91

Opening the Oak-Coffins

PHILOSOPHY
in the belief that archaeology makes
it feasible to write a coherent history of
prehistoric times
A. Sherratt (1997)

XI. REFLECTIONS
With the new and revised dendro-dates, the classic
Early Bronze Age oak-coffins have revealed another
few of their secrets. The important thing is to apply
these in studies of artefact chronology and, through
a series of equally advanced methods, of life, society
and culture of the age, as has been attempted above,
like many times before.
The studies have encompassed a full range of approaches, to name the most important ones: scientific
studies of chemical processes allowing preservation
of organic materials, dendro-scientific studies, classical typological chronology aided by the latter, quantitative studies of burial goods with regards to social
structure, warfare, etc., observations on the symbolic
significance of artefacts, cosmological observations
and beliefs, numerological studies, etc. Indeed, a full
range of approaches, old as new, have been brought
to bear on the unique oak-coffin graves, their structural properties and interpretative potential.
Discussions of a particular theoretical nation seem
redundant in a universe of study so rich and complex
that a multitude of approaches, methods and theoretical argumentation are called for. Rather the problem is
one of problematization and subsequence integration
of discrete analyses. Typically, the latter takes the form
of complex interplays centred on the functional and
symbolic properties of all things cultural. It is, in other
words, centred on the roles of the man-made material
reality created by Man the Actor. Several narratives
have been employed, typically as fragments of a historical vision of Bronze Age society and ideology, rather
than a mere structural one. Where structure is evident,
it mainly concerns the initial scientific search for stabile
patterns as the base of interpretative suggestions.

For instance, the distribution of supreme beltplates, reflecting secret cosmological, in fact calendar knowledge housed with the manufacturer (and
others), concentrate on Sjlland (in Period II). This
structure allows the localisation of high cosmological wisdom, and thus the isolation of an elite of
the elites, whose ultimate power is defined by such
knowledge, indeed, by a particular form of literacy.
Sun-images may be found everywhere, but knowledge of calendars and mathematics were doubtless
for the few. Furthermore, such observation allows a
link between abstract knowledge and high quality
craftsmanship, including acquisition of costly exotic
raw materials. In turn, these dimensions are referred
to systems of material production, tribute, gift-giving
and exchange, and even cultic performances, like the
ones depicted on rock-carvings. In rituals, the many
dimensions of society congregate in public display of
beliefs and power involving the prime items of the
period, from ships and chariots to weapons, so-called
shields and lur trumpets in parades and rituals, likely
of public nature (notably, burial is seemingly not depicted on the rock-carvings, even though some of the
rituals may relate to such).
It is also in this particular universe that the expressly female use of belt-plates, a cosmological idiom, primarily referring to the Sun, is a very interesting observation. While men, to judge from the burials, is the dominant being in terms of power, control
and consumption of luxury items, females displaying Sun-idols on their bellies, in particular if these
were of the supreme and secret kind, would have
been given powers referring to reproduction of the
universe and thus of daily life. Also other jewellery

92

Acta Archaeologica

seems to have had cosmological significance, such

as neck-rings (cyclic continuity) and moon-shaped
neck-collars.
The disappearance of belt-plates with the advent
of Period III is highly interesting in this context, not
least since it is accompanied by a decline of spiral
ornamentation, and thus movement, and a rise of
the centrally placed star (likely depicting the sun) on
discs, buttons, belt-boxes, etc. At the same time, a
relative rise in number and status of women is seen
in burials. In Period III, the number of women with
artefacts is about half that of the men. Recovery of the
cultic position is only made with the arrival of large
belt-boxes and, in particular the so-called hanging
vessels of the Late Bronze Age, perhaps the heavily
decorated precious heirlooms of female shamans, still
with cosmological references and found filled with
amulets, at least in one case of Period III date (Oppe
Sundby/Maglehj, AK I 183A).
Stars or rays, in fact arches, dominate the ornamentation of the hanging vessels of Period IV, but in
Periods V and VI the star/arch motive is suppressed
and substituted by running meander-like decoration,
often as impressive as the spirals of Period II and like
these with a strong emphasis on movement. Only at
the end of the Bronze Age do such items disappear
altogether, signalling a massive change in cosmology
and society, indeed, the fall of a culture.
The shifting emphasis on male and female items
would seem to relate to still poorly understood relations between the private and public spheres of the
genders. The interpretation of the latter are made
complicated by the general disappearance of grave
goods and the highly fluctuating patterns of other
depositions. The depositions span a range from (usually) one-type finds of male weapons, golden rings
and vessels, long so-called lur trumpets and ceremonial or special purpose shields to lavish female ceremonial items, jewellery etc. In addition to these are
common mixed deposits of mostly common broken
items, possibly treasures. The former finds much look
like the crown jewels of society, the depositions of
which as dangerous items may signal the end of
such societies.
These interpretative suggestions are stated deliberately vaguely stated in order to account for the fact
that archaeological interpretation, as the history of re-

search amply demonstrates, is unusually difficult and

open for discussion. Indeed, one might often benefit
from taking the material reality for its face value.
The common approach to ascribe to particular theories of interpretation - be they historical or anthropological - is less recommendable, except for heuristic
reasons. Such approaches are derived from academic
fields, which have the benefit of active participation
of the researcher in an environment of contemporary
informers. By contrast, archaeology usually has
no one to ask, even though written sources play a
crucial, sometimes dominating - and even strangling
- role as regards later and recent eras.
Most archaeological research results are not individual postulates, but formulated in correspondence
with archaeologists past and present. In this way, research history becomes a cornerstone in argumentation, in itself delineation the routes of future enquiry.
Thus, the Early Bronze Age oak-coffin graves and related finds are posing an ever fruitful demonstration
of the complexity of advanced archaeological studies
in a data-rich environment, including the freedom to
chose - and be responsible for - the approaches chosen and results propagated.
Novel observations are posing the most exiting element in this process, delineating the points in time
space and data, where research history and future investigations are joined in one being, Man the Archaeologist. This person is a historical creature who has
appeared in several forms and disguises ever since
Prehistory, and who is in fact joining the present and
even the distant past (Randsborg 1999).
A final note concerns archaeology as a medium
and material history as a teleological project. By creating the past as the past (which it undoubtedly is),
the difference between them and us is accentuated
in much the same way as the foreign is in contemporary discourse. We cannot transform ourselves to
the past, nor can the past to our times. Nevertheless,
the question is whether we can conceive ourselves in,
say, the Bronze Age (likely, a not too pleasant experience), or vice versa, and still be true to both. In other
words, whether we can free ourselves of academic
constraints, even archaeological theory and some
method, and, like visitors in each others world, communicate. One way to do so is to obtain foreign experiences, of archaeology and the world. Another is to

Opening the Oak-Coffins

have a historical vision. To make everything contemporary - as some post-modernist scholars would have
it - only accounts for the status of data (and partly of
research history) and will not help in understanding
major differences. Indeed, academic correctness is a
way of failing history.

93

The Past is the Past, but it is also us - observers

and students. History has only one direction but many
faces in its mirror, one of these faces is our own. Another important mirage is the things that might have
happened, but never did. We are learning from conceiving them all.