Abstract:Bronze Age ceramics – A source of information on communication and social interaction in Bronze Age DenmarkIf not avoided completely, Bronze Age ceramics have generally been dealt with in terms of either Early or Late Bronze Age. Attempts to classify the ceramics within these periods according to ordinary typological conventions have mostly failed. It is therefore argued that Bronze Age ceramics should be viewed in a much broader chronological framework. It is also emphasised that ceramics should be seen in a social context and in relation to functional change. Therefore, all published ceramics from periods I to V from Jutland and Funen have been subjected to an investigation of the chronological and functional implications of groupings in form and attributes (figs. 1-2). As a result, it can be concluded that certain types of vessels that have not previously been classified are diag nostic for periods II-III and IV-V, respectively. Other types of vessels appear sporadically from period II and become frequent from period IV onwards, while yet further types are current during the entire Bronze Age (fig. 3). There is certain agreement with the Swedish A/B-phase partition in the investigated material, such that a Western Danish A-phase can be dated primarily to period IV (with a few exceptional occurrences in the Early Bronze Age), and the B-phase to periods V and VI (with a few occurrences in period IV) (figs. 4-5). Although the A/B-features are chronologically significant there seems to be some overlap between the two phases in Jutland and on Funen, which is also the case in Southern Sweden. It is therefore argued that future research on the subject is necessary and could provide better means of dating Late Bronze Age ceramics (fig. 6). The changing stylistic traits seen in the ceramics at the transition from Early to Late Bronze Age can be considered from a communicational point of view. In proposing this, the European context becomes very relevant. Different levels of similarity between the Continental and the Western Danish ceramics can be pointed out. Cases of very accurate copying and even possible import of foreign vessels are seen in both the Early and Late Bronze Age. But also a more general form of inspiration can be traced. In particular, three themes in vessel shape are omnipresent: Bi-conical vessels, quadri-partite vessels and carinated bowls. Also the tradition of face and house urns is a Pan-European phenomenon. Although some of these Lausitz-inspired vessel types occur sporadically in the Early Bronze Age, European influence on the Danish ceramics tradition seems to become radically more standardised and thorough from period IV onwards. By examining relationships between form and archaeological context it has been attempted to examine the functions of ceramics in a wider perspective. Probable practical functions are discussed briefly on the basis of settlement ceramics, archaeological field observations and general knowledge concerning form and function deduced from ethnographic studies. Attention is drawn to a certain combination of large vessels and smaller cups or bowls that can be recorded in settlement context. It is suggested that this “set” represents storage vessels and individual service. The function of ceramics in relation to burial practice is also discussed. Through comparison of ceramics from settlements and graves it can be stated that grave ceramics in both the Early and Late Bronze Age represent a wide range of vessel types. In contrast, certain types do not occur at settlements, for example, the three Lausitzinspired shape themes bi-conical, quadripartite vessels and carinated bowls in the Early Bronze Age, and face urns and house urns in the Late Bronze Age. Ceramics form a part of the formal transition from inhumation to cremation and urn graves. Apparently, proportional factors were dominant when it came to choosing a vessel for burial. Primarily small beakers were chosen for inhumation and, not surprisingly, large vessels were used as urns, combined with bowls placed upside down as lids. In cremation graves without urns, ceramics were used in much the same way as in inhumation graves. Also the earliest urn graves seem to reflect a transitional phase bet ween different uses of ceramics (fig. 7). The small vessels in the Early Bronze Age inhumation graves could be seen as being linked to a general drinking cult related to burial rites as has been suggested for cups made of other materials, e.g. bronze and gold. This possible drinking cult clearly has European implications. Additionally, it seems that vessels in Early Bronze Age inhumation graves were primarily a masculine privilege as was also the case with other kinds of containers. On the other hand, the earliest ceramic urns seem to have been reserved entirely for women and children as far as can be concluded from the sparse evidence. The latter brings to mind the fact that the earliest cremation graves on the Continent are likewise those of women. The combination of large vessels and bowls that can be seen in both settlement- and grave assemblages also seems to have its roots in Continental practising of the urn-grave custom (fig. 8). Bronze Age society is often regarded as an exogamic and patriarchal tribal system. Cases of women buried with a complete set of equipment originating from a different region to that in which they were interred are normally interpreted as evidence of intermarriage and alliances between distant tribes. Five very similar vessels have been found dispersed from Hammah, near Hamburg, through Northern Germany to the southwestern and eastern coasts of Jutland and as far as Thy in Northern Jutland. It is an interesting thought to see these as an expression of related women married into different regions passing on a certain ceramic tradition. It is proposed that potters in the Early Bronze Age were very much at liberty to express themselves in creating vessels, being limited only by the broad conventions implied in bodily rooted patterns shared by cultural groupings (so called Motor Habits). Early sporadic occurrences of certain vessel types from period II onwards can be seen within this framework. The changes, which ceramics underwent between periods III and IV, seem rather radical and must be explained in another way. Inspired by Pierre Bourdieu, an attempt has been made to connect different kinds of “symbolic capital” to the ceramics. It is argued that ceramics have more to do with the domestic sphere and the changes in burial customs than with prestige and political alliances in a classical sense. Ceramics and urn burials could also be connected with the female sex. It has previously been documented that there could have been a change in the status of the female gender during the Bronze Age (figs. 9-12). It is therefore stated that the development in pottery tradition, towards new vessel types and a higher degree of standardisation and possibly specialisation, should be seen in the light of a new role in society for the female gender, implying new ritual and social skills internally on the settlements, and in external communication. Using Michael B. Shiffer’s thoughts on communication and material culture, it is recommended to focus attention on the receiving part in a communication process. In this way the transformations in ceramic production between the Early and Late Bronze Age can be seen as an expression of changing associations in the mind of the receiver. Vessels in the Early Bronze Age might only have signalled individual factors, whereas ceramics in the Late Bronze Age were associated with certain Pan-European conventions connected to burial customs and women. The standardisation of the ceramic production and higher degree of similarity in vessel shape and ornamentation across large geographical areas might indicate a different kind of group identity, at least for female potters. Such identification can happen “down the line” between small local groups, or it can involve some sort of imagined community over larger areas. In addition, an attempt has been made to sketch a possible cognitive framework behind the perception and use of ceramics in the Bronze Age. It is suggested that Early Bronze Age use of grave ceramics reflects a tradition where the vessel is a container either for provisions on the journey to an after-world or for ritual consumption during burial. The urn in the Late Bronze Age, on the other hand, can be seen as a metaphorical house and/or likewise metaphorical body for the remaining part of a pluralistic soul, while the bowl could be a symbolic roof and/or head on the “urn house/body”. These deduced connotations may to some extent have formed common ground in large communities as variations on a theme. Finally it is stated that synthetic studies such as this are sometimes necessary in order to move in archaeological research, forward although not all data can be handled with equal profundity. This article aims to draw attention to the interesting aspects of a ceramic record, which deviates from the general typological development, and recommends keeping the potential of this source in mind when dealing with interpretations of Bronze Age society.Julie LolkMoesgård Museum

Abstract:Five Stages in the History of a Burial Mound In the years 1949-50 a fairly large barrow, which had been considerably damaged by casual digging, was excavated in the centre of the city of Esbjerg (fig. 1).Excavation methodThe tumulus was cut away quarter by quarter and the resultant vertical section-walls drawn. In the centre of the mound excavation was carried out by the removal of layers of 5 cms. thickness and the majority of the horizontal planes thus laid bare were drawn to show the changes in the nature of the soil composing the mound. All stones found in the mound were plotted in on special plans and a similar plan was made of changes in soil composition in the subsoil under the tumulus.The core of the barrow consisted of gravel and over this a later mound of grass-clad or heather-clad turf had been built.The constructional stages of the gravel moundThe gravel tumulus had been built in three stages, which have been given the names "the lower mound", "the middle mound" and "the upper mound". The oldest grave in the barrow (grave A in fig. 2) had been dug in the original ground surface and the lower mound raised above it. Grave B was later dug in the northern side of the lower mound and grave C in its southern side. These latter two graveshafts went down into the light-coloured sand under the mound. This sand, which was thrown up, during the digging of the shafts, onto the sides of the lower mound and was not all filled in again, could be seen as pale bands in the section through the gravel of the mound (fig. 2), and thereby made it possible to determine the upper limits of the lower mound. Otherwise the line of demarcation between the lower and the middle mounds was completely indistinguishable. On the south side of the lower mound a further grave (D) was later laid and another (grave E) on the northern side. The latter appears to have been constructed as follows: the coffin was laid in a very shallow excavation in the surface of the lower mound and the middle mound thereafter heaped up over the grave and the lower mound. The upper surface of the middle mound could with difficulty be distinguished in the substance of the gravel tumulus. Grave F lay immediately over the top of the middle mound. It was presumably, like grave E, laid on the surface of the previous mound and covered with a new mound (the upper mound). Grave G lay immediately above grave F but it was impossible to determine whether it was dug into the upper mound or whether it too occasioned a raising of the height of the tumulus which can now no longer be distinguished. Grave H was dug down into the subsoil under the southern foot of the gravel tumulus. A stripe of sand in the section wall (fig. 2) doubtless arose as a result of soil dug up from grave H being allowed to lie on the surface of the middle mound, the grave being therefore constructed before this mound was covered by the upper mound.The graves of the gravel tumulusAll the above graves are from the SingleGrave Period, graves A-E from the later ground-grave and graves F and G from the upper-grave periods. Clear traces of the skeletons and the coffins were found in graves A, B, C and E, the coffins in the first three being formed of tree-trunks while that in grave E was apparently of planks. Grave D was empty apart from insignificant traces of the coffin, and nothing was found in grave H apart from three amber beads. To judge by the size both these graves must have been of children, while the oldest grave in the tumulus (grave A) was also that of a child. For the contents of graves A, B, C, E, F and G the reader is referred to figs. 4-14.Graves A-E appear to form an associated group which was laid within a comparatively short period of time. There is no doubt that the position of the child-grave A was known at the time when graves B and C were constructed. Grave E was laid exactly above grave B, conforming to the normal Single-Grave practice of laying one grave above another, and showing without doubt that the position of grave B was known at that time, while grave D is older than grave E but later than graves C and A. The fact that no humus layer separates the lower mound from the middle mound is additional evidence that only a short interval separates the two. The circumstance that two men, one woman and two children were buried in the same tumulus within a short space of years appears to lend weight to the opinions already put forward, that Single-Grave barrows were family burial-places. Graves F, G and H, on the other hand, cannot be brought into association with the lower group of graves and it is probable that at least the two former are considerably later in date than graves A-E.The outward appearance of the gravel tumulusOn the sides of the gravel tumulus down towards the foot lay large quantities of stones (figs. 15 and 20). These stones should doubtless be interpreted as the remains of a "stone collar" (fig. 16). The stone collar is an archeological phenomenon which has been almost disregarded but which occurs on many types of tumulus: dolmens and passage-graves, Single-Grave barrows, Bronze-Age barrows and possibly also Iron-Age tumuli (cf. examples in figs. 17-19), The fact that the collars are so often broken up and disintegrated is doubtless explained by the supposition that the stones originally lay open upon the surface of the completed tumulus. No real boundary-ring of stones was found in the case of this SingleGrave barrow, though a short row of stones which lay under the gravel tumulus should possibly be explained as the remnants of a stone ring around the middle mound. On the other hand traces were found at two points of a circle of posts (figs. 21 and 22). These posts were quite slender and had stood fairly close together; they had doubtless borne a wattle fence (fig. 23). The post ring undoubtedly belonged to the upper mound, but it is remarkable that it appears to have stood eccentrically to it.The turf tumulusA little cremation grave (I), which could not be dated, lay buried in the top of the gravel tumulus and perhaps was the grave which provided the reason for the building of the turf tumulus. Another - and a more likely - possibility, however, is that the cremation grave had nothing to do with this tumulus, which was constructed later over a central grave which must be assumed to have been destroyed in the course of modern digging. A few Iron-Age urns and a heavily damaged stone cist built on the original ground surface at the foot of the tumulus to the east (fig. 21) were found in the turf tumulus. The cist could not be dated but was most probably from the Early Bronze Age. It would appear that the cist had provided the occasion for an addition to the turf tumulus (fig. 24). It had clearly been placed in an excavation in the foot of the earlier turf tumulus, and thereafter covered by a layer of earth laid over the east side of the tumulus.*After this descriptive survey of the successive stages of construction of the Esbjerg tumulus certain of the problems raised by it are treated in a wider context. The stone collars and the stone and post rings, three widespread and long-lasting features of prehistoric barrows, are first discussed. Support is given to the view that these features - at least originally - served a double purpose, being designed both to prevent the foot of the mound from flowing outwards and to give monumentality to the barrow. On the other band the magical or cult-significance which has been suggested from certain quarters in association with these features is considered to be doubtful, or at best to be of secondary origin. The stone collars are considered to be of decisive importance in supporting the "practical" interpretation, as it appears obvious that their purpose was to hold the substance of the mound in place. Stone rings consisting of comparatively small stones have been declared to be useless as supports to the soil of the mound but they may well have been admirably effective as a foot-support to a covering layer of turves. The argument has been put forward that certain stone rings in Bronze-Age tumuli have never been visible but were covered by the substance of the mound immediately after being laid. The correctness of this view is doubted as the Esbjerg tumulus has shown how impossible it may be on occasions to distinguish the line of demarcation between an older mound and a later one which covers it; it may therefore well be that these buried rings may originally have been visible as the edge-ring of an older mound. In attempts at reconstructing the Dutch "palisade-tumuli" which have been published the authors have clearly been inspired by the resemblance of these features to Stonehenge, and this resemblance has further given rise to theories on the cult-significance of postrings. It is, however, doubtful how much weight may be laid on resemblances between such simple geometric figures as those formed by these rings.The infant-grave H in the Esbjerg tumulus is of special interest in being placed at the foot of the mound and not in its centre as was normally the custom. It is, however, possible that the reason why graves are so seldom found near the edges of tumuli is simply that earlier excavators only interested themselves in the central portion of the tumuli. A number of graves lying out toward the edges have been found in a little Single-Grave tumulus at Vebbestrup south of Aalborg. These graves lay parallel to the circumference of the mound without reference to the cardinal points of the compass, nor to the normal east-west orientation of Single-Grave burials. This method of siting secondary graves becomes normal practice in the Bronze Age (fig. 26).Child-burials in Single-Grave barrows are extremely rare. This tumulus, with its three child-burials, is therefore worthy of special attention. The fact that two infant graves were found in the Vebbestrup tumulus sited on the outer edge of the mound could be taken as suggesting the possibility that it is there, in the hitherto neglected edge-areas of the barrows, that these graves should be particularly sought.The three trunk-coffins in the Esbjerg tumulus are the earliest coffins of this type found in Denmark. However, this type of coffin appears to have won considerable ground towards the end of the Single-Grave Period and the short, wide plank-coffin which had been previously used appears at that time to have gone completely out of use. Similarly in the early Single-Grave Period the dead were buried lying on their sides with legs flexed; but it appears that towards the end of the Single-Grave Period this practice was changed and the bodies were laid flat on their backs. This change in the position of the body should doubtless be seen in connection with the new type of coffin which was not suitable for containing a contracted body.Harald Andersen

The Cultural Construction of Childhood in Scandinavia, 3500 BC—1350AD

Don’t all mothers love their children? Deposited infants as animate objects in the Scandinavian Iron Age

Ghost Children: Delayed Personhood and Culture-specific Models of Infancy in Western Anatolia

The Siberian Paleolithic site of Mal'ta: a unique source for the study of childhood archaeology

Bronzealderens keramik – En kilde til forståelse af kommunikation og social interaktion i bronzealderen

A matter of months: High precision migration chronology of a Bronze Age female

Coming of Age as a Viking: Historical Children’s Books and Gender

Genomic Steppe ancestry in skeletons from the Neolithic Single Grave Culture in Denmark

Social implications of mortality patterns of juveniles from Poundbury Camp, Romano-British Cemetery

The impact of male burials on the construction of Corded Ware identity: Reconstructing networks of information in the 3rd millennium BC

Mobility patterns in inland southwestern Sweden during the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age

The inheritance of a Mesozoic landscape in western Scandinavia

Environmental Archaeology in Southern Scandinavia

Mellemholm

Childhood, Play and the Evolution of Cultural Capacity in Neanderthals and Modern Humans

The Neolithic Pitted Ware culture foragers were culturally but not genetically influenced by the Battle Axe culture herders

Skyscapes, landscapes, and the drama of Proto-Indo-European myth

Compromised health: Examining growth and health in a late antique Roman infant and child cemetery

Fra tomten af en sløjfet høj

First Ladies

Sr analyses from only known Scandinavian cremation cemetery in Britain illuminate early Viking journey with horse and dog across the North Sea