Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:10:30.845Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hidden and Remote: New Perspectives on the People in the Levänluhta Water Burial, Western Finland (c.ad 300–800)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2017

Anna Wessman
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Teija Alenius
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Elisabeth Holmqvist
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Kristiina Mannermaa
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Wesa Perttola
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Tarja Sundell
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland
Santeri Vanhanen
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Finland

Abstract

The wetland find in Levänluhta (western Finland) consists of unburnt, mixed up remains from almost 100 human individuals along with artefacts and animal bones. This spring site, a small lake at the time of use (ad 300–800), has been investigated archaeologically from the late nineteenth century onwards. An impressive array of finds, including precious artefacts, is on display at the National Museum of Finland. However, the material has not previously been subjected to systematic research to clarify who these people were, and why they were buried in a small lake at a time when cremation was the prevailing burial tradition. Here we present the results of a multidisciplinary study that includes new analyses and interpretations of the finds and the site. Prestigious artefacts, peripheral location, and the fact that only a few males were found suggest this unusual burial site was a cemetery for socially or ideologically deviant members of the society.

Le site aquatique de de Levänluhta en Finlande occidentale contient les restes entremêlés de presque 100 personnes non incinérées ainsi que du mobilier et des ossements d'animaux. Ce site de source, un petit lac l’époque de son utilisation entre environ 300 et 800 apr. J.-C., a été fouillé à plusieurs reprises à partir du IXe siècle. Une série impressionnante de trouvailles, comprenant des objets précieux, est exposée au Musée National de Finlande. Mais ce mobilier n'a jamais fait l'objet d'une étude systématique visant à déterminer la nature des occupants di site, et pourquoi ils avaient été ensevelis dans un petit lac à une époque où l'incinération était d'usage. Ici nous présentons les résultats d'une étude multidisciplinaire qui comprend de nouvelles analyses et interprétations du site et de son mobilier. Ses objets prestigieux, sa position périphérique et le fait que fort peu d'individus masculins ont été retrouvés semblent indiquer que ce site inhabituel était une nécropole abritant des individus en marge de leur société. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Die Feuchtlandstätte von Levänluhta im Westen von Finnland enthält die gemischten Überresten von knapp 100 Individuen sowie Artefakte und Tierknochen. Vom späten neunzehnten Jahrhundert ab haben mehrere archäologische Untersuchungen auf dieser Stätte (eine Quelle, die während der Benutzungszeit der Nekropole zwischen 300 und 800 n. Chr. einen kleinen See bildete) stattgefunden. Eine eindrucksvolle Serie von Funden, darunter wertvolle Gegenstände, ist im Nationalmuseum von Finnland ausgestellt. Aber man hat noch nie eine systematische Untersuchung des Befundes unternommen, die verdeutlichen könnte, wer dort begraben wurde und warum diese Leute in einem kleinen See bestattet wurden, wann die dann normale Bestattungssitte die Leichenverbrennung war. Hier legen wir die Ergebnisse einer multidisziplinären Untersuchung vor; sie enthält neue Analysen und Deutungen der Funde und des Befundes. Die wertvollen Gegenstände, die Randlage und die Tatsache, dass man nur sehr wenige Männer gefunden hat, weisen darauf hin, dass diese ungewöhnliche Grabstätte wahrscheinlich für gesellschaftliche Außenseiter bestimmt war. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © European Association of Archaeologists 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albarella, U. 2005. Alternate Fortunes? The Role of Domestic Ducks and Geese from Roman to Medieval Times in Britain. In: Grupe, G. & Peters, J., eds. Feathers, Grit and Symbolism: Birds and Humans in the Ancient Old and New Worlds. Rahden: Marie Leidorf, pp. 249–58.Google Scholar
Arrhenius, B. 1962. Det flammande smycket. Fornvännen, 1962: 79101.Google Scholar
Arrhenius, B. 1971. Granatschmuck und Gemmen aus nordischen Funden des frühen Mittelalters. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Arrhenius, B. 1985. Merovingian Garnet Jewellery: Emergence and Social Implications. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Benecke, N. 1993. On the Utilization of Domestic Fowl in Central Europe from the Iron Age up to the Middle Ages. Archaeofauna, 2: 2131.Google Scholar
Bennett, K.D. & Willis, K.J. 2001. Pollen. In: Smol, J.E., Birks, H.J.B. & Last, W.M., eds. Tracking Environmental Change Using Lake Sediments. Vol. 3: Terrestrial, Algal, and Siliceous Indicators. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 532.Google Scholar
Bergman, I., Östlund, L., Zackrisson, O. & Liedgren, L. 2007. Stones into the Snow: A Norse Fur Traders' Road into Sami Country. Antiquity, 81: 397408.Google Scholar
Beug, H.-J. 2004. Leitfaden der Pollenbestimmung für Mitteleuropa und angrenzende Gebiete. München:Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil.Google Scholar
Blomqvist, L. & Fortelius, M. 1982. Animal Bones in the Luistari Graves: Appendix II. In: Lehtosalo-Hilander, P.-L., ed. Luistari, I, The Graves. Helsinki: Finnish Antiquarian Society, pp. 310–12.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2008. Deposition Models for Chronological Records. Quaternary Science Reviews, 27(1–2): 4260.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2009. Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates. Radiocarbon, 51(1): 337–60.Google Scholar
Charalambous, A., Kassianidou, V. & Papasavvas, G. 2014. A Compositional Study of Cypriot Bronzes Dating to the Early Iron Age Using Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (pXRF). Journal of Archaeological Science, 46: 205–16.Google Scholar
Dahlin Hauken, Å. 2005. The Westland Cauldrons in Norway (AmS-Skrifter 19). Stavanger: Arkeologisk museum i Stavanger.Google Scholar
Dussubieux, L. & Walder, H. 2015. Identifying American Native and European Smelted Coppers with pXRF: A Case Study of Artifacts from the Upper Great Lakes Region. Journal of Archaeological Science, 59: 169–78.Google Scholar
Faegri, K. & Iversen, J. 1989. Textbook of Pollen Analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Formisto, T. 1993. An Osteological Analysis of Human and Animal Bones from Levänluhta. Vammala: Vammala Kirjapaino.Google Scholar
Formisto, T. 1996. Osteological Material. In: Purhonen, P., ed. Vainionmäki: A Merovingian Period Cemetery in Laitila, Finland. Helsinki: National Board of Antiquities, pp. 8187.Google Scholar
Gal, E. 2005. New Evidence of Fowling and Poultry Keeping in Pannonia, Dacia, and Moesia During the Period of the Roman Empire. In: Grupe, G. & Peters, J., eds. Feathers, Grit, and Symbolism: Birds and Humans in the Ancient Old and New Worlds. Rahden: Marie Leidorf, pp. 303–18.Google Scholar
Geological Survey of Finland, 2009. Map of Quaternary Deposits 1:20 000 and 1:50 000.Google Scholar
Glørstad, Z.T. & Røstad, I.M. 2015. Mot en ny tid? Merovingertidens ryggknappspenner som uttrykk for endring og erindring. In: Vedeler, M. & Røstad, I.M., eds. Smykker. Personlig pynt i kulturhistorisk lys. Trondheim: Museumsforlaget, pp. 181210.Google Scholar
Gotfredsen, A.B. 2013. The Role of Birds as Grave Gifts in richly Furnished Roman Iron Age Inhumation Graves, c. 1–375 ad, Eastern Denmark. Anthropozoologica, 48: 355–70.Google Scholar
Grant, A. 1982. The Use of Tooth Wear as a Guide to the Age of Domestic Ungulates. In: Wilson, B., Grigson, G. & Payne, S., eds. Aging and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, pp. 91108.Google Scholar
Grimm, E.C. 1991–2011. TILIA v1.7.16 software. Springfield (IL): Illinois State Museum. https://www.tiliait.com/Google Scholar
Haavio, , 1937. Tarinoita Levänluhdan ym. lähteistä. Kotiseutu: 157159.Google Scholar
Habermehl, K.-H. 1975. Die Altersbestimmung bei Haus- und Labortieren. Berlin und Hamburg: Paul Parey.Google Scholar
Hackman, A. 1906. Fyndstället på Levänluhta åker vid Orismala by. Unpublished Survey Report. Helsinki: Archives of the National Board of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Hackman, A. 1913. Ein Opferfund der Völkerwanderungszeit in Finland. In: Opuscula Archaeologica Oscari Montelio septuagenario dicata. Stockholm: J. Haeggstroem, pp. 299316.Google Scholar
Hårding, B. 2002. Människan och djuren: om dagligt liv och begravningsritualer under järnåldern. In: Viklund, K. & Gullberg, K., eds. Från romartid till vikingatid: Pörnullbacken – en järnålderstida bosättning i Österbotten. Vasa: Scriptum, pp. 213–22.Google Scholar
Hellman, S., Bunting, M.J. & Gaillard, M.J. 2009. Relevant Source Area of Pollen in Patchy Cultural Landscapes and Signals of Anthropogenic Landscape Disturbance in the Pollen Record: A Simulation Approach. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 153: 245–58.Google Scholar
Holmqvist, E. 2017. Handheld Portable Energy Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (pXRF). In: Hunt, A., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Ceramic Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 363–81.Google Scholar
Jenkins, D.A. 1989. Trace Element Geochemistry in Archaeological Sites. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 11: 5762.Google Scholar
Jennbert, K. 2011. Animals and Humans: Recurrent Symbiosis in Archaeology and Old Norse Religion (Vägar till Midgård 14). Lund: Nordic Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kivikero, H. 2008. Cremation from Karjaa Alasätra Hönsåkerskullen (unpublished MA dissertation, Osteoarchaeological Research Laboratory, University of Stockholm).Google Scholar
Kivikero, H. 2009. Isokyrö Pukkila. Osteologinen analyysi (KM 7729). Unpublished osteological report. Helsinki: Archives of the National Board of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Kivikoski, E. 1961. Suomen esihistoria (Suomen historia I). Helsinki: WSOY.Google Scholar
Lehtosalo-Hilander, P.-L. 1984. Uhrit ja uskomukset: keski- ja myöhäisrautakausi. In: Suomen historia I. Helsinki: WSOY, pp. 303–09.Google Scholar
Leppäaho, J. 1949. Kalevala vertailevan muinaistieteen valaisemana, In: Heporauta, F.A. & Haavio, M., eds. Kalevala kansallinen aarre. Helsinki: WSOY, pp. 4981.Google Scholar
Meinander, C.-F. 1950. Etelä-Pohjanmaan Esihistoria I–II. Helsinki: Etelä-Pohjanmaan historiatoimikunta.Google Scholar
Meinander, C.-F. 1977. Forntiden i svenska Österbotten. In: Hägg, W., ed. Svenska Österbottens historia I. Vasa: Österbottens landskapsförbund, pp. 1143.Google Scholar
Monikander, A. 2010. Våld och vatten. Våtmarkskult vid Skedemosse under järnåldern (Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 52). Stockholm: Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Moore, P.D., Webb, J.A. & Collison, M.E. 1991. Pollen Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
NBA, 1886. Excavation Catalogue from the Excavation of Oscar Rancken, Levänluhta 1886. Unpublished catalogue. Helsinki: Archives of the National Board of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Nielsen, A.B. & Sugita, S. 2005. Estimating Relevant Source Area of Pollen for Small Danish Lakes Around ad 1800. The Holocene, 15: 1006–20.Google Scholar
Niskanen, M. 2006. Stature of the Merovingian-Period Inhabitants from Levänluhta, Finland. Fennoscandia Archaeologica, 23: 2436.Google Scholar
Oestigaard, T. 1999. Cremations as Transformations: When the Dual Cultural Hypothesis Was Cremated and Carried Away in Urns. European Journal of Archaeology, 2: 345–64.Google Scholar
Olsen, V.S. 2006. The Development of (Proto)-Disc-on-Bow Brooches in England, Frisia and Scandinavia. Palaeohistoria 47/48: 479528Google Scholar
Orfanou, V. & Rehren, T. 2014. A (Not So) Dangerous Method: pXRF vs. EPMA-WDS Analyses of Copper-Based Artefacts. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 10.1007/s12520–-014-0198-z.Google Scholar
Ørsnes, M. 1966. Form og stil i Sydskandinaviens yngre germanske jernalder. København: Nationalmuseet.Google Scholar
Ramqvist, P. 1992. Högom. The Excavations 1949–1984. Högom Part I (Archaeology and Environment 13). Umeå: University of Umeå.Google Scholar
Raninen, S. & Wessman, A. 2015. Rautakausi. In: Haggén, G., Halinen, P., Lavento, M., Raninen, S. & Wessman, A., eds. Muinaisuutemme jäljet. Suomen esi- ja varhaishistoria kivikaudelta keskiajalle. Viljandi: Gaudeamus, pp. 215365.Google Scholar
Reille, M. 1992. Pollen et spores d'Europe et d'Afrique du nord. Marseille: Laboratoire de Botanique Historique et Palynologie.Google Scholar
Reille, M. 1995. Pollen et spores d'Europe et d'Afrique du nord. Supplément 1. Marseille: Laboratoire de Botanique Historique et Palynologie.Google Scholar
Reimer, P., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Becks, J.W., Blackwell, P.G., Bronk Ramsey, C., et al. 2013. IntCal 13 and Marine 13 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0–50,000 Years cal bp. Radiocarbon, 55: 1869–87.Google Scholar
Røstad, I. 2016. Smykkenes språk. Smykker og identitetsforhandlinger i Skandinavien ca. 400-650/700 e. Kr. Bind I. Oslo: UiO.Google Scholar
Salo, K. 2004. Osteologinen analyysi, Laitila Vainionmäki (KM 34726), Kirsi Luoto 2004. Unpublished osteological report. Helsinki: Archives of the National Board of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Salo, K. 2005. Osteologinen analyysi, Jaala Pukkisaari (KM 19915, KM 29097 ja KM 30871). Unpublished osteological report. Helsinki: Archives of the National Board of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Seger, T. 1982. The Plague of Justinian and Other Scourges. Fornvännen, 77: 184–98.Google Scholar
Serjeantson, D. 2009. Birds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Silver, A.I. 1969. The Ageing of Domestic Animals. In: D. Brothwell, E. Higgs & G. Clark, eds. Science in Archaeology: A Survey of Progress and Research. Thames & Hudson, pp. 283302.Google Scholar
Smith, D. 2012. Handheld X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Renaissance Bronzes: Practical Approaches to Quantification and Acquisition. In: Shugar, A.N. & Mass, J.L., eds. Handheld XRF for Art and Archaeology. Leuven: Leuven University Press, pp. 3774.Google Scholar
Stockmarr, J. 1971. Tablets with Spores Used in Absolute Pollen Analysis. Pollen et Spores, 13: 615–21.Google Scholar
Storm Munch, J. 1956. Folkevandringstidens gullskatter i Norge. Viking. Tidskrift for norrön arkeologi, 20: 97126.Google Scholar
Viklund, K. 2002. Österbottens järnåldersbygd och kontinuitetsproblematiken. In: Viklund, K. & Gullberg, K., eds. Från romartid till vikingatid. Pörnullbacken- en järnålderstida bosättning I Österbotten. Vasa: Scriptum, pp. 2544.Google Scholar
Vretemark, M. 1997. Från ben till boskap. Kosthåll och djurhushållning med utgångspunkt i medeltida benmaterial från Skara (Skrifter från Skaraborgs Länsmuseum 25). Skara: Skaraborgs Länsmuseum.Google Scholar
Wallin, J.-E. & Segrström, U. 1994. Natural Resources and Agriculture during the Iron Age in Ostrobothnia, Western Finland, Investigated by Pollen Analysis. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 3: 89105.Google Scholar
Wessman, A. 2009a. Levänluhta: A Place of Punishment, Sacrifice, or just a Common Cemetery? Fennoscandia Archaeologica, 26: 4771.Google Scholar
Wessman, A. 2009b. Reclaiming the Past: Using Old Artefacts as a Means of Remembering. In Sne, A. & Vasks, A., eds. Memory, Society, and Material Culture (Interarchaeologia 3). Riga, Helsinki, Tartu & Vilnius: Universities of Riga, Helsinki, Tartu, and Vilnius, pp. 7188.Google Scholar
Wessman, A. 2010. Death, Destruction, and Commemoration: Tracing Ritual Activities in Late Iron Age Cemeteries (ad 550–1150) (ISKOS 18). Helsinki: The Finnish Antiquarian Society.Google Scholar