question relating to Wielbark and Scandinavian burial customs

[akoddsson]

Hails Tore.

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore at g...> wrote:
>
> Konrad,
> I presume you have no problem reading Swedish.
> Have you read Mårten Stenberger, Det Forntida Sverige?

No, but you have now put it on my list. Thank you for the link.

> You find it in my private research library 
http://www.stavgard.com/romaniron/stenberger_/forromerskj_/aldstajarn
alder/default.htm

Tore, I want to take this opportunity to thank you for providing 
such important and interesting links as this one, as well as the 
(for the purposes of this list) immensely important links to the 
history, culture, and scholarship about Gutland. 

> He writes among other things
> 
> Annorlunda förhåller det sig på Gotland. Där har på senare tid den 
arkeologiska aspekten undergått stora förändningar. Några lösfynd 
var tidigare kända därifrån, huvudsakligen bygelnålar av brons och 
järn ävensom ett mindre antal brand- och skelettgravar med liknande 
nålar. Dessa skelettgravar väckte tidigt uppmärksamhet, eftersom 
samtida sådana inte var kända från andra håll i Norden. Genom 
omfattande fältundersökningar av Erik Nylén har de gotländska fynden 
ökats i anmärkningsvärd grad och en mängd nya brand- och 
skelettgravar tillkommit. Jordandet har inte varit en 
undantagsföreteelse utan ett allmänt tillämpat gravskick på ön under 
denna tid. De döda har nedlagts i kistor av sten, ibland kanske av 
trä, under flat mark eller täckta av flacka, runda, ofta omfångsrika 
stenrösen. Vid slutet av bronsåldern har alltså jordandet 
återinförts på Gotland och tillämpats under åtminstone hela 
övergångstiden för att sedan försvinna igen, s. 334. Först vid den 
romerska järnålderns början åtenvänder bruket på nytt, denna gång 
genom inflytanden från germankulturerna på kontinenten. Därefter 
vidmakthölls det under den följande förhistoriska tiden vid sidan av 
likbränningen för att vid kristendomens införande bli allenarådande.

Interesting. The implied explanation here for the co-occurence of 
cremation and inhumation would seem to be influence from germanic 
continental peoples. I have been reading and researching mostly 
about the grave finds from Norway, focusing on one area so as to 
form a more coherent picture of the development and history of 
burial customs through time. Here is some general information, which 
I have culled from numerous sources about grave finds in Norway: 1) 
cremation displaces earlier inhuman with gravegoods about 1000BC - 
that is, during the later Scandinavian bronze age; cremation quickly 
becomes universal and gravegoods become uncommon, the bones of the 
dead being buried below flat earth, often washed and often in an urn 
of bronze, beech-tree (known from the remains of the sap-glue used), 
or the like, but not always; furthermore, ash and remains of the 
pyre are often buried together with the bones; also, bear-claws are 
often found in the remains, indicating cremation on bear-hides for 
some of the dead. 2) while in the earlier bronze age (before 1000BC 
in Scandinavia) the dead were placed unburned in coffins built of 
stone in the earth (steinkistur), often in collective grave areas 
(like Toldness in Trondheim, for example, where a large example of 
this survives), being stacked up generation after generation, and 
typically with grave mounds raised over the dead (and gravegoods), 
the dead are now hard to find for modern archeaologists, as there 
are no noticable mounds, and the grave-markers have often been 
removed. 3) from surviving examples, the grave-markers would seem to 
have been mostly stone circles, often with some filling (so as to 
form a pattern, etc.), but occasionally also mounds (I think that 
the leading idea about this is that wealthy and important folk got 
the mounds as markers during this time), and apparently always with 
a ON bauta(dar)steinn (a kind of vertical, narrow, upright stone cut 
and set into the earth as a grave-marker), regardless of whether or 
not there was a mound, stone-setting, etc.. (but most of these have 
been destroyed or removed in later times) 4. occasionally we find 
cenotaphs, which are monuments raised to the dead without any 
apparent connection to an actual burial or cremation site, but 
generally nearby; examples of this include ship-settings (of which 
there is a fine example not far from the ancient chieftain's farm 
Eggje in Trondheim, which I have examined personally), but also from 
all over Scaninavia. 5. later, in the so-called Mervingotid, the two 
hundred years or so before the dawn of the viking age (+/-800AD), we 
start to see occasional inhumations again, but mostly on the west 
coast, where gravegoods are often greatly increased; furthermore, 
the custom of burning the dead in boats becomes common (the northern 
province of Naumudalr being especially named as a place where this 
custom was typical, as well as in parts of Trondheim; the custom is 
thought to have been imported from Sweden; furthermore, this custom 
lasts, at least for wealthy persons in some areas, until the end of 
the viking age (but by this time we also find boat-inhumation with 
massive gravegoods, such as the famous example of the Åsaborg ship 
from the south-west). Now, there is apparently some connection 
between ship-burials and the practise of erecting stone-settings in 
the formation of a ship, even if only a symbolic marker. Another 
point of interest in that the re-emergence of inhumation has often 
been attributed to foreign influence (i.e. from the continent - see 
above), and indeed, it would seem to appear most in areas with 
closer contact with the British Isles, etc. and then mostly as a 
rich man's practice (no cremation, but a fine grave chamber to live 
in with lots of gravegoods). Areas with less contact, like Tronheim 
and the areas to the north of it, but by no means exclusively, seem 
to have held faster to the time-honoured practice of cremation, even 
for the wealthy (as was the case in conservative Sweden, where the 
cremation finds appear close to universal from this period, as far 
as I can tell from what I have read). Also, grave-mounds become more 
and more common, perhaps due to an increase in wealthier persons, 
regardless of the means of burial. Lastly, grave-mounds are banned 
with the introduction of christianity and violators punished by loss 
of all property and eternal exile (Gulathingslog, for example), 
unless they pay a huge fine and excavate the dead from the mound and 
re-bury it in a churchyard (unless the dead were not baptized, a 
criminal, or excommunicated - unbaptized and excommunicated lay 
outside the churchyard, while criminal were buried 'thar es moetask 
sær ok groen torfa' - that is, where the sea and green turf meet - 
an ignoble burial). No mention is made in law, as far as I am aware, 
of the punishments for cremating the dead, but I imagine that these 
would be extreme (see my reference above to punishment for mounds). 
Ok, enough for now. This is not intended as a comprehensive report, 
just as some brief notes on the general development of the burial 
practices in Norway, as culled from my own reading, etc.. 

> You can also find quite a lot of literature in my sources
> http://www.stavgard.com/historia/sources_/default.htm
> 
> I am trying to collect as much sources as possible in my private  
> research library.

It is much appreciated. Again, thank you.

Regards,
Konrad
 
> Tore
> 
> On Jan 25, 2006, at 7:17 PM, akoddsson wrote:
> 
> > Tore, thank you for the link below.
> > I have been reading about iron age scandinavian burial customs 
for
> > some time, even visiting sites myself. Also, in reading about the
> > Wielbark finds some months ago, I quickly noticed that they 
matched
> > the overall scandinavian pattern. This book also confirms this.
> > However, one thing which is not explained here, or in other 
sources
> > that I have seen, is the difference about cremation and 
inhumation
> > burials, which is found in the Wielbark culture and throughout 
all
> > of Scandinavian during this period. What I am wondering is, why 
were
> > some members burned and others inhumed? This book mentions a 
young
> > girl inhumed over an older cremation grave, and similar mixes 
occur
> > widely in the archeaological finds from this period. There must 
have
> > been some reason why occasional inhumations occured in a culture
> > which otherwise cremated its dead, like other IE folk. IE 
religion,
> > as attested in Hinduism, for example, strongly favours cremation,
> > and various theological reasons are given for this, such as the 
view
> > that man is spirit and not matter; furthermore, there is no 
belief
> > in a future physical recurrection of bodies from the earth, such 
as
> > in the semetic traditions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). 
Clearly,
> > Goths from the Wielbark area, as from Gotland, and Scandinavians
> > more widely, shared a common view about the insignificance of the
> > body after death, which was generally cremated. However, we do 
find
> > inhumations as well. The question is: why? Do you know of links 
to
> > articles on this topic, footnotes or comments about it, etc.? One
> > thing that I suspect, but cannot confirm, is the existence of 
some
> > kind of legal stricture about the cremation/inhumation issue in 
the
> > oral laws of this period, probably connected to a religious 
belief
> > of some kind. Otherwise, one suspects that either form of burial
> > would become quickly universal at the expense of the other. This 
is
> > not what the archeaological record shows. On the contrary, the 
two
> > forms coexist throughout the entire roman iron age, even as far 
back
> > as 1000BC in Scandinavia (which is technically later Scandinavian
> > bronze age), but with cremation as the clear overall victor, 
both in
> > sites where inhumation also occurs, as well as in those where 
only
> > cremation occurs (sites vary widely in the number of finds, 
etc.).
> > Finally, let me rephrase my question: what was the reason for the
> > simulteaneous occurance of cremation and inhumation over such a 
long
> > period? Why did inhumation not just die out completely, but 
instead
> > staggered along in the shadow of cremation for such a long 
period?
> > Could there have been a legal stricture, or belief, which caused 
the
> > continued inhumation of certain individuals, but not most? Could 
the
> > age of the deceased, for instance, have had something to do with 
it,
> > social position, manner of death, or reputation?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Konrad.
> >
> > --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore at g...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >> Have you read Kaliff's book "Gothic connections"
> >>
> >>
> > 
http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/gothicconnectio_/gothic/default.htm
> >>
> >> Tore
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 25, 2006, at 11:16 AM, Wilhelm Otto wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Gothic list,
> >>>
> >>> Is this a chat list just for the language itself or for a wider
> >>> approach to
> >>> the gothic culture, as history?
> >>>
> >>> If it serves the later purpose as well I will raise a subject.
> > I
> >>> have just
> >>> read Peter Heather:
> >>>
> >>> "The Goths" and this book gives me an entirely new view of the
> > old
> >>> gothic
> >>> world. He tells us about Jordanes' Gethica and claims that it 
is
> > among
> >>> contemporary historians Jordanes' fault that people still
> > believe
> >>> the Goths
> >>> originated in Scandinavia before moving across the Baltic.
> >>> Secondly, from at
> >>> least the the third century the Goths was divided into two
> > groups: the
> >>> Visgoths and the Ostrogoths and thirdly that these groups were
> > led
> >>> by two
> >>> families with unique royal prestige, the Balthi and the Amals.
> >>>
> >>> These ideas, Peter Heather says, have set an agenda around
> > which
> >>> argument
> >>> has raged.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I have been trying to discuss the first of these topics, the
> >>> exodus, on a
> >>> Swedish chat list and am very confused by the response. There
> > are
> >>> members
> >>> who claim there has been an exodus, although Peter Heather
> > claims
> >>> that the
> >>> dating of relevant objects from both sides of the Baltic shows
> > that
> >>> there
> >>> has been none. And Peter Heather seems to be a man who to day
> >>> carries the
> >>> weight of argument. I have a general feeling that in Sweden the
> > Gothic
> >>> exodus is a valueloaded topic, and that it is difficult to give
> > it
> >>> a fair
> >>> treatment.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> For me this is a matter of preserving my bearings in a world I
> >>> thought was
> >>> rational, at least in these circumstances.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Is this a topic for the Gothic list?
> >>>
> >>> Wilhelm Otto
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a  
> > blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    gothic-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/