Gripla - 20.12.2009, Blaðsíða 140
GRIPLA140
2004) 2, and also to the largely neglected presence of the Slavs in southern
Scandinavia (cf. Roslund 2001 and naum 2008). More important for this
particular discussion is the internal variability of the “nordic civilization”
itself.
Scandinavian archaeologists traditionally interpreted the visible uneven
ness of cultural manifestations as merely local variations of one unified
cultural tradition. this deeply rooted assumption may be checked by
studying collective death rituals that were important for both the external
differentiation of particular communities and their internal integration.
fredrik Svanberg’s (2003a and 2003b) analyses of southeast Scandinavia
during the period 800–1000 AD, indicate that there were eleven quite
distinct burial traditions (Svanberg 2003b, fig. 61). this undermines the
popular concept of some homogenous “viking Age culture” because terri
torial variability of grave types indicating differentiation in burial customs
and death rituals, may be interpreted in terms of religious differentiation.
this, in turn, undermines the concept of common panScandinavian reli
gious symbolism and eschatological beliefs because “…it is hard to see how
a number of different traditions may all simply be reflections of one and
the same coherent mythology or religion” (Svanberg 2003a, 142).
Even in Denmark, most of which is dominated by inhumations, Jutland
exhibits a significantly large number of cremations. unfortunately there
are no such detailed regional studies for other parts of Scandinavia but also
there are other clear points of differentiation. For Norway we might
regard the more general observation that “there were probably major dif
ferences in culture and belief” in the area of contemporary Norway (S. W.
nordeide 2006, 222), because the late Iron Age burial customs there seem
2 Today, the early contacts between the two populations, Germanic and Sami, are seen as
equally important for both parties. The times when mutual relations were interpreted
mostly in terms of the forced exploitation of the Sami by Germanic chieftains are long
gone, while references to numerous medieval accounts of the use of Sami expertise in
magic and the marrying of Sami women to Norse men of high rank are held to be signific
ant. Contacts during pre-Christian times are now discussed in terms of symbiosis and
cooperation rather than confrontation and subordination (Hansen and olsen 2004, ch.
3.3). Rich female graves in the Norwegian zone containing typical Sami ornaments, and
females buried in the Sami zone with Scandinavian jewellery, seem to testify to an opport
unistic “exchange” of women. This may suggest some institutionalization of the cross-
ethnic contacts, which is further suggested by some linguistic connections and place names
(Hansen and olsen 2004, ch. 3.5).