tradition which had de- ticular time, in order to understand how veloped after the initial appearance of the pottery used in Shetland relates that type of pottery. This accords with the 59

‘adoption and adaptation’ model which tery in use during the first half of the this author has proposed to account for third millennium in Shetland, then there many developments in Shetland over the is nothing that bears any resemblance to fourth to second millennia, in which suc- the pottery from Ness of Gruting, Stany- cessive episodes of contact with the dale etc. – unless one counts the exist- outside world are followed by a strong ence of one flat-based pot from Scord of localising tendency (ibid.). Brouster (ibid., fig. 57.11). The cord-deco rated pottery described above constitutes As for Gibson’s argument that the Ness a striking novelty, as do the vessel forms of Gruting – and Stanydale house and and decoration on the assemblages from Benie Hoose – pottery represents an imi- Ness of Gruting, Stanydale etc. Indeed, tation of Beaker pottery elsewhere (Gib- all the evidence points towards the ini- son 1982: 45; 1984: 95), this begs the tial appearance of the new, alien, Beaker question ‘from where?’ The parallels with ceramic tradition, followed by the emer- Hebridean domestic Beaker assemblages gence of a regionally-specific trajectory are not sufficiently strong to suggest that for its development. The mechanism and there had been emulation of the pottery date of the appearance of this tradition made by communities there; and there will be discussed below. are precious few finds of any kind of Beaker pottery immediately to the south Meanwhile, it is legitimate to ask, with- of Shetland. Furthermore, his explanation in the Shetland context, where the defi- for regional variability among non-funer- nition of ‘regionalised Beaker pottery’ ary Beaker assemblages, which posited stops. The pottery reviewed above con- the existence of local, non-Beaker ele- stitutes a fairly diverse set of material, ments that continued pre-existing tradi- but with some features in common be- tions and were used alongside Beaker tween different sites, as in the case of elements (Gibson 1984: 95), is hard to the cord-decorated pottery listed above, sustain within the Shetland context. It is or the pottery with incised, diagonal-line indeed true that our knowledge of the decoration from Ness of Gruting, Stany- ceramic repertoire of Late Neolithic Shet dale House, Scord of Brouster House 2 land is sketchy in the extreme, currently and Tougs. However, other material that being limited to the assemblage of mostly has been included in some discussions large, globular undecorated vessels from of Shetland Beaker pottery differs con- House 1 at Scord of Brouster (Whittle et siderably from this and can arguably be al. 1986: Figs. 56–57). However, if that excluded, not least on chronological material is in any way typical of the pot- grounds. Thus, while there are four

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 60

sherds in the Benie Hoose assemblage Three assemblages are particularly prob- which appear to have ‘Beaker affinities’ lematic as regards identifying their date (Gibson 1982: 110–111, regarding Calder and place in the overall trajectory of pre- 1961: Fig. 7.6,7,10 and 11) – namely two historic Shetland pottery, and deciding with incised horizontal lines, one with pin- whether there are any connections with prick impressions and one with dragged a Shetland tradition of Beaker pottery. thumbnail impressions – these are not These are the non-cord decorated ves- closely comparable with the pottery dis- sels from the Stanydale ‘temple’ (Calder cussed above, and indeed their similarity 1950: Fig. 7); the few sherds from Mid- with Beaker pottery elsewhere may be den II at Jarlshof (Hamilton 1956: Fig. 9); coincidental, not least since the pin-prick- and the assemblage from Wiltrow (Curle decorated pot may have been square- 1936). mouthed. Furthermore, the remainder of the assemblage (Calder 1961: Fig. 7) is The Stanydale ‘temple’ pots, which in- radically different, with large, coarse, clude vessels that have been variously, undecorated jars predominating. The and erroneously, compared to Manx Neo fact that organic encrustation within lithic ‘Ronaldsway’ pottery (Calder 1950: one of the latter has produced a radio- 195) and to Swedish pottery (Henshall carbon date of 3360±40 BP (GrA-29373, 1956: 383), comprise several vessels of 1740–1530 cal BC at 95.4% probability: diverse sizes, shapes and fabrics. While Sheridan 2005: 183) suggests that at one (Calder 1950: Fig. 7B and B1) has a least part, if not all, of the Benie Hoose corrugated exterior comparable to that assemblage post-dates the Beaker pot- seen on some non-funerary Beaker pottery from Ness of Gruting and the other tery elsewhere (e.g. Glenluce, Dumfries sites discussed above. A similar argu- and Galloway: Gibson 1982: Fig. ment (minus the radiocarbon date) could GLE.8.19–21), the other vessels have no be applied to the assemblage from the convincing Beaker comparanda. In the Standing Stones of Yoxie, even though absence of any radiocarbon dates, and this had not previously been cited as since we do not know whether the struc- candidate Beaker material (Calder 1961: ture was used at different times in pre- Fig. 8): despite the presence of a few history, it is quite possible that this pot- sherds with decoration reminiscent of tery belongs to several different periods. that seen on the Ness of Gruting pot- We simply do not know enough about the tery, the rest of the assemblage differs overall picture of Shetland pottery de- radically and could be of comparable velopment to be able to place it in any date to the Benie Hoose material. meaningful typochronology. 61

The small assemblage from Midden II at er than being residual from an earlier Jarlshof (Hamilton 1956: Fig. 9) is also phase of activity. However, Audrey Hen- frustratingly uninformative as to its date shall drew attention to superficial simi- and identity. On the one hand, the pres- larities between the incised decoration ence of incised herringbone or criss-cross found on some of this pottery (Curle decoration on one sherd (ibid. fig. 9.7) 1936: Fig. 14) and that from the Ness of echoes that seen on the Beaker pottery Gruting (Henshall 1956: 381); and indeed from Ness of Gruting and other sites; the filled lozenge design on one sherd the flanged rim on another (ibid. fig. 9.1) (Curle 1936: Fig. 14.10) is a motif seen is reminiscent of one from the Sumburgh on many Beakers in Britain. It is indeed house; and the apparent rustication on possible that we are dealing with a pal- another sherd (ibid. fig. 9.6) is a decora- impsest of activities, with a pre-existing tive technique known from Beaker pot- house site being re-used as an iron tery elsewhere in Britain. Furthermore, smelting area; that would account for the enigmatic bone plaque from the same the abundance of non-ironworking cera midden bears Beaker-like decoration. On mic material and of coarse stone tools. the other hand, the radiocarbon evidence On closer examination, the assemblage for Midden II tells a different story. In clearly includes some material of prob- addition to the date of 3260±35 BP (GU- able Iron Age date: this is true, for ex- 12914, 1610–1500 cal BC at 95.4% prob- ample, of the sharply-kinking neck from ability) obtained from carbonised barley a large jar (ibid., fig. 15.3), reminiscent of grain/s (Dockrill & Bond 2009: 50), there some Iron Age pottery from Jarlshof and is now an even later date of 2830±27 Sumburgh, and of the sherds from other (SUERC-43684 (GU-29030), 1070–900 cal large undecorated coarseware pots. Too BC at 95.4% probability) obtained from little is known about the overall typo a bone point from the midden (Sheridan chronology of Shetland’s prehistoric pot- et al. 2012). Clearly, many more dates tery to tell whether all the assemblage is for Midden II are required before this Iron Age, or whether this is a multi-period conundrum can be resolved. site with a Beaker element. Luckily, some sherds (albeit not the most interesting Finally, as for the Wiltrow assemblage, examples, in the present context) have this comes from a site with abundant radiocarbon-datable organic encrusta- evidence for ironworking and the exca- tions on their interior surface, so there vator assumed that the pottery must be is scope for obtaining some idea of the contemporary with the ironworking, rath- date of some of this pottery.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 62

When, how and why did traditions include Continental-style funer- Beaker pottery come to be ary practices. In Britain, with the excep- used in Shetland, and was it tion of the communal cist associated part of a ‘package’ of novelties? with the ‘Boscombe Bowmen’ (Fitzpatrick The ‘when’ question is difficult to answer, 2011), the earliest British Beaker-asso- given the paucity of radiocarbon dates ciated funerary monuments consist of relating to Shetland Beaker pottery. As oval or subrectangular earth-cut graves, far as the overall appearance of Beaker with or without wooden plank-built cof- pottery in Britain is concerned, the evi- fins/chambers, and with or without a dence points to a diasporic-like appear- modest mound of earth and stones on ance of Continental Beakers during the top. Some, as at Newmill (Perth and Kin- 25 th century BC that was geographically ross) and Upper Largie (Argyll and Bute), extensive yet thinly and unevenly dis- are encircled by a ditch, the latter having tributed (Needham 2012). This is believed posts set into it (Sheridan 2008). Accord- to relate to the arrival of small numbers ing to Stuart Needham, an early phase of individuals, coming to different parts when Beaker pottery and its associated of Britain and Ireland from different novelties were a rare phenomenon was parts of the Continent, for various reasons. followed, from the 23 rd century, by a pe- Some, such as the ‘Amesbury Archer’, riod when people in many parts of Britain could have been making heroic long-dis- enthusiastically adopted this ‘package’ tance journeys – along with their reti- of novelties, and when regional styles of nues, as befitted the ideology of elite Beaker emerged; by around 2000 BC, men keen to underline and enhance their other styles of pottery had gained in prestige (Fitzpatrick 2011). Others came to popularity and Beaker use was declining seek sources of copper and gold (O’Brien in many areas. 2012); with others, the motives are harder to discern. The rarity of these earliest It is clear that the earliest appearance Beakers has been noted by previous of the Beaker ‘phenomenon’ extended at commentators: we are most certainly not least as far north as Skye where a slab- dealing with an invasion of ‘Beaker Folk’. lined grave associated with early All- A ‘package’ of other Continental novel- Over-Cord and incised Beaker at Broad- ties is associated, including the use of ford has recently produced radiocarbon metal and of new, fancy styles of archery dates comparable with other early Beak- gear; this suggests that the immigrants er graves in Britain, between the 25 th were bringing with them the traditions and early 23 rd centuries BC (Birch 2012) and practices of their homelands. These and, on the east coast, at least as far as 63

Inverness, where another early Beaker as discussed below, the dating at Tougs grave was found at Beechwood Park suggests that that pot was made closer (Suddaby and Sheridan 2006). Further to the end of the third millennium. Further north, on the Black Isle, an assemblage more, no example is known from Shetland of early Beakers, including a large All- of the oval/subrectangular Beaker grave Over-Comb decorated Beaker and a large format. The use of rectangular stone cists rusticated Beaker, was found as a sec- – translations into stone of the timber ondary deposit in a Neolithic chamber chambers – is associated with the period tomb at Kilcoy South – also confusingly when Beaker use gained in popularity, known as Kilcoy West, Highland (Clarke rather than when it initially appeared, 1970: Figs. 96, 126; Henshall and Ritchie and thus there is no reason to suspect 2001: 71-2, 153-157 and fig. 32), and All- that the Fraga cist is particularly early; Over-Cord sherds have been found on the the ceramic evidence accords with that north coast of Caithness, at Freswick and view. And Shetland is notable for the Lower Dounreay (Edwards 1929; Hen- absence of the other elements of the shall 1963; Clarke 1970: 529). Indeed, the Beaker ‘package’. There is no fancy ar- Lower Dounreay All-Over-Cord Beaker chery gear, for example, and there are no – which, like the Kilcoy Beakers, had been metal artefacts that pre-date 1500 BC at a secondary deposit in a chamber tomb – the earliest (Trevor Cowie pers. comm.). closely resembles one of the Broadford The tanged blade from Northerhouse Beakers. So did this initial ‘diaspora’ ex- (Nordrhouse) is of Middle Bronze Age tend as far as Shetland? date, despite its inclusion in John Coles’ listing of Early Bronze Age metalwork Frustratingly, the answer must be ‘We (Coles 1969: 91). cannot say’ – or, at least, there is no un- equivocal evidence for this. As mentioned What radiocarbon dates there are for above, the presence of All-Over-Cord Shetland Beaker pottery – from Ness of Beaker is not proof of a ‘Beaker pres- Gruting, Tougs and Sumburgh – relate to ence’ as early as the third quarter of the a time when the ‘regionalisation’ referred third millennium. The shape of the All- to above had already taken place. As Over-Cord Beakers as implied by the noted above, the Ness of Gruting house rimsherds from Stanydale ‘temple’ and seems to have been constructed between Tougs does not match that of the earliest 2200 and 1980 cal BC, to judge from the All-Over-Cord Beakers elsewhere, which radiocarbon dates for the cache of car- tend to have slightly more pointed rims bonised barley grains found within its and can have slightly curving necks – and, walls (Sheridan 2012a: Table 1). This

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 64

ostensibly gives a terminus post quem 10): a piece of carbonised rope was dated for the pottery, although no great inter- to 3535±153 BP (GU-1015, 2300–1490 val between house construction and the cal BC at 95.4% probability) and charred deposition of at least some of the pot- wood from a hearth or cooking pit – again, tery need be involved – and indeed, unidentified as to species – produced a Audrey Henshall argued that most of the date of 3629±53BP (GU-1006, 2200-1830 pottery might actually slightly pre-date cal BC at 95.4% probability). The dates the construction of the house (Henshall obtained for House 2 at Scord of Brouster 1956: 381). That the house’s occupation (Whittle et al. 1986: 8) need not be con- or use may have extended over several sidered here since all clearly relate to a generations is implied by the presence previous, Neolithic phase of pre-house of two unfinished miniature battle axe- activity between c 3300 and c 2900 BC. heads in the house which, by analogy with a dated example from Doune, may So, as regards the question of when date to some point between the 19 th and Beaker pottery came to be used in Shet- 17 th century BC (Sheridan 2012a: 28). land, all we can conclude is that its appearance was probably before the last The date range for the construction of two centuries of the third millennium, the Ness of Gruting house is not dissimi but how long before that is unknown. lar to that obtained for the building be- That it arrived as a tradition of potting, side the burnt mound at Tougs (Hedges featuring a full repertoire of vessel forms, 1986: 12): two samples of ‘wood’ – spe- is suggested by the variety of pot sizes cies and condition unspecified – produced and shapes in the ‘developed’ Ness of dates of 3525±75 BP (GU-1110) and Gruting Beaker assemblage. And the 3610±60 BP (GU-1111), which calibrate fact that Beaker pottery is associated respectively to 2120–1660 cal BC and with the use of a rectangular stone cist at 2150–1770 cal BC at 95.4% probability. Fraga suggests that it may have appeared One assumes that there had been no after this style of funerary monument had ‘old wood’ effect with these dates since begun to be used elsewhere in Scotland there will not have been substantial trees – although the appearance of these two on Shetland at the time, although if novelties need not necessarily have been driftwood had been used, there could be contemporary. In the current author’s an age offset. Similar dates were also opinion, the 23 rd century would seem to be obtained for the phase of activity asso- the most likely date for the appearance ciated with the cord-impressed pottery of Beaker use in Shetland; future discov- from Sumburgh (Downes and Lamb 2000: eries will show whether this is correct. 65

If the question of ‘when?’ is hard to an- is more likely to be a case of active swer, equally hard are the questions, adoption by ‘Shetlanders’ who had trav- ‘From where?’ and ‘How and why?’ elled south (either to the Hebrides or to the northern Scottish mainland), than of Orkney seems an unlikely ‘source area’ introduction by immigrants from one of for two reasons. Firstly, like Shetland, it those areas. This is because both of lies at the northernmost edge of Beaker these novel traditions seem to have been pottery distribution, and Beakers are no- absorbed and adapted within a wholly table for their rarity; the initial diaspora localised social milieu. The style of house does not seem to have extended as far as building continues a tradition established Orkney and, in contrast to some areas to during the Neolithic period, and there are the south, the idea of using Beakers does clear continuities in traditions of stone not seem to have become very popular use for artefacts – including the re-use there. Secondly, there is no evidence for of fragments of felsite stone axeheads the use of All-Over-Cord Beakers in Ork- and knives, as at Tougs, for instance ney. This is not to deny the existence of (Hedges 1986). Furthermore, the associa contact between Shetland and Orkney: tion of Beaker pottery with chamber tombs the similarity between the Ness of Gruting – at South Nesting and in the Giant’s and Braes of Ha’Breck pottery suggests Grave, on Hestinsetter Hill – continues late third millennium links, as does the a tradition of using megalithic funerary exportation of Shetland steatite vessels monuments that was, again, established to Orkney. However, this contact seems during the Neolithic period. Whether the to have occurred once the tradition of use of heel-shaped cairns was a novelty Beaker use in Shetland had already be- dating to the time when Beaker pottery come well established. Arguably more began to be used remains to be seen; it plausible as potential source areas are is a possibility. As regards the use of the Western Isles and the northern ‘main rectangular stone cists, while the Fraga land’ of Scotland. Both these areas were and Pettigarth’s Field examples (Calder touched by the initial diaspora, which 1961: Fig. 6) are comparable with the introduced the tradition of using All-Over- use of such cists on ‘mainland’ Scotland, Cord Beakers – among other types; and their deployment at Muckle Heog (Hen- the subsequent use of rectangular stone shall 1963: 170) is decidedly idiosyncra cists is also attested in both areas. tic. Here, two such cists were found under a heel-shaped cairn; one contained the As for the ‘how and why?’ question, the unburnt remains of several individuals evidence from Shetland suggests that this together with ceramic or steatite vessels,

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 66

and a second contained a skull and sev- this, they were following a well-estab- eral steatite vessels. This monument is lished pattern of adopting and adapting unparalleled and, as argued elsewhere novelties following episodic contacts (Sheridan 2012a: 27), reflects a ‘pick and with the wider world. Shetland may not mix’ approach, combining the exogenous have been touched by the remarkable – i.e. the use of the cists – with the in- diaspora of the 25 th century, nor did it digenous – i.e. the heel-shaped cairn. witness the hierarchisation and compet- itive conspicuous consumption that is The phenomenon of prehistoric Shet- obvious in some parts of Britain during the landers travelling south and adopting 22 nd to 20 th century. There may indeed novelties has a precedent during the have been some social differentiation in early third millenium when, as argued Shetland, and perhaps the use of stea- elsewhere (Sheridan 2012a: 22–24), such tite vessels – an indigenous innovation – travellers may well have visited Orkney and the choice of funerary monument and been inspired to adopt the pestle- was linked with this. However, as had and cushion-shaped maceheads that were been the case during the early third mil- used as symbols of power there. That lennium, when a markedly inegalitarian external travel continued – or resumed – society seems to have existed in Orkney, during the time when Beaker pottery but not in Shetland, it may well be that was in use is indicated by the export of Shetland lacked the conditions for sub- steatite cinerary urns to Orkney within the stantial social inequality to emerge. While 2200–1900 cal BC timeframe (ibid., 26), agriculture and stock-rearing were clearly as well as by the evidence from Braes of being undertaken (Dockrill et al. 1998), Ha’Breck. there may not have been the opportunities to amass surpluses that existed else We can thus imagine the inhabitants of where; similarly, there was no scope for Shetland as active agents, in contact controlling the movement of highly-de- – however sporadic – with the outside sired resources such as metal or metal world and choosing what exotic aspects artefacts – as seems to have been the to adopt, rather than as passive recipi- case in Kilmartin Glen, for example ents of incoming influences. (Sheridan 2012c).

Conclusions What is also clear from this review is That the inhabitants of Shetland partook how small our evidential base is, and how of the ‘Beaker phenomenon’, in their badly we need more radiocarbon dates, way and on their own terms, is clear; in and more well-excavated findspots, if we 67

are to advance our understanding of the ing the overall typochronology of Shet- ‘when, how and why?’ questions and to land prehistoric pottery, as is clear from set them within a broader framework of the discussion of the chronological un- developments in Shetland. In this regard, certainties surrounding several ceramic one issue that is particularly important to assemblages. explore is whether there was a significant increase in population during the Finally, the fact that the use of Beaker period when Beaker pottery was adopted pottery seems not to have been associ- and used. The evidence from the South ated with the use of metal in Shetland Nesting project and elsewhere points to raises the question of whether it is ap- flourishing communities that were prac- propriate to use the terms ‘Chalcolithic’ tising intensive ‘infield’ cultivation and and ‘Early Bronze Age’ to describe the stock-keeping in fertile areas (Dockrill et period in question. On the one hand, the al. 1998; Dockrill and Bond 2009; cf. lifestyle that was being followed was a Hedges 1986 and Whittle et al. 1986), continuation of what had been practised and Simon Butler’s review of the palaeo for many centuries during the Neolithic; environmental evidence for Shetland it could be argued that Shetland re- suggests that this was when a major mained essentially ‘Neolithic’ until metal development of heathland occurred, re- began to be used, around or after 1500 BC lating to the use of heath for grazing – and indeed for some time after that. (Butler 1998). Now that it is realised On the other hand, we need some way that not every substantial stone-built of recognising that developments in Shet house has to be of Neolithic date, we can land were not entirely divorced from ask how many of the oval houses that those elsewhere in Britain. Perhaps a appear on Canter’s map (Canter 1998: pragmatic solution would be either to Fig. 15) – and indeed, how many of the use those terms, but to qualify them, or burnt mounds (ibid., fig. 20) – might be else to abandon period names and refer of late third/early second millennium date. instead to ‘late third millennium/early Targeted fieldwork similar to that used second millennium BC developments’ to by the South Nesting Project (Dockrill et cover the timeframe of interest here. al. 1998) should help to provide the an- Given the diversity of the terminology that swer to these questions. is currently in use, and the uncertainty over what time periods are being in- One other conclusion to emerge from this voked, it may be that the latter approach review of Shetland Beaker pottery is that is the least likely to cause confusion. we are still a long way from understand-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 68

Acknowledgements Calder, C. S. T., 1950: Report on the ex- The author is grateful to Antonia Thomas cavation of a Neolithic temple at Stany- for permission to reproduce her photo- dale in the parish of Sandsting, Shet- graph of the Braes of Ha’Breck pottery land. Proceedings of the Society of and to cite the unpublished radiocarbon Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol. 84 (1949- date; to the Society of Antiquaries of 50): 185-205. Scotland, the Glasgow Archaeological Society, and Jane Downes and Raymond Calder, C. S. T., 1956: Report on the dis- Lamb for permission to reproduce images covery of numerous Stone Age house- first published by them; and last, but by sites in Shetland. Proceedings of the So- no means least, to Ditlev Mahler for his ciety of Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol. 89 saint-like patience! (1955-56): 340-397.

Calder, C. S. T., 1961: Excavations in References Whalsay, Shetland, 1954–5. Proceed- ings of the Society of Antiquaries of Birch, S., 2012: Broadford Medical Centre. Scotland. Vol. 94 (1960-61): 28-45. Discovery and Excavation in Scotland. Vol. 13: 115-6. Canter, M., 1998: Prehistoric sites in the Shetland landscape: a GIS study of Brend, A. & Barton, R., 2011: Hill of Mainland Shetland. The Shaping of Crooksetter, Delting, Shetland. Excavation Shetland. Turner, V. (ed.), The Shetland at Site 002. Unpublished Data Structure Times, Lerwick: 47-60. Report, Project 246, ORCA, Kirkwall. Clarke, D.L., 1970: Beaker Pottery of Bryce, T. H., 1933: Notice of a short cist Great Britain and Ireland. Cambridge at Fraga, Scatness, Shetland. Proceed- University Press, Cambridge. ings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol. 67 (1932-3): 34-36. Coles, J. M., 1969: Scottish Early Bronze Age metalwork. Proceedings of the So- Butler, S., 1998: Climate, ecology and ciety of Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol. land-use since the last Ice Age. The 101 (1968-69): 1-110. Shaping of Shetland. Turner, V. (ed.), The Shetland Times, Lerwick: 3-11. 69

Curle, A. O., 1936: Account of the exca- Edwards, A. J. H., 1929: Excavations at vation of an iron smeltery, and of an as- Reay Links and at a horned cairn at Low- sociated dwelling and tumuli at Wiltrow er Dounreay, Caithness. Proceedings of in the parish of Dunrossness, Shetland. the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries Vol. 63 (1928-89): 138-149. of Scotland. Vol. 70 (1935-36): 153-169. Fitzpatrick, A. P., 2011. The Amesbury Curtis, N. & Wilkin, N., 2012: The re- Archer and the Boscombe Bowmen. Bell gionality of Beakers and Bodies in the Beaker Burials at Boscombe Down, Chalcolithic of North-east Scotland. Is Amesbury, Wiltshire. Wessex Archaeol- there a British Chalcolithic? People, ogy (Report 27), Salisbury. Place and Polity in the Later Third Mil- lennium. Allen, M. J., Gardiner, J. and Gibson, A.M., 1982: Beaker Domestic Sheridan, J. A. (eds.), Oxbow/Prehistor- Sites. A Study of the Domestic Pottery ic Society (Prehistoric Society Research of the Late Third and Early Second Mil- Paper 4), Oxford: 237-256. lennia B.C. in the British Isles. British Archaeological Reports (British Series Dockrill, S. J. & Bond, J. M., 2009: Sus- 107), Oxford. tainability and resilience in prehistoric North Atlantic Britain: the importance of Gibson, A.M., 1984: Problems of Beaker a mixed palaeoeconomic system. Journal ceramic assemblages: the north British of the North Atlantic. Vol. 2(1): 33-50. material. Between and Beyond the Walls. Miket, R. & Burgess, C. (eds.), Dockrill, S. J., Bond, J. M. & O’Connor, John Donald, Edinburgh: 74-96. T., 1998: Beyond the burnt mound: the South Nesting Palaeolandscape Project. Gibson, A.M., 2006: Pottery. Excavations The Shaping of Shetland. Turner, V. (ed.), at Northton, Isle of Harris. Simpson, S. The Shetland Times, Lerwick: 61-82. D. A., Murphy, E. M. and Gregory, R. A. (eds.), British Archaeological Reports Downes, J. & Lamb, R., 2000: Prehistor- (British Series 408), Oxford: 90-133. ic Houses at Sumburgh in Shetland. Ex- cavations at Sumburgh Airport 1967–74. Hamilton, J. R. C., 1956: Excavations at Oxbow, Oxford. Jarlshof, Shetland. Her Majesty’s Sta- tionery Office (Ministry of Works Ar- chaeological Reports No. 1), Edinburgh.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 70

Hedges, J. W., 1986: Bronze Age struc- Barclay, G. J. (eds.), Society of Antiquaries tures at Tougs, Burra Isle, Shetland. Glas of Scotland, Edinburgh: 217-245. gow Archaeological Journal. Vol. 13: 1-43. Needham, S. P., 2005: Transforming Henshall, A.S., 1956: Appendix II. Pot- Beaker culture in north-west Europe: pro tery and stone implements from the Ness cesses of fusion and fission. Proceedings of Gruting. In Calder, C. S. T., Report on of the Prehistoric Society. Vol. 71: 171-217. the discovery of numerous Stone Age Needham, S. P., 2012: Case and place for house-sites in Shetland, 381-391. Pro- the British Chalcolithic. Is there a British ceedings of the Society of Antiquaries Chalcolithic? People, Place and Polity in of Scotland. Vol. 89 (1955-56): 340-397. the Later Third Millennium. Allen, M. J., Gardiner, J. and Sheridan, J. A. (eds.), Henshall, A. S., 1963: The Chambered Oxbow/Prehistoric Society (Prehistoric Tombs of Scotland. Volume 1. Edinburgh Society Research Paper 4), Oxford: 1-26. University Press, Edinburgh. O’Brien, W., 2012: The Chalcolithic in Henshall, A. S. and Ritchie, J. N. G., Ireland: a chronological and cultural 2001: The Chambered Cairns of the Cen- framework. Is there a British Chalcolithic? tral Highlands. Edinburgh University People, Place and Polity in the Later Press, Edinburgh. Third Millennium. Allen, M. J., Gardiner, J. and Sheridan, J. A. (eds.), Oxbow/ Hunt, J., 1866: Report on explorations Prehistoric Society (Prehistoric Society into the archaic anthropology of the Is- Research Paper 4), Oxford: 211-225. lands of Unst, Brassay, and the Main- land of Zetland, undertaken for the Earl Shepherd, I. A. G., 2012: Is there a Scot- of Zetland and the Anthropological Soci- tish Chalcolithic? Is there a British Chal- ety of London. Memoirs Read before the colithic? People, Place and Polity in the Anthropological Society of London. Vol. Later Third Millennium. Allen, M. J., Gar- 2 (1865-66): 294-338. diner, J. and Sheridan, J. A. (eds.), Oxbow/ Prehistoric Society (Prehistoric Society Needham, S. P., 2004: Migdale-Marnoch: Research Paper 4), Oxford: 164-171. sunburst of Scottish metallurgy. Scot- land in Ancient Europe: the Neolithic Sheridan, J.A., 2005: The National Mu- and Early Bronze Age of Scotland in their seums’ of Scotland radiocarbon dating European Context. I. Shepherd, A. G. & programmes: results obtained during 71

2004/5. Discovery and Excavation in Sheridan, J. A. (eds.), Oxbow/Prehistoric Scotland. Vol. 6: 182-183. Society (Prehistoric Society Research Paper 4), Oxford: 40-55. Sheridan, J.A., 2007: Scottish Beaker dates: the good, the bad and the ugly. Sheridan, J. A., 2012c: Contextualising From Stonehenge to the Baltic: Living Kilmartin: building a narrative for devel- with Cultural Diversity in the Third Mil- opments in western Scotland and beyond, lennium BC. M. Larsson & M. Parker from the Early Neolithic to the Late Pearson (eds.), British Archaeological Bronze Age. Image, Memory and Monu- Reports S1692, Oxford: 91-123. mentality; archaeological engagements with the material world. Jones, A. M., Sheridan, J.A., 2008: Upper Largie and Pollard, J., Allen, M. J. and Gardiner, J. Dutch-Scottish connections during the (eds.), Oxbow/Prehistoric Society (Pre- Beaker period. Between Foraging and historic Society Research Paper 5), Farming. An Extended Broad Spectrum Oxford: 163-183. of Papers Presented to Leendert Louwe Kooijmans. Fokkens, H., Coles, B. J., van Sheridan, J.A., Henshall, A. S., Johnson, Gijn, A. L., Kleijne, J. P. Ponjee, H. W. M. & Ashmore, P. J. in press: The pot- and Slappendel, C. J. (eds.), Faculty of tery assemblage. Calanais. Survey and Archaeology, Leiden University (Analecta Excavation 1979-88. P. J. Ashmore, Praehistorica Leidensia 40), Leiden: 247- Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 260. Scottish Archaeological Internet Report www.sair.org.uk, Chapter 18. Sheridan, J.A., 2012a: Neolithic Shet- land: a view from the “mainland”. The Sheridan, J. A., Goldberg, M., Blackwell, Border of Farming and the Cultural Mark- A., Mahler, D. L., Richards, M., Duffy, P., ers. D. L. Mahler (ed.), National Museum Gibson, A. M., Macniven, A. & Caldwell, of Denmark, Copenhagen: 6-36. D. H., 2012: Radiocarbon dates associated with the Scottish History and Ar- Sheridan, J. A., 2012b: A Rumsfeld real- chaeology Department, National Muse- ity check: what we know, what we don’t ums Scotland, 2011/12. Discovery and know and what we don’t know we don’t Excavation in Scotland. Vol. 13: 200-202. know about the Chalcolithic in Britain and Ireland. Is there a British Chalcolithic? Suddaby, I. & Sheridan, J.A., 2006: A pit People, Place and Polity in the Later Third containing an undecorated Beaker and Millennium. Allen, M. J., Gardiner, J. and associated artefacts from Beechwood

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 72

Park, Raigmore, Inverness. Proceedings Whittle, A. W. R., Keith-Lucas, M., of the Society of Antiquaries of Scot- Milles, A., Noddle, B., Rees, S. & Ro- land. Vol. 136: 77-88. mans, J. C. C., 1986: Scord of Brouster. An Early Agricultural Settlement on Thomas, A., 2010: The Braes of Ha’Breck, Shetland. Oxford University Committee Wyre. Discovery and Excavation in Scot- for Archaeology, Oxford. land. Vol. 11: 121-123.

At Julianehøj passage grave. From the excursion during the symposium. Photo J. Arntzen 2012. 73

Felsite axehead reduction – The flow from quarry pit to discard/deposition

Torben Bjarke Ballin

Introduction social organization of Neolithic Shet- In previous papers from this project (Bal- land. The present paper deals exclusively lin 2011c; 2012a), the author discussed with felsite axeheads, as there is pres- aspects of artefact production based on ently insufficient evidence to allow an North Roe riebeckite felsite. These pa- equally detailed discussion of the move- pers focused on more general questions, ment of felsite polished knives (so-called such as the colonization of the Shetland Shetland knives). Islands, the advent of felsite production, the possible “interdict” on felsite expor- The “flow” of felsite tation in the Neolithic period, and the Recent surveys and excavations have general character of the prehistoric fel- added much new information on the site exchange. The focus of the present Shetland Neolithic, not least relating to paper is on the flow of felsite through felsite procurement, reduction and ex- Neolithic Shetland, from quarry to depo- change. With the addition of these new sition, and it will be attempted to relate assemblages (e. g. Hill of Crooksetter, a number of key Neolithic sites on Shet- Firths Voe, the lower levels at Old Scat- land to specific stages in the felsite flow, ness, and the North Roe Felsite Project; see fig. 1. It is thought that this exercise Ballin 2008a; forthcoming; Cooney et al. may shed light on the organization of 2012), it has been possible to construct felsite procurement, reduction and ex- a flowchart (fig. 1) which shows the change1 and thereby, essentially, on the movement of felsite, from the North Roe

1 Exchange is here defined as in Renfrew (1977: 72), that is “... in the case of some distributions it is not established that the goods changed hands at all; [exchange] in this case implies procurement of materials from a distance, by whatever mechanism”.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 74

Fig. 1: Felsite axe head re- quarries to final deposition, on archaeo- production of prestige and ritual items duction – the flow from logical sites and in the landscape. Sheri (fig. 1’s left and right columns, respec- quarry pit to dan’s (2012) recent discussion of the tively). The main difference between the deposition/ Modesty cache also added information two flows is that the latter does not in- discard. relevant to the construction of fig. 1. clude a use phase, including adaptation, rejuvenation, and recycling. In both cases, It is thought that the movement of fel- the basic reduction occurs ‘on the moun- site, within the sphere of axehead pro- tain’ (i. e. within the quarry complex), duction and reduction, is best under- with use and deposition occurring “off stood as two parallel flows, one relating the mountain”. It is still uncertain where to the production of domestic implements the axeheads were polished. – although felsite itself may have had an inherent non-functional value, giving Following the terminology of Vemming any felsite artefact some ‘special’ mean- Hansen & Madsen (1983), the basic part ing or value – and one relating to the of the axehead production is defined as a 75

five-step process, see fig. 2: 1) a nodule In the paper’s discussion of activities or block is removed from the quarry or taking place at the North Roe quarries, outcrop; 2) a crudely shaped blank is focus will mainly be on the Midfield out- produced; 3) the blank is given its general crops and workshops. The Beorgs of Uyea axehead shape – the blank becomes a scheduled area – popularly referred to as rough-out or preform; 4) the lateral seams “the Beorgs” – generally represents a are refined by the detachment of small palimpsest situation, covering centuries chips, and the edge is formed by pres- of overlapping activities, whereas the Mid- sure-flaking; and 5) the axehead is finally field area is characterized by individual polished. Each stage is associated with quarry pits and well-defined workshops. specific types of waste, as shown in During the 2012 survey of both areas (Bal- Vemming Hansen (1981). lin & Davis 2012), it was possible to de- fine discrete felsite-bearing scatters along The evidence the eastern pe-riphery of the Beorgs of – the sites and the felsite “flow” Uyea quarry area, but none included axe Fig. 1 is the combined result of evidence head rough-outs. Most likely, this is due to from old sites and new excavations, the Beorgs generally being a well-known supplemented by evidence from the re- archaeological, and to a degree tourist, cent surveys of the North Roe Felsite Pro location, and as it is also more easily ac- ject. Below, these sites are presented and related to the different stages in the Fig. 2: Stages in the manufacture of thin-butted flint axe heads felsite flowchart. (courtesy of Vemming Hansen & Madsen 1983: 45): raw nodule, blank, rough-out, finished axe head, and polished axe head.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 76

cessible than Midfield, it is thought that any rough-outs which may originally have formed parts of these peripheral scatters have been ‘plucked’ by visitors and collectors: in addition to being a prehistoric palimpsest, the Beorgs has also been more heavily disturbed in modern times.

Below, known examples of the various type sites (fig. 1) are presented. Present- ly, it is not possible to determine with any degree of certainty whether ‘everyday’ axeheads and prestige axeheads were produced from the same workshops, or whether the production of these two functionally different types of axeheads were spatially separated.

1 Quarry pits Quarry pits are known from three locations in the Midfield area, namely Mid- field 1 & 2 along the area’s eastern flanks, and Midfield 3 along the area’s northern flanks (Cooney et al. 2012, Fig. 10; Ballin & Davis 2012). Generally, these pits are elongated features in the landscape, following the north-south trending felsite dykes (fig. 3). They occur in groups of two to five pits, with the pits being up to 15 metres long, 5 metres wide and 1 metre deep. They are generally not associated 2.a Workshops “on the mountain” with piles of upcast, as many chert quarry – the cruder work pits are (Ballin & Ward 2013), which As described in previous papers (e. g. suggests that either the excavated sur- Ballin 2012a), workshops occur along the plus has eroded back into the pits, or dykes and on either side of the quarry they were backfilled in prehistory. pits. At Midfield 1, towards the Midfield 77

Fig. 3: ‘String’ of quarry pits along a Midfield felsite dyke. Courtesy of D. L. Mahler.

area’s north-east, workshops with finer the eastern, down-hill side. This separa- debris, probably relating to the production of knife and axehead production, tion of Shetland knives, were found on the which is not entirely mutually exclusive, western, uphill side of the pits, whereas may have been based on functional rea- cruder waste, thought to relate to axe- soning as well as religious ideas (cf. Scott head production, was mainly located on & Thiessen 2005). The workshops in the

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 78

Fig. 4: Dis- At the present time, it is thought that crete axe head blanks (fig. 2) may have been formed at workshop at Midfield 1. the quarry pits, but that rough-outs were The circle shaped at the workshops. This, however, highlights an is to be tested during surveys and exca- abandoned axe head vations at Midfield 1 in 2013 (Cooneyet rough-out with al. 2012). a crude lateral knapping seam clearly 2.b Workshops “on the mountain” visible. – the finer work Two tiny felsite-bearing concentrations (figs. 5-6) were noticed on the Uyea Midfield area are to a large extent dis- Scord plateau between Collafirth Hill crete single-event scatters (like that in and Midfield (Ballin & Davis 2012), pos- fig. 4), but there are also larger, but still sibly indicating the route from the Mid- well-defined scatters, which were prob- field quarry area to settlements along the ably used by the same group of people eastern coast of North Roe or further south. over, say, a few years (eg, Ballin 2011a, In both cases, a few handfuls of diminu- fig. 12), as well as somewhat larger pal- tive chips and flakes were recovered, impsest situations, which are more dif- with one concentration being character- ficult to disentangle. Figs 5-6: The two felsite/quartz assemblages recovered from the Uyea Scord plateau between Collafirth Hill and Midfield. The pieces were collected from two areas, each measuring approximately 3 x 3 m. 79

ized by a felsite: quartz ratio of c. 1:10 and it is suggested, that the lack of and the other by a ratio of 10:1. These quartz within the Beorgs and Midfield may small scatters differ from scatters within indicate an absence of domestic activity the main quarry areas at the Beorgs and within these areas in prehistory, and that Midfield by the felsite artefacts being the presence of quartz in scatters on the generally small and thin/delicate, and Uyea Scord plateau may indicate some by the presence of quartz. The debris in mixture of basic felsite production and the main quarry areas is generally char- domestic activities. It is presently uncer- acterized by the individual felsite pieces tain whether these scatters represent the being fairly large and coarse, and by the camp sites of quarriers, locations for the complete absence of quartz (figs. 5-6). production of final axeheads, or possibly both. During approximately one decade of occasional fieldwalking in the North Roe Although this is presently entirely con- area, the author has only found one piece jectural, it should be considered whether of quartz within the two quarry areas, the large quartz core recovered from the namely a large (greatest dimension 95 Beorgs may represent deliberate deposi mm) dual-platform core in homogeneous tion. In his discussion of Shaft 27 at the milky quartz. The piece has two well-de- Grimes Graves flint mines, Topping defined platforms positioned at an angle to scribes offerings at quarries, which may each other. It was recovered at the Beorgs, have formed part of rituals of ‘symbolic amongst the debris from one of the more renewal’ (Topping 2005:66; also see productive felsite dykes. In terms of the Scott & Thiessen 2005). These deposits Beorgs, it cannot be ruled out that small placed at prehistoric quarries could take quartz flakes could have fallen through the the form of products from the quarries cracks between the occasionally metre- themselves, but they also include, inter thick layer of boulder- and cobble-sized alia, pottery and human remains. felsite waste, but the smaller, well-defined, single-event felsite scatters at the 2.c Polishing the axeheads eastern end of the Beorgs, and at Mid- At present, it is unknown where the final- field, do not include any quartz either. ly shaped felsite axeheads were polished (fig. 7) – somewhere on the mountain, or On Shetland, the domestic waste at Neo- at special sites or domestic settlements lithic and Bronze Age sites is generally off the mountain. It is a fact that no fel- heavily dominated by debris from the site artefacts or fragments with dorsal production of quartz tools (Ballin 2008b), polish have been found within the quar-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 80

3 Use – adaptation and rejuvenation The use stage of the axeheads is characterized not only by utilization of the individual tools, but also by ongoing modification of them. Although it was possible to fit many, if not most, polished axeheads into pre-existing axeshafts (Evans 1897, 151; Sheridan 1992; 199), some axeheads were too large and need- ed to have their butts reduced in width and/or thickness to fit. Axehead CAT 1079 from Hill of Crooksetter is a fine example of this practice (fig. 8), showing how pieces were first polished all over and then, if necessary, adapted to their intended shaft. In this case, a number of polished felsite chips and flakes were struck off the axehead’s butt, allowing the axehead to fit into its shaft.

Although it is not entirely certain whether the axeheads were adapted to their shafts at the domestic settlements where they were to be used – this can only truly be proven by refitting polished “butt reduction flakes” to their parent axeheads – Fig. 7: Polished the realization that this practice existed is felsite axehead, important in terms of how small polished ARC 65451. Courtesy of chips and flakes on Neolithic sites are D. L. Mahler. interpreted.

ry complex, and no grindstones either. From the lower levels at the Old Scat- Given the presently available evidence, ness Broch, a small lithic collection was it is most likely that the finished axe- recovered, including almost 1000 quartz heads were taken off the mountain to artefacts – mostly chips – and eight small be completed elsewhere. felsite chips/flakes (Ballin 2008a). Three 81

Fig. 8: Axe head 1079 from Hill of Crooksetter after having been adapted to its shaft. Courtesy of ORCA. of the felsite pieces have recognizable of a stone axehead would usually cause dorsal polish, indicating that they were some wear of its cutting-edge, and worn removed from a polished axehead. In the pieces would occasionally have their report on the Old Scatness lithics, the edges trimmed by fine chipping and/or author interpreted these pieces as ex- renewed polishing (Mahler 2010:16). amples of axehead recycling, whereas Broken pieces could have new cutting- these small pieces may just as likely, edges formed, mostly by flaking. The as- given the evidence from Hill of Crook- semblage from Modesty, near Bridge of setter, represent adaptation of an axe- Walls, includes a relatively large number head to its shaft. of intact and broken felsite axeheads and knives, and the axeheads are mostly rela Rejuvenation of the polished felsite axe tively small or medium-sized everyday heads was carried out at a later stage, for pieces, most of which are worn and/or example when the implements had been rejuvenated/reworked (Sheridan 2012). blunted or damaged by use. Extensive use

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 82

Although a number of felsite axeheads, out of the site /“tossing” (Binford 1983: and in particular adzes, are clearly func- 189); or placing them in domestic waste tional pieces produced for everyday use, disposal areas or middens. Discard is Ritchie (1992: 214) noted that 1: most discussed below. Shetland axeheads are considerably larger and well-made than, for example, stone Meticulous inspection of the North Roe axeheads from neighbouring Orkney; quarries has shown that in these parts 2: the larger Shetland axeheads tend to be of North Roe focus was on the manufac- unused; and 3: most were recovered not ture of axeheads and Shetland knives, from domestic settlements but as stray and less so or not at all on the production finds in the landscape. This suggests that of smaller everyday tools – at the present a comparatively large proportion of the time, only one formal everyday tool in felsite axeheads may be ceremonial or felsite has been recovered from North prestige objects, explaining the relatively Roe, namely a double-scraper found at low number of Shetland axeheads with Quina Waters, in the low-lying areas more than sporadic edge-wear and/or north of Collafirth Hill (Ballin 2011a, fig. traces of rejuvenation. 8). The exhibition and stores of Shetland Museum include not only axeheads and 4 Recycling or deposition Shetland knives, but also some leaf- At the end of the felsite axehead opera- shaped – predominantly kite-shaped – tional schema or “life cycle”, the indi- arrowheads, as well as scrapers. The vidual implements are either recycled, Museum arrowheads generally have deposited or discarded. In the present two faces covered by invasive retouch, paper, the term “deposition” is used to and it is not possible to determine where describe a deliberate, frequently ritual- and how these pieces were made. Ap- ized act, where an artefact is “taken out proximately eight of 10 scrapers have of circulation” by depositing it in care- dorsal, and in one case also ventral, fully chosen and prepared locations. polish, and the author (e. g. Ballin 2011a) Most Shetland axeheads are uncontext- therefore suggested that smaller tools ed finds, but the cache of felsite knives were generally, if not exclusively, profound by Dr Noel Fojut at Stourbrough duced by the recycling of polished axe- Hill, West Mainland, is a fitting example heads and Shetland knives. of this practice (Fojut forthcoming). “Dis- card”, on the other hand, describes the The excavations of Orkney Research act of permanently getting rid of worn or Centre for Archaeology (ORCA) at Firths broken pieces by either throwing them Voe brought about an unusual lithic as- 83

Fig. 9: Single- platform core based on the recycled butt of a polished axe head (CAT 6). Drawn by Amanda Brend; courtesy of ORCA. semblage which shed light on the recy- ” As indicated by the high proportion cling of felsite axeheads (Ballin forth- of flakes with polished dorsal faces coming). Where lithic assemblages from (28%), as well as abandoned frag- most domestic sites on Shetland – apart ments of polished axeheads and cores from rare sites like Ness of Gruting in- with polished surfaces (fig. 9), the clude no or little worked felsite (Henshall raw material for the site’s felsite 1956), Firths Voe yielded an assemblage production was clearly not obtained of 271 pieces, supplementing the site’s from the North Roe quarries in raw quartz assemblage at a ratio of almost 1 form. Instead, it was supplied in the to 10. The felsite artefacts embrace 257 form of polished axeheads, which had pieces of mostly diminutive debitage, six been abandoned either as a result of cores and eight tools. Approximately one- damage or (if the process was gov- third of the unmodified and modified fel- erned by non-functional reasoning) site artefacts have polished surfaces. for more impenetrable reasons. ”

In his report on the Firths Voe lithics, the New felsite tool blanks were manufac- author characterized the site as a “chop tured from felsite cores (axehead frag- shop” (Ballin 2012b): ments), and new tools were manufac-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 84

Fig. 10: Combined tool (scraper/scale-flaked knife) based on a hard percussion flake (CAT 1). Drawn by Amanda Brend; courtesy of ORCA. from the two sites, where several had working-edges formed by secondary polish of the ventral face in combination tured either on newly produced flakes or with dorsal axehead polish. This is im- on axehead fragments. Firths Voe, as portant, as it informs us that not all well as neighbouring Hill of Crooksetter, polish on small everyday tools is polish both yielded well-shaped discoidal and from the formation of the original axe- endscrapers, but for the first time formal heads or Shetland knives (fig. 9-10). felsite knives have been recovered. The assemblage from Firths Voe included not The Firths Voe “chop shop” clearly rep- only a simple scale-flaked knife (CAT 53), resents a specialized and well-organized but also a well-executed combined tool activity area, and, in terms of the felsite (CAT 1) with a regular steep scraper- flow, it should probably be linked to col- edge at one end, and a neat scale-flaked lections like the Modesty cache (Sheri cutting-edge along one lateral side, see dan 2012). It is not absolutely certain fig. 10. Another new insight into felsite whether the Modesty objects represent a tool production was provided by scrapers sacrificial deposit or an economical cache, 85

but the character of the felsite artefacts for presently unknown reasons were tak- – not all fully polished, generally used, en out of circulation. Basically, it is pos- some broken, rejuvenated, and/or re- sible to subdivide the ritually deposited paired – suggests that this may largely be felsite axeheads into two main groups, an economical cache. As such, the col- namely 1) axeheads made specifically for lection may generally represent ‘scrap’ deposition, and 2) axeheads made ini- intended for a “chop shop” like that of tially for use as a chopping tool. Firths Voe. The fact that these bits of “scrap” were not recycled may be explain Our knowledge of felsite deposition is ed in many – more or less conjectural – currently limited, as many of the more ways. The cache may simply have been spectacular felsite artefacts are uncon- forgotten, if it had been “… hidden for texted stray finds. However, the present- safekeeping at the base of a tree or in a ly available information suggests that house” (White & Modjeska 1978 on stone ritually deposited “super-axeheads” were axehead holdings and circulation). largely disposed of in the landscape, in the same manner as the cache of visu- Felsite recycling was probably carried out ally exceptional Shetland knives from in different ways, either in well-organized Stourbrough Hill (Fojut forthcoming), “chop shops” (e. g. Firths Voe), where whereas it was deemed acceptable to some very well-executed implements were deposit the smaller, occasionally even created, or as individual ad hoc cases “wonky”, functional axeheads on or near where unshapely, but functional, tools were settlements as well as in the landscape. formed by adding an expedient working- At Hill of Crooksetter, Site 003, see fig. edge to a broken-off bit of axehead, like 11, two medium-sized functional axe- the irregular felsite scraper from Scord of heads had been deposited with felsite Brouster (Ballin 2005: Fig. 24). flakes, cores and scrapers in association with an area of intense burning. In the As mentioned above, the size and exe- original report on the site’s lithic assem- cution of many felsite axeheads suggest blage, the author wrote (Ballin 2011b): that they were produced specifically for “It is presently uncertain specifically which ritual deposition rather than for use, and activities took place at this site, but the these axeheads therefore do not have a deposition of felsite flakes and tools in use stage, see fig. 1. However, all ritually connection with fire-setting has a distinct deposited axeheads were not oversized ritual character”. For a full discussion prestige or ceremonial pieces, with some and interpretation of this site and as- clearly being functional axeheads which semblage, see Reay et al. forthcoming.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 86

Fig. 11: Hill of Crooksetter. Two ? ritually deposited felsite axe heads. Cour- tesy of ORCA.

5 Discard functional raw material, that is, it may Discard of lithic waste may take differ- have been imbued with some form of ent forms, such as – in Binford’s terms: symbolic meaning: 1) the time invested in preventive maintenance – the immediate the production of “show pieces” – over- disposal of items away from intensively sized, all-over polished axeheads and used spaces, “tossing”; post hoc main- overly patterned Shetland knives; 2) the tenance – the actual cleaning up of areas association of axeheads and knives with and the transport of the debris to spe- ritual deposition; 3) the highly schematic cial dumping areas (Binford 1983: 189). and regulated manner in which smaller A third type of waste is found in the pre- tools were produced: axeheads and knives historic site’s “drop-zones”, where waste at the quarry workshops or smaller tools objects too small to be perceived as po- at the settlements by recycling the larger tential future problems to traffic across tools; and 4) the level of scrap collection the site were simply ignored and left and recycling/cannibalization – e. g. the where they fell. “scrap” from Modesty and the Firths Voe “chop shop”. In many respects, North Roe A number of factors suggest that felsite felsite seems to be a northern parallel was perceived as more than simply a to Arran pitchstone, which was also per- 87

ceived as having an intrinsic value (Bal- The following are examples of regula- lin 2009: 73). tion based on apparently non-functional reasoning: Although the felsite artefacts from the Firths Voe “chop shop” clearly represents • Extensive quarrying was only under- abandoned or discarded material, rather taken within well-defined areas, such than carefully deposited objects, the ap- as the Beorgs and Midfield. Abun- parently special status of felsite would dant resources – some dykes kilome- probably prevent artefacts in this raw tres long and up to 5-8 metres thick – material from being discarded as freely of seemingly usable felsite in the and willingly as waste in, for example, low-lying North Roe interior (e. g. the quartz: although felsite artefacts may be Gilgordie Brogs dyke; fig. 12) were recovered from the drop and toss zones ‘nibbled’ but not properly exploited of felsite workshops and “chop shops”, (Ballin 2011d). these pieces are probably less likely to • At Midfield 1, there is a specializa- appear in actual middens. tion of areas east (downhill) and west (uphill) of the main dyke or the Discussion quarry pits into areas reserved for In the present paper an account has been made of how felsite flowed from Fig. 12: A segment of the Gilgordie Brogs dyke. quarry pit to deposition or discard, and it Courtesy of Gabriel Cooney). has been shown how felsite procurement, reduction and exchange formed a highly sophisticated operational scheme. This scheme was not just complex in practical terms, dealing with the reduction and distribution of many tons of felsite, but also in-cluded regulation, some of which must have been based on non- functional reasoning. The latter may be one of the more revealing elements in terms of shedding light on the social organization on Shetland in the Neolithic period, but it also raises interesting questions regarding people, power and control: who regulated whom?

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 88

axehead production (east) and areas In practical terms, the procurement, re- reserved for knife production (west). duction and exchange of felsite repre- • It is also fairly obvious that the quar- sent an impressively sophisticated level ry complex was kept separated from of task organization, which includes pro areas associated with domestic acti specting, raw material testing, quarry- vities, as indicated by the almost ing, several distinct levels of reduction, complete absence of quartz and every subsistence/camping ‘on the mountain’, day tools within the quarry complex. transportation of objects ‘off the moun- It is possible that the small felsite/ tain’, use, as well as repair, recycling, quartz scatters on the Uyea Scord pla and deposition of felsite artefacts. teau represent the camp sites of the quarriers, as well as locations where, In social terms, the organization of the for example, axeheads were finished, felsite reduction is equally sophisticated. although probably not polished. As mentioned above, several parts of the • For as yet unknown reasons, the pol- felsite operational schema in fig. 1, are ishing of final axeheads probably associated with some form or degree of took place ‘off the mountain’. At the regulation, dealing with matters such as present moment, not a single polished which implements were “allowed” to be implement, flake or fragment has been manufactured in which raw materials; found within the quarry complex. where should the different tasks take • Visually different types of felsite were place (some on the mountain/some off); preferred for different types of im- and when was it “allowed” to produce plements, with plain, homogeneous the different tool forms – e. g. axeheads felsite being favoured for axeheads and Shetland knives at the beginning of and more colourful, patterned felsite the operational scheme and smaller tools for Shetland knives (Ballin 2011a). only as part of the recycling of axeheads • The complete absence of Shetland and knives. As described by Topping (2005) knives outside Shetland, and the fact and Scott & Thiessen (2005), much regu- that only a handful or two of felsite lation of quarry activities also dealt with axeheads (which might not neces- the question of who should do what, with sarily be based on Shetland felsite) women frequently being banned from the have been recovered from mainland quarries altogether, whereas some tasks Scotland, suggests that the exporta- were reserved for older men or ‘men be- tion of felsite objects was limited by yond reproach’. some form of regulation, almost akin to an interdict (Ballin 2011c), fig. 12. 89

It is expected that our understanding of Ballin, T. B., 2008a: The lithic assem- the technological as well as social or- blage from Old Scatness Broch, Sum- ganization of felsite reduction will be burgh, Shetland. Unpublished report. improved notably over the next few years, not least due to the activities of Ballin, T. B., 2008b: Quartz Technology in the North Roe Felsite Project (Cooney et Scottish Prehistory. Scottish Archaeo- al. 2012). The fieldwork planned for the logical Internet Reports (SAIR) 26 (2008). summer 2013 will focus on, inter alia, [http://www.sair.org.uk/sair26]. the spatial organization of the opera- tions at Midfield 1. Ballin, T. B., 2009: Archaeological Pitch- stone in Northern Britain. Characteriza- Acknowledgements tion and interpretation of an important I am grateful to Orkney Research Centre prehistoric source. British Archaeological for Archaeology (ORCA) for generously Reports British Series 476, Archaeo- allowing me to use a number of their press. Oxford. photos and drawings of artefacts from their excavations at Hill of Crooksetter Ballin, T. B., 2011a: The Felsite Quarries of and Firths Voe, both Delting, Shetland North Roe, Shetland – an overview, Stone (Reay et al. forthcoming). I am equally Axe Studies III, Davis, V. & Edmonds, M., grateful to Peter Vemming Hansen & Bo eds., Oxbow Books. Oxford: 121-130. Madsen for granting me permission to use this paper’s fig. 2, from their enlightening Ballin, T. B., 2011b: The lithic assemblage discussion of flint axehead production in from Hill of Crooksetter, Delting, Shet- Neolithic Denmark (Vemming Hansen 1981; land. Unpublished report. Vemming Hansen & Madsen 1983). Ballin, T. B., 2011c: The post-glacial colo nization of Shetland – integration or iso- Bibliography lation? Evidence from lithic and stone assemblages, Farming on the Edge: Cul- Ballin, T. B., 2005: Re-Examination of the tural Landscapes of the North. Short pa- Quartz Artefacts from Scord of Brouster. pers from the network meeting in Lerwick, A lithic assemblage from Shetland and Shetland, September 7th – 10th 2010, its Neolithic context. Scottish Archaeo- Mahler, D. L. & C. Andersen, C. eds., The logical Internet Reports (SAIR) 17. National Museum of Denmark. Copenha [http://www.sair.org.uk/sair17]. gen: 32-43. [http://nordligeverdener.natmus.dk/fileadmin/site_upload/nordlige_

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 90

verdener/pdf/Farming_on_the_edge_ Quarry. The e-Newsletter of the SAA’s rapport_web.pdf] Prehistoric Quarries & Early Mines Inter- est Group 9: 3-23. [http://www.saa.org/ Ballin, T. B., 2011d: Shetland: Gilgordie Portals/0/SAA/ABOUTSAA/interest- Brogs, central North Roe (Northmaven groups/prehistquarry/Quarry 9 Jan13.pdf] parish); survey. Discovery and Excavation in Scotland, New Series 11 (2010): 159. Binford, L. R., 1983: In Pursuit of the Past. Decoding the Archaeological Record. Ballin, T. B., 2012a: The distribution of Thames & Hudson. London. worked felsite – within and outwith Neo lithic Shetland, The Border of Farming Cooney, G., Ballin, T.B., & Megarry, W., and the Cultural Markers, Mahler. D. L. 2012: Objects for an island world, North ed., National Museum of Denmark. Co- Roe Felsite, Shetland, The Border of penhagen: 62-78. [http://nordligeverde Farming and the Cultural Markers, Mahler, ner.natmus.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/ D. L. ed., the National Museum of Den- temasites/nordlige_verdener/nordlige_ mark. Copenhagen: 87-93. [http://nord- verdener/Ditlev_L_Mahler/The_Border_ ligeverdener.natmus.dk/fileadmin/user_ of_Farming.pdf] upload/temasites/nordlige_verdener/ nordlige_verdener/Ditlev_L_Mahler/The_ Ballin, T. B., 2012b: The lithic assem- Border_of_Farming.pdf] blage from Firths Voe, Delting, Shetland. Unpublished report. Evans, S. J., 1897: The Ancient Stone Imple ments, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Ballin, T. B., fortcoming: Various entries, Britain. Longmans, Green, and Co. London. D. Reay et al.: Laggan-Tormore: Archaeo logical Discoveries in Delting, Shetland Fojut, N., forthcoming: The Stourbrough [working title]. Hill Hoard and other Polished Stone ‘Knives’ from Shetland. Ballin, T. B. & Davis, V., 2012: Shetland: North Roe (Northmaven parish); survey; Henshall, A. S., 1956: Appendix II: Pot- pre-project evaluation. Discovery and Exca tery and Stone Implements from Ness of vation in Scotland, New Series 13 (2012). Gruting. In: C. S. T. Calder: Report on the Discovery of Numerous Stone Age Ballin, T. B., & Ward, T., 2013: Burnet- House-Sites in Shetland. Proceedings of land Hill Chert Quarry: A Mesolithic ex- the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland traction site in The Scottish Borders, The 89: 381-397. 91

Mahler, D., 2010: Shetlandsøerne - ager- honour of Audrey Henshall, Sharples, N. brug på grænsen 4000-3000 f.v.t. Nord- & A. Sheridan, A. eds, Edinburgh Univer- lige Verdener, Rapport 2010. Copenhagen: sity Press. Edinburgh: 194-212. Nationalmuseet. Sheridan, A., 2012: Neolithic Shetland: Reay, D. et al. forthcoming: Laggan- a view from the ‘mainland’ The Border Tormore: Archaeological Discoveries in of Farming and the Cultural Markers, Delting, Shetland [working title]. Mahler, D. L. ed., National Museum of Denmark. Copenhagen: 6-36. [http:// Renfrew, C., 1977: Alternative Models for nordligeverdener.natmus.dk/fileadmin/ Exchange and Spatial Distribution, Ex- user_upload/temasites/nordlige_verde- change Systems in Prehistory, Earle, T. K. & ner/nordlige_verdener/Ditlev_L_Mahler/ J. E. Ericson, J. E. eds., Studies in Archae The_Border_of_Farming.pdf] ology. Academic Press. New York: 71-90. Topping, P., 2005: Shaft 27 Revisited: An Ritchie, R., 1992: Stone Axeheads and Ethnography, The Cultural Landscape of Cushion Maceheads from Orkney and Prehistoric Mines, Topping, P. & M. Lynott, Shetland: Some Similarities and Con- M. eds. Oxbow Books. Oxford: 63-93. trasts, Vessels for the Ancestors. Essays on the Neolithic of Britain and Ireland in Vemming Hansen, P., 1981: Neolitisk bo- honour of Audrey Henshall, Sharples, N. pladsflint.Kontaktstencil 19, 23-37. & Sheridan, A. eds., Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh: 213-220. Vemming Hansen, P., & Madsen, B., 1983: Flint Axe Manufacture in the Neo- Scott, D. D., & Thiessen, T. D., 2005: lithic. An Ex-perimental Investigation of Catlinite Extraction at Pipestone Nation- a Flint Axe Manufacture Site at Hastrup al Monument, Minnesota: Social and Vænget, East Zealand, Journal of Dan- Technological Implications, The Cultural ish Archaeology 2: 43-59. Landscape of Prehistoric Mines, Top- ping, P. & Lynott, M. eds. Oxbow Books. White, J. P. & Modjeska, N., 1978: Oxford: 140-154. Where do all the stone tools go? Some examples and problems in their social and Sheridan, A., 1992: Scottish Stone Axe- spatial distribution in the Papua New heads: Some New Work and Recent Dis- Guinea Highlands, The Spatial Organisa coveries, Vessels for the Ancestors. Essays tion of Culture, Hodder, I. ed., University on the Neolithic of Britain and Ireland in of Pittsburgh Press. Pittsburgh: 25-38.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 92

Those who came before: Shetland’s antiquarians and the Neolithic

Jenny Murray and Carol Christiansen

Before professional archaeologists be- communicated with local antiquarians gan to visit Shetland in earnest in the about sites and finds, and made a point to early part of the 20th century, Shetland’s visit sites and collect objects with the aid antiquities were investigated by visiting of local information during their visits. and local antiquarians. Indeed, work published by antiquarians, especially Local antiquarians in Shetland were announcements of donations to profes- generally self-taught but attained a high sional societies in mainland Britain, un- level of local knowledge, which compli- doubtedly enticed archaeologists to mented the more formal learning of their travel north and explore the large British counterparts. They acted as the number of relatively untapped sites in eyes and ears on the ground for col- Shetland’s landscape. leagues living away from Shetland. They carried on with research and explored There existed an antiquarian community new sites, which they reported in letters with a focus on Shetland from the mid- or in professional publications. More im- 19 th Century onwards. The participants portantly, they had access to local people were exclusively men, and many lived on and folk knowledge that visiting antiquari the British mainland. Some individuals, ans found difficult to reach. such as Gilbert Goudie, had family connections in Shetland and visited regularly Shetland Museum and Archives holds a for most of their lives. Others like Dr An- mere fraction of the information collected drew Mitchell had professional ties to and exchanged between visiting and lo- Shetland which allowed them to visit only cal specialists. In letters, diaries, photo- occasionally and for a limited period. In graphs, essays and published articles, either case, however, visiting antiquarians sites and finds are noted and discussed. 93

Fig. 1: Stand- ing Stone of Suckamires, near Lund, Unst, sketched in 1868 by James Tho- mas Irvine.

In some cases it is possible to link docu- James Irvine (1826-1900) mentary information about sites to pub- James Thomas Irvine was from Cullivoe lished articles or finds located in Shet- in north Yell and became an accom- land Museum or elsewhere. In other plished historian and antiquarian. Follow cases, however, the information contain ing the early death of his father, James ed in unpublished documents shed light grew close to his paternal uncle, Thomas on new, unknown sites, features and finds. Irvine. A keen enthusiast of Shetland’s

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 94

history, Thomas was to influence the three skeletons were uncovered, two of young James in all things Shetlandic in- which appeared to have been laid on a cluding its archaeology, place-names and thick bed of fish bones. He also found folklore (Ritchie 2011: 5). At the age of evidence of burning, including wood ash fourteen, like many others during this which concealed tiny fragments of oxi- period, James left Shetland to earn a dised copper. Were these finds the first living but never lost his passion for his tantalising evidence for Shetland’s Chal- birthplace, returning often to record its colithic period? Recognising its signifi- history and architecture. cance, Irvine deposited the copper fragments with the National Museum in Based in England during his working life, Edinburgh. There is no evidence today of Irvine was an architect specialising in the five cairns uncovered by Irvine, and his churches and cathedrals (ibid). His inter- record remains a valuable insight into this est in historic built heritage was proba- complex. bly the stimulus for Irvine’s visits home to record and draw the islands’ ancient Irvine published two further papers, churches, standing stones and antiqui- where he presented detailed photo- ties. It was during one of these trips in graphs and records of Shetland’s stand- the 1860s that Irvine excavated and re- ing stones (Irvine 1885; 1887; Fig. 1). He corded a group of five cairns at the Sands also recorded various burnt mounds or of Breckon in north Yell. Irvine recog- ‘fairy knowes’, which survived from an- nised the need to document ancient his- tiquity due, he explained, to supersti- tory and published regularly in the Shet- tious reluctance to graze animals near land Times and the Proceedings of the them (1887: 218). He makes no mention Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. of Neolithic houses but concentrates instead on burial practices, looking at In a paper to the Society Irvine outlined cairns, cists and later boat burials. Irvine his excavation of the Breckon cairns (Irvine discussed an excavation carried out at 1898). He recognised that this grouping Tafts of Bayanne in Yell when he was a was an important and unusual cairn boy. While gathering stones to build a cemetery unlike any others he had noted house workmen uncovered a stone dwell- in the islands and described them as the ing which they dismantled. Irvine recol- largest cairns he had seen. Within their lected them finding saddle querns and stone chambers Irvine discovered a skel- triangular stone knives. In correspond- eton of a young person lying prostrate ence between Irvine and a woman who and placed in a stone-lined box. A further remembered the finds, which were later 95

sent to an unknown location in England, One of its first acts was to form a Library she recalled quantities of ashes, human and Museum, it having received many remains and a large shell midden (Irvine donations of artefacts and scholarly works 1885: 386). Irvine frustratingly notes, ‘Sim- at its formation. An accessions list of ilar remains were also found opposite the donations, providing the date of donation Tafts, at a place called ‘The Whumblins and name of donor, shows that the major- of Cunnister’, where there seems to ity were polished axes taken from various have been a group of ancient buildings, sites around Shetland, although the sites though no one showed sufficient interest are not mentioned (Shetland Literary in them to collect any of the relics’ (ibid). and Scientific Society, 1861-63: [3-8]).

His vexation at objects being taken out Its first Curator of Antiquities was Robert of the islands, and the previous lack of Nevin Spence of Windhouse, Yell, a legal concern for others now lost, may have clerk living in Lerwick. One of his initial been his incentive to join the newly- duties was to organise the excavation formed Shetland Literary and Scientific of the broch of Clickhimin, but he died in Society. His uncle Thomas offered the 1863 and did not live to see the excava- first artefact of the Societies’ collection tions fully realised. J. T. Irvine stepped in – a bell from the Kirk o’ Ness and a box of to carry out the recording of the excava- archaeological specimens (Ritchie 2011: tions (Irvine 1866). 30). Irvine became an important member of the Society, producing a report and illu By the 1880s the Society’s museum in the strations of the excavations of the broch Tollbooth at Lerwick was experiencing of Clickimin (Irvine 1866). difficulties and it sold its collection to the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland for a Shetland Literary sum of £50 (Ritchie 2011: 31). The objects and Scientific Society are illustrated and described further in the In 1861 the Shetland Literary and Scien- notification of purchase by the Society tific Society was formed, boasting 227 in Edinburgh (Mitchell 1882: 13-20). annual and five life members in its first year. Not all of its fellows lived in Shet- Burgh Collection land, and it solicited membership from It would be four more decades before scholars and antiquarians in Britain, Shetland held another museum collec- Scandinavia and abroad. Shetland-based tion, this time housed in the Town Hall members represented a cross-section of ‘with many interesting exhibits already mainly Lerwick civic society at the time. on view’ (Corrie 1931: 76). The core of the

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 96

collection was purchased by public sub- and his research continued, even when scription from the trustees of the former confined to ship: Provost of the Burgh, the late James Goudie. The ‘Burgh Collection’ remained ” During the voyage I have endeavoured in the islands and now forms part of to solicit information from the Shet- archaeological collections at Shetland land portion of the crew concerning Museum and Archives. It encompasses old tales, legends, etc. but as most of many stone tools of Neolithic date in- them were native of the north part of cluding felsite axes and knives (fig. 2). the islands, with whom I was unac- Unfortunately few records were kept quainted, they seemed greatly preju- about where or in what context these arte- diced against giving any information facts were found. Nevertheless, the Burgh of the kind; either owing to a super- Collection was an important repository stitious fear of making such disclo- for Shetland collectors prior to the devel- sures, or from the impression that to opment of a formal museum service in do so would lower them in the opin- the 1960s. ion of those belonging to the south.” (D60/3/19/5). Robert Cogle (1853-1918) Robert Cogle was a self-taught historian In another letter, Cogle described a new- and antiquarian from Cunningsburgh. Like ly discovered prehistoric feature in his many Shetland antiquarians in the latter home parish of Cunningsburgh in 1875: half of the 19 th century, he was interested in ancient Scandinavian history and ” It was found in March last by a man culture as a basis for understanding Shet- while searching for stones to build a land history. To this end he taught him- fence. It was imbedded in a sandy soil, self Icelandic. He corresponded regularly nothing being visible except the tops with Gilbert Goudie, Thomas Irvine, and of a few stones. It was about thirty Jakob Jakobsen. Goudie sent him news- feet square, and in the middle was a paper cuttings, books and pamphlets re- compartment made of large flags set lated to antiquarian matters, which Cogle upright, and containing skeleton of a was very grateful for. He was particularly cow or a horse, then followed a flag interested in Shetland superstitions and lying flat and under it a quantity of folktales, which he recorded in his let- burnt corn either bere or barley, but ters. By profession he was a fisherman, so severely charred that most of it fell working at the Greenland seal and whale to dust when removed. The stones of fishery. His interest was Shetland-wide which this building was composed 97

Fig. 2: Adze and Shetland knives in the Burgh Collec- tion, Shetland Museum.

were apparently brought from the is- Mealsair or Mail Ayre is 150 metres land of Mousa about two miles from east of a very early burial ground at this place, as there are none of the South Voxter (The Royal Commission on same quality to be found nearer. ” the Ancient Monuments of Scotland (D3/20/14) (RCAHMS) HU42NW 9). The site described

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 98

Fig. 3: Shetland tools found at Shurton Brae, Lerwick, donated by Peter Moar. finds to the Burgh Collection. He gathered by Cogle has not been identified in more information about sites from local people recent times and does not appear on the and provided advice on potential sites RCAHMS site map. found by others (D11/12/7). Moar was instrumental in providing valuable early Peter Moar (1889-1983) information on the site at Kebister, which Peter Moar was from Unst but spent was recorded on maps and index cards many years living in Lerwick, where he compiled by Shetland Museum. He knew helped to uncover important finds and that Neolithic material had been found sites ahead of building development on Shurton Hill near Lerwick in 1934. In around the town. He discovered impor- 1943 he discovered 5 polished knives in tant early finds in Shetland and collabo- the same area, and was given a polished rated with John Stewart in discovery and stone adze found there 10 years previous- reporting of finds. He acted as anad hoc ly (Moar 1948). The knives and the adze repository for stray finds before there are now in the collection of Shetland was a museum in Shetland, and donated Museum (fig. 3). 99

John Stewart (1903-1977) ” No. 4. Smooth oval sandstone object

John Stewart was born on the island of 3½” x 1½” x 1/3” found at 6 – the Whalsay. The son of a crofter fisherman, smooth oval sandstone is foreign to his childhood appears to have been im- the district so must be some symbolic mersed in books and debate. With both offering.” parents and seven siblings these family discussions covered politics as well as He concluded some stones were delib- religion (Stewart 1987: vi). With this inher- erately broken adding to his theory these ent and flourishing thirst for knowledge, were symbolic offerings. As his under- Stewart entered Aberdeen University in standing of Neolithic Shetland grew, 1923, where he graduated with an MA. Stewart began publishing his thoughts Fig. 4: John Stewart (right) He never returned to Shetland but spent and findings through a weekly column in and Peter his working life teaching in Aberdeen the Shetland Times, later published in Moar exca until his retirement in 1970. booklet form. In it he notes (Stewart vating in Petti- garth’s Field, 2008: 5): Whalsay His interest in the history and culture of 1948. his native islands never left him and he returned to Shetland during his holidays to study its language and archaeology. A keen practical archaeologist, during the 1930s Stewart undertook various excavations in his native Whalsay, concen- trating on a Neolithic house and cairn at Pettigarth’s Field (Fig. 4). He kept meticu lous records of these “digs”; the earliest “Report on a Cairn from the West side Houll Loch, Whalsay” was documented in August 1935 (D27/9/7). In these hand- written notes he left no stone unturned and we can glean from them the enquir- ing mind of a man trying to piece together the architecture and belief systems of his ancestors from a bygone age. He notes the construction of the cairn in detail and lists the finds, offering a detailed discussion of each – for example:

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 100

” Although we cannot give a single ac- Council for British Archaeology (Stewart curate date, we can say that the ear- 1954). It was during this period that liest remains in Shetland present a Stewart collaborated with Charles Cal- more complete picture of the inhabit- der, culminating in a joint excavation of ants than anywhere else in Britain, the Neolithic ‘Benie Hoos’ and Yoxi ‘tem- for there are tombs, temples, houses, ple’ in Pettigarth’s Field (Calder 1961). fields, walls, stone implements; the These excavations, plus Stewart’s earlier complete Neolithic economy in fact, work, offer us a detailed insight into except for the boats that brought Shetland’s prehistoric material culture. them.” Detailed drawings of decorated pottery and stone tools highlight an established Radiocarbon dating was in its infancy domestic settlement. Evidence showed when Stewart was researching archaeo that the house had been repaired and logy but his booklet offered Shetlanders rebuilt with habitation spanning hundreds their first chronological account of their of years (Calder 1961: 37). history. Using typology as a method of dating his finds, he notes the changes in All the finds from Pettigarth’s Field were tomb construction, varying pottery type deposited with the National Museum in and decoration (Stewart 1987: 4). Stew- Edinburgh but the Shetland Archives re- art observed that fashions changed and tains some of Stewart’s field notes and a he dated a new type of beaker to the fine collection of black and white photo- early Bronze Age, fragments of which graphs that record his excavations in were found in burial cists (ibid: 8; Fig. 5). Whalsay. There can be no doubt that John Stewart has left us an important Among Stewart’s papers in Shetland Ar- legacy; his extensive discoveries of the chives are correspondences with the Neolithic culture in his homelands have National Museum in Edinburgh and the been disseminated not just to Shetland- Royal Commission of Ancient and His- ers but to a much wider public. torical Monuments (Scotland). It is obvious from these letters that Stewart sent Acknowledgements many artefacts found during his excava- The authors would like to sincerely thank tions to Edinburgh for identification. He the Stewart Family for allowing us to in- also registered his findings with the clude their family photographs and also Sites and Monuments Records, and Mrs Mary Kay for identifying her father much of his detailed accounts were pub- in Figure 4. lished for the Scottish Regional Group, 101

Bibliography

Calder, C. S. T., 1961: Excavations in Whalsay, Shetland 1954-55, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 94: 28-45.

Corrie, J. M., 1931: Notes on (1) a two- storeyed grave at Little Asta, Shetland; (2) certain prehistoric relics from Shet- land; and (3) a Viking brooch of silver from Skaill Bay, Orkney, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 66: 69-85.

Irvine, J. T., 1866: On the Brough of Clickimin, in the Loch of Clickimin, Near Lerwick, Mainland of Shetland, Journal of the British Archaeological Associa- tion, vol. 22: 369-375.

Irvine, J. T., 1885: Note of excavations and discoveries on the Tafts of Bayann, below Sellafirth, on Bastavoe, Yell, Shet- land, Proceedings of the Society of Anti- quaries of Scotland vol.19: 385-387.

Irvine, J. T., 1887: Notes on some prehistoric burial-places and standing stones in the island of Yell, Shetland, Proceed- ings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 21: 215-219. Fig. 5: Bronze Age cist at Willie’s Wart, Whalsay (Shetland Archives D27/9/10/2/1). Irvine, J. T., 1898: Notes on sepulchral cairns discovered by the blowing of sand on the Sands of Bracon; and on the

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 102

sculptured stone discovered at South Stewart, J., 1987: Shetland Place-Names, Garth, Island of Yell, Shetland, Proceed- Lerwick, Shetland Library and Museum. ings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 32: 171-174. Stewart, J., 2008: An Outline of Shet- land Archaeology, Lerwick, Shetland Mitchell, A., 1882: [‘Purchases for the Amenity Trust. Museum’], Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 17: 5-21. Shetland Archives

Moar, P., 1948: ‘A Small hoard of pol- D11/12/7 Plans by R.G. Flavell of sus- ished stone knives and a polished stone pected ancient monuments on Trebister adze from the Ward of Shurton, Near Ness, with typed comments by Peter Lerwick’, Proceedings of the Society of Moar, October 1966. Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 80: 140-141. D27/9/7 Manuscript report by John ‘Purchases for the Museum’. 1882. Pro- Stewart on prehistoric cairn at west side ceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Houll Loch, Whalsay, August 1935. of Scotland, vol. 17:13-20. D3/20/14. Robert Cogle to Arthur Lau- Ritchie, A., 2011: A Shetland Antiquarian: renson, 19 February 1875. James Thomas Irvine of Yell, Lerwick, Shetland Amenity Trust. D5/8. Shetland Literary and Scientific Society, [Information], 1861-1943. Stewart, J., 1954: Shetland – Mr J. Stewart reports numerous unrecorded D60/3/19/5. Robert Cogle to Gilbert sites, Ninth Report, Council for British Goudie, 14 August 1876. Archaeology, Scottish Regional Group: 14-15. 103

Neolithic in the Baltics From Agrarian Option to Practice

Inga Merkyte

Introduction Building upon M. Zvelebil’s and P. Row- ley-Conwy’s (1984) general availability model, this article aims to demonstrate that for the Eastern Baltic societies (the region covered by modern Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Sambian Peninsula) the tendency to conceptualise foraging and farming as separate steps of development has severely constrained the understanding of the highly complex interactions between new phenomena and local strategies. The acceptance and suc- cess of a new idea or a new technique depends on a variety of factors. “Agrar- ian knowledge” has circulated in the Eastern Baltics during the whole of the Neolithic, but this was just one economic option in a complex socio-economic system, where hunting, fishing, gathering, and trade were equally significant factors.

Fig.1: Map of North Eastern Europe with cultural groupings containing pottery c. 5000 with key sites mentioned in the text. L.: Lake. (after Pie- zonka 2008.)

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 104

Chronology the new technology spread further to In Baltic and Finnish research the inno- the west and north, and the hunters and vation and use of pottery is one of the fishermen in the area east and north of most important indicators of the transi- the Baltic Sea started producing the tion to the Neolithic, unlike in Central and Narva, Dubicˇiai (ex-Neman/Nemunas), Western Europe where the main criterion Ka I: 1/Sperrings and Säräisniemi 1 pot- is the transition to productive economy. tery types, see fig. 1. The knowledge of ceramics in terms of technology and shapes spread in the Traditionally, the transition between East European forest zone during later Early and Middle Neolithic is defined by part of the 7th Millennium BC, with local the appearance of Comb-and-Pit ware, hunter-gatherer groups (Piezonka 2008; while the transition between Middle and 2011; Budja 2011, with references.). The Late Neolithic is defined by the appear- area between Volga and Dnepr is a true ance of the Globular amphora (4000/3650- “battle zone” for establishing the very 2100/1900 BC) and Corded Ware cul- earliest pottery, including cultural entities tures around 3200 BC in Lithuanian and such as Kairšak, Elšan, Rakušecˇnyi Yar, Latvia, and in the mid-3rd millennium Surskaya, etc. (ibid.). From the second (2600-2300 BC) in Estonia (fig. 2). half of the 6th Millennium BC onwards

Fig. 2: Chronological table, based upon sources listed in the bibliography.

Period Lithuania, BC Latvia, BC Estonia, BC Cultural groupings

Early Neolithic 5500/5300- 5500-4200 5000/4900- Narva, Dubicˇiai (ex-Nemunas), 4400/4200 4200/4100 Sperrings (Co mbed)

Middle Neolithic 4400/4200- 4200-3200/3000 4200/4100- Narva, Nemunas, Pit-Comb 3100/2900 3200/3100 Ware, Textile Ware

Late Neolithic 3100/2900-2000 3200/3000- 3200/3100- Narva, Nemunas, Pit-Comb 1900/1700 1900/1800 Ware, Globular Amphora, Bay Coast (Rzucewo), Corded Ware Early Textile Ware

Early Bronze Age 2000-1700 1900/1700- 1000 1900/1800-1100 Cultural fragmentation: Luba¯na-type Ware, Middle Bronze Age 1700-1300 [1250-1000] Kiukainen-type Ware, Textile Ware, Žalioji-type Ware, Late Bronze Age 1300-500 1000-500 1100-500 Striated Ware, West Baltic Barrow Culture 105

Around 300 carbon dates are available Settlements and Dwellings from the region (Antanaitis-Jacobs & The distribution of the cultural groupings Girininkas 2002; Kriiska et al. 2005; in the Eastern Baltics does not provide an Pilicˇiauskas et al. 2011). The last ten entirely clear picture of the cultural and years can be termed as a revolution in social situation in the region. The major respect of radiocarbon dating, involving cultural entity, being the Narva culture, Accelerator Mass Spectrometry and a is spread from Northern Estonia to Cen- greater temporal resolution. Nearly all tral Lithuania, see fig. 1. It shares the the recently acquired dates stem from same traits in terms of pottery shapes, dating food crust deposited on ceramic expedient use of lithic materials, abun- shards, which is appreciated as a highly dance of bone and wooden artefacts, direct dating method. and reliance on hunting and fishing.

Nevertheless, it is too early to enjoy the Looking closer, the region is fragmented results. While the effects of hard water into an island-like settlement pattern, and marine water have been acknowl- resembling a sort of the Danish Åmose edged for some time now, only recently situation. The Neolithic sites cluster are we becoming aware of the distorting around water bodies, implying both perio effects caused by the origin of the crust. dical movement and returns. The famous B. Philippsen from Århus University has Narva area, after the Estonian independ- demonstrated (on North German and ex- ence renamed Riigiküla, has a concen- perimental materials) that the fault mar- trated occupation of 24 sites (Kriiska gin can be as much as 1000 years, and 1999). Lake Kretuonas in Eastern Lithua- that stable isotopes are only suitable to a nia was surrounded by 36 sites of Neo- limited extend for identifying the origin lithic to Early Bronze Age date located of food crust and thus for undertaking up to 1.5 km from the present shores proper adjustments of AMS results (2010). (Girininkas 1994). The coastal Šventoji is As demonstrated in her study, it is troub made up of 42 sites (Rimantiene˙ 2005) ling that there is only little correlation (Fig. 3). Biržulis Lake in Western Lithuania between the food crust dates arriving from has attracted over 40 sites of Mesolithic- the same site – resulting in descrepan- Neolithic date (Stancikaite˙ et al. 2006). cies of 1000-1500 calibrated years. The new Baltic AMS dates differ from the Such settlement patterns, dictated by conventional dates by up to 400 uncali- the availability and diversity of natural brated years. Thus, chronology remains resources, have inspired reduced resi- an unresolved issue, compare fig. 2. dential mobility and a sense of territori-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 106

Fig. 3: Example of settle- Coastal Bay Culture or groups of Corded ment patterns (Šventoji, Ware Culture. These are spreading in after Rimantiene˙ 2005: Fig. 15). small groups to inland areas, leaving traces of short-lived habitation sites with remains of fingerprinting ceramic shards ality, the best example (Rimantiene˙ 2001). being the famous Zvej nieki cemetery from Pollen Data 7500 to 2600 BC (Lars- Accumulating pollen evidence points to son & Zagorska 2006). environmental management practices long before the onset of proper farming. Dwellings in the area Although there is an emerging consensus are varied. Some are that only macrobotanical remains should small pit houses, oth- be accepted as indisputable evidence ers are complex sur- for agricultural activities (e. g. Tinnera et face structures like al. 2007), the broad spectrum of differ- the ones at Zvidze ent non-native cultigens in Baltic pollen (Lubans Lake), Latvia. diagrams deserves attention. Some sites have even produced evidence of In general, Baltic pollen diagrams are Neolithic pile dwell- similar to the ones of Southern Scandi- ings. Settlements can navia: expansion of hazel trees from the also be fenced (Šven mid 6th Millennium BC, associated with toji 1, Žemaitiške˙ 2 food collection but also construction of (Kretuonas Lake)). Near the settlements fishing gear, expansion of edible wild permanent fishing installations have of- plants like rowan and a decline of elm ten been observed. Some settlements around 3800 BC, supporting the idea of were multilayered, like Zedmar on the pan-European epidemics rather than the Sambian peninsula and Icˇa (Lake Lu- earlier assumed stress on animal hus- bans) in Latvia, as well as others. bandry.

It is often possible to detect pioneer be- But already at a very early date we are haviour from such intensely exploited seeing hops (Canabis/Humulus type) of areas. Yet the best-documented cases of East Asian origin, planted by the Zvej pioneer movements in the 3rd millennium nieki population (Kalnina 2006: Fig. 7). BC are associated either with so-called At the same time, around 7000 BC, there 107

is a significant increase of charcoal dust. nia (Daugnora & Girininkas 2004: Table 1). It can be debated whether hops were This is just slightly less than the occur- appreciated for their use as food and rence of elk or deer teeth among the medicine or rather for producing excel- grave goods. The teeth were discovered in lent fibre strands in high demand for two separate burials, suggesting direct fishing nets: likely for both. Grains of contact with agrarian societies. hops are also discovered at later sites, such as Šventoji 3B of the Middle Neo- Bones and teeth of domestic animal lithic (Rimantiene˙ 2005). bones have also been discovered in early Neolithic sites of Riigiküla III (ex-Narva), Pollen of cereals was discovered in sed- Kõnnu on Saaremaa Island, Zvidze (Lake iments dated to the Early Neolithic of Lubans) in Latvia (Daugnora & Girininkas Southern Lithuania and West Byelorus- 2004). For instance, Kõnnu Early Neo- sia, including oats, seemingly deriving lithic layers held 10 bones of goat/sheep from Western Asia (Kabailiene˙ & Stan (3,5%), 3 bones of pig, 1 of horse, 1 of cˇikaite˙ 2001: Fig. 3.4; Weiss et al. 2006). dog, while the Latvian Zvidze layers of The same pollen profiles have produced the Early Neolithic produced 151 pig contemporary evidence of sorrels (Rumex bones, 39 horse bones, 16 bones of dogs acetosa & acetosella), indicating land- and several cattle bones. Although small, scape opening. the discovered quantities indicate viable population of domestic animals. It should be mentioned, that grains of millet are often discovered at coastal More interesting is to ask what kind of sites, but these are regarded as result of social, even political factors would have the exchange in amber, for sandy dunes made the addition of domestic animals to are not suitable for cultivation of millet the economy either viable or desirable. (Rimantiene˙ 2005). One answer might be trade. Indeed, the sites with the earliest evidence of animal Domestic Animals husbandry are located in an area which The earliest evidence of domestic ani- is devoid of flint or other suitable lithic mals is dated to the Late Mesolithic. 19 resources. Limitations may have fostered teeth identified as cattle incisors (Bos the impetus to produce exchangeable bovis) – as opposed to 23 auroch (Bos commodities, and eventually be a core primigenius) teeth, also encountered – factor of the transition towards regular were found in two of the 14 burials in agrarian practices. Donkalnis (Lake Biržulis), Western Lithua-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 108

Another trend, becoming more apparent known Danish materials, which is due over time, reveals different strategies in to the lack of plants. The 15N levels are animal husbandry. For instance, at the also low, ~12 ‰, which implies lack of Zedmar A site the preference is placed marine recourses. Nevertheless, the data on goats or sheep, in the Estonian Loona clearly demonstrates reliance on differ- site (Saaremaa island) pigs are making ent subsistence strategies in different up the dominant group (9% of all bones), periods of the past, as also confirmed by in South Lithuania it is cattle (Dusios 8, recent studies of Lithuanian remains – 14%), in West Lithuania – goat/sheep, albeit there are no sharp divisions be- pig and horse, but no cattle, in East tween marine and terrestrial, as in Danish Lithuania – cattle and horses. materials (Antanaitis-Jacobs et al. 2009). It is evident that local conditions are a Currently there are 10 locations in East- factor: establishing local baselines is thus ern and Western Lithuania with finds of, necessary for proper interpretations of in all probability, domesticated horse the isotopic values (Schutkowski 2006). bones attributed to the Late Neolithic (Girininkas et al. 2009). Earlier finds of Pottery Indications horse bones have also been made in the Although pottery is no longer coupled broader region beginning from the Me- with sedentism or with productive econ- solithic, but their origin in terms of natu- omy as marking major shifts in human ral wild or introduced domestic habitat history, introduction, acceptance, and is disputed (ibid.). “domestication” of pottery is still considered an indicator of social transfor- In the Late Neolithic most of the sites mations. have significant amounts of bones of domestic animals, on average around 20% Narva settlements, even of the earliest (ranging from 5 to 32%), the highest Neolithic, have produced surprisingly quantities being encountered in Lithuania large quantities of pottery, amounting to (Daugnora & Girininkas 2004). thousands of shards (Girininkas 1994; 2011 with ref.). Other neighbouring cul- Diet 13C and 15N tures have much smaller quantities of The most abundant isotopic information pottery, but significantly richer lithic in- revealing diet in the past comes from ventories. In the earliest period there are the Zvejnieki cemetery (Eriksson 2006). two types of pottery – large pointed or In general the 13C levels are rather low rounded based vessels, and bowl lamps, – ~21 ‰, lower than for instance in just like the Ertebølle-set. 109

But even within the same cultural unit it several elements, decoration occurring is possible to note technological differ- on the whole surface, etc. All elements ences. For instance, the earliest Narva of phase I are thus incorporated into the pottery from eastern Lithuania (Žemai repertoire of phase II or, in other words, tiške˙, Lake Kretuonas) is made with the into the standardisation of the symbolic help of so-called U-technique, is domi- language. nated by shell temper, and often decorated. The earliest Estonian Narva pot- By estimating the amount of decorated tery (Kääpa) is produced with the help of pottery at individual sites, it is possible H-technique, is undecorated, and tem- to observe another trend, namely that the pered with plants and only occasionally earlier the occupation, the richer becomes with crushed shells. the decoration of the pottery at the site over the time. This demonstrates the The attempt to summarise the typologi- existence of locally accumulated com- cal dynamics of Narva pottery have pro- plexity at developing of social centres. duced two distinct patterns. Subdividing the rims into basic types of straight, in- Middle Neolithic innovations comprise verted, everted or combined (I, S, C and SC so-called Textile Pottery, termed so due profiles), it is evident that the dominant to textile impressions on the surface. type in the Northeastern Narva area is The earliest dates are currently deriving the most simple one, namely the straight from Lithuania (Pilicˇiauskas et al. 2011). rim type. In the Southwestern area of Such decoration is the secondary result the distribution of the Narva Culture the of a significant technological novelty, earliest period is not attested yet, but the namely the use of the paddle and the pottery shapes in general are showing anvil, when mats are used as surfaces domination of more complex shapes. for paddling and thinning the walls of the pottery. Perhaps complexity was expressed differently in different areas: a survey of Another trend appearing in the Middle decoration elements used on pottery Neolithic in the Eastern Baltics is the shift clearly demonstrates that Northern Narva from vessel types mainly used for food pottery had a larger repertoire of deco- preparation to vessel types used for ration elements than the Southern Narva storage. Also a separate group of smaller area. Comparing the Narva I period with vessels appears, with diameters of 12- Narva II, we observe an increase of com- 15 cm, showing new family and food mon decorative elements, combination of preparation trends. Some vessels, mainly

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 110

in the south, are becoming flat based originates in Northern Russia, in the (for placing on surfaces such as shelves or Valdaj Highlands. The greenish schist is tables). In the north flat-based vessels are spreading across the eastern Baltics from only dated to the Late Neolithic. Finally, it Northern Estonia. The area of Karelia is should be mentioned that Funnel Beaker contributing with violet-coloured quartz pottery has also been discovered in sandstone (Daugnora & Girininkas 2004; Latvia, at the Lake Lubans sites. Girininkas 2011).

The greatest complexity in terms of pot- Ground stone tools are spreading from tery shapes is observed in the 3rd millen- around 4000 BC (the Middle Neolithic) nium. 14 different principal types of (Juodagalvis 2010). At the same time, pottery have been established in the both on the coast but also on inland coastal areas of the southern part of the sites, amber workshops are emerging. region – the Coast Bay Culture. The most intense period of amber exchange starts at the end of 4th millennium Exchange BC, where a significant standardisation Exchange was of vital importance, pri- of production occurs (Beck et al. 2003). marily due to unevenly distributed stra- Amber spread from the Baltics to Cen- tegic resources such as flint and rocks in tral Russia and on to Southern Europe. general (Daugnora & Girininkas 2004: Fig. 17; Zvelebil 2006). The central area Distribution of flint axes like the ones of the Eastern Baltic and the central made of grey danien flint of possibly area of the Narva Culture, is completely Scandinavian provenience – fig. 4, or devoid of suitable lithic resources. Polish Krzemionki flint demonstrates the intensity of such contacts and the routes Flint is occurring as natural nodules on of exchange, also of information (Juoda- the surface or deposited in gravel in galvis 2010: Fig. 128; Girininkas 2005: southern Lithuania. A number of special- Fig. 55). ised flint mines have also been discovered in Southern Lithuania and North- The Role of the Contact Cultures western Byelorussia (Baltru¯nas et al. From the last quarter of the 4th millennium 2006). The occurrence of Narva pottery in BC the Baltic region is discovered by so- Southern Lithuania, foreign to the area, is called Contact cultures (or Cultures of being explained as a result of resource- contact according to H. Vandkilde), at first driven interaction. Different sorts of flint, by the Globular Amphora Culture, and including a very distinct type of pink flint later on by the Corded Ware Culture. The 111

Fig. 4: Noru¯nai hoard, South- ern Lithuania, (after Juoda- galvis 2010: Fig. 128).

culmination of exchange networks coin- of the inhabitants, but they certainly in- cides with these cultures. Much paper troduced new rules and economic strat- has been devoted attempting to down- egies. The distribution of the sites of the play the role of these cultures and cer- Contact Cultures coincides with places of tainly on ruling out the possibility that strategic resources. The mobile nature these immigrants were the ancestors of of these cultures is geared by resource- the Balts. driven cultural interaction, limiting both access to the resources and introducing The appearance of these cultures may new exchange models for the local have not changed the ethnic composition groups, and at the same time inspiring

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 112

the flow of new and exotic, but also vital Summing-up & Conclusions materials. Thus, in the 3rd millennium BC It is attempted here to demonstrate the the flow of flint was abundant and sta- complexity of the Neolithic societies in ble, as reflected also in the macro-flake the Eastern Baltics, including all expect- technologies of the Late Neolithic. ed agrarian pre-conditions being in place well before the third millennium BC. Al- The mithochondrial DNA extracted from ready from the earlier part of the Baltic four Neolithic burials in Lithuania be- Neolithic it is possible to observe a trend longs to haplogroups which are not exist- towards decreased residential mobility ent in the modern population (U5b2) or are and long-term occupation, with large very rare (U4); U5-types are found in 45% settlements and micro-regional conscious- instance in Saami population (Bramanti ness, including territoriality with recur- et al. 2009; Jankauskas 2010). Thus, the rent attachment to the same area. The ghost of migration is still daunting. concentrated settlement islands of popu lation usually associated with lacustrine Post Scriptum: The Bronze Age environments have exploited varied local During the earliest phases of the Bronze resources intensively, engaging also in Age (1800-1500 BC), in itself a highly interregional multidirectional trade net- active “Contact culture” period, Neolithic works, providing constant opportunities traditions were completely abandoned for interaction with the “managers of (Girininkas 2011). This is reflected both neolithisation”, along with flows of in- in the pottery and in lithic materials. formation including that of agrarian New locations were chosen for settle- knowledge (Sørensen & Karg 2012, with ments with heavier and more fertile soils. references.). Towards the 3rd millennium Culturally, the region undergoes fragmen- BC these trends intensify, as viewed in tation, creating a platform for the later technological development and special- mosaic of ethnic subdivisions. Home- isation, together with exploitation of steads are gradually becoming the domi strategic resources and production of nant economic unit. Also, the settlements marketable outputs, growing diversity are being established on locations with of cuisine practices, and ditto in food restricted access. Towards the end of handling the 2nd millennium BC the first hill-forts appear, and with the introduction of cre- It is significant to stress that the hunter- mation burials, the Eastern Baltics joined gatherer societies of the Eastern Baltics the main stream of European cultural were not passively absorbing new ideas development. from agrarian core areas, but had a 113

much broader communicative interface have developed along similar lines as spanning from the Volga-Oka region to the Baltics: slowly and on the basis of Fennoscandia. Copper rings from Zve- extensive traditional networks which, for jnieki burial 277, dated to 4460-4330 instance, introduced Baltic styled pot- BC, demonstrate a local inventiveness tery to the Ertebølle Culture, no doubt in not yet seen in other European pre- exchange for flint. agrarian contexts (Gaismin¸a 2006: Fig. 2; Zagorska 2006). Bibliography The hunter-gatherer societies in the East Baltic demonstrated cognitive readiness Antanaitis-Jacobs, I., Girininkas, A., for adoption of agrarian practices through- 2002: Periodization and chronology of out the Baltic Neolithic, yet it was not the Neolithic in Lithuania, Archaeologia before the appearance of the resource- Baltica 5: 9–40. driven Contact Cultures, that social and subsistence strategies had to be truly Antanaitis-Jacobs, I., Richards, M., reconsidered. The competition for stra- Daugnora, L., Jankauskas, R. and Ogrinc, tegic resources resulted in more closed N., 2009: Diet in early Lithuanian prehis- and regulated networks of exchange and tory and the new stable isotope evi- in territorial divisions, thus pushing the dence, Archeologia Baltica 12: 12-30. Eastern Baltic communities into farming, in fact the only viable escape from the Baltru¯nas, V., Karmaza, B., Kulbickas, D. environmental and geo-political “trap” and Ostrauskas, T., 2006: Distribution of created by the external and differently raw material for prehistoric flint arte- geared structures represented by agro- facts in South Lithuania, Geografija 42, pastoral communities. At the same time, 2: 41-47. the Contact Cultures, agents of encoun- ters, are in themselves the result of con- Beck, C.W., Loze, I. and Todd, J. M., tact. 2003: Amber in archaeology : proceedings of the Fourth International Confer- Seen in this light, it is impossible to ex- ence on Amber in Archaeology, Talsi, plain the rapid neolithisation processes 2001. International Union of Prehistoric in Denmark without (a significant) influx and Protohistoric Sciences. Amber Com- of foreign population, in fact the early mittee. Association for the Advance- “Contact Culture” of the Funnel Beaker ment of Baltic Studies. Riga, Institute of complex. Without this, Denmark would the History of Latvia.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 114

Bramanti, B., Thomas, M. G., Haak, W., Centre of the Latvian History Museum, Unterlaender, M., Jores, P., Tambets, K., Back to the Origin. New Research in the Antanaitis-Jacobs, I., Haidle, M. N., Mesolithic-Neolithic Zvejnieki cemetery Jankauskas, R., Kind, C.-J., Lueth, F., and environment, northern Latvia, Lars- Terberger, T., Hiller, J., Matsumura, S., son, L. and Zagorska, I. eds., Acta Ar- Forster, P., Burger, J., 2009: Genetic dis- chaeologica Lundensia 52. Almqvist & continuity between local hunter-gather- Wiksell International: 309-310. ers and Central Europe’s first farmers, Science 326: 137-140. Girininkas, A., 1994: Baltu˛ kultu¯ros išta kos [Origins of Baltic culture] I, Vilnius, Budja, M., 2011: Early Neolithic pots Savastis. and potters in Western Eurasia. Panon- ski prapovijesni osviti. Zbornik radova Girininkas, A., 2005: Neolitas. Lietuvos posvec´enih Korneliji Minichreiter uz 65. istorija I: Akmens amžius ir ankstyvasis Obljetnicu života, Zagreb: Institute of ar- matalu˛ laikotarpis [Neolithic. The Histo- chaeology: 31-67. ry of Lithuania, vol. 1: Stone Age and the Earliest Period of Metals], Vilnius, Bal- Daugnora, L. & Girininkas, A., 2004: Rytu˛ tos lankos. Pabaltijo bendruomeniu˛ gyvensena XI-II tu¯kst. pr. Kr. [Lifeways of Eastern Baltic Girininkas, A., 2011: Baltu˛ kultu¯ros ištakos communities during the XI-II millennium [Origins of Baltic culture] II. – Klaipe˙da. BC]. Kaunas. Girininkas, A., Daugnora, L. and Antan- Eriksson, G., 2006: Stable isotope analy- aitis-Jacobs, I., 2009: When did domes- sis of human and faunal remains from ticated horses appear in Lithuania? Ar- Zvejnieki. Back to the Origin. New Re- cheologia Baltica 11: 22- 31. search in the Mesolithic-Neolithic Zvej nieki cemetery and environment, northern Jankauskas, R., 2010: Ancient Mitochon- Latvia, Larsson, L. and Zagorska, I. eds., drial DNA from Stone Age Lithuania and Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 52. Alm the Possible Origins of the First Inhabit- qvist & Wiksell International.: 183-215. ants, Archaeologia Baltica 13: 32-36.

Gaismin¸a, S., 2006: Treatment of the Juodagalvis, V., 2010: Užnemune˙s copper rings from Burial 277, Zvejnieki priešistore˙ [Prehistory of Užnemune˙ Stone Age cemetery, at the Restoration (Southwestern Lithuania)], Vilnius. 115

Kabailiene˙, M. & Stancˇikaite˙, M., 2001: Larsson, L. and Zagorska, I. eds., 2006: Akmens amžiaus žemdirbyste˙s ir gyvulin Back to the Origin. New Research in the kyste˙s raida pagal paleobotaniniu˛ tyrimu˛ Mesolithic-Neolithic Zvejnieki cemetery duomenis [Development of Stone Age and environment, northern Latvia, Acta farming and stockbreeding according to Archaeologica Lundensia 52. Almqvist palaeobotanical studies], Stone Age in & Wiksell International. South Lithuania (according to geological, palaeogeographical and archaeological Philippsen, B., 2010: Terminal Mesolithic data), Baltru¯nas, V. ed. Vilnius: 218-224. Diet and Radiocarbon Dating at Inland Sites in Schleswig-Holstein, Landscapes Kalnina, L., 2006: Palaeovegetation and and Human Development: The Contribu- human impact in the surroundings of the tion of European Archaeology, Kiel Grad- ancient Burtnieks Lake as reconstructed uate School Human Development in from pollen analysis. Back to the Origin. Landscapes. Universitätsforschungen zur New Research in the Mesolithic-Neo- prähistorischen Archäologie 191. Bonn, lithic Zvejnieki cemetery and environ- Dr. Rudolf Habelt: 21-36. ment, northern Latvia, Larsson, L. and Zagorska, I. eds., Acta Archaeologica Piezonka, H., 2008: Neue AMS-Daten zur Lundensia 52. Almqvist & Wiksell Inter- Frühneolitischen Keramikentwicklung in national: 53-73. der Nordosteuropäischen Waldzone, Esto nian Journal of Archaeology 12, 2: 67-113. Kriiska A., 1999: Formation and development of the Stone Age settlement at Rii Piezonka, H., 2011: The earliest pottery giküla, Northeastern Estonia. Environ- east of the Baltic Sea, Early Pottery in mental and Cultural History of the the Baltic – Dating, Origin and Social Eastern Baltic Region, PACT 57: 173-183. Context, Hartz, S., Lüth, F. and Terberger, T. eds., Bericht Der Römisch-Germanischen Kriiska, A., Lavento, M. and Peets, J., Kommision 89, 2008, Philipp von Zabern, 2005: New AMS dates of the Neolithic Darmstadt/Matintz: 301-346. and Bronze Age ceramics in Estonia: preliminary results and interpretations, Pilicˇiauskas, G., Lavento, M., Oinonen, Estonian Journal of Archaeology 9, 1: M. and Grižas, G., 2011: New 14C dates 3-31. of Neolithic and Early Metal Period ceramics in Lithuania, Radiocarbon 53, 4: 629–643.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 116

Radin˛š, A., 2012: Arheolog´isks cel¸vedis Archaeological Science: 1-17, http://dx. latviešu un Latvijas ve¯sture¯ [Archaeo- doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.08.042 logical guide to Latvian history]. Riga, Neputns. Tinnera, W., Nielsen, E. H. and Lotter, A. F., 2007: Mesolithic agriculture in Switzer- Rimantiene˙, R., 2001: Pietu˛ Lietuvos ak- land? A critical review of the evidence. mens amžiaus kultu¯ru˛ raida bei jos vieta – Quaternary Science Reviews 26: 1416- visos Lietuvos ir Europos kontekste. [De- 1431. velopment of South Lithuanian Stone Age cultures and their place in the context of Vasks, A., Vaska, B. and Gra¯vere, R., Lithuania and Europe.], Stone Age in 1997: Latvijas aizve¯sture [Prehistory of South Lithuania (according to geologi- Latvia]. Riga, Zvaigzne. cal, palaeogeographical and archaeological data), Baltru¯nas, V. ed., Vilnius: Zagorska, I., 2006: Radiocarbon chronol- 234-239 ogy of the Zvejnieki burials, Back to the Origin. New Research in the Mesolithic- Rimantiene˙, R., 2005: Die Steinzeit- Neolithic Zvejnieki cemetery and envi- fischer und Ostseelagune in Litauen. ronment, northern Latvia, Larsson, L. and Vilnius, Lithuanian National Museum. Zagorska, I. eds, Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 52. Almqvist & Wiksell Inter- Schutkowski, H., 2006: Human ecology: national: 91-113. Biocultural adaptations in human communities. Springer. Zvelebil, M., 2006: Mobility, contact, and exchange in the Baltic Sea basin Stancikaite˙, M., Baltru¯nas, V., Šinku¯nas, 6000-2000 BC, Journal of Anthropological P., Kisieliene˙, D. and Ostrauskas, T., 2006: Archaeology 25: 178–192. Human response to the Holocene environmental changes in the Birzulis Lake Zvelebil, M. & Rowley-Conwy, P., 1984: region, NW Lithuania. Quaternary inter- Transition to farming in northern Europe: a national 150: 113-129. hunter-gatherer perspective, Norwegian Archaeological Review 17 (2): 104-128. Sørensen, L. & Karg, S., 2012: The expansion of agrarian societies towards Weiss, E., Kislev, M. E. and Hartmann, A., the north e new evidence for agriculture 2006: Autonomous Cultivation Before during the Mesolithic/Neolithic transi- Domestication. Science 312: 1608-1610. tion in Southern Scandinavia, Journal of 117

Patterns of agricultural spread in Nordic landrace crops

Matti Leino

Introduction Landraces Phylogeography is the study of geo- Present day crop cultivars cannot be used graphic distribution of genetic diversity for detailed phylogeographic studies. with the aim to elucidate the historical Modern cultivars are produced at scien- processes behind. It has been suggested tific institutes and plant breeding com- that phylogeographic patterns observed panies and a single cultivar can be dis- in crops, at least partially, reflect the tributed over large areas. Instead, locally original spread of agriculture (Brown cultivated traditional landraces are a 1999; Jones et al. 2008). The genetic re- more relevant material for phylogeograph- lationships in crop plants from different ic studies. A currently accepted definition geographical areas could also indicate of landraces reads ‘a dynamic popula- how seed has been exchanged and tion or populations of a cultivated plant spread in historical times. that has historical origin, distinct identity and lacks formal crop improvement, as A critical point for conclusions to be well as often being genetically diverse, drawn from phylogeographic studies is locally adapted and associated with tra- the type of crop material studied and its ditional farming systems’ (Camacho Villa availability from relevant geographical et al. 2005). The landraces represent the areas. Here I discuss some aspects of diversity of crops grown since the origin genetic analyses on different crop mate- of agriculture up until the 19th century rials and possible historical interpreta- when modern plant breeding arose. tions. Examples from my present work on barley in the Nordic countries are Contrary to modern day cultivars, where presented. new seed is regularly purchased, land races are maintained by the farmers’own

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 118

Fig. 1: 19th century agriculture. Although ethnologists have been good at documenting all kinds of artifacts from pre-industrial agri- time. In a study of Swedish field pea culture such as tools, buildings, clothing etc, the biological material was forgotten and most crops and landrace animals were lost. comparing landraces that were recently Photo: Nordiska Museet assembled with 100-year-old landrace samples preserved in a historic collec- seed production from one year to the tion, similar geographical patterns were next. Different actions and events, such as obtained in the extant and in the histori pollen flow, seed exchange, mutation, cal material (Leino et al. 2012). However, genetic drift and intentional and natural the extant landraces showed clear signs selection can alter the genetic setup of a of genetic drift, most likely due to their landrace over years. Nonetheless, a core maintenance as small, isolated popula- of genetic diversity could remain relations during the 20th century. Studies in tively static in the landraces for a long European wheat landraces support a de- 119

gree of genetic continuity over thou- Nordic Genetic Resource Center (Hagen- sands of years (Allaby et al. 1999). Thus, blad et al. 2012). From other areas of Eu- the genetic relationship between differ- rope, such as the Alps and Mediterranean, ent landraces from different localities more extant landrace accessions and can potentially reflect historical events with better passport data are available from very far back in time. (Jones et al. 2008). The use of extant landraces maintained by genebanks is the Studies of extant, aged easiest approach for phylogeographic and ancient plant materials studies, but it is necessary to perform by DNA methodologies careful evaluation of accessions in re- With the onset of modern plant breed- spect of accurate and reliable prove- ing in the late 19th century, the landraces nance of data. cultivated for millennia in Europe were rapidly replaced by modern cultivars. An alternative material to gene bank Landraces were rarely saved (fig 1). Later held landraces is historical herbaria or during the 20th century, the value of land seed collections. In Nordic museums races was recognized and collections large, and probably world-unique, seed were made to preserve landraces in gene collections from the 19th century can be banks. Today substantial amounts of Euro found (Leino 2010, fig 2). This material pean landraces can be found in gene has excellent passport data (e. g. age and banks, but this material presents several name of the location where the seeds constraints. Firstly, the geographical dis- were collected). Most important, the tribution is very uneven, with especially seeds have not been handled since their poor coverage in Northern Europe (Jones original harvest more than 100 years et al. 2008). Secondly, the accession pass- ago and are therefore not riddled by the port data, if present at all, is often unre- problems occurring in gene bank main- liable, meaning that uncertainties exist tenance. Indeed phylogeographic patterns about the landrace authenticity and its using this type of historical material can accurate provenance. Thirdly, the main- be clearer than those obtained from ex- tenance of landraces in gene banks could tant material of the same species (Lister alter the genetic integrity of the landraces et al. 2009; Hagenblad et al. 2012; Leino by contamination or genetic drift (random et al. 2012). Moreover, the geographic loss of genetic diversity in small popula- coverage of Northern Europe is very good. tions). In fact, several of these concerns Although seeds from historical collec- were in many cases confirmed in a study tions are no longer viable they can never involving Swedish landraces from the theless be studied using DNA method-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 120

Fig. 2: 19th century barley seed stored at Nordiska museet. The seeds are not viable but genetic analysis is still possible using such ancient materials have proven dif- DNA technologies. Photo: Matti Leino ficult, especially for charred materials (Schlumbaum et al. 2008). However, re- ologies (Leino et al 2009). The DNA in cent developments in DNA sequencing aged seeds is partly degraded and can- are proving promising and could offer the not be as easily analysed as DNA ex- possibility of analysing also more recal- tracted from viable material. However, citrant types of material in a near future amplifications of short fragments of (Bunning et al 2012). DNA where genetic variability occurs can be obtained and used in the phylo- Another important aspect is the pollina- geographical studies. tion system of the crop studied. Cross- pollinating species, e. g. Brassicas, rye and The use of archaeological crop remnants maize, have a constant gene-flow within would expand the time period that can and between populations, contrary to self- be studied by molecular methods and pollinating species such as wheat and answer the important question of whether barley. Consequently, the genetic varia- or not landraces remain genetically stable tion within populations may well exceed over time. Archaeological plant remains the variation between populations. This are most often charred or sometimes phenomenon hinders the observation of waterlogged. Hitherto, DNA analyses of fine-scale geographical patterns. None- 121

Fig. 3: A six-row barley landrace from Jämtland, Sweden. One of theless, on a larger geographical scale the few landraces available as viable material. Photo: Matti Leino patterns can still be observed also in cross-pollinating crops such as maize less common and used chiefly in beer (van Heerwarden et al. 2010) and rye production. Six-row barley was not sub- (Oliveira et al. unpublished) if sufficient ject to modern plant breeding until the genetic markers are used. 1920s (Olsson, 1997). Consequently, six- row barley landraces, especially the his- Phylogeographical patterns torical materials, are less likely to be in Swedish landrace barley mixed up with cultivars from seed indus- Historically barley is the most important tries. The species are also particularly cereal in the Nordic countries (Hjelmqvist, suitable for phylogeographical studies 1979). Landrace barley was typically of due to its self-pollinating habit (see the six-row type and used for making above) and the high number of molecu- bread and porridge. Two-row barley was lar genetic markers available.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 122

draces from the seed collection held at Nordiska Museet using suitable DNA markers to search for phylogeographical patterns. In an initial study, 14 landraces from Sweden were studied with micro satellite markers (Leino & Hagenblad 2010). This study showed a very clear differentiation between landrace barley from northernmost Sweden (Norrbotten) and landraces from other parts of the country (fig. 4). In addition, genetic diver sity was higher within and between populations from mid and southern Sweden.

Different introduction routes of barley to the Nordic countries? Fig. 4: Phylogeographic The results obtained from Swedish land pattern of landrace barley races suggested that barley seed was in Sweden. Barleys from the northernmost part not introduced to the northernmost parts of the country are of Sweden from the South. More likely clearly separated from the seed would have come from the east, the barleys from other parts of Sweden. The i. e. Finland. To test this hypothesis we pie-charts represent are presently studying landraces from the different land other countries in Northern Europe: Fin- races and colors represent the proportion land, Norway, Denmark, Estonia and of each landrace that Russia, together with a higher number has been assigned to of Swedish landraces. The majority of the either of two clusters or th ancestral populations. accessions are historical (19 century) material found in several Nordic museums (Leino 2010), but a few extant land races are also being included for areas Unfortunately, very few landraces of where historical material is missing. To barley from the Nordic countries have obtain a higher resolution of genetic re- been preserved in gene banks as viable lationships these accessions are being material. We therefore analysed histori- tested with a set of 284 single nucleo cal seed samples of six-row barley lan- tide polymorphism (SNP) markers. 123

Preliminary results show a similarity be- gical remains could allow the two scena tween landrace barley from northen- rios to be distinguished from each other. most Norway, Sweden and Finland, whereas the landraces from the central Conclusions and southern parts of these countries Phylogeographical studies of Nordic land are more similar to each other. The land race crops could reveal historical pat- races from Estonia and Russia appear to terns of seed spread and elucidate con- be genetically different from all of the nections between farming populations Nordic barleys. over different geographic scales. In this area, historical material, i. e. 19th century In recent studies of extant European land seed collections, has proved to yield races, some Finnish and Northern Swe clearer patterns than extant landraces dish barleys show similarity to Eastern obtained from gene banks. In the case European (Hungarian and Romanian) of barley, landraces cultivated in the far barley and an eastern introduction route North of Scandinavia and Finland con- to the North was suggested (Jones et al. stitutes a separate cluster, possible due 2011). In contrast, barley from central to a separate introduction route. Sweden and Denmark are more related to Western European landraces. At pre The extent to which the observed phylo- sent, there is no data available to com- geographic patterns in Nordic landraces pare with our material, but one working reflect the original spread of agriculture hypothesis is that the distinct separate or is obscured by later over-stamping by population of barleys from the far North seed trade/exchange would require the represents the traces of an eastern route use of archaeological materials, and with of seed spread, whereas the remaining the use of developing DNA technology parts of the Nordic countries were culti- this will be a highly interesting research vated with barleys that were brought to topic for the future. Scandinavia from Western Europe. Acknowledgement An alternative, or perhaps complemen- The author would like to thank co-work- tary, hypothesis is that the landraces ers in the Historic Seed Group; Nils Fors- from the far North represent a more an- berg, Jenny Hagenblad and Hugo Oliveira cestral barley population and that this for sharing their results and for valuable population has been replaced in other comments to this manuscript. parts of the Nordic countries by later seed introductions. Analysis of archaeolo

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 124

Bibliography Jones H., Lister D. L., Bower M. A., Leigh F. J., Smith L. M. J. and Jones M. K., Allaby, R. G., Banerjee, M. and Brown, T. 2008: Approaches and constraints of us- A., 1999: Evolution of the high molecular ing existing landraces and extant plant weight glutenin loci of the A, B, D, and G material to understand agricultural genomes of wheat, Genome 42: 296- spread in prehistory, Plant Genetic Re- 307. sources 6: 98-112.

Brown, T. A., 1999: How ancient DNA Jones, H., Civánˇ, P., Cockram, J., Leigh, may help in understanding the origin F. J., Smith, L. M. J. and Jones, M. K., and spread of agriculture, Philosophical 2011: Evolutionary history of barley cul- Transactions of the Royal Society Lon- tivation in Europe revealed by genetic don, B 354: 89–98. analysis of modern landraces, BMC Evo- lutionary Biology 11: 320. Bunning, S. L., Jones, G. and Brown, T. A., 2012: Next generation sequencing of Leino, M. W., Hagenblad, J., Edqvist, J. DNA in 3300-year-old charred cereal and Karlsson Strese, E.-M., 2009: DNA grains, Journal of Archaeological Sci- preservation and utility of a historic seed ence 39: 2780-2784. collection, Seed Science Research 19: 125–135. Camacho-Villa, T. C., Maxted, N., Scholten, M. and Ford-Lloyd, B., 2005: Leino, M. W. & Hagenblad, J., 2010: Defining and identifying crop landraces, 19th century seeds reveal the popula- Plant Genetic Resources 3: 373-84. tion genetics of landrace barley (Hor- deum vulgare), Molecular Biology and Hagenblad, J., Zie, J. and Leino, M. W., Evolution 27: 964–973. 2012: Exploring the population genetics of genebank and historical landrace va- Leino, M. W., 2010: Frösamlingar på mu- rieties, Genetic Resources and Crop Ev- seum, Nordisk museologi, no 1, 2010: olution 59: 1185–1199. 96-108.

Hjelmqvist, H., 1979: Beiträge zur Ken- Leino, M. W., Boström, E. and Hagen- ntnis der prähistorischen Nutzpflantzen blad, J., 2012: 20th century changes in in Schweden, Opera Botanica 47: 1-58. the genetic composition of Swedish field pea meta populations, Heredity doi:10.1038/hdy.2012.93. 125

Lister, D. L., Thaw, S., Bower, M. A., Schlumbaum, A., Tensen, M. and Jaen- Jones, H., Charles, M. P., Jones, G., icke-Després, V., 2008: Ancient plant 2009: Latitudinal variation in a photope- DNA in archaeobotany, Vegetation His- riod response gene in European barley: tory and Archaeobotany 17:233–244. insight into the dynamics of agricultural spread from ‘historic’ specimens, Jour- van Heerwaarden, J., Doebley,. J., nal of Archaeological Science 36: 1092- Briggs, W. H., Glaubitz, J. C., Goodman, 1098. M. M. and Gonzalez, J. J. S., 2011: Ge- netic signals of origin, spread and intro- Olsson, G., 1997: Gamla lantsorter – ut- gression in a large sample of maize land nyttjande och bevarande; Den svenska races, Proceedings of the National växtförädlingens historin, Olsson, G. ed., Acadamy of Science 108: 1088-1092. KSLA, Stockholm: 121-130.

West Voe, Sumburgh, Shetland. D. L. Mahler photo 2011.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 126

Farmers hunting and hunters farming – The expansion of agrarian societies during the Neolithic and Bronze Age in Scandinavia

Lasse Sørensen

Introduction Agrarian evidences The expansion of agrarian societies dur- from South Scandinavia ing the Neolithic and Bronze Age in 14C dates of domesticated animals and Scandinavia is in this paper investigated charred grains from South Scandinavia on a large geographical and chronologi- clearly show that farming was introduced cal scale by focusing on radiocarbon to this region more or less simultaneously dates processed on charred cereal grains, during the period of 4000 to 3700 cal BC pollen grains, bones of domesticated (Larsson 1984; Nielsen 1984; 2009; An- animals or contexts of material culture dersen 2008; Skousen 2008; Sørensen & connected to agrarian activities. The re- Karg 2012). From South Scandinavia there sults open new discussions of where, are, compared to other regions in Cen- when and why the different expansions tral Europe, many 14C dates of domesti- occurred in Scandinavia during the Neo- cated animals from the Early Neolithic I lithic and Bronze Age. It is hereby possi- (Hartz & Lübke 2004; Noe-Nygaard et al. ble to scrutinize the various reasons be- 2005). The direct dates have mainly been hind the introduction of agrarian activities conducted on cattle (Bos taurus), while in different regions. only a few dates have been made on sheep (Ovis aries), goats (Capra hircus) and domesticated pigs (Sus domesticus). 127

The lack of 14C dated bones from sheep Scandinavia is characterized by an agrar- and goats are due to a higher degree of ian way of life supplemented by some fragmentation of these bones, identifica hunting and fishing, which was practiced tion problems and difficulties in extract- on inland sites representing a change in ing collagen from the preserved bones. the settlement pattern. At the same time The few 14C dates of pigs are also asso- hunting and fishing activities supple- ciated with the difficulties in distinguish- mented by some herding of domesticated ing bones from domesticated pigs from the animals took place on coastal and lake wild boar (Sus scrofa) (Magnell 2005). shore sites, thus representing a continuity of the hunter-gatherer way of life (Søren 14C dates have also been conducted on sen & Karg 2012). The sudden appear- charred cereal grains from South Scan- ance of a new material culture – short dinavia, showing cereal cultivation and necked funnel beakers, clay discs, point processing from 4000 cal BC onwards butted axes and polygonal battle axes – (Kaul & Sørensen 2012). The identified together with the clear evidence of agrar- species from Early Neolithic contexts ian activities and flint mining in South are emmer (Triticum dicoccum), einkorn Scandinavia around 4000 to 3700 cal BC (Triticum monococcum), naked barley may suggest that agriculture was intro- (Hordeum vulgare/nudum), bread wheat duced by smaller groups of pioneering (Triticum aestivum/compactum) and pos- farmers from Central Europe. The few sibly spelt (Triticum spelta) (Larsson & domesticated animals at the coastal and Broström 2011; Sjögren 2012; Sørensen lake shore sites could be interpreted as & Karg 2012). Generally charred cereal initial herding activities by communities grains and quern stones have been that still lived as hunter-gatherer-fishers, found on many inland Early Neolithic who had contact with pioneering farm- sites, whereas very few evidences of ers. Generally, the complexity of agricul- crop cultivation have been reported from tural technologies, especially regarding coastal or lake shore sites (Nielsen to crop cultivation and keeping of do- 1984, 2009; Rosenberg 2006; Hallgren mestic animals all year round, require a 2008; Skousen 2008; Rudebeck 2010; long-term experience in order to succeed. Larsson & Broström, 2011; Mischka If these hunter-gatherers wanted to suc- 2011; Sørensen & Karg 2012). ceed as farmers, they had to integrate with agrarian societies. The impact of Farmers hunting and herding these pioneering farmers within the ar- hunters in southern Scandinavia chaeological record depended on the lo- The Early Neolithic period in Southern cal hunter-gatherers ability and desire

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 128

to integrate with the incoming farmers, from 4000 to 3700 cal BC by the evi- making the neolithisation process differ- dence of cereal pollen, which was found ent from region to region. in a few pollen diagrams in southern Nor way (Henningsmoen 1980: 175; Høeg Agrarian evidences from Southern 1982; Østmo 1988; Prøsch-Danielsen Norway – farming on the edge 1996; Kaul & Sørensen 2012). Unfortu- Recent research in southern Norway nately, the cereal pollen from southern suggests that big game hunting may Norway has been identified as barley have played a more important symbolic (Hordeum), which causes some serious role than the incoming agrarian activi- problems. Pollen grains from barley can, ties (Glørstad 2010; 2012; Solheim 2012). when found in limited numbers, easily The region is located on the periphery of be identified incorrectly. They could just the Funnel Beaker Culture, thus leading as well derive from different kinds of to a limited number of contacts with pio wild grasses such as wood barley neering farmers from South Scandinavia. (Hordelymus), wild rye (Leymus) or sweet Agrarian activities have been confirmed grass (Glyceria). Pollen diagrams show a

Fig. 1: Short necked funnel beakers of type II from Dønski near Oslo (Koch 1998; Demuth & Simonsen 2010). Photo Lasse Sø- rensen. 129

higher level of plantain pollen (Plantago 1977: 336; Nærøy 1987: 118; Olsen lanceolata), thus indicating a more open 1992; Åstveit 1999; Hallgren 2008; Åhr- landscape from 3700-3300 cal BC. The berg 2011). period is roughly simultaneous with the building of the few megaliths in South Additionally, several stray finds of point- Norway around 3500 cal BC (Høeg 1982, and thin butted axes and polygonal battle 1989, 1995, 1997, 1999). The agrarian axes can also refer to a continuous ex- expansion during the Funnel Beaker Cul- change and possible contacts between ture can be regarded as a continuous hunter-gatherers in southern Norway process of pioneering farmers trying to and farmers from Southern Scandinavia expand towards southern Norway from (Hinsch 1955; Østmo 1986). Most of the neighboring regions, but their impact axes are found near light sandy soils and seems to have been rather limited. water courses, which was ideal both for farming and seafaring along the coast Visits of a few pioneering farmers? (Solberg 2012). The distribution of Neoli A few finds near Oslo do, however, show thic flint axes clearly demonstrates that material culture together with deposition- some flint axes played a role as prestige al practices of symbolic values, which symbols in hunter-gatherer societies. The originate from South Scandinavia. A flint interpretation is supported by the fact, axe depot consisting of three thin butted that some of the axes were exchanged flint axes and a raw nodule has been to the region of Nordland within a large found in Disen (Glørstad 2012). Further- geographical hunter-gatherer network more, some short necked funnel beakers (Valen 2012). Nonetheless, many of the were found in a shallow pit in Dønski, Neolithic flint axes also represent an in- where the pottery was below 1 cm in tensification of a depositional practice in thickness and contained tempered in- southern Norway, indicating a new way clusions below 30 mm in size (Demuth & of perceiving the landscape compared Simonsen 2010) (Fig. 1). The ceramics to the Late Mesolithic. These changes from Dønski were either imported from could be linked to agrarian activities as- South Scandinavia or produced by incom- sociated with a few pioneering farmers ing farmers, because it differs from the moving from the neighboring regions to locally produced ceramics in southern southern Norway. The combination of a and western Norway. The local ceramics shorter growing season for crop cultiva- from the Early Neolithic is very thick tion, lower population density and lim- (above 1 cm) and coarse tempered with ited areas of easy arable soils in the inclusions of up to 1 cm in size (Skjølsvold central parts of Scandinavia could be

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 130

some of the reasons why the agrarian axes and imitations of thin butted axes expansion stopped in southern Norway made in local raw materials have been and north of the Mälardalen. Neverthe- registered in West Norway (Østmo 1999; less we should not rule out, that pio- Bergsvik 2003; Brevik 2010; Bergsvik & neering farmers could have reached cer- Østmo 2011). Nonetheless it is important tain favorable agrarian parts of western to acknowledge, that an agrarian expan- Norway during the Early Neolithic. sion is not one incident, but several, where pioneering farmers continuously Agrarian evidences in tried to expand into unknown territories. Southwestern and Western Norway However, the agrarian impulses became during the Early Neolithic very limited during the Pitted Ware Cul- In Southwest Norway pollen cereals of ture and it is not until the mid-third mil- barley have been reported from a pollen lennium that agrarian activities emerge diagram on Lista and another on Jæren, (Strinnhom 2001; Østmo 2008; Olsen thus indicating a limited amount of ce- 2009; Prescott 2009). real cultivation. Here, we face the same identification problems in separating bar The Middle Neolithic/Late Neolithic ley pollen from various species of wild I transition – an agrarian expansion grasses (Prøsch-Danielsen 2012). A few during the third millennium stray finds of polygonal battle axes, Evidence of cereal cultivation is observed point- and thin butted flint axes together in many pollen diagrams in Norway dur- with imitations of flint axes in local raw ing the mid-third millennium (Høgestøl & materials, seem to support the theory of Prøsch-Danielsen 2006; Hjelle 2012). This some minor agrarian activity during the is supported by the many 14C dates of Early Neolithic in Southwest Norway charred cereal grains showing agrarian (Bergsvik & Østmo 2011). However, it is activities during the transition between more likely, that a new material culture the Middle Neolithic B and Late Neolithic – ceramics and flint axes – could have I (2600-2200 BC) in southern and west- been brought to Southwest Norway by ern Norway (Glørstad 2004; Sørensen local hunter-gatherers, who had contacts 2012; Kaul & Sørensen 2012). Further- with a limited number of pioneering more, the earliest domesticated animals farmers in South Norway. The traces of from Hordaland have been 14C dated to agrarian societies become even sparser the transition between the Middle Neo- in West Norway, as no Early Neolithic lithic B and Late Neolithic I (Hjelle et al. flint axes have been registered in this 2006). region. Only a few double-edged battle 131

Fig. 2: A Bronze Age rock carving from Dysja- land, Roga- land, showing a herdsman with his dog and livestock (sheep?). Photo Lasse Sørensen.

Recently, it has been suggested that ani suggest a shift in both subsistence and mal husbandry already began during the settlement pattern towards an agrarian Middle Neolithic B (2800-2400 cal BC) in way of life during the Middle Neolithic B western Norway (Olsen 2009). The hypo or the Battle Axe Culture (Olsen 2012; Kaul thesis is based on finds of black layers & Sørensen 2012). However, the clear- with some charcoal and thickness of ance layers are completely lacking any several centimeters, which have been archaeological finds making it difficult interpreted either as the systematic burn- to associate the layers with a particular ing of heather or organized clearances of culture. Furthermore, it is at present dif- vegetation for the construction of pastur- ficult to determine whether the black ing fields. A few sites with the interpreted layers are a product of actual clearances clearance layers are distributed within or secondary drifting of cultural layers the inner parts of the fjords, which could from nearby sites (Prescott 2012: 171).

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 132

But many of the sites, located near the (Harrison 1980; Liversage 2003; Sarauw clearance layers, are situated within the 2007, 2008; Prescott 2009; Vander Linden inner fjords, which continue to be re- 2012). Only one Bell Beaker vessel from settled during the Late Neolithic (2400- Slettabø has been found in Norway, 1700 cal BC) and Early Bronze Age (1700- making the evidence rather limited 1100 cal BC) (fig. 2). The repeated settle- (Skjølsvold 1977). However, the concen- ment pattern indicates the initial stages tration of flint daggers and tanged points of an economic shift during the Middle along the Norwegian west coast indi- Neolithic B towards an agrarian subsist- cates that North Jutland may have served ence economy concentrated on animal as a bridgehead of contact by seafaring husbandry supplemented by some hunt- ships during the Bell Beaker Culture ing and fishing. Arguably, a very limited (Scheen 1979; Apel 2001; Østmo 2005; amount of material culture can be asso- Sarauw 2006). The ships transported ciated with the Battle Axe Culture in people with an agrarian knowledge to- these parts of West Norway (Oldeberg gether with a wide range of new mate- 1952; Hinsch 1956). Nevertheless, a few rial culture including flint daggers, tanged battle axe types of Malmers group D: 2 points with straight wings, wrist-guards and E: 2 and some corded ware pottery of slate and metallurgy (Prescott 2009). have been found in western Norway, The agrarian evidences found along the which seems to support either a direct or Norwegian coast support the argument an indirect contact with the Battle Axe of a possible leap frog migration from Culture in southern and western Scandi- South Scandinavia (Anthony 1990; Moore navia (Malmer 1975; T. B. Olsen 2004; 2001). Østmo 2010, 2012). Husbandry practices seem to have been initiated during the The agrarian expansion towards Battle Axe Culture, but it is not before Central Norway and Sweden the Late Neolithic that the agrarian ac- It is still uncertain whether the Bell tivities were intensified. Beaker Culture’s agrarian expansion also reached central parts of Norway. The Bell Beakers in Norway – part Generally the agrarian evidence is still of a large scale agrarian expansion? relatively sparse. In Central Sweden Weather the increased evidences of crop (Hälsingland and Ågermanland) there cultivation in West Norway can be asso- are evidences of crop cultivation from ciated with an agrarian expansion of pio around 2600 to 2300 cal BC (Viklund neer farmers from the Western European 2011; Kaul & Sørensen 2012). Further- Bell Beaker Culture is still debatable more, a tooth from a domesticated cow 133

found in the kitchenmidden of Ham- may be related to grain varieties and mersvold was 14C dated to the transition ability to grow crops in Northern Scandi between Middle Neolithic B and Late navia. Current DNA-analysis on histori- Neolithic I (2600-2200 cal BC) (Asprem cal barley types show that the northern 2012). Moreover several plough marks type of barley is different from the bar- were found on the site of Egge located ley found in Southern and Central Scan- northwest of the city of Steinkjer, in dinavia (Leino & Hagen Sheet 2010; Leino Trøndelag. A piece of charcoal found in this volume). Maybe the barley used dur- one of the plough marks was 14C dated ing the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze to 1769-1538 cal BC, thus indicating an Age had difficulties withstanding the very agrarian cultivation during the Early short growing season and the rainy peri- Bronze Age (Solem 2002; Kaul & Søren ods in Northern Scandinavia? sen 2012, Asprem this volume). Evidence of agrarian The central part of Norway and Sweden activities in North Scandinavia contains a huge potential in respect of Currently most of the 14C dates primarily finding further evidence of an agrarian support an agrarian expansion during way of life from the Middle and Late the Late Bronze Age from 1100 to 500 Neolithic. A quick investigation of the cal BC (Johansen & Vorren 1986; Johan distribution of flint sickles from the Late sen 1990; Arntzen & Sommerseth 2010; Neolithic and Early Bronze Age in Cen- Viklund 2011; Jensen 2012; Arntzen 2012; tral Norway show that about 80 % had Sjögren & Arntzen 2012; Kaul & Søren signs of gloss, thus indicating harvest- sen 2012). During the Late Bronze Age a ing of either cereals or common reed re-organization of the cultivation meth- (Phragmites australis) (Juel Jensen ods seems to have emerged, which for 1994). The distribution of the flint sick- South Scandinavia resulted in the con- les becomes less dense in Northern struction of Celtic fields, the introduc- Trøndelag and the sickles disappear in tion of the bow ard and new cereals Nordland, which demonstrates the limit such as flax (Linum) and rye (Secale ce- of the agrarian expansion during the Late real) (Robinson 1994; Pihl 2013; Wehlin Neolithic and Early Bronze Age (Mar 2013). All these changes could have made strander 1956; Zinsli 2007; Valen 2012; it possible for agrarian societies to ex- Skandfer 2012). The reason is probably pand further north and beyond the Arctic linked with a low population density and Circle during the Late Bronze Age. How- limited access to large areas of easy ever, we should not dismiss the possibil- arable soils. An alternative explanation ity of farmers trying to establish them-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 134

Fig. 3: Expan- sion of arable land, making it suitable for cultivation, is also important today. Photo Flem- ming Kaul.

selves so far north already during the ence in North Scandinavia is still debat- Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age able and might first have become really (Kaul 2011; 2012; Rønne 2011; 2012; important during the Iron Age (Fig. 3). Skandfer 2012). Arguably, the climate Conclusions and perspectives may have been so harsh that it probably Agrarian activities began around 4000- took several attempts to expand further 3700 cal BC in South Scandinavia, caused north, which first became a reality dur- by a minor migration of pioneering farming the Late Bronze Age and Pre-Roman ers from Central Europe. The indigenous Iron Age (Sjögren & Arntzen 2012). The hunter-gatherers integrated with the in- less successful farmers either had to coming farmers at different haste during withdraw towards the south or switch to the Early Neolithic. The expansion stopped fishing, hunting and gathering, possibly in southern Norway and north of the supplemented by some livestock. The Mählardalen. The reason for this stop of importance of the agro-pastoral subsist- expansion is still debatable, but the re- 135

gions further north in Norway and Sweden Bibliography had a lower population density, colder Andersen, S. H., 2008: The Mesolithic – climate, limited areas of easy arable Neolithic transition in Western Denmark soils and shorter growing season for crop seen from a kitchen midden perspective. cultivation. The next agrarian expansion A survey, Between Foraging and Farm- towards Central Scandinavia occurs during, Fokkens H., Coles B. J., Van Gijn A. ing the transition between the Middle L., Kleijne J. P., Ponjee, H. H. and Slap- Neolithic B and Late Neolithic. Limited pendel C. G. eds., Analecta Prehistorica husbandry practices probably began dur- Leidensia 40. Faculty of Archaeology, ing the Middle Neolithic B or Battle Axe Leiden: 67-74. Culture, and increased agrarian activities including crop cultivation was inten Anthony, A., 1990: Migration in Archae- sified during the Late Neolithic or Bell ology: The Baby and the Bathwater. Beaker Culture. During the Late Neolithic American Anthropologist, nr. 92: 895-914. an improved ship technology could have urged pioneering farmers to expand fur- Apel, J., 2001: Daggers Knowledge and ther north reaching central parts of Power. The Social Aspects of Flint-Daggers Scandinavia along the coast. The first Technology in Scandinavia 2350-1500 reliable evidence of agriculture in north- ca BC, Coast to coast-book 3. Uppsala ern Scandinavia can be dated to the Late Universitet, Uppsala. Bronze Age, where a re-organization of the cultivation methods could have created Arntzen, J. E., 2012: Jordbruksboplasser new possibilities of establishing agrarian fra bronsealder og førromersk jernalder i societies beyond the Arctic Circle. Gene Nord-Norge: Veien videre, Agrarsam- rally, the transition towards an agrarian fundenes ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & society can be characterized as a com- Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verdener. plex and continuous process, which is Symposium på Tanums Hälleristnings- dependent on a constant gene-flow from museum, Underslös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. pioneering farmers and the local hunter- Maj 2011, Nationalmuseet: 184-194. gatherers willingness to change their ideology and subsistence strategy. We Arntzen, J. E. & Sommerseth, I., 2010: are therefore dealing with several tran- Den første gården i Nord-Norge – Jord- sitional processes, which are different bruksbosetting fra bronsealder til jernal- from region to region. der på Kveøy, TROMURA 39, Tromsø.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 136

Asprem, F., 2012: Neolitiseringen i Midt- Glørstad, H., 2010: The Structure and Norge – En utvikling i flere trinn?Agrar - History of the Late Mesolithic Societies samfundenes ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. in the Oslo fjord area 6300-3800 BC, & Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verdener. Göteborg. Symposium på Tanums Hälleristnings- museum, Underslös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Glørstad, H., 2012: Traktbegerkulturen i Maj 2011, Nationalmuseet: 142-151. Norge – kysten, jakten og det tidligste Bergsvik, K. A., 2003: Ethnic boundaries jordbruket, Agrarsamfundenes ekspansion in Neolithic Norway. University of Bergen. i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. eds., Nord- lige Verdener. Symposium på Tanums Bergsvik, K. A. & Østmo, E., 2011: The Hälleristningsmuseum, Underslös, Bohus experienced axe. Chronology, condition län, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Nationalmu and context of TRB-axes in western Nor- seet: 44-56. way, Stone Axe Studies III, Davis V. & M. Edmonds M. eds., Oxbow Books. Ox- Hallgren, F., 2008: Identitet i Praktik. ford: 7-20. Lokala, regionala och överregionala so- ciala sammanhang inom nordlig tratt- Brevik, K. A., 2010: Løsfunn, landskap, bägerkultur, Coast to Coast book 17. samfunn. En kontekstuell studie av gjen- Universitetet i Uppsala. stander fra senmesolitikum til eldre bronsealder i Aursundet, Arasvikfjorden og Harrison, R.J., 1980: The Beaker Folk. Valsøyfjorden på Nordmøre. Unpublished Copper Age Archaeology in Western MA. NTNU University of Trondheim. Europe. Thames & Hudson.

Demuth, V. & Simonsen, M. F., 2010: Hartz, S. & Lübke, H., 2004: Zur chrono Dønski med langelaar, 80/1 Bærum, Akers stratigraphischen Gliederung der Erte- hus, Unpublished excavation repport. bølle-Kultur und frühesten Trichterbecher Kulturhistorisk Museum. Oslo University. kultur in der südlichen Mecklenburger Bucht. Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklen Glørstad, H., 2004: Svinesundprosjektet burg-Vorpommeren. Jahrbuch 2004, vol. bind 4. Oppsummering av Svinesundpro 52: 119-143. sjektet, Universitetets kulturhistoriske museer, Fornminneseksjonen Varia 57. Henningsmoen, K., 1980: Trekk fra flo- Oslo. raen i Vestfold, Bygd og by i Norge, Møller V. ed., Oslo: 163-175. 137

Hinsch, E., 1955: Traktbegerkultur-mega Høeg, H. I., 1995: Pollenanalyse på Lista, litkultur. En studie av Øst-Norges eldste, Farsundprosjektet – stenalderbopladser neolitiske gruppe, Universitetets Oldsak på Lista, Ballin T. B. & Jensen O. L. eds., samling. Årbok 1951-1953. Oslo: 10-177. Universitetets Oldsaksamling Varia 29. Oslo: 266-318. Hinsch, E., 1956: Yngre steinalders strids økskulturer i Norge. Uib Årbok 1954. Høeg, H.I., 1997: Pollenanalytiske under Historisk Antikvarisk rekke Nr. 1. Univer- søkelser på Øvre Romerike. Ullensaker sity of Bergen. og Nannestad, Akershus fylke, Univer- sitetets Oldsaksamling Varia 46. Oslo. Hjelle, K. L., 2012: Naturvitenskapelig dokumentasjon av det eldste jordbruk/ Høeg, H.I., 1999: Pollenanalytiske under beite i Vest-Norge, Agrarsamfundenes søkelser i Rogaland og Ersdal, Vest- ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. Agder, Museumslandskap. Artikkelsam- eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på ling til Kerstin Griffin på 60-årsdagen, Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Underslös, Selsing, L. & Lillehammer G., eds., AmS- Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, National- rapport. Arkeologisk museum i Stavan museet: 119-124. ger. Stavanger: 145-225.

Hjelle, K. L., Hufthammer, A.K. & Bergs- Høgestøl, M. & Prøsch-Danielsen, L., vik, K.A., 2006: Hesitant hunters: a review 2006: Impulses of agro-pastoralism in of the introduction of agriculture in west the 4th and 3rd millennia BC on the southern Norway, Environmental Archaeology western coastal rim of Norway, Environ- 11(2): 147-170. mental Archaeology 2006, vol. 11: 19-34.

Høeg, H. I., 1982: Introduksjonen av jord Jensen, C. E., 2012: Tidlig jordbruk i det bruk i Øst-Norge, Introduksjon av jordbruk nordligste Norge – botaniske vitnesbyrd i Norden, Sjøvold, T., ed., Oslo: 143-151. Agrarsamfundenes ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verde Høeg, H. I., 1989: Noen resultater fra ner. Symposium på Tanums Hälleristnings den pollenanalytiske undersøkelsen i museum, Underslös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Telemark, Fra jeger til bonde. Utvikling Maj 2011, Nationalmuseet: 169-183. av jordbrukssamfunn i Telemark i steinalder og bronsealder, Mikkelsen, E. ed., Johansen, O. S., 1990: Synspunkter på Universitetets Oldsaksamling Skrifter Ny jernalderens jordbrukssamfunn i Nord- rekke 11. Oslo: 372-421. Norge, Stensilserie B 29, Tromsø.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 138

Johansen, O. S. & Vorren, K.-D., 1986: Koch, E., 1998: Neolithic Bog Pots from The prehistoric expansion of farming into Zealand, Møn, Lolland and Falster, Nor- “Arctic” Norway: A chronology based on diske Fortidsminder serie B, vol. 16. 14C dating. Radiocarbon 28: 739-747. København.

Juel Jensen, H., 1994: Flint tools and Larsson, L. & Broström, S. G., 2011: plant working – hidden traces of Stone Meeting for transformation. A Locality Age technology, Århus. Århus University for Ritual Activities during the Early Neo Press. lithic Funnel Beaker Culture in Central Sweden, Current Swedish Archaeology Kaul, F., 2011: Early Agriculture at the 19: 183-201. Border, Farming on the edge: Cultural Landscapes of the North, Short papers Larsson, M., 1984: Tidigneolitikum i Syd- from the network meeting in Lerwick, västskåne. Kronologi och bosätningsmön- Shetland September 7th – 10th 2010, ster. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia, se- Mahler, D. L. & Andersen C. eds., Northern ries in 40, nr. 17. Rudolf Habelt, Bonn. Worlds, the National Museum of Den- mark, København: 44-57. Leino, M. W. & Hagenblad, J., 2010: 19th century seeds reveal the population ge- Kaul, F., 2012: Fund, helleristninger og netics of landrace barley (Hordeum vul- landskaber, Nordnorge, Agrarsamfundenes gare), Molecular Biology and Evolution ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. 27(4): 964–973. eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Underslös, Liversage, D., 2003: Bell Beaker Pottery Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, National- in Denmark. It’s Typology and Internal museet: 205-220. Chronology, The Northeast Frontier of Bell Beakers, Czebresszuk, J. & Szmyt, M. Kaul, F. & Sørensen, L., 2012: Efterskrift. eds., BAR International Series 1155: 39-49. Oversigt, problemer og udfordringer, Agrarsamfundenes ekspansion i nord, Magnell, O., 2005: Tracking wild boar Kaul F. & Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verde and hunters. Osteology of wild boar in ner. Symposium på Tanums Hälleristnings Mesolithic South Scandinavia. Studies in museum, Underslös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Osteology, Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Maj 2011, Nationalmuseet: 244-293. Series in 8° No 51. Almqvist & Wiksell International, Stockholm. 139

Malmer, M. P., 1975: Stridsyxekulturen i Nærøy, A.J., 1987: Redskapstradisjon i Sverige och Norge, LiberLäromedel Lund. Hordaland fra 5500 til 4000 før nåtid. En Stockholm. lokalkronologisk studie. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Bergen. Marstrander, S., 1956: Hovedlinjer i Trøndelags forhistorie, Viking. Bind XX- Oldenberg, A., 1952: Studien Über die 1956: 1-69. Schwedische Bootaxtkultur, Kungl. Vitter hets Historie Och Antikvitets Akademien. Mischka, D., 2011: The Neolithic burial Stockholm. sequence at Flintbek LA 3, north Germany, and its cart tracks: a precise chronology, Olsen, A. B., 1992: Kotedalen – en bo- Antiquity 85: 742-758. plass gjennem 5000 år. Bind 1. Fangst- bosettning og tidlig jordbruk i vestnorsk Moore, J. H., 2001: Evaluating Five Mod- steinalder: nye funn og nye perspektiver. els of Human Colonization, American University of Bergen. Anthropologist 103 (2): 395-408. Olsen, A. B., 2009: Transition to Farming in Nielsen, P. O., 1984: De første bønder. western Norway seen as a rapid replace Nye fund fra den tidligste Tragtbægerkul- ment of landscapes, Mesolithic Hori- tur ved Sigersted, Aarbøger for Nordisk zons. Papers presented at the Seventh Oldkyndighed og Historie 1984: 96-126. International Conference on the Meso- lithic in Europe, Belfast 2005, McCartan, Nielsen, P. O., 2009: Den tidligneolitiske S., Shulting, R., Warren G., Warren and bosættelse på Bornholm, Plads og Rum Woodman eds., Oxbow books, Oxford: i Tragtbægerkulturen, Schülke, A. ed., 589 – 596. Nordiske Fortidsminder Serie C: 9-24. Olsen, A, B., 2012: Neolittiseringen av Noe-Nygaard, N., Price, T. D. and Hede, Vestnorge. Møtet mellom to historiske S. U., 2005: Diet of aurochs and early tradisjoner i MNB Agrarsamfundenes cattle in southern Scandinavia: evidence ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. from 15N and 13C stable isotopes, Journal eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på of Archaeological Science 32: 855-871. Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Under- slös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Na- tionalmuseet: 125-141.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 140

Olsen, T. B., 2004: Egger av tid og rom. arkeologiske artefakter, Agrarsamfundenes Transformasjonen av steinalderens fangst ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. samfunn i Vest-Norge. Unpublished MA eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på thesis. University of Bergen. Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Under- slös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Na- Pihl, A., 2013: Oldtidsagre omkring Øster tionalmuseet:116-118. søen i 1. årtusinde f.Kr. Unpublished Mag. Art. thesis. University of Copenhagen. Robinson, D. E., 1994: Dyrkede planter fra Danmarks forhistorie. Arkæologiske Prescott, C., 2009: History in Prehistory Udgravninger i Danmark 1994: 20-35. – the later Neolithic/Early Metal Age, Norway, Neolithisation as if History Rosenberg, A., 2006: Beretning for Ulle mattered. Processes of Neolithisation in rødgård. Beretning over den arkæolo- North-Western Europe, Glørstad, H. & giske forundersøgelse og udgravning på Prescott, C. eds., Bricoleur Press, Lin- matr. 3x med flere. Ullerød By, Tjæreby. dome: 193-215. (NFHA 2424). Excavation rapport from Folkemuseet in Hillerød. http://www.folke Prescott, C., 2012: Veien til norske gårds museet.dk/Bygherre/A2424_net.pdf samfunn. Synspunkter på den kronolo- giske og kulturelle konteksten, Neolitikum. Rudebeck, E., 2010: I trästodernas skugga Nye resultater fra forskning og forvalt – monumentala möten i neolitiseringens ning, Solberg, A., Stålesen, J. A. and tid, Arkeologiska och förhistoriska värl Prescott, C. eds., Nicolay Skrifter 4. Uni- dar. Fält, erfarenheter och stenålders versity of Oslo: 169-179. platser i sydvästra Skåne, Nilsson, B. & Rudebeck E. red., Malmö Museer, Arkeo Prøsch-Danielsen, L., 1996: Vegetation logienheten. Malmö: 83-251. history and human impact during the last 11500 years at Lista, the southern- Rønne, P., 2011: Highlights from the most part of Norway: based primarily on Northernmost Bronze Age societies in professor Ulf Hafstens material and Norway, Farming on the edge: Cultural diary from 1955-1957, Norsk geografisk Landscapes of the North, Short papers tidsskrift 50/2: 85-99. from the network meeting in Lerwick, Shetland September 7th – 10th 2010, Prøsch-Danielsen, L., 2012: Spor av neo Mahler, D. L. & Andersen, C. eds., North- litisk økonomi i Syd- og Sydvest-Norge. ern Worlds, the National Museum of Regionale variasjoner i pollensignal og Denmark, København: 58-69. 141

Rønne, P., 2012: De tidligste bronzer i Sjögren, P. & Arntzen, J., 2012: Agricul- Midt- og Nordnorge, Agrarsamfundenes tural practices in Arctic Norway during ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. the first millennium B.C,Vegetation His- eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på tory and Archaeobotany, volume 22, Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Under- issue 1: 1-15. slös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Na- tionalmuseet: 195-204. Skandfer, M., 2012: Technology Talks: material diversity and change in North- Sarauw, T., 2006: Bejsebakken. Late Neo ern Norway 3000-1000 BC, Becoming lithic Houses and Settlement Structure, European. The transformation of third Nordiske Fortidsminder C4. København. millennium Northern and Western Eu- rope, Prescott, C. & Glørstad, H. eds., Sarauw, T., 2007: Male symbols or war- Oxbow Books. Oxford: 128-143. rior identities? The ‘archery burials’ of the Danish Bell Beaker Culture, Journal of Skjølsvold, A., 1977: Slettabøboplassen. Anthtropological Archaeology 26, 2007: Et bidrag til diskusjonen om forholdet 65-87. mellem fangst- og bondesamfunnet i yngre steinalder og bronsealder, Arkeolo- Sarauw, T., 2008: Danish Bell Beaker gisk museum i Stavanger. Skrifter nr. 2. pottery and flint daggers. The display of Stavanger. social identities? European journal of Archaeology Vol. 11, 2008: 23-47. Skousen, H., 2008: Arkæologi i lange baner. Undersøgelser forud for anlæg Scheen, R., 1979: De norske flintdolkene. gelsen af motorvejen nord om Århus, Unpublished MA thesis. University of Oslo. Moesgård Museum. Forlaget Moesgård, Højbjerg. Sjögren, K.-G., 2012: Neolitisering i Västsverige. En översikt over källäget, Solberg, A., 2012: Ferdselsårer for ideer Agrarsamfundenes ekspansion i nord, Kaul og materiell kultur i tidligneolitikum. Kyst F. & Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verdener. og elveleier i sørøstnorske grensetrakter, Symposium på Tanums Hälleristnings- Neolitikum. Nye resultater fra forskning museum, Underslös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. og forvaltning, Solberg, A., Stålesen, J. A. Maj 2011, Nationalmuseet: 73-86. and Prescott, C. red., Nicolay Skrifter 4. University of Oslo: 35-56.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 142

Solem, T., 2002: Makrofossilundersø kel se standsmaterialet og de naturvitenskape og pollenanalyse Egge, Steinkjer, Nord- lige undersøkelsene? Agrarsamfundenes Trøndelag. Upubliceret rapport. Institutt ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. for naturhistorie, Vitenskapsmuseet. NTNU. eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på Trondheim. Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Under- slös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Na- Solheim, S., 2012: Lokal Praksis og tionalmuseet: 152-168. Fremmed opphav. Arbeidsdeling, sociale relasjoner og differensiering i østnorsk Vander Linden, M., 2012: Demography tidligneolitikum, Avhandling for graden and mobility in North-Western Europe Ph.d. Universitetet i Oslo. during the third millennium cal. BC, Be- coming European. The transformation of Strinnholm, A., 2001: Bland säljägare och third millennium Northern and Western fårfarmere. Struktur och förändring i Europe, Prescott, C. & Glørstad, H. eds., Västsveriges mellanneolitikum, Coast to Oxbow Books. Oxford: 19-29. Coast book 4. Uppsala 2001. Viklund, K., 2011: Early Farming at Umeå Sørensen, L., 2012: Pioneering farmers in Västerbotten. Charred Cereal Grains cultivating new lands in the North. The Dated to the Bronze Age, Fornvännen expansion of agrarian societies during 2011: 238-242. the Neolithic and Bronze Age in Scandi- navia, Northern Worlds – Challenges and Wehlin, J., 2013: Östersjöns Skeppssätt solutions, Gulløv, H. C., Toft, P. A. and ningar. Monument och mötesplatser un- Hansgaard, C. P. eds., Report from work- der yngre bronsålder, GOTARC Serie B. shop 2 at the National Museum: 87-124. Gothernburg Archaeological Theses 59. University of Gothenburg. Sørensen, L. & Karg, S., 2012: The expan sion of agrarian societies towards the Zinsli, C., 2007: Samfunn og bosetning på North – new evidence for agriculture Vestlandet i senneolitikum. En analyse av during the Mesolithic/Neolithic transi- gjenstander og bosetningsspor, Unpub- tion in Southern Scandinavia, Journal of lished MA thesis. University of Bergen. Archaeological Science 2012, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.08.042. Østmo, E., 1986: New observations on the funnel beaker culture in Norway, Acta Valen, C. R., 2012: Neolitisering av Nord- Archaeologica 55: 190-198. Norge. Hva sier det arkeologiske gjen- 143

Østmo, E., 1988: Etableringen av jord- Østmo, E., 2012: “Der lagde bispen sig brukskultur i Østfold i steinalderen. Uni- ne doc saa de rind” Opdagelsen av mega versitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter, Ny littgraver i Norge, Agrarsamfundenes rekke Nr. 10. Oslo. ekspansion i nord, Kaul F. & Sørensen L. eds., Nordlige Verdener. Symposium på Østmo, E., 1999: Doubble-edged Axes Tanums Hälleristningsmuseum, Under- under the Northern Lights. The northern- slös, Bohuslän, d. 25.-29. Maj 2011, Na- most finds of the Funnel Beaker Culture in tionalmuseet: 57-72. Norway, Acta Archaeologica 70: 70-112. Åhrberg, E. S., 2011: Haslum, 51/29, 33, Østmo, E., 2005: Over Skagerak i stein- 78. Frogn, Akerhus. Boplass fra tidligneo alderen. Noen refleksjoner om oppfinnel litikum, bronsealder, jernalder, Archaeo- sen av havgående fartøyer i Norden, logical excavation rapport. Kulturhistorisk Viking LXVIII: 55- 82. Museum. University of Oslo.

Østmo, E., 2008: Auve. En fangstboplass Åstveit, L.I., 1999: Keramik i vitenskape fra yngre steinalder på Vesterøya i Sande lig kontekst. En studie over et neolitisk fjord. I. Den arkeologiske del, Norske keramikkmateriale fra Radøy, Hordaland. Oldfunn XXVIII. Oslo. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Bergen. Østmo, E., 2010: The cord stamp in Neo- lithic Scandinavia, Acta Archaeologica. Vol. 81-1, 2010: 44-71.

Cairn, Gallow Hill, Shetland. D. L. Mahler photo.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 144

Norway – Denmark. Material connections in the Early Bronze Age

Karen Margrethe Hornstrup

Introduction The distribution of graves During the last decades it has been gen- Rogaland was evidently an important erally agreed that there were close links area in Norway in the Early Bronze Age between North West Jutland and Roga- since not only most of the known graves, land in the Late Neolithic and the Early but also the richest graves are found on Bronze Age (e. g. Nordenborg Myhre 1998; Karmøy and Jæren. Moreover, there are Apel 2001; Kvalø 2004; 2005). spectacular grave cists with decorated slabs, huge burial mounds, and large rock The assumptions are based on the com- art sites, and Rogaland has been inter- paratively short distance between Roga preted as a meeting point (Nordenborg land and North West Jutland and on Myhre 2004: 223). The graves are rather similarities in metal objects during the dispersed in East Norway along the Early Bronze Age. Detailed analyses of south and west coast, and the concen- the material are necessary for an under- trations of graves are situated at Lista, standing of the formation of the Early in West-Agder and in Steinkjer, North- Bronze Age in Scandinavia. This paper Trøndelag, and here especially at Sparbu analyses a selected number of metal ob (Johansen 1986; Rygh 1906). In all parts jects from burials dated to Early Bronze of Denmark, there are numerous graves Age, period (per.) II and III, in order to from the Early Bronze Age, but North shed more light on the connections be- West Jutland was a significant area, tween Norway and Denmark. There especially in per. III characterized by an were probably varied forms of relations extraordinarily large number of male between Norway and Denmark, but only burials containing swords besides richly one subject, marriage, will be discussed equipped female burials (Hornstrup here. 1998). 145

Comparison of artefacts When the right preservation conditions are extant, the form and decoration of selected bronzes from Norway have been compared with types from Den- mark and Sweden. On the assumption that the distribution patterns of tools, as well as male and female related artefacts were different (Asingh & Rasmus- sen 1989), the following types were selected: bronze hilted swords, razors, ribbed arm rings, and ornaments from the Rege burial.

Within the male category, there are two bronze hilted swords from Karmøy and Lista1 belonging to Ottenjann type B1; a common type in per. III (Ottenjann1969: 34ff). As the swords are almost identical they probably are produced by the same bronze smith (Hornstrup 2011). The closest parallels to the swords were – besides those from Schleswig-Holstein – from North West and West Jutland.

The razor was an important male implement in the Bronze Age. Razors with handles shaped like naturalistic horse heads with manes and decorated bands on the blade were the preferred type in per. II, especially on Zealand (e. g. Aner & Kersten, No. 458 and 1033). One of these Fig. 1: Map of Norway and Denmark.

1 S7425 Jaasund, Sola k., Rogaland; C27790 Meberg, Farsund k., Lista. Information about the Norwe- gian finds is available at Universitetsmuseenes arkeologiske gjenstandssamlinger:http://www.unimus. no/arkeologi/forskning/sok.php

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 146

razors was found in a grave at Todnes, are from Jutland, and only a few of North-Trøndelag (fig. 2 a). An almost iden- those are decorated (Aner & Kersten tical razor, although with a slightly styl- 1981 ff.). Three Norwegian per. III razors ized head, is from Sola, Karmøy, dated are from Karmøy, Hov in Oppland, and to the late per. II or early per. III (fig. 2 b). Sparbu, North-Trøndelag (fig. 2 c-e). A Danish razors from per. III are character- common feature is the relatively long ized by handles formed as stylistic horse neck, which occurs on a few razors from heads and narrow blades. The majority Jutland, but far more often in eastern Scandinavia, especially Sweden (e. g. Oldeberg 1974: S293, S523, S745). The Fig. 2: Razors from the early Bronze Age in Norway. a) T2412. Todnes, Sparbu, Steinkjer k., North-Trøndelag. After Rygh 1906: 11, razor from Karmøy is probably not deco- fig. 8. b) B908. Solagaardene, Sola k., Rogaland. Photo: Ann-Mari rated, whereas the other razors have a Olsen and AmS. c) B5952. Gunnarshaug, Karmøy, Rogaland. After decorated band at the blade. Further- Shetelig 1905: 29, fig. 8. d) C4417. Hov, Gran, Oppland. After Rygh 1885: No. 116. e) T7587. Holan, Sparbu, Steinkjer k., North-Trønde- more, the razor from Sparbu has a unique lag. After Rygh 1906: 14, fig. 10.

a b

e 147

Fig. 3: The Rege burial. Photo Terje Tveit, Arkeologisk museum, Universitetet i Stavanger.

feature as the horse’s ears are laid back tion. Furthermore, the razors with the (fig.2 e). On all the Danish and Swedish long neck indicate links between distant razors from the Early Bronze Age the Norwegian sites. horse’s ears point forward, and the question is, if the handle of the Sparbu razor Within the female category, the richly depicts a hunted animal, maybe an elk? equipped Rege grave from Rogaland 2 It thus appears that the Norwegian per. III containing a belt plate, a tutulus, a neck razors seem to be inspired by the East collar, two ribbed arm rings, a dagger, a Scandinavian types, and at least the bronze tube and a brooch – see fig. 3 – Sparbu razor must be of local produc- has been interpreted as evidence of a

2 S1263-69, Rege, Sola k., Rogaland (Lund 1935).

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 148

close link between Jutland and Norway There are 10 such arm rings from Roga- (Lund 1938: 39). However, the closest land and one from Lista (Larsen 1997; parallels to the broad neck collar with Johansen 1986: 58ff.). Already in 1913, narrow ribs, the belt plate with three A. W. Brøgger stated that the closest zones of running spirals and the decora- parallels to the ribbed arm rings were tion of the arm rings are all found on from Jutland (1913). Compared with the Zealand (Hornstrup 2011). The artefact scattered finds in other parts of Denmark, combination is typical of per. II, and the there is a surprisingly high concentration latest part of it.3 of ribbed shaped arm rings in Thy with 35 ribbed arm rings (Aner & Kersten 2001). In South West Norway and in Thy, the 25 of the arm rings from Thy and eight ribbed shaped arm rings represented an from Norway have been studied, and four important part of the female equipment. arm rings from Rogaland and the one

3 The transition from Period II to III is complicated as a large number of graves contain items from both periods or are dated to a late phase, sub-period II which mainly appears in Zealand (Randsborg 1968). However, recent dendrochronological and radiocarbon of burials from Periods II and III indicate, that the transition phase must have been brief (Hornstrup et al. 2012).

Fig. 4: Ribbed arm rings from Sjørring, Thy. After Aner & Kersten 2001: No. 5181. 149

from Lista are almost identical and very similar to a type consisting of 11 specimens from North Thy (Hornstrup 2011: 71). The only difference is that the Norwegian arm rings have pronounced edges, and the arm rings from Thy have vertical strips at the ends, see fig. 4 and 5.

The Norwegian arm rings should probably be dated to late per. II and III, whereas the Danish specimens are dated to per. III (Hornstrup 2011). In contrary to Nor- way, the Danish arm rings developed to very broad rings in the late per. III (Horn- strup 2011: 71). The occurrence of almost identical arm rings must indicate close connections between South West Nor- way and Thy. Finally there are a few soapstone moulds for the production of palstaves dated to Period II. One mould is found at Voile, West-Agder, and two are from North Zealand: Valby and Sølle rød.4 All of the moulds are single hoards from wetlands. Other moulds for palstaves found in Denmark are made of bronze (Jantzen 2008: 171f). It is a well- known fact, that there are several soapstone quarries in Norway, and quarries are also found in Sweden, especially in the county of Halland and Bohuslän (Storemyr et al. 2002: 360, Fig. 1; Jantzen Fig. 5:. Ribbed arm rings from Anda, Klepp, Roga- 2008: 146). land. Photo Terje Tveit, Arkeologisk museum, Universitetet i Stavanger.

4 C21853 Voile, Farsund, West-Agder (Johansen 1986: 72ff, fig. 49 ); Ke 96 Valby and Ke 433 Søllerød, both Frederiksborg amt (Aner and Kersten 1971).

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 150

External connections with Norway Müller, who argued for a western and an Given the few examples it appears that eastern culture flow from Central Europe the Norwegian-Danish connections are to South Scandinavia. The western flow in no way clear-cut as there is little evi- to Jutland comprised especially the Early dence. The two razors from North-Trønde Bronze Age metals, and the eastern flow lag and Karmøy and the ornaments from to East Scandinavia included mainly the Rege grave, all of which most likely metals from the Late Bronze Age (1876; are from per. II, probably came from Zea- 1897: 336). This west-east division cor- land, and the soapstone moulds could responded to the metal distribution in be regarded as a kind of repayment. The Norway as well (e.g. Brøgger 1913), and two per. III bronze swords from Roga- since long distance trade was the pre- land and Lista are supposed to have come ferred interpretation of cultural develop- from Jutland, and the ribbed arm rings ment it was a logical step to continue indicate close connections between South- the Jutish trade route across Skagerrak West Norway and Thy. The razors of per. to South-West Norway (Lund 1938: 46; III style from various Norwegian regions Marstrander 1950). Another important were inspired by types from east Scandi fact is the distance between Norway and navia, probably Sweden. Denmark, where Skagerrak is the shortest route between Rogaland and North In a recent paper Ørjan Engedal states West Jutland (Johansen 1987; Kvalø 2004; that the bronzes in Sweden dated to per. I 2005). As a consequence, researchers came from Central Europe and from Swe- have focused on Jutland although Zea- den by inland routes to Norway (2012), land was an important area in the early whereas the flint objects probably were of Bronze Age. Jutish origin (Apel 2001; Engedal 2012). Studies of Late Neolithic flint types prove Moreover, it appears that a local Norwe that the south west Norwegian imple- gian production of razors and arm rings ments came from the Limfjord area around seems to stand out in the course of Pe- Aalborg (Becker 1993; Sarauw 2009). riod III, and the soapstone mould indicates bronze casting of tools as early as In the Early Bronze Age it is confirmed Period II. The question of local produc- that Norway had connections with vari- tion in Norway is controversial. Finds of ous parts of South Scandinavia. It was alloys, small bronze pieces etc. indicate previously supposed that only Jutland bronze production in the Late Neolithic was the external link to Norway, accord- and Early Bronze Age whereas Nils An- ing to the Danish researcher, Sophus finset is sceptical because of the scarce 151

evidence (Prescott 2006; Melheim 2009; navian style. In this respect, there is no Engedal 2012; Anfinset 2012: 237). basis for proving that the Rege woman was a foreigner although the possibility Marriage naturally exists. No matter what the nature of the connections between South Scandinavia and The ribbed arm rings from Thy occur in Norway, it still meant a long and risky rich graves containing belt plates with open-sea voyage, and only wealthy groups conical spikes, gold spirals, and neck were able to perform those costly travels. rings, but also in graves either with a small ceramic vessel or without any other It is a well-known statement, that ex- grave goods. The main part of the arm change of females was an important rings from Thy and South-West Norway strategy in maintaining alliances or gen- occur as pairs, often similar, and due to erating new alliances in the Bronze Age the diameter they must have belonged (Rowlands 1980: 30; Kristiansen 1998: to adults. Presumably, the arm rings ex- 398). The foreign females would pre- pressed a common identity of an adult sumably carry their own dresses and female group across the Skagerrak. personal items with them to the new society, and these objects would probably In contrast to the previously mentioned follow them to the grave (Rowlands swords, razors, belt plates and neck col- 1980: 30; Bergerbrant 207: 119ff also for lars, which have been found over a large further references). The question is part of South Scandinavia, it is amazing whether the woman from the Rege burial that the ribbed arm rings are that con- and not only her ornaments, came from centrated in South-West Norway and Zealand. It appears however, that there Thy, and they can indicate a direct link. are more burials containing belt plates Referring to Ian Hodder, there are greater and neck collars in Rogaland, some of cultural differences between cultural which are contemporary with or a little groups in periods of instability than in earlier than the Rege burial.5 Furthermore, peaceful periods (1982: 26). So this phe- swords and weapon palstaves etc. from nomenon probably mirrors a peaceful male burials are just like the ornaments relationship and could be interpreted in from the female burials of South Scandi relation to marriages. Instead of consid-

5 Belt plates: B 2844 Klepp k., B 3322 Særheim, Klepp k., B 4320 Vigrestad, Hå k., S 859 Orre, Klepp k., S 4265 Kåsen, Klepp k. Neck collars: B 4320 Vigrestad, Hå k., S 1272 Braut, Klepp k.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 152

ering women as passive objects of ex- that connections cannot always be de- change, Joanna Brück has stated the view termined from a rational way of thinking based on anthropological examples, that such as the shortest distance. In the Early females moving to other societies as Bronze Age, there were connections be- marriage partners played an active role tween different Norwegian regions and as mediators between their former and different South Scandinavian areas. Not the new society (2009). As the move until per. III are there clear indications of probably meant a kind of mental loss, the interactions between South West Nor- women tried to maintain some relations way and North West Jutland, which can with their relatives e. g. by continued be explained as a result of possible mar- exchanges of gifts (Brück 2009: 14). riages. In general, the Norwegian-Danish These relations were an advantage for connections might include small-scale the males and their groups because they migrations, warfare, commodity or social hereby gained access to her network in- exchange, meeting at third places be- cluding social, political, and economical sides marriages. Future local studies com- resources, and maybe also the possibil- bined with metal analyses may hopefully ity of further marriages (ibid). The active provide more details of the character of role of the females may explain the oc- the different external connections and currence of almost similar arm rings in not least the internal Norwegian links. two distant parts, as the arm rings could be seen as symbolizing the relationship Acknowledgements with the former group. At the same time I am grateful for travel grants from Julie the arm rings have a local style, express- von Müllen’s Fund which made it possi- ing the membership of the new group. ble to record all the Norwegian burial The arm rings occurred in Rogaland as finds from the Bronze Age. My thanks too, well as Lista, and the close connections to the staff at Kulturhistorisk museum, between these parts of Norway are fur- Oslo, Arkeologisk museum, Stavanger, ther confirmed by the two almost identi- Bergen Museum and Vitenskapsmuseet, cal full hilted swords. Trondheim for all their help during my visit and to Lise Frost, Moesgaard Mu- Concluding remarks seum, for reading and commenting the By comparing the material culture be- manuscript. tween Norway and Denmark it emerges 153

Bibliography Bergerbrant, S., 2007: Bronze Age identities: custome, conflict and contact in Aner, E. & Kersten, K., 1973-2008: Die Northern Europe 1600-1300 BC. Lindome, Funde der älteren Bronzezeit des nor- Bricoleur Press. dischen Kreises in Dänemark, Schleswig- Holstein und Niedersachsen, Band I-XII. Brück, J., 2009: Women, Death and So- Neumünster. cial Change in the British Bronze Age. Norwegian Archaeological Review 42, Anfinset, N., 2012: Social response of 1: 1-23. resistance to the introduction of Metal? Western Norway at the edge of the “glo- Brøgger, A. W., 1913: Nogen armringer balized world” Local societies in Bronze fra ældre bronsealder fra Jæderen, Age northern Europe, Anfinset, N. and Norge. Opuscula Archæologica Oscari Wrigglesworth, M. eds., Sheffield, Equi- Montelio septuagenario dicata d. IX m. nox Publishing Ltd.: 232-250. sept. A: 97-104.

Apel, J., 2001: Daggers, Knowledge & Engedal, Ø., 2012: On the bronze trail: Power: the social aspects of flint-dagger short-cuts, byways, transformation and technology in Scandinavia 2350-1500 cal displacement, Local societies in Bronze BC. Uppsala, Department of Archaeology Age Northern Europe, Anfinset, N. & and Ancient History, Uppsala University, Wrigglesworth, M. eds., Sheffield, Equi- Göteborg. nox Publishing Ltd.: 108-125.

Asingh, P. and Rasmussen, M., 1989: Hodder, I., 1982: Symbols in action: ethno Mange slags grænser, Regionale forhold archaeological studies of material culture. i Nordisk Bronzealder, Poulsen, J. ed., Høj Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. bjerg, Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab: 79-88. Hornstrup, K. M., 1998: Overgangen fra Becker, C. J., 1993: Flintminer og flint- ældre til yngre bronzealder. Et eksempel distribution ved Limfjorden, Limfjords fra Nordvestjylland, Danmark, Bronse projektet, Lund, J. and Ringtved, J. eds., alder i Norden – Regioner og interaksjon. Rapport nr. 6: Kort- og råstofstudier om- Stavanger, Løken, T. ed., Arkeologisk kring Limfjorden. Aarhus, Aarhus Univer museum i Stavanger: 23-33. sitet: 111-133.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 154

Hornstrup, K. M., 2011: Rogaland – Thy Larsen, I. C., 1997: En armring fra eldre i ældre bronzealder. Historisk Årbog for bronsealder. Fra Haug ok Heidni 1: 23-28. Thy og Vester Hanherred: 64-76. Lund, H. E., 1935: En eldre bronsealders Hornstrup, K. M., Olsen, J., Heinemeier, ornert gravhelle fra Rege i Håland på J., Thrane, H., and Bennike, P., 2012: A Jæren, Stavanger Museums Årshefte for new absolute Danish Bronze Age chro- 1933-34: 49-53. nology as based on radiocarbon dating of cremated bone samples from burials, Lund, H. E., 1938: Sjøhandelsveier og Acta Archaeologica 83: 9-53. handelsvarer til og fra Rogaland i bronse alderen, Stavanger Museums Årshefte Jantzen, D., 2008: Quellen zur Metallver for 1936-37: 35-55. arbeitung im Nordischen Kreis der Bronze zeit. Prähistorische Bronzefunde, XIX, 2. Marstrander, S., 1950: Jylland-Lista. Viking XIV: 63-85. Johansen, Ø., 1986: Tidlig metallkultur i Agder. Oslo, Universitetets Oldsaksam- Melheim, L., 2009: Kobberimport eller lings Skrifter, Ny rekke, 8. kobberproduksjon? Det 10. nordiske bronse aldersymposium i Trondheim 5. – 8. okto- Kristiansen, K., 1998: Europe before history. ber 2006, Grønnesby, G. and Henriksen, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. M. M. eds.,Vitark 6, Trondheim, Tapir akademisk forlag: 10-35. Kvalø, F., 2004: Facing the sea in Bronze Age Norway: the ship, the sea and society, Müller, S., 1876: Bronzealderens perioder, The Dover Bronze Age boat in context: Aarbøger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og society and water transport in prehistoric Historie: 185-312. Europe, Clark, P. ed., Oxbow, Oxford: 148-152. Müller, S., 1897: Vor Oldtid: Danmarks forhistoriske Archæologi. København, Nyt Kvalø, F., 2005: Oversjøiske reiser fra Nordisk Forlag. sørvest-Norge til nordvest-Jylland i eldre bronsealder: En drøfting av maritim rea Nordenborg Myhre, L., 1998: Historier lisering og rituell mobilisering, Sjøreiser fra en annen virkelighet, Ams-Småtrykk og stedsidentitet, Hedeager, L. ed., Oslo 46. Stavanger, Arkeologisk museum i arkeologiske Serie, Oslo: 11-134. Stavanger. 155

Nordenborg Myhre, L., 2004: Trialectic Rowlands, M. J., 1980: Kinship, alliance Archaeology. Monuments and space in and exchange in the European Bronze Southwest Norway 1700-500 BC, AmS- Age, Settlement and Society in the British Skrifter 18. Stavanger, Arkeologisk mu- Later Bronze Age, Barrett, J. and Bradley, seum i Stavanger. R. eds., B.A.R. 83 (i): 15-55.

Oldeberg, A., 1974: Die ältere Metallzeit in Rygh, K., 1906: En gravplads fra bronze Schweden, I. Stockholm, Kungliga Vitter alderen, Det Kgl. Norske Videnskabers hets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. Selskabs Skrifter 1: 3-29.

Ottenjann, H., 1969: Die Nordischen Rygh, O., 1885: Norske Oldsager, ordnede Vollgriffschwerter der älteren und mittle og forklared, Christiania, A. Cammer- ren Bronzezeit. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter. meyer.

Prescott, C., 2006: Copper production in Sarauw, T., 2009: Danish Bell Beaker Bronze Age Norway? Historien i forhisto pottery and flint daggers – the display of rien. Festskrift til Einar Østmo på 60-års social identities? European Journal of dagen, Glørstad, H., Skar, B. and Skre, D. Archaeology 11(1): 23-47. eds., Universitetet i Oslo. Oslo: 183-190 Shetelig, H., 1905: Fortegnelse over de til Randsborg, K., 1968: Von Periode II zu III. Bergens museum i 1905 indkomne sager Chronologische Studien über die ältere ældre end reformationen, Bergens Mu- Bronzezeit Südskandinaviens und Nord- seums Aarbog, 14: 1-52. deutschlands, Acta Archaeologica XXX- IX: 1-142. Storemyr, P. & Heldal, T., 2002: Soapstone production through Norwegian history: Randsborg, K., 1972: From Period III to geology, properties, quarrying, and use, Period IV. Chronological studies of the Asmosia 5, Hermann, J. J., Jr., Hertz, N. Bronze Age in Southern Scandinavia and and Newman, R. eds., Interdisciplinary Northern Germany, København, National Studies on Ancient Stone: 359-369. museet.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 156

The One-edged razor – northernmost and southernmost

Northern Worlds meet Southern Worlds

Flemming Kaul

Introduction The Nordic razor The one-edged razor is a peculiarity of the The extent of influences from the Aegean Nordic Bronze Age culture. During per. II Bronze Age cultures to Northern Europe and III of the Bronze Age the one-edged has long been a topic of debate, and razor with the handle in the shape of a many types of objects have been con- horse head became one of the emblems sidered as evidence of contact such as of the Nordic Bronze Age. Some of the the folding stools and the pictorial evi- northernmost razors of this type will be dence of chariots (Randsborg 1967; highlighted, as well as examples of Late Harding 1984; Schauer 1985; Bouzek Bronze Age razors with decorated blades. 1985; Randsborg 1993; Kristiansen & It is proposed that the emergence of the Larsson 2005; Harding 2007). Nordic one-edged razor around 1400 BC was due to influences from the Myce- The Nordic Bronze Age razor is one- naean-Minoan world. Southern worlds edged and asymmetrical. From the blade and northern worlds became connected the handle protrudes as a continuation of in the use of the one-edged razor. In the its back. The earliest razors, appearing South, in the sacred Dicte Cave on the during Montelius period (per.) II of the island of Crete, a votive razor with a Nordic Bronze Age, are characterized by horse headed handle has come to light. a handle terminating in a plastic horse’s In the North, close to the Arctic Circle, head. The back is straight or slightly con at Skjeggesnes, Nordland, Norway, the cave (fig. 1). Some of the earliest razors northernmost razor with the handle in the carry a spiral shaped handle (Müller shape of a horse’s head has been found. 1921: 16) (fig. 2). 157

Fig. 1: Razors with horse headed handles, Nordic per. II, Ubby, Montelius’ per. II began around 1500 BC. Darup, Karlstrup and Petersdal, all Zealand, Denmark. Length: Recent chronological studies based on 9.0-10.8 cm. After Aner & Kersten 1973 & 1976. absolute dendro-dates of the Danish oak Fig. 2: Razors with spiral handles, Nordic per. II, Kirke-Værløse and coffins demonstrate that the mature per. Dragsholm, Zealand, Denmark. Length: 9.8-10.5 cm. After Aner & II of the Nordic Bronze Age first took its Kersten 1973 & 1976. start around 1400 BC (Randsborg & Christensen 2006: 21). The first Nordic bronze razors with the handle in the shape of a horse’s head can be related to this mature phase of per. II, though some very few specimens could be one or two decennia earlier than that, belonging to the Løve-horizon (Lomborg 1969: 109-119). The tweezers seem to appear some decades earlier, though not associated with any distinct type of razor.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 158

The Minoan and Mycenaean razors razors, the handle of the Aegean razors is Even though we are dealing with a com- mostly flanged and with holes for rivets. mon European phenomenon, the shape Parts of the handle were made of organic of the Nordic razors differs markedly material, wood, bone or ivory, secured by from almost all other Middle Bronze Age the flanges and rivets (fig. 3). razors: The Nordic razors are one edged and asymmetrical, whereas all other ra- The Aegean one-edged razor appeared zors are two-edged and symmetrical at the transition between Late Heladic/ (Jockenhövel 1971; 1980). So, at this time, Late Minoan II and Late Heladic/Late we find a huge European area with differ- Minoan A. It continued without many ent variants of the two edged type. changes until and including Late Heladic/ There is one exception from this, where Late Minoan III C. Before that, the Aegean we find basically the same design as in the razor was two-edged and symmetrical, Nordic Bronze age area, namely in the and with a leaf-shaped blade. An over- Aegean area. Whereas the handle with its lap period between the two different horse’s head is fully cast on the Nordic types can be observed.

Fig. 3: Late Minoan razors from Zapher Papoura, Knossos, Crete, Greece. Length: c. 18 cm. F. Kaul photo. 159

Fig. 4: View over the Lasithi plain from the mouth of the Dicte Cave, Psychron, Crete, Greece. F. Kaul photo.

The last decades have seen a reassess- edged razor in the Aegean was replaced ment of the absolute chronology, in par- by the asymmetrical one-edged razor ticular based on the dating of the Thera around 1450 BC (Kaul 2013). The chrono eruption. Evidence from Greenland ice logical observations are of great impor- cores as well as evidence of dendro- tance since they render it possible to give dated limited tree ring growth from the sufficient time for allowing the dissemi- northern hemisphere indicates a major nation of this particular shape of razor volcanic event in the second half of the from the Mediterranean to Scandinavia. seventeenth century BC (Baillie 1996; Muscheler 2009). Recently a branch of an The Dicte Cave olive tree, charred and buried in the pum- Since being partially of organic material ice of the eruption on the very island of it has not been possible to determine Thera has yielded 14C-dates of the second the full shape of the handle of the Mi- half of the 17th century BC (Heinemeier noan and Mycenaean one-edged razors. et al. 2009). The reassessments of the However, some votive objects found in absolute chronology indicate that the the Dicte Cave at Psychron, Crete, throw transition between Late Minoan II and light on this matter. The Dicte Cave Late Minoan III A took place around 1450- ranks among the most important sacred 1420 BC. It seems likely that the two- places of Minoan Crete, and according

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 160

to one ancient tradition it was the birth The votive razors from the Dicte Cave place of Zeus. The mouth of the cave belong to the one-edged type, and by opens on a mountain side at a height of their shape they should be dated to Late 1025 m above sea level, with a splendid Minoan III. The razors are all cut out of view over the fertile inland Lasithi plain thin sheet bronze. On these votive rep- (fig. 4). At the bottom of the cave there resentations of Minoan razors the full is a pool out of which rises a forest of shape of the handle is present. It is obvi- stalactites. Most of the bronze votive ous that in some cases the handle is in objects, including figurines, knives, razors, the shape of an animal’s head, and in tweezers, pins, chisels and double axes one case we are seemingly dealing with were found in crevices in the stalactite a stylized horse’s head. Also other handle pillars, and in the pool area in the lower shapes are represented, where the han- grotto (Hogarth 1900: 100). The main pe- dle terminates in a spiral curl (Boardman riod of the bronze votives includes Middle 1961: 50-51; Weber 1996: 156-157). By Minoan III to Late Minoan III, but there means of the votive razors from the Dicte are also later depositions (Boardman Cave it is now possible to determine the 1961; Weber 1996). shape of the full handle of at least some of the Minoan and Mycenaean one-edged razors.

Not just the overall design of the early one-edged razors but also the shape of the horse headed handles – and the spiral handles – show striking resemblance between the Aegean and southern Scan- dinavia. It seems possible due to the recent re-assessments of the absolute chronology in both areas to track a ‘time corridor’, where this shape of the razor could have been transferred within a relatively short period of time in the sec-

Fig 5: Votive razor with handle in the shape of a horse’s head, from the Dicte Cave, Psychron, Crete, Greece. Length: 8.6 cm. The full razor and a detail. F. Kaul photo. 161

ond half of the fifteenth century BC. We along the North Sea (Bech & Mikkelsen are not dealing with import of the ob- 1999; Jensen 2000; Jensen 2002). jects themselves, but an introduction of the idea behind. The razor is not to be But how was this north-south exchange considered as a sub-type of a certain system organized? A trade network main- object or tool, but as an autonomous ob- ly depending on alliances has been sug- ject reflecting specific ideas as to hair- gested, linking Southern Scandinavia with fashion, probably the idea of the shaven Central Europe – the Carpathian area and warrior. When the use of the razor was North Italy. The basis was the establish- introduced in the North it swiftly spread ment of marriage alliances and trading and became accepted over larger parts partnerships. Along the exchange alli- of northernmost Germany and southern ances chiefdom traders or warriors trav- Scandinavia as a sort of fashion or ideal. elled to the North bringing with them metal and technological knowledge, and Both in the North and in the Aegean the vice versa (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005). razors occur in rich burials with weapons, This exchange system was hinged on a often accompanied by a pair of tweezers. yet another system with connections Some common ideals as to hygiene, hair further south, eventually the Aegean fashion and bodily appearance obviously trade system. became shared by warrior aristocracies far apart. The razor should not be regard But still, we have only extremely vague ed as an isolated object, but as part of a ideas as to the organization of exchange larger ideological or social ‘package’. of valuable commodities such as amber. How many travelled together? What about Exchange routes escort or guides, local or translocal? How could such ideas disseminate – caravans? – Or guided and protected by through Bronze Age Europe? Trade of tin the rules of hospitality? Even though and copper as well as trade of Nordic marriage alliances and trading partner- amber to the Mediterranean can be seen ships may have been vital for the estab- as a vehicle of social interaction and lishment of and safeguarding the travel further diffusion of ideas. We must be routes, we should expect some general aware of the fact that during the Bronze agreements on regulations and customs as Age the sources of the so-called Baltic to hospitality for the traveller, providing amber that reached the Eastern Medi- security and night-accommodation. It is terranean area were not just the coasts tempting to consider defended sites such of the Baltic Sea but also the beaches as Albanbühel, South Tirol, Italy – where

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 162

amber has been found – in a strategic Following the rivers of Mincio, Adige and position overlooking the Eisack/Isarco Po south of Lago di Garda, a number of Valley south of the Brenner Pass, as a recently excavated sites, even though a chiefdom farm serving as a small cara- bit later, from around 1200-1000 BC, have vanserai (Tecchiati 2011). dramatically widened our knowledge of contacts with the eastern Mediterranean The palafitti settlement site of Molina di world. From the outskirts of Verona to Ledro close to Lago di Garda has yielded the lagoon of Venice and the Po/Adige interesting finds. The shape of a pottery estuary quite some sites has yielded Late cup and its handle closely resembles the Mycenaean pottery, especially of the shape of the vessels of the Vapheio type Late Heladic III C period (Malnati 2003; which were in fashion both in Crete and Terzan 2007). At Frattesina finds of am- Mycenae towards the end of the first ber, faience, glass, ivory and ostrich eggs half of the second Millennium BC. Some have demonstrated that such sites were sherds of similar vessels have turned up centres for production and exchange be- at a site south of Peschiera at Lago di tween areas inland of the Po and alpine Garda, and from Terramare sites at the areas, the Mediterranean and the Aegean. Po River Valley (Barfield 1966; Bouzek Nordic amber was worked here and re- 1985: 49-51; Nicolis 2010). Amber beads of Nordic amber have been found at Molina di Ledro, as well as on the pile Fig. 6: Amber bead, extremely well preserved due to wet conditions, from the palafitti settlement at dwelling site of Fiavé in the neighbour- Fiavé, Trentino, North Italy. Diameter: c. 1.2 cm. ing valley (fig. 6), here being dated to F. Kaul photo. 1500-1300 BC; at Fiavé even an imitation of a Mycenaean boar’s tusk helmet has come to light, though made in straw/ fibres ofviburnum (Perini 1987:173-174 & 190).

From around 1500 BC along the Adige Valley, and lake valleys such as Lago di Garda, more settlements, also pile dwellings leading to the Po Valley, have yielded amber. Peschiera itself and neighbouring settlements should perhaps be seen as central places of communication. 163

Fig. 7: The cave opening close to the fortified site of Monkodonja, Istria, Croatia. F. Kaul photo. exported, both half-worked pieces as occupation has been documented. Mon well as un-worked lumps of amber have kodonja may be regarded as an imitation been found (Il Villagio di Frattesina 2010; of Mycenaean palace architecture (Ter- Nicolis 2010). The North Italian sites thus zan et al. 1999; Hänsel 2007). In the find seems to demonstrate an establishment material, there seem to be evidence of phase of an amber route around 1500 BC contacts with Cyprus. Not far from one of (1600 BC), and an ‘explosion’ phase at its gates there is a cave, and at its open- around 1200 BC. ing seats or steps are cut into the rock, surrounded by standing stones (Terzan Monkodonja in Istria, northern Croatia, et al. 1999). The area around the cave provides a link between the Minoan- opening could have been widely accepted Mycenaean world and Central Europe. as a sacred place – perhaps even the seat Inside stone built walls – with inner walls of an oracle? – Also a meeting point for encircling an acropolis area occupied c. the mediation of ideas. The innermost 1600-1300 BC and with impressive outer parts of the cave have collapsed, so its walls with two gates, a highly structured secrets remain.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 164

The dispersion of the one-edged razor or eller from the North who had died here, rather the idea behind it could have fol- on an eastern route, eventually ending up lowed such lines of communication: From at Caput Adria. Crete or Greece northwards along the Adriatic coast until Istria, then up Po or It was the idea behind the razor that was Adige, or via River Mincio to Lago di Garda. transferred – and its particular shape – From here, after some days of travel, you probably reflecting new ideals related to reach the Brenner Pass, or similar, smaller the shaven warrior. It was via the travel passes, and you are soon north of the routes, some regularly supplying the Alps. This proposed route is one among North with metal, others supplying the many ‘amber routes’ (Harding 1984: 80). South with amber, that such knowledge I have allowed myself to focus on this became extended. Somewhere in Europe route, when considering the geographic certain prominent members of the socie situation of sites such as Frattesina. Of ties could have met and discoursed as to course, this should not exclude the im- ideals of bodily appearance could have portance of the many other amber routes. taken place. Following the line of recent Recent finds of Mycenaean imports in discoveries, candidates for such places southern Germany such as the fragment could be at Monkodonja in Istria, in the of an ox hide ingot from Oberwilflingen, Po valley, at Lago di Garda or Bernstorf and the golden crown from Bernstorf in Bavaria. could have reached the areas north of the Alps via a route northwards from Caput The diffusion of the razor and the ideas Adria, or by the Po-Adige-Brenner route behind just prior to 1400 BC should not (Primas & Pernicka 1998; Gebhart 1999; be seen as part of a wave that over- Krause 2010). A typical Nordic razor with whelmed the passive receivers in the horse headed handle, from a burial, found North. Terms like ‘influence’ or ‘diffusion’ at Tovacov at Brno in Moravia, represents do not seem sufficiently explanatory. We the southernmost find of this type, but could perhaps talk about active ‘diffu- far away from its main distribution area sion’, where leading members of the so- (Jockenhövel 1971: 201). It belongs to cieties having knowledge of the world per. III of the Nordic Bronze Age (1300- of the South – probably after long jour- 1100 BC), and hence it has nothing to do neys – deliberately picked up certain ele with the primary transmission of the idea ments that could be used in self-promo- of the razor to the North. When the razor tion in a dynamic time of change. Such as such should be considered as a very leaders must have had a great authority personal item, this find may reflect a trav- within their local networks, since it was 165

possible for the razor with horse headed handle to spread and being accepted all over southern Scandinavia within a generation or even a shorter span of time. With lightning rapidity – as a fashion – many men of importance felt themselves obliged to possess and use the razor. Fig. 8: The northernmost razor with horse headed handle belonging The introduction of the razor should not be to period II, Todness at Steinkjær, North Trøndelag, Norway. After Rygh 1906. regarded as an isolated phenomenon, but as part of a larger picture of south- north social interaction. It should be con most important bearers of iconography, sidered as component of an ‘aristocratic the horse referring to the sun horse (the package’, reflecting a new chiefdom elite Chariot of the Sun). Probably the razor culture (Kristiansen and Larsson 2005: was given to the young man as marking 212-226; Kaul 2013). At the same time the transition from childhood to adult elements such as the folding stool, bronze status. As part of the initiation rites the drinking vessels and the horse-drawn young man learned about cosmology and chariot were introduced or chosen in the religion. Thus, it would have had an under- North, all to be considered as ruling class lying ideological meaning. A man buried symbols. These features, together with with such a razor was – while living – the razors, indicate the acceptance of considered as a vital member of the Nor- parts of a Minoan/Mycenaean lifestyle. dic Bronze Age agrarian societies.

The northernmost razors The northernmost razors with the handle During the second half of the 14th century in the shape of a horse’s head are found BC the one-edged razor swiftly spread at the broad border zone of the Nordic over larger parts of South Scandinavia, Bronze Age culture, being representatives the area also including northernmost of the Bronze Age cultural ‘package’. In a Germany (Jockenhövel 1971: 186 & 201). burial cairn in a larger cairn cemetery at Its core area is Denmark, Schleswig- the farm of Todness at Steinkjær, North Holstein and South Sweden. The horse Trøndelag, Norway, the northernmost ra- headed razor became very popular and a zor of this type belonging to per. II has sort of emblem of Nordic Bronze Age been found (Rygh 1906: 11; Rønne 2011: culture. Carrying the horse’s head the 61-62). In another cairn a sword from the razor should be regarded as one of the same period was found, with a spiral

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 166

decorated hilt. In the same area, at Spar- low ridge close to the coast. Even though bu, a horse headed razor from Nordic per. this cairn is the only one that has been III (1300-1100 BC) was found. excavated, it is presumed that the others should be dated to the Bronze Age as In 1962 the northernmost of all razors well. This cairn cemetery, in its landscape with the handle in the shape of a horse’s setting can easily be compared with head, though from per. III, was found at similar sites further south. From most of the excavation of a stone cist in a cairn, the cairns there is a fine view over the c. 15 m in diameter, at the farm of Skjeg- sea, and on the inland side the best agri gesnes, Alstahaug, Helgeland, Nordland, cultural land can be seen (fig. 10). The Norway. It contained the skeletal remains fields are found in a sheltered position of two human beings, a pottery vessel, a between low ridges dotted with cairns. bronze pin and a bronze razor with a Due to the mild climate caused by the horse headed handle (Binns 1985: 165- Golf Stream, even less than 100 km’s 168; Rønne 2011: 62). The cairn is part of South of the Arctic Circle, the fields are a larger cairn cemetery with more than well suited for growing barley, though 16 cairns, most of them situated on a hay harvest is preferred today. 167

The razor from Skjeggesnes is not the only Bronze Age find from this rich agricultural area. Not far away, and also situated in a rich agricultural landscape, close to arable fields of today, we find the rock carving fields on the islands of Tro and Flatøy, evidence of Nordic Bronze Age tradition (Sognnes 1985; 1989). Let us here shortly consider the rock carvings of Flatøy with ships, horses and footprints.

Two of the ships on the rock carving are equipped with high, in-turned, stems. The stem-shape, with high in-turned stems, Fig. 9: The northernmost razor of all razors indicates an Early Bronze Age date – the with horse headed handle, per. III, Skjegges nes, Helgeland, Nordland, Norway. Length: centuries around 1400 BC. This date may c. 8 cm. P. E. Fredriksen, NTNU photo. seem to be contradicted by the highly raised keel extension at the prow – a fea-

Fig. 10: Skjeggesnes, Helgeland, Norway. Wiew over the agricultural landscape seen from the cairn cemetery and close to the cairn, where the northernmost razor was found. F. Kaul photo.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 168

ture characteristic of Late Bronze Age (Ling 2008: 79 ff.; 2013: 53 ff.). In any ships (Kaul 1998: 87 ff.). However, a closer case, here we also are dealing with an examination of the two ships in ques- ‘upgrading’ of an older ship image. Such tion demonstrates that the upper part of observations are of importance on differ- the keel extension is a later addition. At ent levels. Firstly, we are informed that a certain point there is almost a break in there was rock carving activity in both the line of the keel extension, and above Early and Late Bronze Age. Secondly that this point the technique of pecking has rock carving continued also here, among changed. In other words, an Early Bronze the northernmost rock carvings of the Age ship was reshaped into a Late Bronze Bronze Age tradition, and the carving re- Age ship (Kaul & Rønne 2011; Kaul spected the old rock carvings just renew- 2012). A ship with stems in the shape of ing the ships, so that they could be in low out-turned horse’s heads has like- accordance with the latest fashion or wise got a heightening of the keel exten- tradition. sion fore. Ships with stems carrying these low horse’s heads should be dated to On Flatøy two horses are depicted. With the second half of per. II and per. III of their long forward-stretched necks, al- the Nordic Bronze Age (1400-1100 BC) most straight bodies, and forelegs turned forward, a dating to the Early Bronze Age, per. II or per. III is most likely. A number Fig. 11: Two horse renderings from the rock carving on Flatøy, Helgeland, Nordland, Norway. With their low, stretched necks a of parallels to this horse shape have date to per. II or per. III is most likely. Rubbing by G. Milstreu. been found in South Scandinavia in Scania Kivik, Villfara, Tågaborg (Kaul 2004: 291 ff.). Perhaps this particular shape or style of the horse figure’s neck and head could be seen as a transmission of the style of shape of the horse’s necks from the early Nordic razors?

When going to Sweden the largest density of finds of razors with a horse’s head is in Scania, the southernmost Swedish province and part of the core area of the Nordic Bronze Age culture. Here they appear in large barrows situated on high ridges in the landscape often overlook- 169

Fig. 12: The razor’s handle in the shape of a horse’s head, Skivarp, Scania, Sweden. F. Kaul photo.

ing the cost. A beautiful razor with a well Late Bronze Age razors modelled horse head from Skivarp at the The horse’s head remained a dominant Scanian Baltic south coast provides a good feature of the Nordic razors until c. 1100 example (fig. 12) (Oldeberg 1974: 106). BC, but it still retained its general shape. At the beginning of per. IV, c. 1100 BC, In a cairn at Valsta, Närke, Middle Sweden, something happened. The handle of the west of Stockholm, a typical example of a razor in the shape of a horse’s head was Nordic per. II razor has been found (Mon- replaced by a handle in the shape of neck telius 1917: No. 927; Oldeberg 1974: 342) and head of an aquatic bird, this due to (fig. 13). Together with the razor from influences from the Central European Todness in North, Trøndelag, Norway it Urnfield Culture (Kaul 1998: 67-68). At demonstrates how soon the early razors, first glance it could look as though the from per. II, reached the border zone of dominating role of the old sun horse was the Nordic Bronze Age culture. seriously challenged. But since both the

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 170

Fig. 13: Razor, per. II, from Valsta, Närke, Sweden. Pre- served L: 4.5 cm. After Montelius 1917.

horse and the aquatic bird should be face decoration of the Urnfield culture considered as somewhat homologous Bronze buckets with the Vogel-Sonnen- symbols or helpers related to the voyage bark motives gave inspiration for utilizing sun, this change should not affect any the surfaces of the razors. serious change of the world view. The horse was not forgotten, it appears still in It should be underlined that the majority many iconographical contexts, and in the of the razors from the Nordic per. IV and following period, per. V (900-700 BC), it V do not carry any detailed iconography reappears with certain strength as the on their blades (except for the handle). handle of the razor. The richly decorated razors do not go as far north as the ‘more common’ razors. Of even greater importance is the fact The only richly decorated razor from that at the beginning of per. IV the blades Norway has been found in a cairn in Opp of the razors became the canvas for fig- land, Østlandet, South Norway north of ural decoration, for instance ships, horses, Oslo. It is decorated with a ship image, fish, snakes and human-like creatures. a fish and a bird of prey (Johansen 1981: The razor became a principal medium 50). With its aquatic bird’s head handle for religious art. Here we find what could it belongs to Nordic per. IV, 1100-900 BC. be considered as a real creative process A razor with an almost identical decora- of the Bronze Age. But still one could tion has been found at Farsø, Himmer- pose the question whether this process land, in the Limfjord area, Northern Jut- was fully independent. Perhaps the sur- land (Kaul 1998: 244 & kat. No 205.). This 171

similarity is worth noting, since pairs of almost identical razors are virtually unknown – when the motifs are rather com plicated, as in this case (Kaul 2004: 246). Consequently the two razors from Opp- land, Norway, and Farsø, Himmerland, could indicate close connections, prob- Fig. 14: Richly decorated Late Bronze Age razor, per. IV/V, Tåby Skola, ably a family relationship. The two men Östergötland, Sweden. Length: 9.5 cm. After Hörfors 2006. buried on either side of Skagerak may have been brothers. A bit further south spiralling bodies are seen, to be dated in relation to Norway, in Bohuslän, Swe- to the border between per. IV and per. V den, a few decorated razors are known. – c. 900 BC. We could also be dealing with two sun-horses, their bodies being Probably the northernmost of the Swed- spiralled, like snakes. But their heads ish Late Bronze Age is richly decorated are definitely that of horses. razors comes from Rönninge in Salem Parish, Södermanland, WSW of Stock- In the eastern Baltic area there is at holm (Althin 1945: 225; Johansen & Jo- least one Late Bronze Age razor from per. hansen 1984: 92-94; Kaul 1998: 244). IV or per. V decorated with a ship image, The razor is roughly the same type as the found in a stone cist grave, Jöeläthme middle Swedish Mäler-lake region per. II and Kongro, Väo, Estonia (Lang 2007: razor from Valsta (see above). By its spi- 142 & 159). ral handle, this razor should belong to per. V of the Nordic Bronze Age, but probably Concluding remarks very early in that period, c. 900 BC. It is The northernmost of all one-edged razors quite curious that the motif on this razor with the handle in the shape of a horse’s is somehow similar to what is seen on head comes from Skjeggesnes, North Nor the razors from Oppland and Farsø. Even way. The southernmost of all one-edged though probably a little bit later, there razors with a handle in the shape of a might be some sort of a connection? horse’s head comes from the Dicte Cave in central Crete, Greece. Even though the Finally a recent find of a razor excavated Dictean ‘razor’ was a votive razor for no in a burial cairn at Tåby Skola, at Norr practical use, it evidences the full shape köping, Östergötland, should be high- of the real razor of Late Minoan Crete. lighted (Hörfors 2006). On the blade of So far away from the eastern Mediter- the razor two facing snake-horses with ranean Skjeggesnes may seem this razor

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 172

demonstrates the wide connections and Archaeologica 67 (Acta Archaeologica cultural influences of Bronze Age Europe. Supplementa I, Copenhagen): 291-298. When the man was buried in the cairn at Skjeggesnes between 1300 and 1100 BC Barfield, L., 1966: A Bronze Age Cup from the story of the razor’s relation to warrior Lago Ledro (Trento), Antiquity 40, 1966: ideals far south had probably been for- 48-49. gotten. Now the razor was customized in a Nordic cultural setting, and new Bech, J.-H. & Mikkelsen, M., 1999: Land- stories as to mythology and ideology be- scapes, settlement and subsistence in came related. During the following cen- Bronze Age, Thy, NW Denmark. Settle- turies the Nordic razor maintained and ment and landscape. Proceedings of a developed its ‘Nordic identity’, the sur- conference in Århus, Denmark May 4-7 faces of the blades becoming an impor- 1998, Fabech, C. & Ringtved, J. eds., tant canvas for the pictorial narratives of Aarhus, Jutland Archaeological Society, the mythology of the eternal voyage of Aarhus University Press: 69-77. the sun. Binns, K. S., 1985: De første tegn til jord But still – from the Dicte Cave to Skjeg- bruk. Helgeland Historie, Bind 1, Petter gesnes, lines of communication stretched sen, K. & Wik, B eds., Helgeland Historie through Europe. Not as direct or unbro- lag 1985: 148-171. ken lines, but along a number of places and points, where travellers met. Prob- Boardman, J., 1961: The Cretan Collection ably no one from southern Scandinavia in Oxford. Oxford, Oxford University Press. ever did visit Knossos or Mycenae per- sonally ... or? Bouzek, J., 1985: The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural interrelations in the second Millenium B.C. Studies in Medi- References terranean Archaeology XXIX, Göteborg/ Prague. Althin, C. A., 1945: Studien zu den bronze zeitlichen Felszeihnungen von Skåne, Lund. Gebhart, R., 1999: Der Goldfund von Bernstorf. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblät- Baillie, M. G. L., 1996: The Chronology ter 64, 1999: 1-18. of the Bronze Age 2374 to 431 BC. Abso- lute Chronology, Archaeological Europe Harding, A. F., 1984: The Myceneans and 2500-500 BC, Randsborg, K. ed., Acta Europe, London. 173

Harding, A., 2007: Interconnections be- the International Conference Bronze and tween the Aegean and Continental Eu- Early Iron Age Interconnections and Con- rope in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages: temporary Developments between the Moving beyond scepticism. Between the Aegean and the Regions of the Balkan Aegean and the Baltic Seas. Prehistory Peninsula, Central and Northern Europe, across Borders. Proceedings of the Inter University of Zagreb, 11-14 April 2005, national Conference Bronze and Early Iron Galanari, I., Tomas, H., Galanakis, Y. & Age Interconnections and Contemporary Laffineur, R. eds., Aegaeum 27, Annales Developments between the Aegean and d’archéologie égéenne de l’Université the Regions of the Balkan Peninsula, Cen de Liège, Liège: 149-154. tral and Northern Europe, University of Zagreb, 11-14 April 2005, Galanari, I., Hörfors, O. 2006: Arkeologisk undersök Tomas, H., Galanakis, Y. & Laffineur, R. ning Tåby Skola, Östergötlands Länsmu- eds., Aegaeum 27, Annales d’archéologie seum, Rapport, Norrköping. égéenne de l’Université de Liège, Liège: 47-55. Jensen. J., 2000: Rav. Nordens guld. Co- penhagen, Gyldendal. Heinemeier, J., Friedrich, W. L., Kromer, B. & Ramsey C. B., 2009: The Minoan Jensen, J., 2002: Danmarks Oldtid. Bron eruption of Santorini radiocarbon dated. zealder 2.000-500 f.Kr. Copenhagen, Time’s Up! Dating the Minoan eruption of Gyldendal. Santorini. Acts of the Minoan Eruption Chronology Workshop, Sandbjerg, Novem Jockenhövel, A., 1971: Die Rasiermess- ber 2007, Warburton, D. V. ed., Mono- er in Mitteleuropa. Prähistorische Bronze graphs of the Danish Institute at Athens funde, Abteilung VIII, 1. Band, München, 10, 2009, Athens: 285-293. C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.

Hogarth, D. G., 1900: The Dictaean Cave. Jockenhövel, A., 1980: Die Rasiermesser The Annual of the British School at in Westeuropa. Prähistorische Bronze- Athens VI, 1899-1900: 94-116. funde, Abteilung VIII, 3. Band, München, C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Hänsel, B., 2007: Ägäische Siedlungs strukturen in Monkodonja/Istrien? Be- Johansen, Ø., 1981: Metallfunnene i Øst tween the Aegean and the Baltic Seas. norsk Bronsealder. Universitetets Oldsak Prehistory across Borders. Proceedings of samlings Skrifter, Ny rekke, Nr. 4. Oslo.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 174

Johansen, E. & Johansen, Ø., 1984: borg, H. C. eds., Bergkunst, Verdensarv Bronsefunnene fra Vansjø. Viking XLVII, senter for bergkunst – Alta Museums 1983: 66-106. skriftserie nr. 1, Alta: 31-39.

Kaul, F., 1998: Ships on Bronzes, A Study Krause, R., 2010: Bronzezeitliche Kupfer in Bronze Age Religion and Iconography. gewinnung in den Alpen – überlegungen Publications from the National Museum zur Organisation des Metallkreislaufs. vol. 3 (1 & 2), Copenhagen. Der Griff nach den Sternen. Wie Europas Eliten zu Macht und Reichtum kamen. Kaul, F., 2004: Bronzealderens religion. Internationales Symposium in Halle (Saale) Studier af den nordiske bronzealders 16.-21. Februar 2005, Meller H. and Ber- ikonografi. Nordiske Fortidsminder, Serie temes, F. eds., Tagungen des Landesmu- B, Bind 22, Copenhagen. seum für Vorgeschichte Halle (Saale) Band 05, Halle (Saale): 845-864. Kaul, F., 2012: The Northernmost Rock- carvings of the Nordic Bronze Age Tradi- Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T. B., 2005: tion in Norway: context and landscape, The rise of Bronze Age society. Cam- Image, Memory and Monumentality bridge, Cambridge University Press. – archaeological engagements with the material world: a celebration of the aca- Lang, V. 2007: The Bronze and Early Iron demic achievements of Professor Richard Ages in Estonia. Estonian Archaeology 3, Bradley, Jones, A. M., Pollard, J., Allen, Tartu, Tartu University Press. M. J., & Gardiner, J. eds., Prehistoric Society Research Paper 5, Oxford, Oxbow Ling, J., 2008: Elevated rock art. Towards Books: 233-240. a maritime understanding of rock art in Northern Bohuslän, Sweden. GOTARC Kaul, F., 2013: The Nordic razor and the Serie B. Gothenburg Archaeological The Mycenaean lifestyle. Antiquity 87, 2013: sis 49, Göteborg Universitet, Göteborg. 461-472. Ling, J. 2013: Rock Art and Seascapes in Kaul F. & Rønne P., 2011: Ved grænsen Uppland, Oxford, Oxbow Books. for den nordiske bronzealderkultur. Fersk Forskning, ny turisme, gammel bergkunst, Lomborg, E., 1969: Den tidlige bronze Rapport fra nasjonalt nettverkseminar i alders kronologi. Aarbøger for Nordisk 2010, Lødøen, T., Stuedal, H.V. and Sø Oldkyndighed og Historie 1968: 91-152. 175

Malnati, L., 2003: Tra Egeo e Adriatico. Perini, R., 1987: Scavi archeologici nella I Veneti dai bei cavalli, Malnati, L. & zona palafitticola di Fiavé-Carera, 2. Cam Gamba, M. eds., Soprintendenza per i pagne 1969-1976: resti della cultura ma- Beni Archeologici del Veneto, Treviso: teriale: metallo-osso-litica-legno. Patrimo 30-31. nio storico artistico del Trentino, 9, Trento.

Montelius, O., 1917: Minnen från vår forn Primas, M. & Pernicka, E., 1998: Der De- tid, Stockholm. potfund von Oberwilflingen: Neue Ergeb- nisse zur Zirkulation von Metalbarren, Muscheler, R., 2009: 14C and 10Be around Germania 76/1: 25-65. 1650 cal. BC, Warburton, D.V. ed., Time’s Up! Dating the Minoan eruption of Santo Randsborg, K., 1967: “Aegean” Bronzes rini. Acts of the Minoan Eruption Chro in a Grave in Jutland. Acta Archaeologica nology Workshop, Sandbjerg, November 38: 1-27. 2007, Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 10, 2009. Athens: 275-284. Randsborg, K., 1993: Kivik. Archaeology and iconography. Acta Archaeologica 64 Müller, S., 1921: Bronzealderens Kunst i (1), Copenhagen. Danmark. Copenhagen, C.A. Reitzels Boghandel. Randsborg, K. & Christensen, K., 2006: Bronze Age Oak-Coffin Graves. Archaeo Nicolis, F., 2010: The role of the central- logy & Dendro-Dating. Acta Archaeologi eastern Alps in connecting Mediterra- ca 77, Acta Archaeologica Supplementa nean and central European elites during (Monographs). Copenhagen. the Bronze Age, Der Griff nach den Ster nen. Wie Europas Eliten zu Macht und Rygh, K., 1906: Videnskabsselskabets old Reichtum kamen. Internationales Sym- sagssamling. Tilvækst i 1906 af sager posium in Halle (Saale) 16.-21. Februar ældre end reformationen. Det kgl. norske 2005, Meller H. and Bertemes, F. eds., videnskabernes selskabs skrifter, 1906 Tagungen des Landesmuseum für Vor- No. 5, Trondheim. geschichte Halle (Saale) Band 05, Halle (Saale): 253-259. Rønne, P., 2011: Highlights from the North- ernmost Bronze Age societies in Norway. Oldeberg, A., 1974: Die ältere Metallzeit Farming on the edge: Cultural Landscapes in Schweden. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie of the North, Short papers from the net- och Antikvitets Akademien, Stockholm. work meeting in Lerwick, Shetland Sep-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 176

tember 7th – 10th 2010, Mahler, D.L. & the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age. Be- Andersen, C. eds., Northern Worlds, the tween the Aegean and the Baltic Seas. National Museum of Denmark, Copen- Prehistory across Borders. Proceedings of hagen: 58-69. the International Conference Bronze and Early Iron Age Interconnections and Con- Schauer, P., 1985: Spuren orientalischen temporary Developments between the und ägäischen Einflusses im bronzezeit Aegean and the Regions of the Balkan lichen Nordischen Kreis. Jahrbuch des Peninsula, Central and Northern Europe, Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums University of Zagreb, 11-14 April 2005, 32: 123-195. Galanari, I., Tomas, H., Galanakis, Y. and Laffineur, R. eds., Aegaeum 27, Annales Sognnes, K., 1985: Bergkunsten. Helgeland d’archéologie égéenne de l’Université Historie, Bind 1, Pettersen, K. & Wik, B. de Liège, Liège: 157-164. eds., Helgeland Historielag 1985: 133-147. Terzan, B., Mihovilic, K. und Hänsel, B., Sognnes, K., 1989: Rock art at the Arctic 1999: Eine protourbane Siedlung der äl- Circle. Acta Archaelogica 59 (1988): 67-95. teren Bronzezeit im istrischen Karst. Prae historische Zeitschrift 74: 154-193. Tecchiati, U., 2011: Albanbühel, Bolzano (Italia). Enigma. Un antico processo di Il Villaggio di Frattesina, 2010: Il Villag- interazione europea: le Tavolette Enigma gio di Frattesina e le sue necropoli XII - X tiche/An ancient European interaction: secolo a.C, Museo Archeologico Nazio the Enigmatic Tablets Piccoli, A. & Laf- nale di Fratta Polesine, 2010. franchini, R. eds., Supplemento al n. XIV di “Annali Benacensi”, Cavriana: 94-98. Weber, C., 1996: Die Rasiermesser in Südosteuropa. Prähistorische Bronze- Terzan, B., 2007: Cultural Connections funde, Abteilung VIII, 5. Band, Stuttgart, between Caput Adriae and the Aegean in Franz Steiner Verlag. 177

The earliest agriculture in central Norway – an overview of indications from the Steinkjer area in North Trøndelag

Frank Asprem

There are occasional indications of farm- the contours of a society, where agricul- ing within Middle Neolithic A and Middle ture plays a more significant role. Neolithic B (MNA and MNB), as well as Late Neolithic (LN) in central Norway. Vegetation history The indicators consist of more or less The majority of the data concerning vege vague traces in the pollen diagrams and tational history in central Norway are by- stray finds of Neolithic axes of funnel products of studies, where the identifica beaker and battleaxe types. The most tion of early agriculture has not been reliable traces of early agriculture are among the main issues. However, there found in the Steinkjer area. Steinkjer is are indeed some interesting results from situated by the Beitstadfjord, which is the the Trøndelag region. From Vassaunet we innermost part of the Trondheimsfjord have a diagram showing proven pollen of (fig. 1). Pollen diagrams from this area Rumex, Ranunculus, Cichoriaceae and show grazing indicators already from Urtica. These species are known to appear the Middle Neolithic A (MNA) period, in combination with grazing, and the date and a double edged battle axe from the of Vassaunet diagram’s evidence is c same period is also present. From the 3370-3100 cal BC (Jevne 1982; Sandvik Middle Neolithic B (MNB) and into the & Selvik 1993). Occurrence of these spe- LN and Early Bronze Age (EBA) these cies proves a more open landscape that traces are, however, something more might be caused by clearing of fields and than just indicators, and one may sense grazing livestock.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 178

Fig. 1: The sites mentioned in the text. 179

Vassaunet is situated a couple of kilo- The pollen analysis describes a mosaic metres further northwest from Egge. The landscape, where different vegetation oldest barley grain from central Norway types have covered relatively small areas has been found at Egge, which is located (ibid.). northwest of the city of Steinkjer. Egge is particularly rich in finds from most pe- Domestication riods of the Iron Age, and is also men- Not far from Egge lies the site Hammers tioned in the Sagas, which describes how volden. This is a kitchenmidden which powerful chieftains kept house here in was excavated in the years 1910 and 1911. the Viking Age (Snorre 1975). The area In the midden some highly weathered is interesting, however, also further back animal bones were found, including an in time. Recently, a new main road – the ox tooth (Rygh 1910; Petersen 1912). E6 – has been built through the area and The tooth has recently been dated to c the archaeological survey and trial exca- 2460-2290 cal BC. This is the earliest vations prior to road construction reveal proof of domesticated animals in central ed among other things plough marks. In Norway (Asprem 2012: 161). The bones samples taken from the plough marks, were determined by Herluf Winge at the the barley grain mentioned was found, Zoological Museum, University of Copen and the 14C date indicate an age of c hagen, but most of the material was too 1745-1520 BC (Solem 2002; Stenvik decomposed to be identified. Some of 2012). Unfortunately, there are neither the bone material was determined to drawings of these plough marks and the originate from large mammals, which barley grain, nor photos. However, one could either mean ox or moose (Topark should take into account that the date is dok. nr. 004601). based on coal fragments from one of the plough marks. The relation between the Archaeological finds cereal grain and plough marks is there- and future perspectives fore indirect and the date must be treat- In central Norway we have traces of do- ed with caution. mesticated animals during the MNB/LNI, and grain in the transition between LNII/ Still, the macro fossil survey and pollen EBA. Both results have been recognized analysis outlines a landscape where the within the last few years and correspond barley field has been situated close to a to the changes in material culture, which meadow, well suited for pasture exploi- can be observed within the MNA to tations. There have also been areas with MNB/LN transitions. At Sparbu, in what bog vegetation and groves of birch trees. must be described as the immediate

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 180

nearby area, a double edged battle axe At present the archaeological evidence was found (T 3160). It was typologically casting light on early agriculture in cen- dated to MNA I-II (Østmo 2000: 86-87). tral Norway is still relatively sparse. The On the farms Vada and Ås in Beitstad, source material is, however, growing two boat-axes were also found (T 3091 (cf. the barley grain and the ox tooth). and T 19409), one of which is likely to be Although the barley grain from Egge is made locally (T 3091). A third boat-axe is indirectly dated to the transition LN/EBA, also likely to be locally produced (T 3195). it clearly demonstrates a strong indica- The latter was found on the farm Kirkenes , tion of grain-growing at this early stage. Inderøy. One does not have to go far be- Furthermore, the ox tooth from Hammers yond these sites to find locations where volden kitchenmidden show the existence other boat-axes have been found. A total of domesticated cattle in central Norway number of 71 boat-axes are known from during the early to middle part of the Central Norway (e. g. Asprem 2005). Ad- third millennium BC. During the transition ditionally, five thick-butted flint axes are between the Middle and the Late Neo- known in Egge/Beitstad’s neighboring lithic we thus have archaeological evi- areas (e. g. Kalseth 2007). The distribu- dence of both crop cultivation and hus- tion of these axes is concentrated in ar- bandry in central Norway, though sparse. eas with easy arable land still in use to- Hopefully more evidence will come to day, thus giving some indication of a light in the future. changing settlement pattern already during the MN. In this short overview, however, it is not possible to go into detail Bibliography on all the archaeological finds indicating early agriculture. Such a project would be Asprem, F., 2005: Jordbrukets røtter i interesting, and should in addition to axes Midt-Norge. En forskningsstatus. En ret- also include the rich occurrence of both rospektiv og kontekstuell analyse av tid hunter’s and agrarian’s rock art found in lige jordbruksindikatorer. Unpublished MA the Beitstad area. For instance the well- – Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige uni known rock-carvings at Bardal is situated versitet, Trondheim, Norway. only a few hundred meters away from the Hammervolden kitchenmidden, where Asprem, F., 2012: Mat, måltider og mening the ox tooth was found (e. g. Sognnes – neolittisk nettverksbygging ved kjøkken 2007). møddingene på Innherred, Grønnesby, G., ed., Vitark 8, Acta Archaeologica 181

Nidrosiensia, Graver i veien, arkeolo- Snorre 1975: Snorres kongesagaer. Over giske undersøkelser E6 Steinkjer, Trond- satt av Anne Holtsmark og Didrik Arup heim, Norway: 155-170 . Seip. Stavanger, Norway.

Jevne, O. E., 1982: Vegetasjons-, klima- Sognnes, K., 2007: Hundre års bergkunst og jordbrukshistorie i Beitstad, Nord- forskning i Midt-Norge, Sognnes, K. ed., Trøndelag. Unpublished MA, Norges Hundre års bergkunstforskning i Midt- teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Norge – utvalgte artikler 1890-1990, KRA Trondheim, Norway. nr. 33, Institutt for arkeologi og religions vitenskap, Trondheim, Norway: 7-25. Kalseth, J., 2007: Mønstergyldige økser. Unpublished MA, Norges teknisk-natur- Solem, T., 2002: Makrofossilundersø kel vitenskapelige universitet, Trondheim, ser og pollenanalyse Egge, Steinkjer, Norway. Nord-Trøndelag, Topografisk arkiv, Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Petersen, T., 1912: En boplads fra yngre Vitenskapsmuseet, Trondheim, Norway. stenalder paa Hammersvolden i Beitsta- den. Det Kongelig Norske Videnskpers Stenvik, L., 2012: Høvdingsetet på Egge Skrifter 1912, no. 1, Trondheim, Norway: sett fra tunellåpningen til ny E6, Grønnes 2-15. by, G. ed., Vitark 8, Acta Archaeologica Nidrosiensia, Graver i veien, arkeologiske Rygh, K., 1910: Arkæologiske under- undersøkelser E6 Steinkjer, Trondheim, søkelser. Det Kongelig Norske Videnska Norway: 140-152. bers Selskapers Skrifter 1910, no. 6, Trondheim, Norway: 17-26. Østmo, E., 2000: Elleve trøndske stein økser. Traktbegerkulturen nordafjells, Sandvik, P. U. & Fjelstad Selvik, S., 1993: Primitive Tider, Oslo, Norway: 80-102. Korndyrking i vegetasjonshistoria, Spor nr. 2, 8. årgang, Trondheim, Norway: 26-29.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 182

The empirical basis for research on farming settlements in northern Norway 1200 BC – 0

Johan E. Arntzen

The warm Gulf Stream makes northern tion phase” as well as the entirety of the Norway milder than the latitude would “consolidation phase” (Zvelebil 1986). otherwise suggest. Even though the win ters are dark and long, agriculture and The primary aim of this paper will be to livestock husbandry is possible along re-evaluate a number of sites along the large parts of the thin coastline. North- northern Norwegian coastline where ern Norway also marks the northern- asbestos tempered ceramics and thin- most extension of the Nordic Bronze walled soapstone vessels have been Age complex. found. Linking these finds to recently excavated settlement sites with house Introduction structures, cooking pits and ancient Both archaeological and botanical data fields, it is argued that the asbestos suggest that the period 1200 BC – 0 tempered ceramics and thin-walled marks the definitive adoption of agricul- soapstone vessels sites represent the ture and husbandry at least up to the key to understanding the geographical Lyngen area in northern Troms (e. g. Jo- extent as well as the significance and hansen and Vorren 1986, Johansen 1990, cultural affiliation of the early farming Sjögren and Arntzen 2013). If one fol- communities of the region. Engeløya, lows M. Zvelebil’s model of the gradual which is an island with a particular con- adoption of farming among hunter-fisher- centration of Nordic Bronze Age finds, gatherer societies, this time period both will also be briefly presented. encompasses the end of the “substitu- 183

Date (approximately) Agrarian activity Period Agrarian development

AD 800-1050 ●●●● Viking Age Expansion AD 550-800 ●● Merovingian Period Abandonment AD 400-550 ●●●● Migration Period Expansion AD 150-400 ●●● Late Roman Iron Age 100 BC - AD 150 ● Late PRIA / Early RIA Abandonment 300-100 BC ●●○ Late Pre-Roman Iron Age 600-300 BC ●● Early Pre-Roman Iron Age Expansion 1000-600 BC ● Late Bronze Age 2300-1000 BC ○ Late Neolithic / Early Bronze Age Expansion?

Fig. 1: Agricultural expansion and abandonment phases in North Norway during the Bronze- and Iron Age (Sjögren and Arntzen 2013: Table 5, freely based on palynological studies, i.e. Vorren and Alm 1985; Johansen and Vorren 1986; Nilssen 1988; Vorren et al. 1990; Vorren 2005, 2009; Sjögren 2009). Relative agrarian activity is:  uncertain; • low; •• moderate; ••• high; •••• very high.

Palaeobotanical studies tion of the recently excavated Kveøy site, From the early 1970s onwards a consider- archaeobotanical, osteological and macro able number of palynological investiga- botanical evidence is scarce and with- tions from lakes and mires have played out a reliable context within the region an important role in the research on early (e. g. Sjögren and Arntzen 2013:2, Fig. 2, north Norwegian agriculture. The most Arntzen in press). prominent researcher in this area has been the botanist Karl-Dag Vorren, who Stray finds and rock art through several years had a fruitful co- indicating the presence of operation with archaeologist Olav-Sverre agricultural settlements Johansen (e. g. Johansen and Vorren Bronzes or moulds of Nordic Bronze Age 1986). Fig 1 shows a summary of the main type have been found at 15 sites in the trends summarized from a number of these region (fig. 2). With the exception of one studies. The first clear expansion phase fragment of a soapstone mould for a can be documented at c 1000 BC with a Bronze Age per. V-VI celt from Sandvika in following phase at c 600 BC. A third and Tromsø municipality, all of the finds are possibly more intense expansion appears located from the southern Troms region between c 300 – 100 BC. With the excep- and southwards. Although the exact de-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 184

Finnmark county

! ! ! # !!

! ! !! ! 70° N !! ! A ! ! rc ! tic ! circle !! !! !! ! !! # ! ! Sandvika #

! !! # ! ! ! !! # ! # !!!!! !!!! !!

! !!

# Vesterålen ## # Troms county #

# X 68° N X Lofoten# islands ^ # Southern Troms Tennevik, Røkenes, Bergsodden, ## Trondenes, Grøtavær, Kveøy, and Nordsand Engeløya # # Hamarøy and Steigen ### Salten# ## # # # Nordland county Arctic circle #X

# # 66° N ## Skjeggesnes ^ Helgeland area ### Sites with ATC and/or TWSV # Settlement site / Undetermined # # ^ Grave X Rock shelter & Find spot for bronzes or moulds North Trøndelag county

10° E X 12° E 14° E 16° E 18° E 20° E 22° E

Fig 2: Map of northern Norway showing the distribution of asbestos tempered ceramics and thin-walled soapstone vessels sites along with find spots for bronzes or moulds. Important regions and place names that are mentioned in the text are marked on the map. The upper left overview also shows the distribution of asbestos tempered ceramics sites in middle and western Norway. Data from northern Norway is based on Jørgensen and Olsen 1988, Andreassen 2002, Valen 2007 and own studies. Data from middle and western Norway is based on Ågotnes 1986. 185

tails surrounding the find context for most The advent of mechanical of these objects are limited, as many as top-soil stripping 12 of the localities can be interpreted as With the introduction of mechanical top- votive finds. Two other finds stem from soil stripping as a method of both archae- graves, while the above mentioned mould ological excavation and survey in the early is the only one that can be directly linked 1980s, 20 years after the method was to a settlement site. established further south in Scandinavia, the empirical basis of the study of early A total of 19 sites with artifacts of late farming settlements in Norway has been Bronze Age type ceremonial stone axes greatly increased (e. g. Løken et al. 1996). should also be mentioned. The northern- This excavation method was first adopt- most is located at Tana in Finnmark at ed in western and southwestern Norway over 70° latitude (cf. Marstrander 1983). inspired by the methods used in South The common denominator of this group Scandinavia and on the Continent. In north- of objects is unfortunately that they all ern Norway, however, the first full-scale lack a reliable context. mechanical top-soil stripping excavation did not take place until 2008 at Kveøy in Bronze Age type rock art is found at 12 southern Troms (Arntzen and Sommerseth sites in northern Norway (Valen 2007). 2010). Trial trenching as a method of field With the exception of the two northern- surveying has however been in use by the most examples, Kåfjorden and Apana county archaeologists of Nordland and Gård in Alta, all the sites north of the Arc Troms since the early 2000s. Following the tic Circle consist of very few individual organization of cultural heritage manage depictions. With the exception of the cup ment in Norway, the county archaeolo- mark stone in Steigen municipality, which gists are responsible for doing surveys will be discussed later in this paper, none prior to full scale excavation, which in of the sites north of the Helgeland dis- turn are the responsibility of the regional trict can be directly linked to documented museums. Quite often small scale surveys agrarian settlements. The neighboring resulting in finds with great research Tro and Flatøy localities within Alstahaug relevance do not lead to full scale exca- municipality, well south of the Arctic Cir- vations. Survey reports from the coun- cle, are as such the northernmost rock art ties often end up hidden in an institutio localities that truly mirror those further nal archive as there are no routines for south in Scandinavia (e. g. Sognnes 1989). disseminating them amongst scholars. As a considerable number of surveys done

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 186

by trial trenching have brought forward were documented. The remains of fossil remains of prehistoric agricultural settle arable field of a completely different ments, re-evaluating these lesser known character than the Bronze Age field were sites is an important step to understand also documented (Sjögren and Arntzen the development of early farming in the 2013, Arntzen in press). region further. Nearby the Kveøy site, several county Results from recent surveys where trial trenching has been excavations and surveys used demonstrate that these types of In the following a few relevant excava- settlement remains are not unique for tions and surveys from recent years will the region. The Nordsand site, located be briefly summarized. This is in no way a on an island nearby the city of Harstad, complete review, but the following sites revealed a cooking pit dated to c 1200 BC might provide some insight as to what along with ard marks and possibly also can be expected when mechanical top- traces of post-holes and fossil field-lay- soil excavations are conducted within the ers that can be contextually linked to the North Norwegian farming landscape. same phase of settlement (Bunse 2012). The results from this survey are difficult The shortest summary possible concern- to interpret because the site is located ing the Kveøy excavations is that the re- within a drift-sand area. A smaller exca- sults in many respects mirror sites from vation of a farm mound at Bergsodden southwestern and western Norway. Re- in the same region also yielded a cook- mains of fossile field-layers were docu- ing pit dated to c 1000 BC (Olsen 2012). mented from the transition between early 14C-dates from the Bronze Age are how- to late Bronze Age c 1200 BC, and from ever rare throughout the region. Sites the late Bronze Age both a three-aisled dated to the Pre Roman Iron Age are on longhouse and remains of a possible slash- the other hand the rule rather than the and-burn field were uncovered dated to exception as results from trial trenching c 900 – 700 BC. Archaeobotanical inves- surveys. At Berg nearby Kveøy both cook- tigations, both macrofossils and pollen, ing pits and field-layers dated to the Pre show that the crop production during the Roman Iron Age have been documented. Pre-Roman Iron Age was more diverse Similarly Pre Roman Iron Age field-layers and intense than during the Bronze Age. have also been documented at the Røke At Kveøy both a longhouse over 20 me- nes farm, just outside of Harstad. Further ters in length, a utility building of some south, throughout the County of Nord- sort, and several graves dated to c 300 BC land, many surveys have yielded the 187

same type of results. These include mas- plex (cf. Munch 1962, Bakka 1976: 29-38, sive fossil Pre Roman Iron Age field-layers Jørgensen 1986, Ågotnes 1986, Jørgen and ard marks that have been document- sen and Olsen 1988, Andreassen 2002). ed at Morfjorden in the Vesterålen area It is important to note that ceramics with (Bjørkli 2009). 14C-dates to the Bronze Age asbestos tempering are found within the however, are so far lacking outside of the context of hunter-fisher-gatherer socie- southern Troms region. ties in northern Fennoscandia from around 2000 BC and being present until the first Summing up these results, it is important centuries AD (e. g. Carpelan 1979, Jørgen to highlight the dubious representativity sen and Olsen 1988). Within this complex they provide when assessed outside of technological tradition only one particu- the context of other data categories. lar type seems to be linked to agricultural What is reflected is obviously the geo- settlements. In northern Norway this va- graphical location of recent economical riety is referred to as “Risvik ceramics”, investments in the region, including named after a site in the Helgeland area, everything from the building of new while a very similar variety appearing roads, housing projects and not the real within the same types of contexts in distribution of prehistoric agricultural middle and western Norway simply is settlements. It is however clear that Pre referred to as “asbestos ceramics”. It Roman Iron Age agricultural settlements should be pointed out that the typology can be expected all along the coast, at most certainly can be debated and that least from the South Troms area and the internal variation is considerable southwards. The Bronze Age settlements (Ågotnes 1986:108-114, Andreassen 2002: are of a somewhat different character than 50-62). Such a discussion is neverthe- the Pre Roman Iron Age settlements, less outside the scope of this paper, and possibly including a completely different both the northern and southern type will approach to manuring practices and field in the following be referred to as asbes- cultivation, and as such might be harder tos tempered ceramics. to document through trial trenching. Another find category that shares many Sites with asbestos ceramics of the contextual qualities of the asbes- and soapstone vessels tos tempered ceramics is the thin-walled Asbestos tempered ceramics have for soapstone vessels. This type is clearly many years been discussed as a possi- discernible from later medieval types, and ble link between the northern border of can in general be dated to the late Bronze farming and the Nordic Bronze Age com- Age and the Pre Roman Iron Age. Contex-

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 188

tually this particular kind of soapstone at Uteid in Hamarøy municipality contain vessel also has a tendency to appear at ed nothing but a few shards of asbestos the same sites as the asbestos tempered tempered ceramics (Helskog 1967). ceramics (Møllerup 1960; Pilø 1989). Anne Ågotnes (1986) noted in her re- Contexts view of the asbestos tempered ceramics At present 40 different sites with asbes- from middle and western Norway that tos tempered ceramics and 20 sites with the finds have a clear connection to ag- thin-walled soapstone vessels are known riculture. Out of her 30 sites, of which within northern Norway, fig. 2. On eight five overlap with the present study, thin- of these sites both categories of finds walled soapstone vessels were present have appeared together. When it comes at 12 and ard marks were found at four. to the asbestos tempered ceramics es- In addition to this she noted that the sites in pecially one grave find is of special im- general were located near arable sandy portance when it comes to a possible soils, and that Bronze Age burials were in affiliation with Nordic Bronze Age. A pro close proximity throughout her research fessionally excavated burial mound of area (Ågotnes 1986:115f). 20 meters in diameter at Skjeggesnes in Alstahaug municipality, contained the re The results from surveys and excavations mains of two persons, as well as asbestos that have taken place the recent years tempered ceramics, a razor with a horse clearly indicate that also the northern head handle and a bronze pin that prob- Norwegian sites can be directly linked to ably should be dated to Bronze Age per. agricultural settlements. Of the northern III (Bakka 1976:26). The only other grave most sites this includes Kveøy where find with both asbestos tempered cera asbestos tempered ceramics were found mics and dateable Nordic bronzes is from in two post-holes belonging to the largest Røkke in North Trøndelag and can most Pre Roman Iron Age longhouse. Just a few likely be dated to Bronze Age per. II (Bakka kilometers away, at Hemmestad, exava- 1976:30-31). In addition to these graves tions of an early iron smelting site, pos- there are at least four burials south of sibly dated as far back as 600 BC has Nordland, where asbestos tempered ce- also revealed asbestos tempered cera ramics have been found and the burial mics (Jørgensen 2011:99-107). Although customs clearly indicate Nordic Bronze a very limited excavation area, the pres- Age. One burial of this type is also known ence of several cooking pits supports an from northern Norway. A cairn with a stone interpretation as a settlement site. During cist that was excavated in the late 1960s a similarly small scale excavation in the 189

Vesterålen area, just south of southern that very often follows the amateur’s Troms, asbestos tempered ceramics have description of the drift-sand sites is been found in context with cooking pits, probably significant in their interpreta- post-holes and ard marks, although it tion. It should also be noted that the dis- should be noted that no 14C-dates exist crimination between cooking pits and (Schanche 1990). At the Skålbunes site, fireplaces can be difficult for profession- further south in the Salten area, asbes- ally trained archaeologists, and probably tos tempered ceramics were uncovered even more so for amateurs. in the wall ditch of a Pre Roman Iron Age house and in relation to both a fossile During field work in the summer of 2012, field and cooking pits (Arntzen in press). I visited a number of the drift sand areas Close to Skålbunes, in connection with a in Nordland that hadn’t been subject to survey at Ilstad, asbestos tempered cera professional excavation. When it comes mics were found in an area with cooking to landscape, the striking common de- pits and post-holes dated to the late Pre nominator for most of these sites was Roman Iron Age (Johansen 2002). Also at indeed their location within areas nicely Nordtun in Meløy municipality asbestos suited for agriculture. One such site at tempered ceramics have been uncovered Fjære in Bodø municipality, was located in an area with post-holes, ard marks and in the middle of a present day grass field. cooking pits (Herstad 2009). No 14C-dates Although the area was quite disturbed exist for this site, but the presence of a following the modern clearance of the flint scraper might indicate Bronze Age. fields, two test pits were dug. No finds were uncovered, but charcoal particles In addition to these seven sites, the con- were evenly distributed within the sandy text for nine finds can be described as subsoil, possibly indicating prehistoric “drift-sand areas with fireplaces”. The cultivation. Just south of the city of Bodø same description is also given for 12 of two similar sites were visited, Seivåg and the 30 southern sites (Ågotnes 1986:106). Seines located on the island Straumøya, The asbestos tempered ceramics and thin- both with a striking location on the best walled soapstone vessels from most of arable land within an otherwise swampy these sites have come to light from ama- area. teurs. The nature of drift-sand areas is obviously that the local topography Engeløya in Steigen – A focal changes rapidly. The shifting sand also site during the Bronze Age? complicates sites with multiple period Engeløya in Steigen municipality is par- settlements. The observation of fireplaces ticularly interesting when discussing the

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 190

The “Cup mark stone” at Sandvågmoen, Engeløya ing from the equation is a complete settle Laskestad Prestegård (farm no. 74/7), Steigen municipality, Nordland county. ID 57107 Original tracing by C. Nordby and B. Helberg 18.09.2001. JEA, Tromsø University Museum - University of Tromsø ment site.

¯ The cup mark stone, located at Sand- vågmoen at the outskirts of a present day infield on the southern side of the is-

Edge of boulder land, is clearly within the Nordic Bronze Age tradition. The boulder itself has a completely flat surface and measures c. 3,8 x 4,6 meters (fig. 3). The 16 cup marks that are carved into the surface Exfoliation area vary from six to four centimeters in dia Erosion surface meter, while their depth ranges from c. two to half a centimeter.

In the Bø area on the northern side of the island we find the rest of the sites that can be linked to Bronze Age agricultural settlements. This includes the only Meters 1 certain burial mound with Nordic bronzes

Fig. 3: Tracing north of Skjeggesnes. The finds came to of the cup Bronze Age settlements in northern Nor- light by the hands of a farmer in 1903 mark stone at way. The island, which has an area of while he was excavating a cairn that Sandvågmoen. c 70 km2, represents one of the densest previously had been converted into a po- and richest find areas for early to late tato cellar (fig. 4). The find consists of Iron Age graves and settlements north some undecorated tweezers as well as a of the Arctic Circle (Moltu 1988). The lo- double stud probably belonging to Bronze cal climate is mild for the region; in fact Age per. IV (Engedal 2010:47, 49). An- the world’s northernmost hazel forest is other grave that possibly can be dated located on the southern side of the island. to the Bronze Age is a monumental ridge Of all the find categories that so far have placed cairn of 20 meters in diameter, been mentioned concerning early agri- located strategically at Grådusan on a cultural settlements, bronzes, rock art, height with outlook towards the Lofoten asbestos tempered ceramics and thin- Islands in the west (fig 5.). The cairn has walled soapstone vessels are all present never been excavated, and was some- at Engeløya. The only thing that is miss- what damaged in the top when turned 191

Fig. 4: Above: Photo showing the view from the now removed Bronze into a machine gun post during the Sec- Age burial cairn at Bø. The drift sand area at Bøsanden is located behind the red barn, just below the mountain. J. E. Arntzen photo. ond World War. Its proximity to other Below: Photo dating to the early 1900s showing the location of the Bronze Age finds as well as its general Bronze Age cairn / potato cellar. It can be seen left of the white resemblance to middle and western Nor building in the middle of the photo. Courtesy of Rolf Lossius. wegian Bronze Age burial customs never theless suggests that the cairn could be stone vessels have been found, as well of Bronze Age origin. as large amounts of fireplaces, or perhaps more likely cooking pits. During the The most interesting site when it comes summer of 2012 I visited this locality to to actual settlement remains is the Bøs try to establish whether it could be pos- anden drift-sand locality situated near sible to document intact cultural layers the seashore north of the above men- or not. Unfortunately the results were tioned burials. Here both asbestos tem- negative, as the area in recent years has pered ceramics and thin-walled soap- been completely lacking turf cover. The

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 192

low average temperatures. Nevertheless, during my visit in the end of august the barley seemed to do far better than the other crops.

Conclusions When seen in connection with the recent results from excavations and surveys it is clear that the asbestos tempered ceramics and thin-walled soapstone vessels sites in many cases should be interpreted as indicating agricultural settlements. However, many nuances concerning these localities have been left out in this paper. There is a definite variation between how the sites are located throughout the region, and without further investigations it is difficult to assess to how large a degree these settlements truly mirror southern Bronze Age and Early Iron Age settle ments. Another factor that has not been discussed is the presence of both slate

Fig. 5: Plan artifacts and ceramic types linked to and profile local topography was therefore totally northern and eastern hunter-fisher-gath- drawing of transformed since the last observations erer societies at several of the sites. The the ridge placed cairn of fireplaces were done in the 1980s. present study must merely be understood at Grådusan. Nevertheless it seems clear that this site as a preliminary overview as to what represents a settlement site that can be kind of empirical basis actually exists linked to Bronze Age and Pre Roman Iron for investigating these early agricultural Age agriculture. As an anecdote it should settlements further. It is clearly possible be mentioned that during the field sur- to get beyond the stray finds and their vey a local farmer, Thor Holand, took me limited context. to see his ripening barley field, located just above the Bøsanden locality. The The next step in this research will be to weather of this summer was terrible excavate one of the most marginal as- with above average rainfall and far be- bestos tempered ceramics and thin-walled 193

soapstone vessels site within the study møde i Nordlige Verdener, Symposium på area, namely the Sandvika site in Tromsø Tanums Hällristningsmuseum, Underslös, municipality (Arntzen 2013). This site in- Bohulän, d. 25.-29. maj 2011, Kaul, F. & cludes, in addition to finds of asbestos Sørensen, L. eds., Copenhagen. National- tempered ceramics and thin-walled museet: 184-194. soapstone vessels, a fragment of a mould for a Nordic Bronze Age celt as well as Arntzen, J., 2013: Den nordligste bronse at least one fireplace. It is located within alderen i Norden? Gjennomføringsplan a marginal area for agriculture, but pol- for arkeologiske undersøkelser av tidlig len analysis confirms that arable fields jordbruksboplass i Sandvika, Tromsø were present in the area during the late kommune, (ID: 115182) våren 2013. Un- Bronze Age. published report in the topographical archive. Tromsø: Tromsø Museum, Uni- Compared to areas such as Engeløya, versitetet i Tromsø. which might be considered to be more closely connected to the Nordic Bronze Arntzen, J. E. & Sommerseth, I., eds., 2010: Age tradition than the northernmost Den første gården i Nord-Norge – Jord- sites, it must be expected that the margin- bruksbosetting fra bronsealder til jernal- al localities have closer ties to hunter- der på Kveøy. TROMURA, vol. 39 Tromsø: fisher-gatherer societies to the north Tromsø Museum – Universitetsmuseet. and east. Bakka, E., 1976: Arktisk og nordisk i bronsealderen i Nordskandinavia. Mis- Bibliography cellanea, vol. 25. Trondheim: University of Trondheim. Andreassen, D. M., 2002: Risvikkeramikk – En analyse av teknologisk stil på Nord Bjørkli, B., 2009: Reguleringsplan for Fv kalotten i sein steinbrukende tid. Unpub 888. Kryssing av Morfjorden, Hadsel lished hovedfag thesis. Tromsø: Univer- kommune. Unpublished report in the sitetet i Tromsø. topographical archive. Nordland fylkes kommune. Arntzen, J., 2012: Jordbruksboplasser fra bronsealder og førromersk jernalder i Bunse, L., 2012: Registreringsrapport – Nord-Norge: Veien videre, Angrarsam- Nordsand, Gnr/Bnr 28/2 M. fl. Archive: fundenes ekspansion i Norden – Netværks Troms fylkeskommune.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 194

Carpelan, C., 1979: Om asbestkeramikens Johansen, T., 2002: Ilstad golfbaneprosjekt historia i Fennoskandien, Finskt museum, – Rapport fra arkeologiske registreringer, 85(1978): 5-25. Gnr. 72, Bodø kommune. Unpublished report in the topographical archive. Nord Engedal, Ø., 2010: The Bronze Age of land fylkeskommune. Northwestern Scandinavia. Unpublished dr. philos. dissertation. Bergen: Univer- Jørgensen, R., 1986: The early metal age sity of Bergen. Available at: http://www. in Nordland and Troms, Acta Borealia, bronsereplika.no/2010b%20The%20 3(2): 61-87. Bronze%20Age%20of%20NW%20 Scandinavia%20WEB.pdf. Jørgensen, R., 2011: Prehistoric Iron Pro duction in North Norway, Acta Archaeo- Helskog, K., 1967: The excavations on logica, 82(1): 97-128. doi: 10.1111/j.160 Sørøy and Hamarøy in northern Norway 0-0390.2011.00412.x. 1966. Unpublished report in the topogra phical archive. Tromsø: Tromsø Museum Jørgensen, R. & Olsen, B., 1988: Asbest – Universitetsmuseet. keramiske grupper i Nord-Norge – 2100 f. Kr. – 100 e. Kr. TROMURA, vol. 13. Herstad, A., 2009: Registrering Nedre Tromsø: Tromsø Museum. Valla. Unpublished report in the topogra phical archive. Nordland fylkeskommune. Løken, T., Pilø, L. and Hemdorff, O. H., 1996: Maskinell flateavdekking og utgrav Johansen, O. S., 1990: Synspunkter på ning av forhistoriske jordbruksboplasser: jernalderens jordbrukssamfunn i Nord- En metodisk innføring. AmS-varia, vol. 26. Norge. Stensilserie B, vol. 29. Universi Stavanger: Arkeologisk museum. tetet i Tromsø. Marstrander, S., 1983: Porfyr- og nakke- Johansen, O. S. & Vorren, K.-D., 1986: bøyde økser som indikatorer for The prehistoric expansion of farming into bosetning og sosiale strukturer i Norges ‘Arctic’ Norway: A chronology based on yngre bronsealder, Foredrag ved det 1. 14C dating, Radiocarbon, 28(2A): 739-747. nordiske bronsealder-symposium på Ise gran 3.-6. oktober 1977, Marstrander, S. ed., Varia, vol. 9. Oslo: Universitetets oldsaksamling: 52-146. 195

Moltu, T., 1988: Engeløya i Steigen – Schanche, K., 1990: Rapport fra arkeolo- Studiar over den førhistoriske buset- giske utgravninger på Føre, Bø k., 1990. naden tufta på arkeologi og vegetasjons Unpublished report in the topographical historie. Unpublished magister thesis. archive. Tromsø: Tromsø Museum – Uni- Tromsø: University of Tromsø. versitetsmuseet.

Munch, J. S., 1962: Boplasser med asbest- Sognnes, K., 1989: Rock Art at the Arctic keramikk på Helgelandskysten. Acta Circle – Arctic and Agrarian Rock Engrav- Borealia B. Humaniora, vol. 7. Tromsø: ings at Tjøtta and Vevelstad, Nordland, Tromsø Museum. Norway, Acta Archaeologica, 59: 65-90.

Møllerup, O., 1960: Kleberkar fra keltertid. Valen, C. R., 2007: Jordbruksimpulser i Stavanger Museum Årbok, 1959: 21-40. neolitikum og bronsealder i Nord-Norge? En revisjon av det arkeologiske gjen- Olsen, M., 2012: Notat om kokegrop un- standsmaterialet og de natuvitenskape der gårdshaug på Bergsodden, Harstad k. lige undersøkelsene. Unpublished hoved – Utgraving 2009. Unpublished report in fag thesis. Tromsø: Universitetet i Tromsø. the topographical archive. Tromsø: Trom- sø Museum – Universitetsmuseet. Zvelebil, M., 1986: Mesolithic prelude and neolithic revolution. Hunters in Transition: Pilø, L., 1989: Early Soapstone Vessels Mesolithic Societies of Temperate Eura- in Norway from the Late Bronze Age to sia and their Transition to Farming, Zve- the Early Roman Iron Age, Acta Archae- lebil, M. ed., New Directions in Archaeo ologica, 60: 87-100. logy. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press: 5-15. Sjögren, P. & Arntzen, J., 2013: Agricul- tural practices in Arctic Norway during Ågotnes, A., 1986: Nordvestnorsk asbest the first millennium BC, Vegetation His- keramikk. Karform, godsstruktur, utbre- tory and Archaeobotany, 22(1): 1-15. doi: delse og datering, Arkeologiske skrifter 10.1007/s00334-012-0346-2. fra Historisk Museum, 3: 86-118.

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 196

Heel shaped chambered cairn at Punds Water, Shetland. D.L. Mahler photo 2011. Northern Worlds Shetland Project 198

Contributors

Johan E. Arntzen Lauren Doughton PhD Fellow in Archaeology Postgraduate Researcher Department of Cultural Sciences Department of Archaeology Tromsø University Museum ‘The Social Archaeology of [email protected] Early Prehistoric Shetland’ lauren.doughton@ Frank Asprem postgrad.manchester.ac.uk Arkæolog, cand.philol. Vitenskapsmuseet, NTNU Hans Christian Gulløv Trondheim Senior researcher, dr. phil. [email protected] Etnografical Collection, The National Museum of Denmark Torben Bjarke Ballin [email protected] Independent Lithics Specialist PhD, Cand Phil, MIFA, FSA Scot Karen Margrethe Hornstrup Lithic Research / Hon Research Fellow, Moesgaard Museum, Højbjerg Univ of Bradford [email protected] [email protected] Flemming Kaul Carol Christiansen Senior researcher, dr. phil. Curator, PhD Danish Prehistoric Collection, Shetland Museum & Archives The National Museum of Denmark [email protected] [email protected] Contributors

Matti Leino Lasse Sørensen associate professor PhD PhD Candidate Nordiska museet - Copenhagen University Swedish Museum of Cultural History [email protected] [email protected] Alison Sheridan Ditlev L. Mahler Dr, FSA Scot FSA AIFA Senior Project Researcher PhD Principal Curator Danish Prehistoric Collection, Department of Scottish History The National Museum of Denmark and Archaeology [email protected] National Museums Scotland [email protected] Inga Merkyte PhD, Part-time lecturer Val Turner University of Copenhagen PhD FSA. FSA Scot MIFA The Saxo Institute Shetland County Archaeologist [email protected] Shetland Amenity Trust & University of Stirling Jenny Murray [email protected] Curator of Collections, Shetland Museum and Archives [email protected]

Northern Worlds Shetland Project 200

Part of Jarls hof, South Mainland, Shetland. Photo D. L. Mahler 2012. The Border of Farming – Shetland and Scandinavia Neolithic and Bronze Age Farming

Backcover: Participants in the excursion during September 2012 in front of the Øm passage grave:

From left Val Turner, Johan E. Arntzen, Flemming Kaul, Carol Christiansen, Søren Diinhoff,Matti Leino, Jenny Murray, Alison Sheridan, Joakim Goldhahn, Lauren Doughton, Karen Margrethe Hornstrup, Ditlev L. Mahler

The National Museum of Denmark Frederiksholms Kanal 12 DK-1220 Copenhagen K 202

http://nordligeverdener.natmus.dk

The Border of Farming – Shetland and Scandinavia

Papers from the symposium in Copenhagen September 19th to the 21st 2012