Steinsland+1986_Giants+as+Recipients+of+Cult+in+the+Viking+Age.pdf

GIANTS AS RECIPIENTS 0F CULT IN THE VIKING AGE?

15 Giants as Recipients of Cult in the Viking Age? Gro Steinsland

A bok at the research in the field of Norse religion will soon show that scholars have made considerable efforts to grasp the nature of the giants.’ The giants have been understood as beings connected with death, situated in the underworld; as corpse eating demons; as enormous figures created by the human mmd in mental states of ecstasy, intoxication, or in conditions of extreme hunger. Usually they are interpreted as personifications of the wild and impressive nature of western Norway and Ice land. And especially they are seen as the enemies of the gods.2 On one point only has there been full agreement among scholars within different fleids of research: it has been unani mously taken for granted that giants have never been connected with ritual in any form. Some examples illustrating this will be mentioned below. Magnus Olsen stated his agreement with the dominating trend in the field of research in these words: ‘On the other hand one has to agree with Heusler stating that “Kultus von Riesinnen oder Riesen für das nordische Heidentum nicht Glaubhaft bezeugt (ist)”.’~ Jan de Vries sums up the discussion in the following words: ‘Es braucht kaum gesagt zu werden, dass in dieser Entwicklung nirgends für einen Kult der Riesen ein Platz zu finden ist’.4 Anne Holtsmark’s statement is equally categorical: ‘Men jotnene har aldri kultus. De har vært bekjem pet, ikke dyrket’ (The giants never got any sort of cult. They have been combatted, not worshipped).5 Indeed, Holtsmark makes the lack of any ritual context a sign of definition of giants. Giants were traditionally confused with trolls and land vettir, but: ‘De skiller seg fra vettene i det at de aldri skal ha ...

213

offer’ (The giants differ from the vettir in that they never receive offerings).6 In short, it is established as something like an accepted truth that the Norse jptnir never received offerings of any sort. Nevertheless we shall venture to question this accepted truth and take a new bok at the sources. As a matter of fact the Eddaic poetry explicitly connects shrines with a being who is beyond any doubt a giant, viz. the giantess Skadi. Gm depicts Odinn’s visions of the homes of the gods, among which we also find a giant’s home described: Prymheimr heitir inn sétti er Piazi bié, så inn åmåtki iQtunn; enn nû Scaôi byggvir, scir brûör goöa, fornar tåptir fQôur.7 Gm 11 The dramatic circumstances that made Skadi the owner of Ir.rymheimr are, according to Snorri, caused by murder and reconciliation, which resulted in marriage between the daughter of the murdered giant and the vanir-god, Njordr. The incorporation of a giant’s home amongst the abodes of the gods is in itself remarkable. Aud it is even more remarkable that the circumstances have not received much attention in scholarly research. The mythical dwelling of a god has its counterpart in the psysical shrine. And in Ls Skadi’s shrines, her vé ok vangr, is mentioned. On this occasion Skadi is threat ening the evildoer Loki in following words: frå minom véom oc v~ngom scolo ~ér æ kQld råå koma.

Ls 51

Vé and vangr are common terms for sites where a cult takes place. G. Turville-Petre is the only one to point out that this relationship is problematic: ‘If Skadi, this shining bride of gods, was of giant race, it is surprising that she would be worshipped.8 Early in the century attention was drawn to the figure of Skadi from another field than that of history of religion, viz. from toponomy. Hjalmar Lindroth presented in 1914 and again in 1930 his views coneerning a group of names strongly repre

214

WORDS AND OBJECTS

GIANTS AS RECIPIENT5

sented in the middie and south of Sweden and also in the south east of Norway: names like Skadevi, Skedvi, Skee, Skjøl etc. Lindroth postulated a first part Skedju-, gen. of Skedja, a fem.form to masc. Skadi. This fem.form of the name is com monly linked to well-known terms of cult-places: vé, -hof or lundt. We are not going to enter into this toponomical discussion, but we ought to remind ourselves that this group of names probably bear witness to a time when the name of Skadi was attached to cult-places. The toponyms seem to belong to old agrarian areasY In our context it is interesting to notice that diseussions coneerning Skadi within toponomy totally avoided approaching the question of giants. Lindroth drew the conclusion that Skadi was an old goddess. And all those who perceived the figure of Skadi in toponomical material, have without further investiga tion treated her as an old goddess, somewhat faded as time passed on and at last reduced to an inhabitant of the world of giantsio There is, however, notbing in the source material to justify this conclusion. Indeed, the Edda poetry always presents Skadi as a giantess. Her giant-nature is stressed, not disregarded. The literary sources suggest that the question should be put in this way: If a group of toponyms really contains the name of the giantess Skadi combined with a term designating a cult-place or shrine, then perhaps these sources bear witness to an old cult of giantesses? In myth Skadi is united to Njordr through marriage. The myth has its parallel in the hieros gamos-myth of Freyr and Gerd, a mythic theme which forms the core of 5km. In 1909 Skm was analysed by Magnus Olsen, and his interpre tation has become classical. According to his view, 5km exem plifies the Nordic versjon of the world-wide myth of father sky and mother earth. Freyr is seen as the old Norse sky-god and Gerd as the goddess of agriculture. Their mythic marriage se cures fertility and wealth and was ritually re-enacted every spring. From our point of view it seems remarkable that Olsen and his many followers could without question treat Gerd as a goddess. No attention at all was paid to the fact that the woman -

OF

CULT IN THE VIKING AGE?

215

is, in fact, a giantess; bom, grown up and still an inhabitant of Jotunheimr. The theme ofgianthood is avoided both as a mythic and as a cultic problem; even as a religious problem at all. The avoidance of gianthood as a religious theme in different ways also applies to more recent analyses of the myth of Freyr and Gerd. It applies to Ursula Dronke’s interpretation of 5km of 1962, where the giant-nature of Gerd was seen as a symbol of uncleanness generally connected with women. Lotte Motz (1981a) stresses the hieros gamos as an expression ofa struggle for power. And in many ways the religious perspective is also lost in the structuralistic approaches of Lars Lönnroth of 1978 and Stephan Mitchell’s of 1983. According to Lönnroth, Skm is an expression of tensions in medieval Icelandic society be tween the official view of marriage and an individual, erotic passion. Gerd is a symbol of prohibited individual passion. The social tension is resolved through the myth. The relationship between the god and the giantess is not at all looked upon as a religious theme. Mitchell’s approach is also structuralistic, and like Lönnroth he understands the mythic coniliot as ex pressions of tensions in society. He does not, however, stress the marriage motif as such, but regards the myth as a matrix for resolving inherent conflicts between feuding groups in so ciety. None of these later interpreters seems to be aware of the specific religious mythic and/or cultic—content of the lay. To disregard the strong emphasis laid on the jptunn motif in the literary sources and to negleet the religious perspective in myth, seems disquieting. The literary sources do not try to disregard, but on the contrary underline the gigantic character of Skadi and Gerd. Skadi is distinctly mentioned as a giantess in Gm (Gm Il), and in Ls she is explicitly connected with her father the well-known giant Tiazi (Ls 50-51). The marriage with the vanir Njordr does not weaken her giant-nature. Instead, Snorri relates that the marriage never was a success, Skadi never felt comfortable in Noatun, nor Njordr in Thrymheimr. In a way the conflict was resolved by a compromise: the couple changed their dwelling place every ninth day. The Eddaic poetry and Snorri’s testimony demand that both the jçtunn character of the figures and the combination of giantesses and shrines are to be taken seriously. Our hypothesis concerning the possibility of a cult of giants

216

WORDS AND OBJECTS

is supported from another source: VQlsa~åttir, a missionary story in Flateyarbék connected to St. Olav. The story of the horse’s phallus called VQlsi, sanctified by the housewife and worshipped by’ the household, is used by a Christian writer. But within the Christian frame, we can discern a unique testimony of a heathen ritual. Especially the strophic parts of the story betray an old layer. The main point in the analysis of the ritual, is the refrain: friggi mprnir fietta bloeti, do mprnir accept this sacrifice. The interpretation of mprnir has caused a great deal of trou ble. Linguistically there are two possibilities ofinterpretation:” (1) mprn, masc. sing., meaning ‘sword’, testified among sword-hejtj in SnE. (2) mçirnir, fem.pl., meaning ‘giantesses’. This meaning is best exemplified in the sources: Sn.E.Pulur; HaustlQng 6; Pérsdråpa; Sturl.saga I, 280. Most of the scholars who have been occupied with vp, con sider that linguistically the plural form is to be preferred. Still, this form has been rejected. This is the case with Andreas Heusler, who analysed the story in 1903; with M. Olsen in 1909, and their followers. What is the reason for their choice of interpretation? The answer is: the dogma that giants were never the object of any form af cultic ritual. Folke Ström exemplifies this dilemma in a very clear way. He retains the plural form in his interpretation but translates mprnir as disir, the collective of female powers of fertility.12 Most scholars choose the former possibility: mçrnir = masc. sing. meaning ‘sword’. According to the priapical appearance of Freyr, they see the word as a metaphor of this god. The ritual performance described is then apprehended as an example of a sjålfr sjålfum offering, a god’s offering of himself to him self.’3 Nevertheless, the fact remains that mprn is a term meaning giantess. In HaustlQng 6 the giant Thiazi is mentioned marnar faåir, the father of mprn, and his daughter is Skadi. The ritual described in Vj obviously has the character of a hieros gamos; in one stanza brûdkonur are mentioned. The figures who are asked to receive the phallus VQlsi, are mprnir, the giantesses. vp contains reminiscences of an old ritual per formed for giantesses.

GIANT5 AS RECIPIENTS OF CULT IN THE VIKING AGE?

217

We will now return to the hieros gamos of the god and the giantess. This problem concerns the subject of hieros gamos in

Norse tradition in general. There is much unexplored material in this field, and we will not go into the subject in all its aspects, but limit ourselves to pointing out some of the facts that are relevant to the present study. F. Ström has recently analysed one type of hieros gamos in Norse tradition, the one attached to the sacred kingdom.’~ Another group concerns sexual union between god and giantess in order to obtain a desirable object. This group contains several different types of hieros gamos:

(a) Hieros gamos in order to procreate vengeful sons. Odinn procreated Vali by the giantess Rind, he became the avenger of Baldr; with Grid, Odinn procreated Vidar, his own eschatolo

gical avenger. (b) Hieros gamos between god and giantess as a means to get hold of a desirable object. Odinn’s relation with Gunnlod gives access to the mead of Suttung. (c) Hieros gamos between the vanir god and the giantesses seems to be of another sort. It seems to involve lasting relationships. (A faet that is not explicitly stated in relation to Freyr and Gerd, but it seems logical to see the marriage between their parents Njordr and Skadi as prototypic of the hieros gamos in Skm.) Matrimony was one of the most important institutions in the old Norse society. Marriage implied new ties between families. Circumstances concerning ownership and inheritance were sig nificantly influenced. This social perspective is important when we seek the deeper meaning of the imagery of the myth. The structuralistic approach also stresses this point. But the core of the myth expresses genuine religious concerns. The gods are dependent on the giants, a fact that in many ways is betrayed by the Eddaic mythology. Their alliances are both necessary and fateful. The giants represent protological knowledge and are owners of important treasures, necessary for the gods. At the same time relations with the giantic powers turn out to be disastrous. As time passes on the gods become more and more deeply involved in alliances with the jçtnir. Research in this field has aceentuated too much the opposition between gods and giants. Necessary relations and interactions seem to be

218

WORDS ANn OB3ECTS

more adequate conceptions for the complex relations between these two groups. Thor is usually depicted as the giant-fighter par excellence, his hammer is always lifted against Jotunheimr. Still, even this god makes utterances which reveal deep insight into the com plexity of cosmology. He displays viewpoints which we today would ciassify as ecological. In Hblj 23 Thor utters the following during a verbal dispute with Odinn: mikil myndi ætt iQtna ef allir lifôi, vætr myndi manna undir miôgaröi. The km of giants would grow mighty if all of them were allowed to live. If so, there would be few people in Midgardr. Thor’s preoccupation is the balance in cosmos, not the extermination ofone of two feuding groups. The harmonious relation between the different groups must be secured. This deep insight is as cribed even to Thor, who is usually not the first to be associated with wisdom. The traces of a cult of giants found in the literary sources probably get their deepest meaning from a cosmological point of view. The giants constitute groups of power which are extremely important for the cosmic balance. They have to be fitted into the whole. Aceordingly, they have to be taken care of ritually. It is only appropriate that the vanir-gods are given the task of establishing lasting alliances with the world of the jptnir. Njordr is called a god of hostage in Ls 34. He has come from outside, he is the guarantee of peace and alliances among groups of gods. Our next question is: what sort of cult has been paid to the giants? V~ constituted an example of a fertility cult. The Eddic myths of hieros gamos also indicate fertility rites of some sort. It seems reasonable to suppose that apotropaical rituals directed towards giants have also been important. In all cultures averting rituals are known and performed in order to keep disastrous powers within certain limits. Until now we have dealt with giant maidens; our ritual exam ples have all dealt with cultic rituals directed to females. Cer

GIANTS AS RECJPIENTS GP CULT IN THE VIKING AGE?

219

tainly there are many different groups of jç’tnir, but for the present we can state that the cult of female giants is most directly suggested in the literary material. Further investigation will probably uncover traces of rituals performed also for male giants. In Sskm for example, Snorri tells in his novelistic manner about a travel in the lands of giants. Three gods, Odinn, Hønir and Loki are on their way through Utgardr.’5 They become tired and hungry and want to prepare some food. Much effort is spent on trying to fry an ox. In the meantime an eagle is watching from a tree. The gods do not succeed until they have promised the eagle a part of the roast. The bird turns out to be the giant Thiazi. In the end he steals the better part of the food. The story seems to be based upon knowledge of an old ritual of sacrifice. The story relates that beyond the limits of the blessed homes of gods and men, tribute is to be paid to the powers who are the owners of the land. In the story of Sskm the gods enter Utgardr, which is the land of giants, and accord ingly they have to pay some fee in form of a sacrifice. (One can discuss whether the actual tribute is to be classified as offering or sacrifice. But the question is not of any importance here.) Have we really discovered something like a model? Fertility rituals for beautiful giant maidens and meat-offerings for mas culine giants? The model is not that simple; another sort of source material wilI give further insight and add to the com plexity of the cult of giants. The question concerning the cult of giants also has to be directed towards archeological source material. Obviously the giants have important roles to play in figurative decorations. The scaldic descriptions ofpieture-series on shields or walls is noteworthy. Every scene depicted by Pjôåôlfr ôr Hvini in HaustlQng deals with relationships between gods and giants. The same concerns Ulfr Uggason’s Hûsdråpa, the de scription of the wall-paintings of Ôlåfr Påi in Iceland. An impor tant question is whether these representations had a decorative function only or whether they primarily represented a religious —mythic or cultic content. Obviously different sources de mand different methods. Picture stones from the period follow ing the introduction of Christianity, containing compound Christian and heathen motifs, veil the tension in the heathen mmd. From a Christian point of view every heathen motif may -

220

WORD5 ANn OBJECTS

be used as a symbol of evil, but sometimes heathen gods are given the function of forerunners of Christ. After all, the ten sions between the heathen ereative and chaotic powers are missed within the new context. Basically it is in pre-Christian sources that we can bok for the original function of the figura tive art of the Iron Age in a fruitful way. In an artiele on prehistorie art in 1931 Haakon Schetelig stated that the figurative art ofthe Iron Age is not to be looked upon as private and decorative only: Jernalderens billedkunst var utelukkende sakrale billeder, som hadde en dyp og hellig mening for den hedenske tankegang. Av billedenes anvendelse kan det også sluttes at de tjente til vern og beskyttelse (The pictorial art of the Iron Age is fundamentally sacred, the pictures had a deep and holy meaning and they were made for protection).16 I will concentrate on one example. One of the three pictorial stones constituting the monument of Hynnestad, Skåne, in the south of Sweden, shows a single, female figure. She is riding on a beast like a wolf, uses snakes for reins, and has herselfa tongue like a snake. The woman has been interpreted as Hyrrokkin, the giantess who, aceording to Snorri, was called for when nobody else was able to push the boat with the dead Baldr into the sea.’7 The woman turns out to be an extremely important person; as a matter of fact her function is absolutely necessary in the funeral ritual. Probably this is an element that has hitherho been somewhat overlooked. According to Monica Rydbeck, who published her dissertation in 1936 on pictorial stones from Skåne, the ‘Hyrrokin-stone’ must be of pre-Christian origin.’8 Accordingly it belongs to the heathen funeral tradition. Obvi ously the very act of raising the stone-monument is to be classi fied as a ritual. The picture on the stone indicates that the ritual once performed was of apotropaic character. According to the Baldrmyth, this giantess would probably heip the dead to start his journey to the other world. If the giants were such important figures in critical situations as the myths indicate, it is not surprising at all that they were dealt with ritually. After all, it would be more remarkable if Norse tradition should miss any ritual dealing with powers on

GIANTS AS RECIPIENTS OF CULT IN THE VIKING

AGE?

221

whom the whole of existence finally depended. The giants are as necessary to the world as the gods arei9

Notes 1. The group of mythical beings which in modern English is called (Jptnir) giants, consists of different beings: jptunn (p1. jprnir), frurs, gygr (a female noun), risi, bergrisi, troll. In this study we will not deal with the inter relatjons of the different kinds, 2. Jan de Vries sums up the discussion in Altgermanisc/,e Religionsgeschichte 1:241 pp. Recently Lotte Motz has dealt with the problem of giants in several papers, see Lotte Motz 1981; l~82. According to her view, the giants represent powers oltier than the Norse gods of the Eddaic mythology; tbey are reminiscences of the gods of the original inhabitants of the North (Motz 1982). 3. Magnus Olsen 1917:655. 4. Jan de Vries 1970, B.I: 243 pp. 5. Anne Holtsmark in I’. A. Munch 1967:78. 6. Op.cit. 7. References to Edda are to Gustav Neckel (ed.) Edda. Die Lieder des Codex Regius, rev, ed. Hans Kuhn, Heidelberg 1962. 8. E. 0. G. Turville-Petre 1977:165. 9. Hjalmar Lindroth 1930. 10. Jan de Vries 1970, II: 335 pp. II. Gro Steinsland and Kan Vogt 1981. 12. Folke Ström 1954:2424. 13. Åke V. Ström 1975:145 pp. 14. Folke Ström 1983. IS. SnE. Bragaroedur 2. 16. Haakon Schetelig 1931:220. 17. Gylf. 33. IS. Monica Rydbeck 1936:22 pp. 19. After this paper was presented at Isegran; I became aware of Lotte Motz’s paper: ‘Gods and Demons of the Wilderness’, Arkiv får nordisk J?lologi 99, 1984, pp. 175-87. Here Motz stresses the viewpoint that the giants represent older gods of the Nordie inhabitants. According to this view, the tensions in Norse mythology must be due to a historical development. My view is the opposite: the dramatic tension in Norse cosmology presupposes both gods and giants. The gi’ants are dealt with nitually as chaotic powers as such, not as reminiscences of older kinds of gods. List of abbreviations: Gm = Grimnismål Gylf = Gylfaginning in SnE. Hrblj = Hårbarödsljoö 5km = Skirnjsmél SnE = Edda of Snorri Sturluson

222

WORDS AND OBJECTS

Sskm Skaldskaparmål in SnE. V~, = V~lsajåttir =

References Dronke, Ursula, 1962 ‘Art and Tradition in Skirnismal’, Eng!ish o.nd Medievat Siudies, N. Davis and C. L. Wrenn (eds.), London, pp. 250-68. Heusler, Andreas, 1903. ‘Die Geschichte vom Völsi’, Zeitschrift des Vereinsffir Volkskunde 13, Berlin. Holtsmark, Anne, 1968, in P. A. Munch: Norrone gude- og heltesagn, Oslo, rev., ed., A. Holtsmark. Lindroth, Hjalmar, 1914. ‘En nordisk gudagestalt i ny belysning genom ortnam nen’, Antikvarisk Tidskqfl XX, Stockholm. Lindroth, Hjalmar, 1930. ‘Skee—Skøvde—-Skedevi’, Göteborgs Universildts årsskrjft 36, Göteborg, pp. 38-49. Lönnroth, Lars, 1977. ‘Skirnismâl och den fornislandska äktenskapsnormen’, Opuscula Septentrionalia. Fesiskr~fl til Ole Widding 10.10.1977, Copenhagen, pp. 154-78. Mitchell, Stephan A., 1983. ‘Fér Scirnis as Mytbological Model: friö at kaupa’, Arkivför nordisk filologi 98, Lund, pp. 108-122. Motz, Lotte, 198 la. ‘Gerdr’, Maal og Minne, 3-4, Oslo, pp. 121-36. Motz, Lotte, 1981 b. ‘Giantesses and their Names’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 15. Band, Jahrbuch des Instituts für Frühmittelalterforschung der Univer sität Münster, Berlin, pp. 495-511. Motz, Lotte, 1982. ‘Giants in Folklore and Mythologi: A New Approach, Folklore Vol. 93:i, pp. 70-84. Olsen, Magnus, 1909. ‘Fra gammelnorsk myte og kultus’, Maal og Minne, Oslo, pp. 17-36. Olsen, Magnus, 1917. Norges Indskr(fter med de ældre Runer II, Christiania. Rydbeck, Monica, 1936. Skånes Stenmåsiarefdre 1200, Lund. Schetelig, Haakon, 1931. ‘Billedfremstillinger i jernalderens kunst’, Nordisk Kultur B.XXVII, KUNST, ed. H. Sehetelig, Oslo, pp. 202-224. Strôm, Folke, 1954. Diser, nornor, valkyrfor. Fruktbarhetskult och sakralt kun gadöme i Norden. Stockholm. Ström, Folke, 1983. ‘Hieros gamos-motivet i Hallfredr Ottarssons Hakonardra pa och den nordnorskajarlavårdigheten’, Arkivför nordisk filologi 98, Lund, pp. 67-79. Ström, Åke V., 1975. ‘Germanische Religion’, in Germanische wid Baltisehe Religionen, Die Religion der Menschheit, B. 19, 1, ed. Ström, Å. V. and Biezais, H., Stockholm. Turville-Petre, E. 0. G. 1977. Myth and Religion of Ihe Norlh, New York. Vries, Jan de, 1970. Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte, I-Il, Berlin.

16 Bog Corpses and Germania, Ch. 12 Folke Ström

In the twelfth chapter of Gerniania Tacitus gives a description of Germanic eriminal law. Of crimes that lead to capital punish ment he gives the following account: Licet apud concilium accusare quoque et discrimen capitis intendere. Distinctio poenarum ex delicto. Proditores et trans fugas arboribus suspendunt; ignavos et imbelles et corpore infames caeno ac palude, iniecta insuper crate, mergunt. Di versitas supplicii illuc respicit, tamquam scetera ostendi opor teat, dum puniuntur, flagitia abscondi. (Before the assembly one is atso allowed to make aceusations and bring capital charges. Punishments vary according to the type of crime. Traitors and deserters are hanged from trees; the cowardly, the unmanly, and those who have defiled their bodies are submerged in muddy quagmires and covered with wicker work. The differences in punishment are intended to reflect the ide’a that crimes should be shown up by punishment in public but abominations concealed.) A considerable number of scholars, Germanin commentators, archaeologists and others have associated Tacitus’ information about the category of criminats whose deeds were categorized as abominations and who were punished by being submerged in quagmires, with the well-known finds of so-called bog corp ses. The documentation of bog-corpse finds goes back to 1640, but real research on the subject began in the latter half of the nineteenth century. The primus motor and pioneer in the field was Johanna Mestorf, custodian and, from 1891, director of Museum vaterländischer Altertümer at Kiel, whose work had

Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning

The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, Oslo Serie B: Skrifter LXXI Gro Steinsland (ed.) Words and Objects: Towards a Dialogue Eetween Archaeology and History of Religion

Words and Objects —

Towards a Dialogue Between Archaeology and History of Religion Edited by Gro Steinsland

UNIVERSITETET I OSLO~ HISTORISK INSTITUTT

Norwegian University Press The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture

cg

?~O22o

Norwegian University Press (Iiniversitetsforlaget AS), 0608 Oslo 6 Distributed world-wide excluding Scandinavia by Oxford University Press, WaILon Street, Oxford 0X2 6DP

Contents

London New York Toronto Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi Kuala Lumpur Singapore l-Iong Kong Tokyo Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town Melbourne Auckland and associated companies in Beirut Berlin Ibadan Mexico City

©

Nicosia

Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning 1986

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, eleetronie, meehanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Norwegian University Press (Universitetsforlaget AS) Chs. 12, 13, and 18 translated by Kirsten Williams Ch. 7 translated by Per Chr. Karisen ISBN 82-00-07751-9 British Library Catalogning in Publication Data Words and objects: towards ‘å dialogue between archaeology and history of religion.—(Institute for comparative research in human culture series; 70) I. Northmen—Religion 2. Northmen—Antiquities I. Steinsland, Gro III. Series I5BN 82-00-07751-9 Printed in Denmark by P. J. Schmidt A/S, Vojens

Preface 1. Rock Carvings and Graves: Spatial Relationships. Uif Berilisson 2. The Part and the Whole: Reflections on Theory and Methods Applied to the Interpretation ofScandinavian Rock Carvings. Ragnhild Bjerre Finnestad 3. Die Berater des Schwedenkönigs. Nils Hallan 4. Rock Drawings as Evidence of Religion: Some Princi pal Points of View. Åke Hultkrantz 5. Religion and Archaeology: Revelation or Empirical Research? Øystein Johansen 6. Religion Expressed Through Bead Use: An Ethno Archaeological Study of Shilluk, Southern Sudan. Lise Johansen Kleppe 7. Aspects of Neolithic Ritual Sites. Mats P Maimer 8. Searching for Female Deities in the Religious Manifes tations of the Scandinavian Bronze Age. Gro Mandt 9. Religion and Ecology: Motifs and Location ofHunters’ Rock Carvings in Eastern Norway. Egil Mikkeisen 10. Interpretation of South-Scandinavian Petroglyphs in the History of Religion, Done by Archaeologists:

.

7 9

21 32

43

67

78 91

111

127