ANDERS ANDREN, KRISTINA JENNBERT, CATHARINA RAUDVERE (EDS) Old Norse religion in long-term perspectives ORIGINS, CHANGES, AND INTERACTIONSVAGAR TILL MIDGARD 8 Old Norse religion in long-term perspectives Origins, changes, and interactions An international conference in Lund, Sweden, June 3-7, 2004 Anders Andrén, Kristina Jennbert & Catharina Raudvere (eds) NORDIC ACADEMIC PRESSContents ‘The conference and its context 9 Old Norse religion a Some problems and prospects ‘Anders Andrén. Kristina Jennbert and Catharina Raudvere WORLDVIEW AND COSMOLOGY Can archaeologists study prehistoric cosmology? 16 Richard Bradley Narrative worlds, human environments, and poets 21 “The case of Bragi John Lindow Centrality in Old Norse mental landscapes 26 Addidogue between aranyed and natural places? Charlotte Fabech A world of stone 3 ‘Warrior culture, hybridity, and Old Norse cosmology Anders Andrén Bound animal bodies 9 Ornamentation and skaldic poetry in che process of Christianization ‘Maria Dome Lundborg “The imperative way s Nanouacbha Myrberg Homogeneity and heterogeneity in Old Norse cosmology 50 Jonas Welendorf “The gendering of death in eddic cosmology 54 Judy Quinn ‘The Askr and Embla myth in a comparative perspective 38 Anders Halegind “The eiiges af the Old Norse world-view 6 A bestiary concept? Agnesa Ney Hanging on the world tree 68 ‘Min wand costs in Old Norse mythic poetry: Henning Kare RITUAL AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE Rituals, witnesses, and sagas 7” Thomas A. DuBois Iron in the making ~ Technology and symbolism 79 Ethnographic perspectives on European iron working Randi Hlaaland ‘The origins of Old Norse ritual and religion, in European perspective 86 Mike Parker Pearon How to sort out situal from conteat of prautive gz Peter Habe Escaping the allure of meaning 9s “Toward new paradigms in the study of ritual in prehistory Liv Nilson Soutz Myth and metallurgy 99 Some cross-cultural relections on the eocial identity of smiths ‘Randi Barndon Humans and gods interacting at Augusta ‘Treverorum in Late Antiquity 104 A project presentation Heie Peer Performing death 109 ‘The function and meaning of Roman diuking, vesel i Scandinavian mortuary practices Frodrik Bhengyen The Roman Iron Age in perspectives and perceptions m4 Louise Sirdbeck Hanessing the hunger n9 Religious appropriations af animal predation in early medieval Scandinavia Aleksander Pluskowskt‘Wolves, serpents, and birds m4 “Their syimbulic meaning in Old Nore belief Anne-Sofie Grislund ‘The horse and its role in Icelandic burial practices, mythology, and society 30 Ulla Lowmand ‘The heroized dead BS People, animals, and materiality in Scandinavian death rituals, AD 200-1000 Kristina Jennbert Cemeteries and ritual meals un Rites and their meaning in the traditional Sera ‘world-view Heiks Valk ainer 47 Projections of religious meaning in a Viking Age burial ground in northern Smland Tire Artelius and Anna Kristenson Scandinavian burlal rites on the southern Baltic coast 153 Boat graves in cemeteries of eatly medieval trading places Marcus Gerds Grinding processes and reproductive metaphors 159 Tisti Fendin Spinning seidr 164. Fldar Heide The concept of shamanism in Old Norse religion from a sociological point of view m Tine Jeanctte Bicring RITUAL SITES AND IMAGES ‘What in a name? 19 An archaeological identity css for the Norse gods (and some of their friends) Neil Price Bridging mythology and belief 184 Viking Age functional culture as a reflection of the belief in divine intervention Anubes Siegfried Dobat Ornaments, ornamentation, and female gender 189 ‘Women in castezn central Sweden in the eighth and cay ninth centuries Johan Caller ‘Among trees, bones, and stones: 195 “The sacred grove at Lunda Gunnar Andersson My home is my castle Protection agninst evil in medieval times Anne Bris Falk ‘Ancient building cults “Aspects of ritual traditions in southern Scandinavia nme Carlie Odin and Mithras 200 206 2 Religious acculturation during the Roman Tron Age and Use Miggation Period Aner Kaif und Olof Sundgvse ‘Thor's hammer in Norway ‘A symbol of reaction against the Christian cross? Sebjorg Walaer Nordeide “The temple in Rhetra-Riedegost ‘West Slavic pagan ritual as described at the beginning cf eleventh century Leszek Sbupecki Parhim-Liddigsee - late Slavonic temple and wading site Dietlind Paddenborg Pre-Christian cult at Arktia ‘A short summary of the archaeological evidence Asrid Tiommuscheie “Til holts ek gekk...” Ihe performance demands of Skirmismah, Fafukondl and Sigrdrifumdl in iminal rime and sacred space Terry Gunnell Rituals and power About a small building and animal bones from the late Iron Age AnnLili Nieken Ritual building and ritual space Aspects of investigations at the Iron Age central site Uppers, Scania, Sweden Lars Larson ‘The Uppitkra beaker A discussion of the Figure representations irgitta Hrdb Guldgubber Kelis of Pre-Chrisaan law rituals? Sharon Raske und Readolf Sick MYTH AND MEMORY Enfikvadi ~ myth, ritual, clegy Joseph Harris 28 29 234 238 243 248 354 259 267Myth and the psychology of memory Carolyne Larringion “The generic aspect of the Eddie style Bernt Owind Thorvaldsen ‘Textual figures of Odin Annette Lassen “Theories, explanatory models and terminology Poatibilites and problems in research on Old Norse mythology Fle Mundal Mythology as a mnemonic and literary device in Varnsdele saga Lan van Weel Poetry and practice Egil’ art of poetry and the Odinic legacy Cuubrina Raudvere Where does Old Norse religion end? Keflections on the term (Old Nore religion ‘Maths Berell Archacology and sacrifice A discussion of interpretations daa Bergen Misconceptions concerning paganism and folklore in medieval art The Rogslisa example Gunnar Nordanchog ‘Voluspé and the tree of life A product ofa culcure ina liminal stage ésur Peturson (On wind and waves Bryon Weston Why Porentialities of Loki Yovnne S. Bonnetain Interpretations of Ynglingasaga and the Mabinogi Same NorseCaltie correspondences Karen Bek-Pedersen Love among gods and men Shirnismdl and its tradition Daniel Savborg an 280 285 289 293 298 303 308 313 320 26 331 336 Past memories 3ar Spatial returning as ritualized remembrance Ann-Mari Hallans Stenholm Ancient mounds for new graves 346 ‘An aspect of Viking Age burial customs in southern Scandinavia Anne Pedercen Asgard, Midgards, and Utgardr 354 linguistic approach to a casscal problem. Por Vikrrand ‘What shall we do with Reinaert the Fox? 358 Tina Hamrin-Dabl Heroes, kings, and gods 36 Discovering sagas on Gotlandic picrure-stones Jem Stare “The advent of the esteemed horseman-sovereign 369 A study of rider-motifs on Gotlandic piccure-stones Andreas Lundin RECEPTION AND PRESENT-DAY USE ‘The use and abuse of Old Norse religion a7 Ite beginnings in high medieval eeland Rudolf Simch Kings, cowpies, and creation 381 Incertextual uaffic becween “history” and “myeh? in the ‘writings of Snort Sturluson Bruce Lincoln ‘The “Allgermanische Heidnische Front” and Old Norse religion 389 Fredri Gregurive The organism within 393 On the constmicrion of a non-Christian Germanic narire Henri Janson From queen to sorcerer 399 Nina Nordstrom Drudgery dwarf 405 ‘On the absence of labour in the Nibelungen tradition Stefin Arvidson “The measures of Old Norse religion in long-term perspective 42 ‘Margaret Clanies RossThe conference and its context Fora few sunny days in eaily sunnne, $~7 June 2004, Land hosted the international conference. Old Nore Religion in Long.term Perspectives Origins, Changes and Interactions. [About 200 people from 1s or more countries took part. The delegates represented subjects such as archaeology. art his- tory. historical archaeology history. history of ideas, history of religion, literature, onomastcs, Scandinavian languages, and Scandinavian studies, The idea of the conference was to establish a now and beter dialogue between research de- partments inside and outside Scandinavia on the subject of pre-Christian Norse religion, There has long been scholarly exchange in this research field. but it can be improved. There ae text-based scholars who know litle about the material ‘world thar once surrounded people in Iron Age and medieval Scandinavia, just as there are archaeologists with licde insight Jingo current methods for understanding and analysing old texts. Through the conference we therefore hope to have en couraged this dialogue, leading toa better understanding for diferent perspectives and outlooks in the research field. As a lasting resultof the conference we now publish ths collection of papers, with over 70 of the roughly 100 presentations, We have selected those which we deemed most relevant ro the copie. ‘The conference was organized by the project Roads to Midgard ~ Norse Paganiom in Tangatrrm Perspectives 3¢ Ved ‘University. The background to this project should be sought in cross-dsciplinary discussions that took place in the late ayes. Ie began wits a wure in dhe archaeology of religion for doctoral students in spring 1996, and continued in subse- quent years with seminars on the archaeology of religion for the same target group. The actual work of che project starved thanks t preparatory funding, from the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation. With the aid of this grant a meet- Ing was held in Lund in January 1999, with the envisaged pavicipane in dhe project and a reference goup wnssting of Stefan Brink, Gunnar Broberg, Mats Burstiim, Lats Eragird, John Lindow, Eva Rystede, and Jens Peter Schjode. Based ‘on the lively discussions at that meeting, an application was drawn up for submission to the Bank of Sweden lercentenary Foundation, which granted funding fora major interdiscipli- nary project starting in the year 2000. The project has also received grants fiom Lund University, Maliné Tesitage, and the Swedish Research Council, and smaller amounts from the Crafoord Foundation, the Ebbe Kock Foundation, and the [New Society of Levers in Lund. The project, which builds on cooperation between archae- ‘ology, historical achacology, and history of religion at Lund University, has fifteen participants. To underline the interdis- Liplinary character of the work, the paticipants have been attached to five different rescarch fields regardless of which discipline they belong to, ‘The first theme, which comprises concepts, history of esearch, and history of reception, has been studied by Stefan Arvidscon, Peter Habbe, and Nina Nordstrom, The second area is geared co the long prehistoric perspectives, which have been investigaced by Asa Berggren and Kristina Jennbert. The culcural encounter with the Ro- man Empire and its significance for pre-Christian Norse religion constitutes the third research field, covered by Anders Andtén, Maria Domeij Lundborg, Heike Perer, and Lonise Stribeck. The fourth theme comprises the complex relations beoween pre-Christian Norse religion and Christianity, with studies by Ann-Mari Hllans Stenhiolm, Ann-Lili Nieleu, (Catharina Raudvere, and Jrn Seaccker. Finally, medieval folk conceptions and their possible associations with pre Chris sian taditions have been examined by Ann-Bret Falle and Gunnar Nordanskog ‘The joint work of the project has consisted of monthly seminars lasting one or two whole days. The work began with aseries of internal estas about fundarnental concepts such as religion, myth, ritual, material culeure, ext, and images. “These meetings were later followed by internal text seminars to discuss the texs written by the project participanes. We have alen had excursions in Skine, Sjalland, and Lippland, ro see concrete traces of past landscape. Each term, several guest lectures from Sweden and abroad have also been invited to ‘pent seusiuats under dhe auspices of die project. The project has morcover organized four small-scale Nordic symposia on modem reception, ritual, cosmology, and memory and myth “To round off the wore, the project organized the international conference that is now published in this book. “To ensure thac the research results reach out to scholarly and general readers, the project, In collaboration with che Nowdic Academic Pres it Luu, has established « setics of publications entitled Vigar sill Midgird. Two of the sub- projects have been published so far. Guest lectures on the subjece of the history of reception have been assembled in a special volume, while all the small symposia have been pub- lished in four collections. The present conference volume is the projects way of reaching an international audience, The project and its results have also been presented in a major cthibition during 2006 at the Henry Dunker Culture Contre in Helsingborg, mounted in collaboration with the project. ‘The exhibition was accompanied by a catalogue «0 which ‘many of the project participants contributed.‘he intention behind the project~and the conference—has been wo further interdisciplinary research. ‘Ihis need not be defined in cerms of shared source material or involve different partis studying che same question. The project has theiefure been formulated on the basis of some general quest cerning pre-Christian Norse religion, which we present in ‘more detail inthe following article. "The sub-projects. on the other hand, were individually and independently formulated, ax we underlined through the indefinite plural form of the projectile, Roudh so Midgard, The iwerdisiplinary work on the project has therefore led to ewo different but mutually dependent result. The recurrent discussions over almost ten years have meant that each project participant has identi fied how the othets think, and simultancously a stronger disciplinary identity has been developed within the separate sub-projects, in a way thar we conld nor have foreseen Cooperation beewecn disciplines is difficult. Our lor. often intricate discussions within the project, about concepts such as religion, cosmology, mythology, rival, and material culture, show shat the encounter between material studies in archaeology and texts in the history of religion is never simple. We often define the conceprs in roraly diferent 10 ‘ways, which means thar precise meanings are mixed with more superficial use of words between the subjects. Relations between the texts and the material traces ae never unambigu- ‘ous, and one of the preat challenges in the project has been 0 ‘ny to understand the interpretative porenial of che diferenc categories of evidence, ‘The fundamental problem is that diferene disciplines de- fine what is basically an analytical objece in different ways. In the best case, these ditferences can he developed into a great potential, since the encounter with other research traditions puts one’ own in distin relief: We can see more clearly how ‘our academic disciplines and research traditions ate shaped con the basis of cher special circumstances. Productive inter disciplinary work therefore requires scholars to go outside the core area oftheir cwen subject and try to understand the cculrures of other subjects; at the same time, one must have a distint subject identity of one's own ifthe work isto be rewarding, We hope thatthe present conference volume will further both these perspectives Stockholm, Lund, Copenluagen 2006 Andon: Andrén, Keisting Jennbert, Catharina RaudvereOld Norse religion Some problems and prospects Anders Andrén, Kristina Jennbert and Catharina Raudvere One of the most remarkable texts from prehistoric Seandina- via stands ina field near the church of Rak in Ostergétland. ‘The unique text is a very long runic inscription carved on five sides ofa granite block almost four metes high. The Rake Scone, a8 this Famouts insriprion is called, was waitten ar the start ofthe ninth century, and it includes allusions to heroic poems and myths that are unknown today. ‘The text contains alterations, Kennings, anda stanza in the fornyrdislag mete, and is pardy weiten in secret runes. It ends with a picce of solemn, repetitive, artistic prose. The diffcule text has Ibeen quoted and interpreted since the 17508, and no other Scandinavia rune.stone has been studied in so many works. According to the interpretation chat is generally acoepted today, the inscription runs as follows: “Thea rane sand in memory of Vo, bus Varin wrote them Ut painted), the Father, forthe dead (li. death-marked) on. eral fllememary (or Lette n youth), which the ran spoils were that were twelve times taken as spoils, both together from different men, ‘That we tll s the second, who nine ages (generations) ago Tt i We or ane tof, or cane wo ae soe) wih the Hic goths and died with them for his exime (or: beeause of his pide on and he sill maker verdics, and he ail rules cover the bate) Uhenderic ules (or rode, the bold ruler of sea-wartiots ‘over the shores of Hreidmar (the shore of the Hrid-Se), Now (he) sts equipped on his horse (diz. on his goxh, or ‘om his gothic bors), wich the shield fastened, ce prince of the Maing ‘Thaewe elas the ewelfth, where the hors ofthe Valkyrie (it. the horse of Guna) see fod on the hated, where twenty kings are ting That we tell sth thirteenth, which twenty kings satin Zea land (or: in Silende) during four wincers under four wares, 200s of four brothers. Five Vili (Ze. ive hy the mame of Vall), sons of Rad, five Hreidul, sons of Rugull five Haid, sons of Haru, five Gunamunds (or Kynmunds) sons of Bjorn [Now I tll the memones completely. Somebody Now youth I foster ...? May somebody tll.) (or: nay grow up) fom this) ‘We tla follcmemory, which among the Ingengs was com- pensated (on avenged) through a wife sacrifice (or through the sacrifice of a wif) We tell a follememory, for whom 2 kinsman was bors, for (whch) young warioz Or sew up 0 Vin i is (o Ie is the Wil, oF Do you want chat). He knew iow wo bet gan wih is hae). Use (or Enjoyment, = Milk) ‘Well fllememory (orto youth): be bold (on Thor). Sibi, he guaran of che temple, bgt cild atthe age af nines ‘The Rok Stone and its ambiguous vext can serve as a highly illustrative example of all the problems and paradoxes that encounter anyone who wants to study pre Christian Norse religion. The text was written in an age that is convention- ally regarded a8 “pagan”, but the eelerences ta pre-Christian religion are vague and inditect. A supernatural being like a giant is crushed by a champion. According to one reading of the inscription, this eto is called Viliny which arouses associations with che brother or double of the god Odin, Vi Buc according to other interpretations this is not a name, #0 this divine association is lost. The name Thor is mentioned, burrs uncertain whether it i¢a man or the thunder god that ismeant. Otherwise the text refers to tales of heroes and more ‘ot less historical persons. Despite the pre-Christian content of te Rk Swwue, dhe main figure iv te inscriptions, “Thaw the bold’, chat is to say, the Ostrogothic king Theoderic the Great (c. 455 526), was an Arian Christian. The cryptic formulation suggesting that he i tll afer nine generations, sitting armed on his Gothic horse, has heen convincingly interpreted asa reference ro the equestrian statue of Theoderic the Great thar originally stood in Ravenna, This statue was aioved from Ravenna to Aachen in 801, causing a great com- motion, after Charlemagne had been crowned emperor by the Pope in Rome. Ie's surely no chance chat the Ostrogothic king Theoderie the Great plays a central parton this rune-stone in Cstergor- Jand, Someone wanted to claim his own genealogy. The poem about Theoderic probably alluded ro the Ostrogoths’ myth of their origin, according to which they originared from the Scandinavian peninsula. The Ostergitland magnate Varin may even have believed himself and his family to be distane relatives af the famous Osteogothichera-king, The Rak Stone thus contains both political claims based on history and in- direct references to the great politcal power of the day, the Christian Carolingian empire. If the references to pre-Christian religion are vague and contradictory, then the expressions ofthe cultural and mental word of the day are all the more explicit. The text was writen bby a man, for a man, and with narratives ahont men. “These narratives are about war. booty, battlefields. an armed andmounted king, and kings with warlike names alluding to power, glory, combat, and fierce beasts of prey. Characterist cally, che only glimpse of women is a reference to “a wifes sacrifice” as punishment for a mans acts. The Rok Stone is a memorial raised w a young man, But the significance of memory and the allusions to history are underlined throughout the rexr hy the recurtene questions about stories from the distane past. The solemn style and the ‘poetic stanza in the middle of the inscription alsn express iow rartativesin ral cultures were remembered through formal- ied speech. Someone las suygested at te Vasin who caved thestonewasa ful a speaker or ayer of saws’ who preserved memories by reciting special poems with a mythological content. The text in itself is an expresion of the very special knowledge of reacting an writing, which was limited to che aristocracy of the time, The power of the written word has been further underlined in the rextin thar parts ofthe inscip- tion are carved in sectetruncs, which can only be read through special cipher placed on the top ofthe tall stone. ‘Unfortunately he original location of the Rok Stone is un known. ‘The fist time the stone is recorded in writing it was ‘walled into the church at Rak, We thus do nor know wherher the Rak Stone, like later mine-stanes, fond in a cemetery, at an assembly site, beside a toad, a a village boundary, ut in a farmyard. ‘The only cereain thing is that the lage stone with the long and remarkable inscription was noticed, since it gave the place its maize: Rk comes from the word rau, meaning “stone”. Ihe Rak Stone thus provokes discussions of central concepts in the study of Norse religion, as well as fundamental questions about text and materiality Some central concepts Phenomena in the distant past must of necessity be studied fiom the point of view of the presene day and with the aid of present-day language. The crucial question is therefore which terms are most suitable in modern-day translations and interprecations of 2 past reality. ‘Ihe concept of pre- CChaistian Norse religion in itself cases probe, since dhe ‘erm religion was introduced to the Scandinavian languages with Christianization, and only acquired its modern meaning through studies in the history of eligion during the nine- teenth and twentieth centuries "The word religion goes back to Latin religi, meaning “obligation, conscience, reverence worship of god{s)", and is erymologically connected to the vetb religue,“recounert, bind”. Although this etymology is disputed, che interpretation has been thae the essence of religion is about how humans relate to a transcendent sphere. The consequence has heen that studies of one’s own and other people’ religion have focused on the intellectual content of religion as put forward by instvutional representatives, while everyelay, rival, and habitual behaviours have been more neglected. “The Norse sources —to the extent thata nced was fee to use specific rerm ar al fr the old form sifr “old custom’ ot heidinn sidr “heathen custom”. The change of religion was called sdaskipi, “change of custom. ‘The old days were rhus denoted nor only by their beliefs but just much by che actions and behaviours dhat people had performed: religious rites, judicial acts, behaviour to mark igion — use expressions like R ‘ownership and belonging. An expression like “the old cus- tom’ has far-eaching connotations: the traditional, regular practice, bur also with reference to knowledge about the past. The past stands as a guarantee for honourable behaviour. Just like many aspects of the marerial culture, a deliberate Tink back to history is palpable in a linguistic expression like this. The presence of the past becomes concrete, and one can detect simultaneity in the interaction herween past and present, The conventional scholarly use ofthe term religion is therefore not really applicable, but the word is nevertheless needed in its everyday modern sense to mark the approximate boundaries of the research fc. ‘At the centre of many studies of pre Christian Scandina vian is the Norse mythology, with its gods and irs cosmic events, The word mythology derives from the Greek: mythos, “the spoken word”, which at an early stage acquired the scc- ‘ondary meaning of something that is not relly true, a story or fictitious narrative This distinguishes it fium dhe uthet designation for the spoken word, logos, which acquired the ‘opposite meaning of rational knowledge. The word mythol- ogy may daerefove set like a condition in verms and it fren has negative and condescending connotations ‘Mythology is never used hy people ahour theirowinteligions narratives; instead che term refers to systematic knowledge about other peoples untrue stories. The word mythology has thus been used ever since the Middle Ages, expliily or implicily, asa contrast co correct religion, as 3 fundamentally disparaging term. We may note that the word is rarely ot newer used in accounts of Judsism, Christianity, and Islam, ‘whose dogma and doxa are emphasized instead The concept of myth can nevertheless be useful a a desig- nation for narratives about che past. Myth therefore contalns 1 historical pre-understanding of the value of things fron: the past. The would of gods presened by Suorti Surluson in his Hada is a monument to the past, but itis never superior to Christianity. In the Road ro Midgard project, mythology in the conventional sense has not been studied closely. ‘this [snot because we have undervalued the function of the nat- atves i religious life iv rather expresses an ambition to get away from the analyses of pre-Christian Norse religion which hrave placed the narratives at the centre ‘One aspect of mythology is cosmology, which in the mythical narratives is the geography of the universe, from whats very near tothe furthest limits of creation. The Figures acting in cosmologles are gods, beings, the dead, humans, sal sunteimes also pure ebstracsions. Cosmology is noc the criterion for religion, no more than the occurrence of a cos mology necessarily means that the purpose of an account is exclusively religions, There may be reason to consider a body of evidence that is to be studied and ask at what point it has been systematized: in a scholar’ argumentation, in a compiler like Snore, or in the local tradition as it was handed down, Representations of dhe world-view and understandings of the world can take other forms than systematized accounts, but then they are not as accesible o research, In the case of Norse cosmology: the literary background is essential for understanding the totality brought together by Snori, with classifying units and their mutual relations. Yee we sil face a problem. The Eddic poems thar present a casmology were compiled on the basis of an editor's interest in the poeticOLD NORSE RELIGION ~ SOME PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS form, but they nevertheless givea hint as to how cosmological elements are used in the poetry, We can only speculate ahonit the circumstances that dicated which contextual and metri- cal versions have come down to us or what variations on the theme might have looked like. If the ambition isto proceed fiom the system co the context, the search for cosmoogy and world-view must therefore be extended beyond the world and the geography created in the text. “The projecthas heen geared in large measure towards etal, asa way to broaden and supplement the conventional studies of pre-Christian Norse religion, from mythological structure to religious practice. But even the concept of ritual i dilfcult tw handle, a is particularly evident from the intense debates con ritual in the last decade, Whereas ritual was formerly regarded mostly asthe staging of myth, it ix perceived today a8 a separate social category distinet from myth. Ritual can bea represented act and thus express myths, but it does not need to be this. Nor all rituals are religious in the sense thar they refer w a religious discourse. Ritual ates can very well be interpreed on the bass of other types of socictal defi tions: legal, political, or aesthetic. [eis thus not the individual practicioner’ intention that defines the act, but the contexts thar place it in a specific discourse Based on an open definition, there isa risk of geting stuck Within the boundarles of the convention and regarding only ceria aus (for whicl we lave naines iu the texts) a situa. An analytical advantage is thatthe discussion docs not stop at the question of the type ofthe act but leads on to questions about power and ideology: Who has access to social arenas in which to perform certain acts? Such discussions require a knowiedge of and interest in the context, with parameters such as gender, class, and hierarchy. “The inteudsciplinary work has also mane that the voncepe of material culture, and is relation to religion, myth, cosmo ogy; and ritual, har been discussed intensively. In previous archaeology, material culture was viewed as passive traces of technology, economy, and social conditions, while religious traditions were a kind of residual category for everything thar could nor be explained. Since the contextual turn in the 1980s and 19905, the outlook on materiality has changed in several fundamental ways. Objects, buildings, places, and entire landscapes are regarded as active elements in the con- stantly ongoing negotiations and renegotiations raking place beeween people, Material culture affects people's lives. it can be ascribed meaning, and itcan represent complex ideas. As in many other human sceuces, interpretation has come into focus in archaeology. “The changed view of material culture means that artefacts can play a differene, more active part in the seudy of pre- Christian Norse religion. But the relationship berween the Icelandic texts and the objects is still complicated. The inks beeween the poems and the artefacts are inditect, and they should dhetefore be viewed chiefly as being analogies for each ‘other. The distance in time and place beoween thirtccnth- cencury Iceland and Iron Age Scandinavia meané that the texts never contain descriptions of the acral contexts that can be studied archaeologically. Instead i is always a question of comparing similar structures with each other, for example, descriptions of a hall wich the remains that can be unearthed by an excavation. B ‘The indirect relationship also has constructive causes, since the common denominator for the written word and mate- riality is oral tradition. As many scholars have stressed, oral tradition is both changeable and rich in variation, An extant text i dierefore just one posible variant of a nattative. And since pictures ofthe same narrative can render other versions, the relationship between artefact and tex i only indirect. “The use of material culeure in the study of pre-Christian Norse religion thus has its weaknesses and its strengths. The changed view of ritual means that it can be difficule to ascertain from material traces of ricualized acts whether dhe rituals were conncued wa eligious discourse or not “The variation in the oral tradition also means that the iden ‘ifeation of different motifs and figures can never be any sore than provisional. At the same time, the active role af materiality in all oral culture means that artefacts can be a ‘uly primary source for naratives, conceptions, and patterns of action in the Norse world. Pictures of narraives could be uscd as nmemonic devices for composing new variants of che narratives. Cosmological perspectives are sometimes merely hinced at in mythical or heroic narratives, while the view of the world could he depicted in a highly systematic way in ‘material culture, for example in settlement. buildings, and arceficts. Recurrent formalized actsat one and the same place ‘may even show concretely how certain patierns of ation were maintained for generations, in thatthe place and che acts were part of the collective memory. There is thus grest potential to find new perspectives on pre-Christian Norse religion by using material culture, although the limitaians af the jects ‘must receive critical attention and scrutiny. Some perspectives Since the project is based on individually formulated sub projects, chese inevitably emphasize diferent contexts and perspectives. Discussions of concepts were held within the project to arrive at 2 common denominator. or a shared platform summing up our new perspective on the research, field. These perspectives can be specified as follows. + From mythological structure to ritual history ‘A great deal of esearch on pre-Christian Norse religion con- ccems the Norse myths and their internal structure. There are several auvempts w place dhe myths in theit contemporary social contest, With our work on the project, however, we ‘want to go one step further and create a ritual history, which should be viewed as a complement to the studies of myth In addition, we want to investigate this ritual history over a very long time, unlike the often short temporal perspectives in many of the mythological analyses. Through these changes in perspective we hope to reach a new understanding both of pre-Christian Norse religion and of the individual myths. + From one to several traditions By switching the focus from myth to rite it hes bevome highly obvious that pre-Christian Norse religion is not a uniform or stable category. Instead there were profound chronologi cal, regional, and social differences in pre-Christian religious practice in Scandinavia. ‘he archaeological rraces of rites are in fact so different in time and place that one can seri-OLD NORSE RELIGION IN LONG+TERM PERSPECTIVES, ceunly question the rerm “Norse paganism’. Instead 4 picture emerges abuve all uf regional rites. Social differences in rites «an likewise be detected, since certain rituals, and also sacral place-names, seem to be connected to a small but politically importanc aistoceacy, with contac all ver Scainavia and continental Europe * Traditions without a common origin ‘Apart from the regional and social differences there is also a complex “multitemporality” in whar is often called “Norse paganism’, The elements thar are attested in the late pre- ‘Christian religion differ greatly in age and origin. A symbol like the Thor’: hammer is nor evidenced before the ninth century, when it should probably be viewed as a conscious reaction to the Christan cros. In contrast, the mythological motif of dhe sun being drawn by a horse has a much longer history, since itis attested by archaeological finds and images as far hack ag the fourteenth century BC: Similarly, every ticual element and every mythological mouf seems to have its own history and its own origin, In cases whete itis possible to ave a non-Nordic origin we see influences and contacts {in many different directions, Pre-Christian Norse religion can thus no longer be regarded as an archaic expression of an “original tradition’ on the periphery of Europe. + From deconstruction to hybridization "The results of che project mean that a concept like “Norse pagan Lan ina way be devoustrucied. But we de noc want solely co break down the concept; through our rial history we attempt t0 build up a new image of religions practice cover a very long time in Scandinavia. This ritual history can be described as a continuous “hybridization”, in which ele- ments and motifs from outside are constantly incoipurated in cuditions, which are dhereby suvcesively ater. This meas thateven clements with along history have changed in mean- ing, depending on the different contexts in which they have functioned. It seems, moreover, that che hybridization was ‘not constant it was particularly noticeable in certain periods, such as the Karly Bronze Age, the Roman Iron Age, and the arly Viking Age. * Ongoing hybridization “Norse paganism” is often perceived as ending with the (Christianization of Scandinavia, but we believe instead that ‘we can sce ritual practice with “pre-Christian” fearures, and, 4 the history of the reception of pre-Christian Norse religion, as cases of ongoing hybridization. Through new contexts and ‘now perspectives, the interpretation of pre-Christian rites and myths has gradually changed from Christianization until the prevent day. Back to Rok The Rok Stone and io obscure text thus raises many of the questions and problems that concern studies of pre-Cheistlan Norse religion. [Tow should concepts such asteligion, culture, tnd menualiy be perceived and rete w exes oder? Wau ‘war the significance ofthe long-term cultural encounters be- srwren pre-Christian Scandinavian regions and Christian con- tinental kingdoms? Who had the power over memory. myth, and history? Who had the knowledge of writing, poetry, and formalized speech? How should we perceive the relationship berween the text and the stone? Why was the materality of the stone so important that it gave the place ts name? What role did material culture play, and how should its relation to rext he perceived? There are no set answers ro these questions, and we have not solved the problems in any definitive way. Bur by formulating them we hope that we have created a platfori for further intewdisciplinary research, “The English translation and ineerpreation of the inscrip- tion on the Rak stone are taken from: Lars Linnroth 1977 ‘The Riddles of che Rak seone. A structural approach. Arkiv for norsk flologi 92:1-57. Anders Andrin Department of Archaeology anal Classical Seudie, ‘Stockbobm Universey andersandrenoark suse Kristina Jennbert Deparomens of Archaeology and Anctent History Land University Aristina jennbert ark use Cuubarina Rasuoere Seeton for Hirtory of Religions Department of Cros-Caltural and Regional Studies, Copenhagen University raudvere bum kadCan archaeologists study prehistoric cosmology? Richard Bradley An unusual collaboration [Asa prehistorian based in the British Isles, Ihave several rea- sons to envy my Scandinavian colleagues. Because Norehern Farope was beyond the limits of the Roman world, they can study a continuous sequence which extends deep into the first, millennium AD. My Late Iron Age ends a thousand years before, and thar is where prehisrorians must hand over ro other groups of scholars. Fist theres the branch of Classical Archaeology which is concerned with Roman Britain, and then a historical archaeology that begins with the Migration Period. ‘Ihae division of labour prevents much communica- tion between people who study similar material and makes it dlifficulr ro Investigate the past. Some of the gromps who ser- Ued ia England dung the post-Roman era were prehistoric when they left their homelands and Early Medieval when they reached the other side of the North Sea ‘A second feature of Scandinavian archaeology is that the visual culnure oF later pechisrary was ar least partly figura- live. That is to say, it includes a number of elements that can be idemuiied with feaures of the wal world. Whatever their original significance, itis possible to recognise human figures, artefacts and animals among the depictions on rock surfaces and metalwork. That is nor the case everywhere. The Bricsh Bronze sAge, for instance, is characterised by a series of abstract images. Bath these features of Northern prehistory are the envy’ of other researchers, but they also have their dangers. The unbroken prehistoric sequence has its perils, for its only too tempting to use the carlcst written sources o illuminate much ‘more ancient material. How Faris it legitimate to move back and forth berween the fis literary evidence and the material remains of an earlier phase? Is there a danger that this will diswort ur perceptions of the purely archaculogical evidence? ‘Are visual images especially likely to be misunderstood? In the words of my tele, we must ask whether archaeologists can study prehistoric cosmology. make these points because my starting point isan account of Bronze Age cosmology in Scandinavia, writen by 2 British ptehistorian, Properly speaking, he wasjustone ofthe authors, forthe book in questions The Chariot ofthe Sun by Peter Gel- lings an expert on the Browze Age, and Hilda Elis Davidson, scholar with a research interest in Old Nore cigion (Gelling and Davidson 1969). Of course it was not the first study co combine these elements. Ihere had been others before, and ‘more have appeared since their hook came our thirty-five years ago. But its format is quite unusual and to my mind icepito- mises the diificulty of attempting this exercise. 16 Its ll ide is revealing. Ie considers The Chariot of the Sun cand otber rites and symbols of the Northern Bronce Age. The fice section i Gelling’ study of the images that were engraved fon metal artefacts of carved on natural outcrops. Following cater scholar, he pays most attention to the way in which the sun is carried through the sky. That forms the bass for his ‘own recreation ofa prehistoric cosmology. Buc other sections of his suudy are concerned wit differeat desigus. Thus dhe book considers che sacred marrage, ships, farming, weapons, foorprints, snakes, horses, discs and stags. He discusses theie roles in ancient rock artand draws on comparisons with more distant cultures, but, perhaps revealingly, these tend to be found in Central Europe and the Mediterranean. He makes litle use of what is known about Old Norse religion, and where he compares the Bronze Age images with those created during other periods, he rarely extends his analysis beyond the Classical world The second part of the book is by Davidson. Ir follows almost the same format as Gelling contribution, Individual chapters consider the roles of different images in the Late hon Age and beyond: sun-discs, weapons, footpsints, the sacred marrage, ships, snakes, horses and stags. There are ako chaprers on several elements that were not treated by Gelling: hands, tees, birds and rwins. Davidson refers very sparingly to the prehistoric. images, sa that the two sections of che book seem to occupy separate words. Its clear that Gelling finds Cential and Southern Europe a more fruiful source of comparison for the prehistoric images, whilst Dav- idson ean see little overlap between them and the themes dt she identifies durough laver liverary and aucisic sources. I ss i ewo unrelated texts have been printed end to end, and this impression is only strengthened hy the foreword bby Christopher Hawkes which praises Gelling’ analysis and never mentions his co-author. Tis acutious situation, but pethaps itcan setveas a parable describing one kind of archacology. Another approach illus trated by the work of Flemming Kaul (1998), who has studied many of the Bronze Age images withour making use of later Sources. That is not the only difference, for his research is concerned with the metalwork found in graves and votive deposits. He calls his book Ships on Bronzes and describes i as “a seudy in Bronze Age religion and iconography”. It is eoneerned with the figurative drawings found on Danish artefacts. As the book title makes lew, the dominant image is the bast Kaul chooses a similar point of departure to Gelling: the remarkable object from Trundholm which has becomeCAN ARCHAEOLOGISTS STUDY PREHISTORIC COSMOLOGY? known as ‘the chariot of the sun’. But he makes less use of long-distance parallels, nor does he take much account of examples drawn from ocher periods. His main sources of comparison are contemporary with the objects themselves: cither the iconography of the Late Bronze Age in Central and North-eastern Europe, or the prehistoric rock art of South Scandinavia, most of which isin Sweden and Norway That is not to say that more distant analogies are irrelevant. He ‘makes only limited use of them in the closing chapter of his ‘monograph, but references wo Egypt, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Greece and Crete have assumed a greater prominence in the writings of Klavs Randsborg, (1993), Thomas Larsson (1997) and Kristian Kristiansen (2004). In the same way, Dumézis studies of Indo-Futropean mythology have inthienced Asa Fredells recent analysis of the contents of the Bronze Age tock carvings (Fredell 2003). Ay Kaul acknowledges, his imerpretation is quite sitar to Gelling’. There is a long history of attempts to relate the movements of the sun to the characteristic iconography of the Bronze Age. Where Kaul breaks new ground is in his close attention ro chronology and to the fine detail of the scenes portrayed on Danish artefacts. Several elements are Imporeanc in his analysis, Fst, the images seem to show the sun being cated by a horse across the sky. Secondly he sug> gests that after the sun has set it eavelschrough the sea until the following dawn. During this period ie is talen on a chip, accompanied by a snake or a fish. The third element in his analysis i entirely new, for Kaul considers the directions in which these vesels ae sailing. During the hours of daylight the sun travels towards the right. That is the impression chat one seccives in acing its wourse attoss the sky of the Northern Hemisphere. But the sun must also retuen to its point of departure, and so Kaul suggests that while it was hidden trom view it must have travelled to the let (Fgure 1) Some of the images associated with snakes and fish support this interpretation. ‘Kaul suggests thar the images creared on arceficts such as razors expressed a powerful myzholegy, che meanings of which iiight have been revealed to young men on thei initiation, “The ist time that they shaved could have been an important rite passage. He thinks that similar designson rock outcrops were connected with the performance of ritual, but this dis- tinction may be oo ingenious. Iris certainly true that individ- ual cock carvings in Sweden and Norway are associated with deposits of artefacts, with evidence of fires and the remains of feasts (Bengtsson 2004), but surely the funerals at which such decorated bronzes were displayed were occasions for Finual to, Most authorities would agree thatthe images shown con razors and other artefacts referred to a cosmology whose central feature was the passage ofthe sun actoss the sky, but the sepertoite of prehistoric rock ant wa nore vie an for sat reason scholars have linked these drawings to other themes as ‘well. Some ofthe scenes of humans, animals and ploughing have suggested a concern with fertility (Almgren 1927). Oxh- cers were probably associated with the dead. Ihis idea depends ‘on several observations, bur perhaps the most revealing isthe face char similar designs occur inside burial cists (Mand 1983; Randsborg 1993). This iss che important question whether itis appropriate to transfer the interpretation of Bronze Age iconography from Denmark to Sweden and Norway. 7 Noon Sunrise Sunes Night Figures Summary of the comoegical heme propsed by Kaul (1998). Usted by am out dracon ofa Late Bronze Age razor. 1 find Kaul’s reconstruction of Late Bronze Age cosmo ‘ogy attractive and internally consistent, but it is scheme which is essentially selt-contained. He is admirably rigorous in studying the metalwork on its own terms and in resisting any temptation to draw on later sources, but is there any way of asessing the wider significance of his work? Hete « more detailed comparison with rock art could be revealing ‘The three dimensions of rock carvings “The images created on the metalwork are dificult to interpret in a wider context. They are associated with burials, but with Tule else. Rock carvings, on die udher hau, extend over large pparts ofthe Scandinavian landscape, so that in principle they might express the same cosmology ata larger sale. It is here that problems arise. Kaul does make some comparisons beeween the images found on the metalwork and those carved on natural outcrops, but he has to acknowledge that these cwo phenomena have different distributions ftom one anodes. Most of dhe metalwork with drawings uf ships is found in Denmark or North Germany, whilst the rock arc of the same period is mainly in Sweden and Norway: Ie had a longer history and is comparatively uncommon within the distribution of decorated artefacts. That need not present a problem. Kaul considers that a specifically Scandinavian symbolic scheme was modified during the Late Bronze Age as a result of contacts with regions further to the south. It ‘may be that Bronze Age rock art illustrates a similar process in an atea located further to the north. In this case it is not clear where certain ideas Hist developed. The contentsot these carvings need not conform tothe precise model presented in ‘Kaul’s book, but the two traditions should have enough in ‘ounmon to shed sone light om diese questions ‘There are important differences berween the design cle- ‘ments in theee two style. The decorated metalwork features drawings of the sun, hosses, snakes and fish, but these are uncommon in Scandinavia rock art (Malmer 1981). At the same time, some of the petroglyphs include Features which are not found in the other medium, espectally footprints, carts and cupmmaiks. The common elenrent is die ship, but again“A ae — Aras @ eee ae eee are ees image inthe same pane have bee omitted Information fom Rengn- ee the drawings of boats that appear on rock outcrops are very different from their representation in bronze, Although more than one ship can he portrayed on a single object, some of the open ait carvings show entire Mets “This suggests that there are important contrasts beeween the scheme postulated by Kaul and the organisation of Bronze Age rock art, but in no sense does this does ‘test his model, nor dacs it shed much light on the prospects of studying prehistoric cosmology. In order to do that, I must turn my artention to the topography of the Scandinavian rock carvings. In doing s0, I shall draw mainly on sites in Bohuslin and Uppland. My starting poinc is provided by «wo observations which seem to be uncontentious. There is 2 striking relationship herween the siting of Bronze Age mck art and the presence of water. This has been obscured by the gradual rerrear of the woast, but ic is widely accepted that many of the draw- ings ~ in particular, chose of ships — were created near to the waters edge, or atleast looked our to sca (Bengtsson 20043, Ling 200). The sewwud point is closely rebwed. The separate images were normally placed so that they could be viewed from the ditecrion of the shoreline, and some of them may ven have been visible from boats. One reason for stressing this observation is thar the drawings of ships generally follow athotiastad couse along the contoursof the rock. This would have added wo dhe impression teat diey were cvelling wioss a single expanse of water. These boats do not conform to the simple scheme that characerises the metalwork. Not all the vessels are following. the same course, even within a single panel. Different ships, or r0ups of ships, may travel vowards one another, their courses| can diverge, ot they may slmply pas, salling in opposite diree- B t 4 U4 bt a) Sew ee te and saul! 6 tart? bs ae Sv, SJ aD ~ Figures. Rock carving at Aso, Bobuin, iltsraing the relation: ship beueen abssings of bouts and dow of ears wna fs. The code images inte same panel ave ben emitted. Information from Benson (2002) tions, Some of them have crews but others do not. ‘That contrast may be particularly significan, for Klavs Randlbong (1993) imtesprets the empty boats in Scandinavian rock art as the ships of che dead. He draws attention to a number of contexts, including the decorated cist at Kivi, where draw- ings of boats with afl crew are contrasted with vessels with no one on board. A similar connection is found in the Late Bronze Age when human burials were assoctared with cans arranged in the Form of a ship (Artelius 1996), “The sccond clement consist ofthe drawings of footprints in South Scandinavian rock art (figure 2). Two features seem to be especially significant here. Where entire tails of foor- prints can be recognised, they appear to follow a path lead- ing towards — or even beyond - the limits of the decorated surface. At the same time, there are nv connections bewween these images and any human figures that arc depicted on the same outcrop. In effect, the people who left these trails cannot be seen. ‘The local topography is important too. In most cases where suitable records exist the footprints pursuc a course leading up and down the rock. hat is to say they often follow an axis which i quite diferent fram thar create by the diawings of ships There are even cases in which the groups of footprints overlap with the earvings of boats. If this was intended, it would suggest dat dhe path extended into the wate. Inthe opposite direction, these tracks seem to carry on towards the suummitof the outcrop. Such trailsare not depicted on Bronze ‘Age meralwork, bur among the rock carvings they form an obvious link between the sea and the sky. THe sume idea may be expressed by the drawings of carts in Bohuslin (figure 3). There is nothing to suggese that all oF them were carrying the sun, although the case can certainlyCAN ARCHAEOLOGISTS STUDY PREHISTORIC COSMOLOGY? bemade in individual instances. there are a surprisingly large number of examples in which they run at right angles to the pictures of ships, Again dhey overlap with chose images, as if to suggest chat some of the vehicles entered the sea Like the footprines, they may also have eavelled up the sloping surface ‘of the stone towards a destination that lay somewhere beyond the limit of the carvings Agsin the vertical and horizontal planes have been used to emphasise the difference between land and water. That is why this section is called “the three dimensions of sock caving ‘What happened on the high ground which was both the sourceand destination of the tale? The upper level of certain rocks wete embellished with abstrac designs. The most srk ing evidence comes from Uppland where dense arrays of cup ‘marks were often located above the other images. Some were ‘om level surfaces that Faced the sky. Ir would be too simple to suggest chat such paticins were intended as represcutations of the tar, yet the zoning of the carvings in the prehistoric landecape is very striking indeed (Coles 2000). So far I have tried to identify ewo zones in che petroglyphs of South Scandinavia. ‘Ihese are the counterparts of the sea and the sky chat feature in Kaul's model. Ihave also suggested that they were connected along an axis marked by drawings of foorprints and vehicles. What ofthe land itsel? Much of South Scandinavian rock artis formed out of self-contained scenes which are juxtaposed or cut across one another. Unless the images were painted, only a few freshly. carved designs would have stood ouat any one time. Some of the individual panels were located above the scenes of ships. bbuc in most instances the designs overlap to such an extent that any attempt wo follow a clear distnetiun beween hand and water is bound to fail. This may have happened because these images were not contemporary with one another, but another way of accounting for this mixwre of different features is to suggest that it referred to the importance of the shoreline, for this was the only place in which all those cernents would have come into contact. Images without texts This analysis avoids any comparisons with literary evidence from Northern or Southern Europe. Nor does it make use of Indo-European mythology. Ic depends on only three ele- ments: the images found on Bronze Age metalwork and in the rock carvings of the same period; the topography of the surfaces on which some of those designs were made; and the siing of the petroglyphs in the landscape. It is based on the prehistoric evidence alone and this procedure offers independent support for some of Kauls conclusions. ‘there is less evidence for the importance of the sun, but the rock carvings vill provide indications of a three-tier cosmology within which individual scenes were organised. The main difference is that the rock carvings place more emphasis on the land (igure 4). Both interpretations might he taken further Kaul's scheme ‘emphasises the contrasts beween day and night. He discusses the way In which the sun disappears at dusk and returns to the world at dawn, In a sense, che sunset provides an image of human extinction, just as the sunrise offers a symbol of regeneration. Perhaps that is why the ships chat bear the sun 19 Figure 4. Summary of the cosmological scheme proposed for Danish rmetalvork by Kaul (i998), compared with the scheme smggevted for Snuth Scandinavian mck art. safely through the night may have carried the dead in the way that Randsharg (1993) suggests. This idea is present in ‘many different guises, from the burials found with ship set- tings to the decoration inside Bronze Age cist. It may even awcount for dhe drawings of ships on the artefacts asociaced with cremations, Kaus scheme also emphasizes the eyele according co which the sun vanishes and reappears. Unless this happened, planes and animale wenld he at risk and the human race would ‘eventually die out. The sun also changes its position during the course of the year and this process is reflected by the pas- sage of the seasons on which the lives of farmers depend. Isic cotirely surprising that the version of this system seprescited in Scandinavian rock art chould place 20 much emphasis con fertility? Again ic is present in many guises, from scenes of the “sacred marriage” to. depictions of phallic men and ploughing. ‘There Is one other way in which South Scandinavian rock ant shares che same coneerns as decorated metalwork. The cosmology identified by Kaul is concerned wich the move iment of the sun duting the day, when it can be seen, and at night, when ic is hidden from view. During its absence ie travels though the sea. Ir follows that the cricial transition takes place where the sky meets the water for that is where the sun disappears and where It rises at dawn. That process was best viewed from the water’ edge, and chis is the only place where all three elements mect. It may explain why itis here that so many of the carved rocks are found Conclusion ‘The tide of this paper asks whether it is possible to study pichiswric cosmology. Ic was dhe question raised by the au- thors of The Chariot ofthe Sun, and it scems to me that each of them answered it in a different way. This paper is more sympathetic to Gelling approach, for alls not lost if we are deprived of literary sources. Instead there ate certain advan- tages in working on a large scale, comparing and seeking (0 harmonise different sources of archaeological information. This is what I have attempted tw do here, although i cannot deny thar accounts of the Late Iron AAge will always be richer than those of Bronze Age belief. The «wo fields of seudy areOLD NORSE RELIGION IN LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVES not different in kind, bu they are based on different methods. “The Lund conference provided an opportunity to bring those ancibiods together. Richard Bradley Department of Archaeology University of Reading nj bradleoreading ac.uk ‘Acknowledgements | must thank the organisers for inviting to me to rake part in such an interesting canference and Flemming Kaul and Joakim Goldhahn for discussing the ideas expressed in this paper. The illustrations are by Margaret Mathews. References Almgren, ©. 1927. Hillrseninger och kultbruk. Stockholm: Kang]. Vittrhets och Antikvitets Akademiens Handlingar 35 Artelius, T, 1996. Langfird ooh dterinmee — skeppet& brons- ddderns gravar. Kusysbacka. Riksantikvaricimbetct. Bengtsson L. (ed). 2002. Ashu. Arkeologisk rapport 6 fein Virlyckemusect. Vitlycke: Vidyckemuseet = 2004. Bilder vid vatten. Gothenburg: Géteborgs Univer- sitet, Aekcologisia instinutionen. 20 Coles, J 2000. Rater int rocky land. Rock carvings in south west Uppland. Uppsala: Aun 27. redell, A. 2003. Bildéroar Figuratin bildéommunikation av sdelog och kasmolog’ under sysandanaisk bronsilder och forromers jérnilder. GBteborg: Gorare. Gelling, B. and Davidson, H. Ellis. 1965. The chariot of the sen. Louis Det Kaul, E1998. Ships on bromses. A study in Bronze Age religion and iconography, Copenhagen: National Museum Keistiansen, K. 2004, Instiutioner og material kultur. Tvil lingherskerne som religion og politsk institution under bbronsealderen. In A. Andrén, K. Jennbere and C. Raud- vere (eds) Ordning mot kas ~ studier av nord frkrsten asmologi. Vigar sll Midgard 4. 99-122. Lund: Nordic ‘Academie Press. Larsson, . 1997. Materiel kulrr och religisa symbole (imei: Tnriraionen fr atkeologi, Umel universitet. Ling, |. 2004. Beyond transgressive lands and forgotten seas. ‘Towards a maritime understanding of rock art in Bohus- bin, Current Swedish Archucology 12:121-40. Maliet, M. 198. A chorological study of north European rook art Scockholon: Almayist 8 Wiksel Mande, G. 1983. Tradition and diffusion in west Norwegian rock art. Mjeltehaugen revisited, Norwegian Archaeological Review 16.:14-32 Randsborg, K. 1993. Kivik. Archaeology and iconography, ‘Acta Archucoligicu 63.13-147.Narrative worlds, human environments, and poets The case of Bragi John Lindow Anyone who approaches the mythology so spectacularly maintained in the context of medieval Icelandic writing must account for the existence of the presumably historical poet Bragi and the apparent god of poetry with the same name. ‘The one was active in mid-of late nind-sentucy Noxway and lefe what are said to be the oldest fragments of skaldic poctry; the other acts in the world of the gods. The historical poet and the apparent god meetin two famous poems ftom the tenth century. The anonymous Hrikomal(stan- 223) and Hékonarmal, atributed to Eyvindr Finnsson (stanza 1).budh place Brain Valli, awaiting with Odinn the arrival of the human kings Eirkr bld¥ox and I Tskon inn gi Adal- steinsfstri and thee retinues. This circumstance ~ immediate entry of heroes afer death into Valhill~ make i em likely thatthe poets thought of Reagias having entered Valhall under thesamecircumstance,and the presence ofthe legendary heroes Sigmundrand Sinfiollin irczmafonly increases thelikellhood of thissccnati. Mention of Hermérin Hitkonarmdineed not decrease the likelihood of the possbiliry; even puting aside the fac tha the main redaction of Snore Edda calls Hermé3r svinn Ons, rather than sonr Obie, reading I have explored cesewhere (Lindow 1997210306), we would expect gads as well aseinbenarin Valholl anyway. The Brag who chats with inn and awaits the arrival of new einherjar to Valhll is surely ist the historical pocs, hinnsef elevated wo Valhl, a novion about which T think there has ben a fair amount of unanimity since SigurBur Nordl’s brie treatment (1942:256-37 also be der Wieden 961) Readingchrough thedebateabout Bagi beeween agen Mok (1887, 1889) and Sophuis Bugg (1888) carried out ‘wellmore hanacentury ago ne ees thatforthem the contested texts were not Eiriksmdland Hdkonarmallbut Lokasennaand the issue wasin theend inher’ veisusds, ‘Today we would probably regard that distinction as unim- portant, ifnot unrecoverable. What we can say is that Bragi, like the einheriar Sigmundr and Sinfédli bue unlike O3inn and Port was never the object of cult. Asgard and Valhaill ‘were in fact full of residents who exercised only a mythologi- cal function, alongside residents who figured in cult as well, and one way to capeure chat distinction might be w call he former einheriar. What we would call the lates, thats, deities for whom we can with some kind of confidence postulate a eal, ig more problematic, since the eategory of asir in Old Teelandic demonstrably contains figures for whom na cule can be postulated, Pethaps that is why we have Bragi the lisworical poct and Bragi the ds. Perhaps the class of asir was larger than the class of go Here the famous words of Jordanes about the anes in his Ps Grtica (De origine actibuigue Getarum) ore of incerest. In Rook XITT he wrote that the Goths called che leaders who hhad preceded them not mere men, but demi-gods, “that is, ‘Ancis." If Jordanes was not excusing his ancestors’ paganism. tor auribucing, Roman customs of apocheosls to his ances- tor, che passage suggescs that Bragi clevation w Vall was in keeping with a belief that had lefe traces within another Germanic people in the mid-sixth century. Ik may even sug gest, purely within the semantic realm, that anses/asir were not strictly gods but also included demi-gods: that i, former nobles elevated to equality with the gods. ‘To draw wether these threads: che evidence of, especially, Firthrnal and Hitkonrml suggests clevation of h quality with deities, perhaps under che term asi (cll that according to Snori in Gylfaginning Loki was “also numbered among the air’). In the second halt af the tenth century, at least, arguments were mounted to the effect that such eleva- tion occurred immediately upon death, and that Valholl was peopled by Migration Period herves, an early Viking Age post, and contemporary kings and cheir men, The remark of Jordanes, aswell a similar but obviously mich later remark bby Adam of Bremen, allow us to take the evidence of these ‘wo poems a6 more than a literary conceit. So t00, I think, may be the curiosity bout the afterlife oFheroes lke Starkadr and Sigurd as evidenced in texts like Porsteins Pater skelks The great heroes lived un souichow. In his recent dissertation, Andreas Nordberg (2003) draws attention to the parallel besween the human environment ot the chiefiain’s hall and the narrative world of the mythol- ogy. in which Onn and his eimherjar live an imagined lite similar to that ofthe chieftain and his retainers in the earthly hall. The social context of the myths concerning Valhall is the comitatus, an instcution which ca, I have argued, be traced through historical semantics back to what Tacitus tells us about it and forward to the Middle Ages (Lindow 1976). Uhre yearshetore Nordberg’ disertation was published, Kris Kershaw (2000) had set the einheriarin the context of ecstatic Germanic and Indo-European warrior cults, in which human warriors dedicate themselves ricually to a warrior god who in the Germanic contexts inn, Both Nordbeig and Keishaw operate with a fairly undifferentiated group of retainers; that is, che primary notion is one like that described by Tacitus for the comitatus: ane leader, many followers, without too much formal distinction among the followers. in Eiriksmal, Odinn directly addresses first Bragi (stanza 3) and dhen Sigguundr and Sinfjd (stanza 5). This conflation would appear to put Brag inthe same category as SigmundOLD NORSE RELIGION IN LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVES and Sinféls thar is, presumably, che category of einherje owever, there may be indications of a difference in status. Sigmunde and Sinfédli do not reply to Odinn; indeed, they never address him in the poem. THveit only dialogue is with Eiutha (stanzas 8-0). Bragi, on the other hand, talks ditcetly with Odinn, and much of the poem appears to hea dialogue between Odin and Bragl. To put it another way: Sigmurnde and Sinfjli play te sole of servants dispatched to sce who is atthe door, whcreas Brag is kind of counsellor and familia ~ the birds. Scliwlurs have uccounted for the elevation of Bragi=I would call ie apotheosis but for his apparent starusasa demi-god —by virtue of his heing the First skald: indeed, some have argued that Bragi invented the diGuckvect form, and presumably also the dripa, and thac this contributed to his elevation. Other than ro note that, without other evidence, this argument is cleus, cannot ees this issue here. T would, however, like to discuss other evidence about Bragi, some of which has links to recent flldore My starting point is the idea that only chieftains or, in the Scandinavian context, great warriors, get promoted (0 Valhll. Whar did Brag ever do that was heroic? To be sure, thete isa litte story In Landndmabsk, Hp saga ok Hilfirekka and Geirmundar pater heljarskinns io which he predicts, in verse, the future success of the “Hiel-skins” Hitmunde and Geirmunde. They later joined the early seers to Iceland, which connected Bragi to Icelandic history, as did the fact that there were setters and their descendants who could reckon thelr kin from Brag. But there is more. ‘About thice quatters of the way through Skéldckaparmal, Snorti cnded his discussion of kennings by treating the ken. rings for lorde and their retainers. "Thereafter he rurned ro the “in-kenned” vocabulary, that is, to poetic nouns that stand alone. ‘Ihe section begins with a pair of questions and answers, and the frst quotations follow. These are embedded in a very brief narrative, which I will ayue iy relevant Brags status in the nassative world ofthe mythology. ‘The section begins by asking how one makes poetry ‘without kennings. The answer is by calling each thing by its own name. The next question asks "What are the un-kenned names of poetry?” The answer includes five nouns: bragr and, ‘ari, br, merd, lof A veay buief nactative follows. It states chat Bragi gamli was going through a certain forest during the evening. A troll challenged him in verse (‘stead & han’), Two of the ‘manuscripts that contain the story present the trolls verse and specily thar she isa trol-woman, Ihe other two versions leave her sex and her verse unstated. In the interest of time Tall discuss the more complete version. with buth verses. “The troll’ stanza looked something like this ‘Troll alla mike rung sigecungnis, aug jeuns, bslar bol, vilsinn volu, ‘ygr8 afro bvelsvelg himins — favat’s coll ners pat? Asi82] (Finunur Jonsson rorzers, Brtza; of 22 They call me a ull, moon of the earth-Hrungnir[?}, vwealth-sucker 2} of the giant, destroyer of the storm-sun [7] beloved follower ofthe seress guardian of the “naford” (9 swallower of the wheel of heaven {the sun] What’ a troll if nor thee? Hann svarae, Sk lalla mike skipsmidt Vids, Gaus giafrorud, grep dhneppan, Yuas lbesa, 88s skap-MOBa, hagemid bragar. Hyat er slald nema par? (Finnur Jonsson 1912-15, Br: cf. Ars] Skalds call me: the ship-smlth [2] of Wibur, recipient of Gaut’s gift profligate poet, bearer of Yogrs al, the mind-M68i of poetry. skilled smith of verse. “There are generic variations, of course, but in Old Scandina vian literature in general che trolls (will use the term for all the supernatural beings) live away from human habitation and hence ate not usually seen. they have grotesque form = some of the descriptions in the fornaldarsBigur especially are quite remarkable ~ and their interactions with humans are always tinged widh dager. Iam wholly vonvinced that ‘more recent folk belicf, as they can be extrapolated from recordings from the seventeenth century onwards in Scandi- inavia, describe the situation ai must have heen in medieval Teeland, the homeland of our textual tradition In GkS 2367 410, which i taken for the main manuscript, the troll is explicitly female (she may also have been fermale in DG 11 atv, but there her sex is not indicated). Her being female definitely makes a difference. Within the mythology, and probably also within medieval Icelandic literature a8 2 whole, females were coded as disruptive and asocial if in the public arena. Pére spent as much time killing female as male giants, and many of the most interesting trolls of the for- naldastgur (sec ar oughly the same time as this event would bbe imagined to have taken place, and outside of leeland, as haere), were female. In the world of the mythology, which occupies so much of Snort’ atention in his Fda the relationship between ait and jar, conventionally translated af "gods" and “giancs,” is simila. The gods stand for humans, and the yiants for the uulls. The gods live near the center, and the giants arc confined to the periphery: Gylfaginning tates specifically that the giants were given places live near che se, thats, toward thc outside of the orb of the earth, and Bérris Frequently off fighting giants in the distant the east. Always a journey is requited to the realm of the giants, Tike trolls, some giantsNARRATIVE WORLDS, HUMAN ENVIRONMENTS, AND POETS in the mythology have fabulous strength, and some control ‘what we might term magic. The so-called giants are not larger ran de gous, for the cwo duel and intermarry. ‘What is at stake? | hegin with the ehusive details of the encounter. It was late at night, and presumably therefore dark: although the verb sa can be used cither of a wagon or a sledge, summer was the least favorable season for travel because of the mud. We «an surmise that this forest was somewhere in Norway, given what we know of Bragi life. As the by now classic work on memorates by Honk (1064) and others has taught us, darle woods are likely places to ‘meet trolls. and people continued to encounter trolls in the "Norwegian forests for centuries after Bragi mec his. The toll challenge im, asking ultinsaely or his idesnity. This oll’s challenge, however, contains a pun. The expression used before the demand chat Bragi identify himself is “stead & hhann” The verb stefia has swo meanings. One is “prevent, get in the way of.” and that would certainly hr the context, although if that is what Snore had in mind we might expect the preposition (@) ro be omitted. The second meaning is “co compose verse” It is drawn on the woud ste whic is the refrain in the drépa, the most complex form of skaldic poem. This roll, then, in his woodsy domain, appears to have challenged Rragi, the very first skald, in verse. Although che verse itself is omitted in U, itis present in K, and we will consider it shordy in some detail In more resent folklore, a human challenged like this by a troll might be taken into the mountain, or beaten senscless, or driven mad. In other words, chere is a real danger here. But in many of the narratives of more recent folldore, the hero is able to extricate himself, sometimes by treating the troll politely, more often by ourwitting him. Sometimes this ‘outwitting is verbal, and that accords with Bragi’s response. ‘We muscassume thaca poetic danger accompanies the phys: cal danger, ‘The troll-woman’s verse ‘As the numerous question marks | have used in my trancla- tion indicate, this werse is dificult to understand. However, ceraain things are clear from the start. Unlike neatly every ‘other poetic trol in medicval Scandinavian tradition, this one uses a shaldie meter. She has carefully counted four sylables into each line (in the last line, nema resolves into a single syllable). Her alterations are consistently atthe beginnings of lines, and she has added a second alliterating syllable to lines 5, $ and 7. She has managed a full rhyme inline 2 and Jrasiyres in lines 1,4, 5, andl 6. Semancically the verse is well balanced: “I'm a troll.” she begins, and ‘what’ chat if nota toll” she ends. The fitst line ofthe troll-woman's response is ambiguous: “trols call me’ or “they call mea troll,” r even a petemprory “all me a troll.” Any of these will do. and ambiguities are common in skaldic poetry and were clearly cherished. If we take the reading “rolls call me;" along, with “skalds call me” for Bragi’s verse, we ean invoke the notion of different poctic languages among the various mythological races, which is 4 precisely the conceit of the Eddie poem Aluiomal. Feast Albin Kock (1923-44:S1095) objected to this reading on the ‘basis chat kennings belong to skalds and not trolls, buc in my view chi verse exchange is abuut previsely dat issue. More problematic for the notion of different languages is chat ie is difficule to discern differences in the kennings in the ewo verses of the sort that would suggest alternative dictions. I will take up reading the opening line again in connection with Bragis verse. Lines 2~7 consticure a sting of kennings, all of which must ‘mean “oll All are difficul Line 2, The manuscript has sug! séerungnis, Finn Jons- son suggested emendation to tel sjthungnie, “moon of the “earth-Hrungnie” but admirted that the sense escaped him Kock proposed adding two additional emendations, to tun- ds sonbmungns (acc. of sfshrmungir)“earth-Hrungnir [roll destroyer] of the moon. Line 3. The manuscripe has audiug jituns “tich something, of the giant.” Finnur Jénsson suggested reading the ken- ning as audigy “wealth-sucker,” but he could not explain Whar a “wealthesncker ofthe giant” might he, Clunies Ross (forthcoming) suggests possible allusion to the kenning type “mouthul of giants” for gold. Kock emended to audstid Swealdi-ship” and offered « few parallel wonran keustings swith this form. Line 4. The compound “storm sun’ is unclear. Kock sug gested emendation to dhalar to crexte the kenning “bale of the storm-hall [heaven],”a reference to the role ofthe real in destroying the untverse at Ragnarok. Line 5. Based on a line from another skald (Gisl Sisson), Finns Jonsson glossed Use fast word as “hal work? (19313625 sx vlside). He admitted the diffculy of understanding a Kenning “hard work ofthe sees as “giantexs” and tosed off the idea “beloved companion of the seeress.” Kock accepted that idea Line 6. Finnur Jonsson (1931:s¥. nafjgrd) suggested read ing né-fardar, yielding a possible woll-kenning “guard of the worpse-ford [gravel Line 7. The manuscript reading hodluelg himiny (whecl- wallower ofheaven, thas, swallower ofthe wheel of heaven) produces a reasonable toll kenning, for at Ragnarile a wolf swallows the sun. “Thus the only clear kenning refers to the cosmic destruction of the tolls, and the various surmises adduced above suggest thacin her other kennings the toll identified herself in similar ‘ways and may also have associated herself with death. Thus this ero, who Tam quite sure is meant to be imagined in che ‘mountains in Norway, has challenged the human Bragi with a reference tothe cosmic destruction that her mythic siblings will enact, Here the trols of life have crossed over into the realm of the giants of mythology. Bragi’s verse Brag’ respanse is the performance ofa single verse, respond ing directly in its semantics. changing only “troll” to “skald.” direct in lines rand 8 and as the referents tothe kennings in the other lines, Fle uses the same four-syllable line, placing his allitrations more or less as the roll placed hers: vonsistencly at the beginnings of lines, optionally on che second life inOLD NORSE RELIGION IN LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVES lines 3 and s but not 7. Hie has, however, used more rhymes, specifically full rhymes in lines 2, 4, 6, and 7. ‘When challenged by a supernatural being who specifically identifies herself as a troll, with references o cosmic destruc- sion, Brug performs a verse identifying himself ota hu- ‘man =the ordinary opposite to trolls but as 2 poet. His First line echoes her, with the same ambiguiry, bur with an added cist. If Brapi was the vey fist skal, there were no others to ‘all hina the kennings that follow. The readings “they call me a skald” or “call me a skald” chus seem preferable to Fur Jénszon’s “skalds call me,” which requires an emendation to the plual form stl In this verse, he aks to be addressed asa skald or says that people call him a skald, and he then proceeds to lista number of kennings for a poet. This verse is not as dificule as the trolls, and ie also appears in LXG 1 410, so there are useful alternate wadings. I will quickly unpack the kenings. Line 2. Vidurr is Odinn, who acquired die med of po cexry. The kenning “ship-smith” is unclear; Finnur J6nsson (931507 s.. skipsmid) later suggested emendation to skap- mit] “creating smith” Line 3. Gautr too is an Odin name, and poctry was his ‘aff co gods and men, He stole ie from Line 4. Bragi Is an unrestrained skald, Poetry is power. It is dangerous, especially if unchecked. We can read this line as 8 threat to the troll woman Line 5. Yggr is an Caiinn name, ale the poetry which he took from the giants when it was in the form of mead. Line 6. Médi was a son of bérr, but here the name is 2 Kenning base word, A skap- Midi uf poeuy would be « poet who shaped or Formed things Line 7. Brag i a “skilled smith of vere.” ‘Ta counter the trollwoman’ references to the destruction that her mythic peers will cause and her likely connection with death, Bragi stresses his connection with Odin, who was able to steal the mead of the poetry, and hence the means of encoding infomration and aes 1 the yest ~ fiom the very giants about whom the troll woman has boasted. Where she mentions death, he counters with his craftsmanship, che ability to fashion artifacts in the language that belongs ulti- mately to him and to men, not to «rolls. Bo Almavist subjected this story to some keen analysis Inthe firse volume of his study of néd (Almavist 1962) and ‘made ewo important points. The frst was thac the story shows similarities 0 stories of Arafiaskdld, powerful skalds whose a ic performances lived on in lelandic oral radition ddoven into recent times. Bragi thus encapsulates in this story the power of agonistic poetry a power that lived on in the world view of the Icelanders. Given the parallels in Kalevala poetry, we miay well be luuking hve at a eyjonal constant, 1s Thomas DuBois suggested in his 1999 study. ‘Almgvist’s second poine was to draw the litle story into the realm of later Nordic legend, as I have done above. Under the terms of the field of folklore, the stay certainly does ‘qualify as a legend, Ir thus evinces @ continuity in world view from the thirteenth century down to the nineteenth cencury and later: the woods were dangcrous, trolls might atack, and quick-witted heroes would overcome trolls Howeves, what we have hire ix more than just dhe sory of an encounter beoween a man and a troli in the Norwe= 1 giants. 24 ian woods long agn, one in which we can surmise thar the quick-wited hero saved himself from a wll by geting in the lst word, as human heroes continued to do in folktales from throughout Europe. This is so because Bragi was the fot shald. These was therefore something cosmic about this encounter, as, expecially, the tolls kennings indicate. Twould [propose tn read it asa true and important challenge to Brags supremacy as poet, as a duel between an alternative poetry & poctry of the supernatural beings, and a poctry of gods and nei, a specially, too, as a struggle for ownership of one poctic genre, the so-called deusavisur or occasional stanzas. Like the eoll woman’ were, these are not part of some longer poem, and they relate 0 a specific situation, This is Kragis heroic act. What I am suggesting. i this, Brags fase and i elevation to deity, must rese on his primacy in the form of dedtekvett sud the dep (the skaldic Court foun and the elaborate praise poem). Ihese ate social ~ and socialized — forms. Men com- pose and perform them in the context of chieftain’ retinue. They were the office work of the verbally gifted. But away from the chieltain, away trom the chieftains retinue, away fou the busing torches within the hall (golden swords chat illuminated everything in Snorris presentation of Aagardr at the beginning of Skéldsheparmdl), away from the ritual (if beery) exchanges of gifs, of shields and poems, there was another world. Ir was the world of the forest, the world of darkness, the world where one’s connections didnt count for much, This was the world of the tolls, and ic was here chat the Female woll and Brag fought ie out for the realm of the cceasional verse First the toll: she is out at night in what ‘we might call her garden, and an ineerloper happens by. She st ask who goes there, she offers eight lines of syl- Jable-counted, alliterating verse saying just who she is and asking who goes there. Bragi’s answer can be seen as so much ‘more than a mere exchange in the woods, one that save his cown skin as he one-ups the tol at her ovin game. For all we know, she had prepared her verse and was just waiting for some human to happen by. Bragi, on the other hand, must really come up with an occasional verse, This he does, in the metre the toll-woman herself used. He rescues occasional verse for humans and changes the course of literary history. He even manages fall rhymes, where dhe toll only used laf rhymes ‘And so trolls do not have much to say in skaldic verse, In the fornaldarsigur, where they are principal characters, they are hardly invisible or inaudible as poets, but their form is ‘eddie formyriilag — that is to say, they do not count their syllabies, and they cate nothing for shymes. This they share wich cheir human countesparts in the fornaldarségur. When ic comes to dréttkvatt, however, the highest form of skaldic poetry and the one that came to he used for accasional stanras 22 well for laborate pocms (perhaps to avoid the troll form ‘of she four sllable line?) rhe trolls are all bu silent, Bagi Rodidacon the Old was a charged figure everywhere he appears in Old lelandic literature, because he bead been. placed in Valhalla early as by Viking Age poets and had clearly been understood as an 4s, and therefore a god within the old mythological system, by medieval Icelanders. When he encounters a toll itis therefore no trifling matt. IF he doesntisthe historical Brag, his ife is at risk. IF he is Bragi the ds, he is performing the mythological function of all the gods, namely co do bate with the forces of chaos, with «olls and giants. Bragi’s weapon, in cither case is vers. In the simple ‘human reading of the story he rescues himself with verse In the full-blown mythological version, he rescues occasional verse for men and gods from the trolls, ftom chaos, from the