Territorial Behaviour and Communication in a Ritual Landscape Author(s): Leif Sahlqvist Reviewed work(s): Source: Geografiska Annaler.

Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 83, No. 2 (2001), pp. 79-102 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/491058 . Accessed: 01/02/2012 04:48
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION IN A RITUAL LANDSCAPE

by Leif Sahlqvist

in and Behaviour Communication L., Sahlqvist, 2001:Territorial a RitualLandscape. Geogr.Ann.,82 B (2): 79-102. in ABSTRACT. research thelastdecade,in human geLandscape has and ographyas well as in anthropology archaeology, often methbeenpolarized, eitheraccording traditional to geographical ods or followingthe principles a new, symbolically of orientated Ostergotdiscipline.This cross-disciplinary studyin prehistoric the of and land,Sweden,demonstrates importance usingmethods from both orientations orderto gain reasonable in approaches of structure. Fuhistoryandterritorial comprehension landscape cultural landneralmonuments cognitivenodesin a prehistoric as as elementsof asscapearedemonstrated to containsignificant not tronomy, unlikewhathas beendiscussedfor nativeandprehistoricAmerican cultures,e.g. AncestralPueblo.A locational of was esanalysiswith measurements distancesanddirections A method sentialin approaching structure. nearest this neighbour was usedas a starting-point a territorial for discussion, indicating divisioncouldhaveits rootsin thattheNorthEuropean hundreds linkedto barrows BronzeAge (1700-500 BC) tribalterritories, In interrelated cardinal in alignments. theEuropegeographically an BronzeAge faithand science,the religiousandthe profane, of withinthe framework a solarcult, probably were integrated in withastronomy arituallandscape, organized closelyconnected to with powerandteraccording cosmologicalideas,associated kindwas apparof a similar Cosmographic expression ritoriality. (stonecists) fromthe ently used even earlier,as gallery-graves are LateNeolithic(2300-1700BC) in Osterg6tland alsogeographin alignments. ically interrelated cardinal

Theoretical framework For some time now, in geographyas well as in arlandscaperesearch chaeology and anthropology, has attracted attentionfrom an increasingnumber of scholarsin variouspartsof the world.Discussions have revolvedarounddifferentapproaches, emphasizingconceptualpolarities between - in humangeograterms- a traditional geographical discipline. phy anda new, symbolicallyorientated In geographythis took off seriouslyin the 1970s and in archaeologysomewhatlater.Thus ChristopherTilley has opposed geometry to context, objective to subjective, system to strategy, neutral to empowered, atemporal to temporal, external to internal, coherence to contradiction etc. (1994, p. 8f). ing visiblelinvisible and material/mental (Olwig,

Othershaveproposedsimilardichotomies,includ1984;Cosgrove,1993, 1998).

In traditional geographyspaceexists in itself as an independent container with a surfaceand a voand lume, thereto be measured physicallydivided accordingto mathematical/geometrical principles and or models.Evenwhenspaceis populated terriits torialized, contentscanbe calculated objectively in numbers inhabitants, of birth density, population and deathratesetc. Space remainsneutralas long as it is not filled with structures humanpower, of ritualand religion or other irracommunication, tionalor largelyimmeasurable features.Such features, however, are studied in 'new' geography, as conwherespaceis considered a socialproduct, stantly reproducedand variously approachedin terms of human experience, attachmentand involvement.It is also differently perceivedandunderstoodby differentindividuals,collectives and societies. Cultural are landscapes lookeduponnot in of only as products humanintervention general, as butalso andin particular the resultof humandeof sire to leave an imprint controlandpower,often and associatedwith territoriality religiousor political ambitions.This is an increasinglyprominent for (e.g. Mels, 1999; approach modemlandscapes Book, 2000) as well as for historicandprehistoric in ones (e.g. Tilley, 1991b, 1994).Landscapes prehistory,however,are normallymoreimbuedwith cosmology, ritual and religion than their average In modemday equivalents. ancienttimes faithand science, the religiousandthe profanewereclosely intertwinedand almost impossible to separate. Therefore,symbolicallyinterpreted landscapesin are prehistory also rituallandscapes. However, even though dichotomies of the kind an above-mentioned constitute important part of a theoreticalperspective,in practice,constructive analysesof culturallandscapesrarelybenefit from being polarizedinto any such corner.As I have demonstrated(Sahlqvist, 2000) and will resume below, a prehistoriclandscapein Bronze Age Scandinaviawould preferablybe analysed
both from a geometrical and a contextual point of

neutraldistances view, bothobjectively measuring 79

Annaler- 83 B (2001) - 2 Geografiska

LEIF SAHLQVIST

this and directions and subjectivelyinterpreting framework conof materialwithinan empowered has trol andcommunication. Such a landscape external,atemporalimplicationsfroma generalhuman standpoint is liable to standcomparison and in with similarphenomena otherpartsof theworld. At the same time it shouldbe internallyanalysed withinits own contextof time and space in an attemptto discernits regionalsignificance.It could be lookeduponas a systembutalso as imbuedwith it strategy, couldbe seen as coherentandphenoma enologicallyconsistentas well as displaying conthe sameway as hasbeendiscussed(e.g. J6nssonet withintoday'sEual., 2000) for the development evenif thevisible,materialstructures rope.Finally, of monumentsin a landscapeoughtto be and are nearlyalwaysconsidered,theirinvisible,mentally should conceived geographicalinterrelationships not be overlooked. is view of the landscape of A purelynaturalistic recentoriginandlargelyirrelevant people'sconto ception in prehistory,even only a few hundred can years ago (Tilley, 1994). In a way, landscapes and alwaysbe relatedto ritualperformance cosmoof logical structure, especiallyif a wide definition culAt ritualis applied. thesametime,manyearlier within a their environment tures have structured different cosmologicalframework, fundamentally fromourown andoftenimbuedwithbothgeometricalandastronomical elements,of whichthereare well-knownexamplesin northern Europe,in preColumbian Americaandelsewhere(Bradley, 1993; Hadingham, 1984; Ruggles and Barclay, 1998, of land2000). A symbolicinterpretation a cultural take scapeof thiskindwouldpreferably its pointof departurein a research material, structuredby meansof measurements, locationalanalysis,statisin tics etc. and thus elaborated a combinedtradiIn tionaland 'new'geographical approach. archaewithina cogologicaltermsthiscouldbe contained nitive processualmethod(Renfrew,1994), where traditionalviews are reflected within the basic, processual part and the new, interpretative approachis termedcognitive. Cosmology and cosmography Cosmology,or people's conceptionof the world, which subsequentlycan be considereda fundamental base for interpretations early cultural of has with nalandscapes, its originsin a familiarity tureand in the differentways of takingadvantage
80 tradiction between territory and network, much in

of its resources.It has to do with belief systems, greatreligiousquestionson life anddeathandthe birthof the world,how we preferto explainnatural and events, structures functionsand how we are ableto use suchideasin orderto influencetheenvironmentand let our footprints survivefor generationsto come.The sun'smotionwithits close connectionto light andheatis one of the most significant naturalfeatures that directly affect life on Earth. is usedto measure It time as well as to determine directionand thus helps us to localize ourselves in timeandspace.Thislargelyexplainswhy astronomywas of greatimportancevery early in humancosmologies.Extensiveresearchhas been carried in various out partsof theworldcorroboratinterestandknowledgeamong ing an astronomical prehistoric peoples. When cosmological ideas are realized in the landscape,they become linked to geographyand the cultural receivesa layerof cosmoglandscape raphy.Cosmographic expressionof this kind has in oftenbeenconnectedwithastronomy apparently an attemptto link humanideas to what has been conceivedas powerfulas well as divine.Solarcults are well attestedto in the whole of Europeandthe MiddleEastduring BronzeAge as well as in the the Americas, with the wheel-cross as one of their and widespread symbols.Wheel-crosses solarcults have survivedinto moderntimes amongmanynativeNorth American and tribes,e.g. in California in the Southwest (Hadingham,1984; Williamson, connected 1984).Ritualsof thiskindarefrequently with collective memoriesof legitimizingworldly fromthe gods. If the mostimpoweras transferred portantdivinityis a sun-god,the link betweenastronomyand power becomes evident.The chiefs were supposedto act as suprememediatorsbetweenthepeopleandthe gods as well as defenders of cosmicorder on and reproduced Earth to display theirpoweraccordingly. of Orientations gravesat astronomically significantfeaturesor directions,such as the solsticesor thecardinal points,canbe seenin thiscontext.Prehistoric monumentsand ceremonial sites, geographicallyinterrelated throughastronomicalor anotherformof geometricalalignmentsrepresent cosmographicexpression,increasinglyobserved to andpaidattention in archaeological anthroand pological research (e.g. Bradley, 1993; Lekson, in a 1999;Tilley,1999).Whereas singlemonument itself can be describedas an isolated artefact,no reasonable can comprehension be gainedif its context in the landscapeis overlooked disregarded. or
Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) . 2

IN TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL LANDSCAPE

Oslo
NORWAY

o Uppsala
S S

Gothenburg

Gotland
T Lake
V~it ern

SWEDEN o0Vaxjo

DENMARK
nhaen
d.

1/

. Lund
'Mal 6

4..0

ha

as is area,marked a square (50x50 km)andcalledwesternOsterg6tland, limitedby fourtopographical Fig. 1. Theinvestigation maps NW, Linkbping SW). (HjoNE, Hjo SE, Linkoping

To cite a modemexample,1'Arche la D6fensein de Paris could neverbe understood an acceptable in way withoutrecognizingits alignmentwith 1'Arc de Triomphe-Champs-Elys6es-Le Louvre. Geoconstitute whenthey graphical interrelationships have been verifiedas an intentional layoutandexpressionof humanculture- essentialelementsin cultural landscapes. in Theresultsfrominvestigations southern Sweden carriedout over severalseveralyears (1991field are presentedin my 1999) in this particular doctoraldissertation (Sahlqvist,2000). Its focus is in particular cardinal on alignmentsandtheircosand functionin prehistory especially mographical in the Scandinavian Bronze Age (1700-500 BC). The investigation area(Fig. 1), locatedin western Osterg6tland east of Lake Viittem,Sweden's just secondbiggestlake,is studiedin detailby meansof a cognitiveprocessual method(Renfrew,1994). In this areacosmographic deducedfroma expression, source materialof barrows,appearsto be closely Since whatis attestlinkedto territorial behaviour.
Annaler- 83 B (2001) - 2 Geografiska

be in .ed to here couldprobably recognizable other can geographicalcontexts, westernOsterg6tland as cosmobe regarded a case study.In particular, graphicexpressionof a similarkind seems reconstructable an AncestralPueblo context(mainly in in of the Bonitophase850-1150 AD) the Southwest North America (Sofaer, 1997; Lekson, 1999). Scholars from differentfields and from various to partsof the worldappear be revealingtracesof humanactivities,involvingthe landscapeas a medium for ritualcommunication the displayof and territorial power. Prehistoric Ostergiitlandand the hundreds in WesternOsterg6tland Swedenis one of Scandinavia's most importantearly agriculturallandsettlements fromtheMesolithscapeswithregular in ic into modemtimes. Southern Scandinavia the Neolithic (4200-1700 BC)and the Early Bronze ofAge (1700-1100 BC), includingOsterg6tland, than tofered much higher averagetemperatures 81

LEIF SAHLQVIST

NN,

7.MN

70..

Fig. 2. Late Bronze Age fortified chieftain's farm from c. 900-500 Bc at Vistad, 5 km west of Mj6lby, Osterg6tland, Sweden. Very unusual in Scandinavia and interpreted as a regional centre and a cult-place (cf. vi 'cult-place'), it was partly excavated in 1990. Recovered pottery, house-style and palisades confirm more or less direct connections with the Lusatian culture, one of the Urnfield cultures, found mainly in today's Poland and eastern Germany. The inner palisade, orientated due east/west, divides the site in a northern and a southern part. On the rock in the northwest a Bronze Age carving was discovered with a foot-sole and cup marks. Schematic reconstruction: Thomas B. Larsson (1993, p. 146; 1995). Photo from the excavation with part of the stone row, marking the inner east) west palisade: Leif Sahlqvist, 1990.

climate (Harding, day, more like a Mediterranean 1982;Kristiansen, 1998a).Long distancecontacts withthecontinent well attested andanimporare to tant regional centre has been partlyexcavatedat Vistadwith its Late BronzeAge palisadedfort (c. 900-500 BC) Lusatian and pottery(Fig. 2; Larsson, and 1993, 1995).Themostrenowned largestof severalhillfortsin the areais locatedon the so-called Crown (Hjiissan) of legendary Mount Omberg (Fig. 3) with a visual capacity covering most of LakeVittern and the fertileplain beneath.In this areathe Rok stone was erectedjust after 800 AD,

At with the world's longest runic inscription. Alvastra, outsidethe largestEarlyIronAge cemjust are eteryon the Swedishmainland, the ruinsof one of northernEurope's rare crypt-churches,surrounded an earlyChristian cemeterywith probby around 4000 graves,as well as Scandinavia's ably firstCistercianmonasteryfrom 1143. Also, Sweden's earliest dendrochronologically dated stone churchesareto be foundin the area,at Hagebyh6and (c. ga, Orberga Herrestad 1110)andatleastone of Sweden'searly royal families, the Sverkerdynasty,hadits roots andcentrein westernOstergbit-

4 ,via

;-gg
-N W

F"777

... ..... .... ........... . ............ ...... .....

Fig. 3. The Crown of Mount Omberg, in traditionally "Osterg6tland's sacred mountain", with a monumentally situated hillfort. Sacred mountains, particularly in areas such as western Osterg6tland, where mountains are rare, represent a recurrentphenomenon in various religions. A Bronze Age barrow can be considered a miniature and a metaphor for such a mountain. This interpretation may be particularly relevant here, as the Crown has the appearance of a barrow. Photo from the south: Christer Elderud 2000.

82

Geografiska Annaler- 83 B (2001) - 2

BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL IN LANDSCAPE TERRITORIAL

of land. This concentration worldlyand religious back in prehistory, power certainlyhad traditions andI also arguethatthe territorial divisionin hunSwedencalled 'hiirader'), used dreds(in southern here as in other parts of northern Europe,could behaprobablyoriginatein BronzeAge territorial viourandcosmographic of thekindpreexpression sentedbelow (Sahlqvist,2000). Evenif theBronzeAge appears be a long shot, to I am not the firstto presentmaterial ansupporting cient originsfor medievalterritories Scandinain via. The Swedish archaeologist Dan Carlssonhas a basedon empirical matepropounded hypothesis, rialfromGotland, Sweden'slargestisland(Fig. 1), thattheparishes therecouldhavetheirrootsin pre(1981, p. 14). A precisely BronzeAge territories historicorigin for Gotland'sparishesis also sup1981;Kyhlberg, 1991) portedby others(Lindquist, butnot as earlyas the BronzeAge. A comparison between the hypothetical land BronzeAge and the parishas a spatialunity within an area of six parishes on eastern Gotlanddemonstrates tangiblecorresponda ence. The interpretation this correspondof ence shouldprobably thatthe landdivision be carriedthrough principally duringthe Bronze divisionof the entire Age locks the territorial cultural landscape. The prehistoric settled country(bygd)mainlylives on intoourpresent days, andtheparishas a territory even if not in its details - would consequentlyhave its roots in a very old land division (Carlsson, fromSwedish). 1981,p. 14;translated There is no consensus among scholars about whether parishes generalarebasedon earlier the in territories not, even thoughthis is or pre-Christian for generallyassumed manyScandinavian regions. However,the Christianparishescould very well havebeenprincipally basedon anearlierterritorial withpre-Christian organization cult-placesas centres, later continued as church-sites(Hafstr6m, 1949;Brink,1990a,1996).Thisis supported the by fact thatthe old Norsewordsokn 'parish' probais bly of ancient origin in Germanic languages (Brink,1996). wereusedby Germanic Hundreds tribesin Scandinaviaand Englandas well as on the European continent- in Scandinavia intothe20thcentuwell ry. They were directlylinkedto thejudicialthingwith a thing-placein each hundred organization
Geografiska Annaler ? 83 B (2001) ? 2

division (bygdeuppdelning) at the end of the

and at least for Uppland,Sweden,also with a corfor of responding military organization recruitment soldiers, the so-called ledung. An 11lthcentury fromVallentuna Uppland, rune-stone in whereJarlabankeis mentionedas owning alt huntarithita 'this whole hundred',offers the earliestSwedish evidence of the wordin writing.Textsof Alemannic origin (a people living along the Rhine) from the 8th andthe 9th centuriescontainseveralcompoundswith an element-huntaor -huntari, in e.g. Hattipago Hattihuntari'in the tribal terrritory huntari' Bach, 1953), which could be in(888 AD; as terpreted 'Hattihundred', pagus being the Roman word for a tribalterritory among Celtic and Germanic tribes. A greatdeal of earlierresearch philologically is based and refers to classical materialin orderto tracea commonoriginfor the hundreds. well arA has withtheRoman, guedconnection beenasserted purely geometrical land division centuratio 1968),in any case at least semantically (SWiderlind, to corresponding the hundredsdivision, although its relevancehas been rejectedby others(Andersson, 1982). In Romansurveying practisetwo printo cipal directions perpendicular each other,cardo anddecumanus, were determined. Theyrepresented basically a north/south- an east/west-axis, and variedconsideraalthoughtheirexactorientations was bly in practice.Centuratio achieved,whenparallel lines were subsequently laid out in orderto createa grid,a methodusedextensivelyforlanddivision in the Romanprovincesas well as for town The planning. Romanswerenot the firstin the area to use grids,however,as the Greekcolonies on Sicily were laid out in this manneralreadyin the 7th townMarzacentury as well as e.g. theEtruscan BC bottoc. 500 BC(Ward-Perkins, 1987).The Roman a priests,augures,also implemented rituallanddivision, when they turnedto the southand made a fourfold division of space. The horizontalplane seen from the centre was called templum,which originallymeant 'rituallydetermined space', later also 'shrine',and was probablyrelatedto temperare 'measure, temper'andtempus'time'(cf. Walde 1965). The Etruscan priests,haruspices,also used the cardinalpoints in theirritualpractices(Dilke, 1971). In summary, surveyingandlanddivisionin the classicalworldare clearlyconnectedwith and also originated cosmologicalideasand in probably ritualpractices. to it Returning Scandinavia, has to be bornein mindthatanearlierterritorial division- whether in hundredsor in pre-Christian'parishes'- would 83

LEIF SAHLQVIST

probablyhave been continuedor adjusteddifferently overtime fromregionto region.Most scholars assumea pre-Christian originfor the hundreds (e.g. Helmfrid,1962;S6derlind,1968;Andersson, for wheretheyarecalled 1982),although, Gotland, things,they are consideredlinkedto Christianization (Ersson,1974; Lindquist,1981). In some rehad originthan gions parishesapparently an earlier hundreds(e.g. Gotland:Lindquist, 1981; Kyhlare berg, 1991),whilstin othershundreds assumed to be older (e.g. Osterg6itland: Helmfrid, 1962; Brink, 1990a). Thus allowing for regionalvariaand tion, bothhundreds parishesarelikely to have althoughthe originalrelaprehistoric precursors, betweenthemis obscureandtheirboundtionship aries frequentlyintersecteach other. In western in the Osterg6tland, particular, hundredsdivision has also been consideredto display an artificial character(Andersson,1965, 1982, 1988; Brink, 1990b). have The toponymsof the Swedish hundreds Anbeen thoroughly by investigated Thorsten dersson(1965). He drawsthe conclusionthat this groupof names can be split into primary names.The primary namesare and secondary new,usuallyfromthe nameof the thing-place, namesarethosewhichhavetakenoveran oldernameof a settledarea(bygd),e. g. Sunderbo, etc. Vestbo, Vidhbo They usuallydenote setwhilst tled areas,delimited natural features, by theprimary namesaregenerally namesof what appearsto be more artificiallydivided areas withoutanynatural boundaries. namesof The thislattertypecanthusbe supposed attestto to an administrative division overlayingan area, in this case alreadyin prehistoric times. Such anartificial character particularly is significant for westernOsterg6itland (Brink,1990b,p. 31; translated fromSwedish). Thisartificiality wouldbe perfectlyunderstandable if the hundreds theirroots in an ancient,geohad metricallyconceivedlanddivision,originallysubordinated cosmologicalprinciplesand in this way to wherelinearcomparable the Romancenturatio, than concern for natural ity was more important featuresin the terrain.Investigations so-called of coaxialfieldsystemsin the BritishIsles,particularly in Dartmoorin southernEngland (Fleming, 1987, 1988) frommainlythe earlyIronAge or the
84 with an added herath, e.g. Aska haerath, Gullb(i)erghs hcwrath etc. The secondary

BronzeAge, have demonstrated preciselysuch an artificial wheremoreor less linearstruccharacter, in of tures are laid out apparently disregard topoobstaclesin theirway. graphical Theterrain-oblivious of character some coaxial systemsoften means,of course,thatdifferentzones withinthemarenotintervisible, posing awkwardsurveyproblemsfor those who laid themout, problemswhichthey were evidently willing to tackle and able to solve ... Whatkind of conceptlay behindthe coaxial system?Hereit is difficultto avoidthe rather elusivenotionof 'therituallandscape',sometimes utilized,if not very closely definedby Britishprehistorians (Fleming,1987,p. 191). Bronze Age network I will now brieflysummarize resultsof my inthe The vestigationsin westernOsterg6tland. barrows in the investigation (Fig. 1) werelisted(232 in area thoseregistered the at total),a material containing SwedishBoardof National withtheadAntiquities ditionof a few older,now destroyed documentbut in ed cases.Barrows grave-yards wereonly included if one or two, thus excludinglater Iron Age withbarrows erecteden masse,gravegrave-yards of this kind,although, yards beingrarein the area. Of thosebarrows 17%),whichhavebeen dated, (c. c. 90% were erectedin the Late Neolithic (23001700
BC)

few in apparently barrows theareahaveanIron Age origin (Sahlqvist,2000, p. 68ff, 197ff). The most one datedto theLateIron important is Askabarrow, Age (680 AD?100 years;Clar6usand Fernholm, 1999) and probablythe old thing-placeof Aska hundred. However,being one of Sweden'slargest barrows (50x80 m) andnotmorethanpartlyexcavated,it couldstill containoldergraves. A nearest neighbourmethod (Haggett et al., 1977) was used in orderto visualize clustersand of often used gaps in the distribution the barrows, as reliable settlementindicatorsand particularly valuablein an area where excavatedBronzeAge settlements rare.It was thenrealizedthattheir are distribution with displayeda close correspondence the core areasof the medievalhundreds(Fig. 4). The easiest way of accountingfor this discovery would havebeen to explainit as a consequenceof physical, geographicalconditions.However,this could not be done more than partly (cf. Brink 1990b, p. 31, citation above) in this mainly flat,
Geografiska Annaler ? 83 B (2001) ? 2

or the Bronze Age (1700-500 BC). Thus,

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION IN A RITUAL LANDSCAPE

irdbacken

1435

14 5

145

/14 Bergklin!

BOREN

Jutberget

6490

Bar ow

Ocentral function place

Hilifortwith possible

ASKAliitation

HUNDRED

area investigation
in the east

of

BOBERG

LAKEVALTTERNfrs

VADSTENA
DAL HUNDRED SNGGE

HUNDRED Odens-BERG H.

6480

"Queen Fort", Borghamn Omma's MOUNT OMBERG =HUNDE

6470

Thown

LYSING HUNDRED

RINGFinnberget

/
VIFOLKA

646

of Omberg
ODESHOG 1435 1 5 Kohagsberget *1 Trimplaberget

UNDRED Orbergshu
Asama 1 65

Fig. 4. Hundreds, barrows and hillforts in western Osterg6tland, Sweden. Figures along the borderline indicate Swedish surveying coordinates. The distance between two adjacent figures, e.g. 1445-1435 is 5 km. Lines between barrows and between hillforts respectively are drawn according to a nearest neighbour method (premises in Sahlqvist, 2000, p. 70). The hillforts can be interpreted as delimiting a prehistoric chiefdom in western isterg6tland. The modern towns Motala, Vadstena, Mjilby, Skiinninge and idesh6g are marked as large, filled circles.

lowlandlandscape.What thereforeseemed to remainwas theassumption thehundreds that division in the areahad its roots in Late Neolithic/Bronze an whichwaslaterto be Age territories, assumption confirmed (cf. below). statistically I havediscussedthe reconstruction a building of gephaseandthe reasonsfor choosinga particular, ographicallocation for the barrows (Sahlqvist, in 2000). Theywereprobably the firstplacelinked to existing settlements.This is also confirmedin some partsof the investigationarea for the Late BronzeAge (1100-500 BC),even thoughthe distancesbetweenbarrows settlements and varyconsiderably.For the Early BronzeAge (1700-1100 is BC) local confirmation difficultto obtain,due to the lack of indicatedsettlementsfromthis period. Investigationsin other parts of Scandinavia,alGeografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

though, reveal a close relationshipbetween barrowsandsettlements forthisperiod,atleastfor also Jutlandin Denmark(Kristiansen, 1998b;Thorpe, do 1997).The barrows not seem to havebeen located on any particular of soil, even if light and type medium soils are in a great majority.It is well knownthatheavierclay soils wereavoidedin early for agriculture obviousreasons,butthe questionis whentheybeganto be usedmorethancasually. Apparently, they couldhavebeen takeninto moreextendeduse in partsof the investigation during area the Late Bronze Age (cf. Larsson, 1993). Moreare over,barrows seldomfoundverynearriversor lakes andthey were not alwaysbuilton hills or as are high as possible, even if manybarrows in fact foundin suchlocations.In summary, seemsdiffiit cult to deduce only from featuresin the physical 85

LEIF SAHLQVIST

1435

14451455 MOTALA

146

LAKE BOREN

6490
LAKE VATTERN BOBERG

HUNDRED
VADSTENA
6480
ASKA

DAL
HUNDRED

- 6470

AEA "

LYSINGSKANNINGE
HUNHUNDREDDRED

HUNDRED

ODESHOG

1435
... ...-*H

14 5

1455

1 65

Fig. 5. Intervisibility between the barrows of western Osterg6tland according to a nearest sight method, created by the author for comparison with the same material according to a nearest neighbour method (Fig. 4). Arrows with double direction indicate the nearest external sightline towards a neighbouring group of barrows or a solitary/satellite barrow (premises and details in Sahlqvist, 2000).

whichcouldhave landscape simpleprinciples, any beenmoreorless consistently usedin theinvestigation area,when choosing properlocationsfor the barrows. Another elementwas addedto this,whentheextensive visual networkbetween the barrowswas discovered.Thereis generallygood visibility betweennearest barrows also between and neighbour many otherbarrowsfar from each other,with the and exceptionof some partsof southern Gi6string westernVifolka.This was deducedfromthe comparisonof a nearestneighbour map (Fig. 4) anda nearestsight map (Fig. 5), indicatingnearestvisible barrows. far as we can judge (Garansson, As 1995), Bronze Age western Osterg6tlandwas mainly a relatively open agriculturallandscape with largeareasof pastureland. functionaldiviA 86

sion amongthe barrows to exposureandvisibilas couldhaveexistedalreadyin theLateNeolithic ity with certainbarrowsas visual centresand others withoutanyor muchvisualcapacity.Obviously, it cannotbe argued with anycertainty whatextent to this visualnetworkwas in fact takeninto practical use, but it can be consideredvery unlikelythatit was disregarded. barrows The wereprobably located in the landscapeafterconsideringseveralfacwouldhavebeen tors,amongwhichvisualcapacity of greatsignificance manybutnot all barrows. for Well-developed communicationought to have beenanimportant assetin the struggleforpowerin BronzeAge communities. visualnetworkcould A have been essentialin orderto integratedifferent partsof the areain a chiefdom.In the LateBronze Age andthe IronAge an earliervisualnetwork apGeografiska Annaler 83 B (2001) 2 ?

IN BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL LANDSCAPE TERRITORIAL

as pearsto havebeen completedwithnew barrows wouldhavebeen well as hillforts. Thusthenetwork maintainedand extendedover considerable time, as most of the hillfortsprobablyoriginatein the IronAge. Intervisible hillfortsarelocatedin whatI as line have interpreted a demarcation between a chiefdom in westernand anotherpolitical unit in centralOsterg6tland (Fig. 4). the Fundamentally, barrowsmudt have been closely associatedwith a family and its mortuary andancestral cultswithinthe socialframework a of tribalorganization, also containing hypothetically an intermediate clan level. A connectionwith the power and propertyof the people buriedin them also seems likely.Based on anthropological materialit can be assumedthatin Scandinavia, in all as the communities, spiritsof agricultural prehistoric the deadhavebeen paidspecialattention surviby ving relatives. Seen in this context the barrows musthavebeen cult centresfor ritualcommunication with the gods and the spirits.They could be consideredsignificantcognitive nodes and communication the of sites, attracting attention people for both ritualand more practicalpurposes.Fire and smokehavemost likely beenused, not only in but religiousceremonies alsofor signalling,as they in were with the help of fire beacons(vdrdkasar) laterprehistory the MiddleAges in Scandinaand via (cf. Kaliff, 1999, p. 121f). Well-constructed musthave long-distance warningsystemscertainly enemiesin beenveryeffectiveagainstapproaching times of warandunrest.Barrowsin similarchainlike structures in Osterg6tland as werenoticedearand as ly in Denmark interpreted connectedwith a road network (MUiller, 1904), an interpretation whichhas beenused also for megalithic tombsand in otherpartsof Europe(Baldia, 1995). This is of course entirelypossible, but if the chain is visual via (Fig. 5), it also suggestscommunication signals from fires or smoke or even reflectionsin blankpolishedbronzeobjects. MountOmbergfrom the south Contemplating that (Fig. 3), it is difficultto escapethe observation the Crown(thetop) with its impressive hillforthas the same appearance a Bronze Age barrow,a as cognitive relationshipthat must have been observed by local people in prehistory. MountOmsacknownas 'Osterg6tland's bergis traditionally red mountain' whose Crown,accordingto legon ends, Queen Omma was buried.As, in the Edda names one poemGrimnismill, of Odin'ssecondary is Omme, Queen Ommacan be interpreted an as early fertilitygoddess,laterconnectedwith Odin,
Geografiska Annaler ? 83 B (2001) - 2

presumablythen given an additionalname in a ambition fuse two religiouscultstoto syncretistic gether.Generallyspeaking,sacredmountainsrein presenta recurrent phenomenon manyreligions (Eliade 1958, p. 99f) and a barrowcan be consiand for dereda miniature a metaphor sucha mountain.The Crownwith its characteristic shapeis an excellent,cohesivesymbolfor a regionalfunerary andfertilitycult,centeredaround BronzeAge barrows. Since Mount Ombergwith this assumed metaphoricalsignificance is almost everywhere visible in the area,constructing barrowsandlocain ting themproperly the landscapeas well as supporting the maintenanceof collective memories aroundthemwould have been an efficientway of a diffusing, consolidatingand reproducing theowherethe chiefs were concraticsocial structure, sideredto receive theirpower from the gods (cf. Tilley 1991b). Ritual landscape I have also demonstrated many barrowsare that in interrelated cardinalalignments geographically and crosses and that,in all probability, such relaconceivedandrealized tionshipswereintentionally in the landscape(Sahlqvist,2000; below). Similar cosmological schemes have survivedamong the Pueblo Indiansin New Mexico (Ortiz, 1969; bein relow) andarealsoindicated the archaeological mains of the Ancestral Pueblo culture (Sofaer, of 1997;Lekson, 1999).My investigation barrows in took its point of departure the so-calledIsberga cardinalcross (Heda parish),discoveredin 1986 in nearLakeVaittern MountOmberg Osterg6tand land.It consistsof fourmedievalchurches fromthe locatedin the north,south,east early 12thcentury, andwest respectively (Fig.6). Theeast/westaxis is bisected by the north/south and in the centre one there is a barrowprobablyfrom the BronzeAge. This is the only so-calledcardinalcross with one axis bisected(Fig. 7) amongthe approximately 60 medievalchurchesin the investigation area. is north/south notdifficultandcanbe Measuring done by observinglight and shadowwith the help of a wooden stick (gnomon). Experimentshave in shownthatan accuracy c. 0.250 is attainable of this way (Sofaer, 1997; Lekson, 1999). An even betteraccuracy possibleusing the stars,as every is celestial object culminatesdue south once a day. East/westis obtainedeithergeometricallyas pervia or to pendicular north/south astronomically the whendayandnight Sun'spositionattheequinoxes,
87

LEIF SAHLQVIST

VAVERSUNDA
MOUNT '

OMBERG: ALVA!TRA ABBEY

CHURCH 0.050 E of N

N Cross Centres= cognitive nodes of boundaries

5732 m (andthe R6k stone

from 800 AD) 0.1' N of E

ROK CHURCH

II

1 1

0 o

0-3845 m r"3805 m-O ALVASTRA CRYPT CHURCH BARROW ISBERGA N 6165 m ABY STORA CHURCH

TYPEA

TYPEB

Fig. 6. Isberga Cardinal Cross near Mount Omberg (Fig. 3) in western Osterg6tland, Sweden. Discovered in 1986 by the author, the cross is formed by four medieval churches, cardinally aligned and with a bisected east/west-axis. Isberga barrow in the centre is probably from the Bronze Age. The churches are assumed to have been located at pre-Christian places of worship. Alvastra Abbey, marked as a reference point, belongs to Scandinavia's earliest Cistercian monastery from 1143. The Early Bronze Age sword (c. 17th century Bc), found 100 m from Isberga barrow, was probably made in the Balkans or Anatolia. The type, which is very rare in Northern Europe but well known among the Hittites, must have been imported from far away and used as a symbol for chiefly power. Photo: Antiquarian-Topographical Archives (ATA), Stockholm.

Fig. 7. Model of Cardinal Cross (type A and B). Based on Isberga Cardinal Cross (Fig. 6) with four medieval churches, hypothetically located at pre-Christian cult centres (e.g. barrows), a computerized search was carried through (premises: note 1) to see if such crosses existed with prehistoric barrows. The 86 cross centres thus discovered were located near hundreds' boundaries to an extent, statistically evaluated as hardly coincidental.

have the same length, althoughaccuracyis more withthe geometrical method. easily attainable Based on a hypothesisthatthe churchesin the crosswerebuiltatearlier centres(e.g. barrows) cult in to it was investigated see, if barrows the areaare so geographically interrelated theyformcardithat nal alignments crossesof thiskind(Fig. 7). Afand ter an input of metre coordinatesfrom Ordnance Surveymaps (scale 1:10000) for the barrows,86 such crosses were registeredin a computerized search.It was immediatelyobservedthatan overof whelmingmajority the cross centreswere located nearthe boundaries the medievalhundreds. of The correlationbetween crosses and hundreds' boundarieswas confirmedin simulationexperiments,evaluated statistical by expertisefromLund University (Sahlqvist,2000).An additional experimentin February 2001, also takinginto accounta few newly discoveredbarrows(Fig. 8), only confirmedandstrengthened earlierpublished results.1 In otherwords, the crosses are located near such boundaries an extentwhich could hardlybe exto Thiscorroborated the plainedawayas coincidental. earlierobservedrelationship, a nearestneighvia
88

of bour method (Fig. 4), between the distribution barrowsand the medievalhundreds well as the as in that assumption thehundreds theareacouldhave theirrootsin LateNeolithicor BronzeAge territories.Thus,atleastmostof thecardinal crosses(Fig. areahavein all proba9) foundin the investigation plannedandlaidout. bilitybeen intentionally in Territorial boundaries BronzeAge Scandinabeen markedout only at certain via haveprobably or points, cognitivenodes with intervisibility pervia hapscommunication firesor smokesignalling. Thecrosscentresmayhaverepresented suchnodes with (cf. boundary alongboundaries reconstructed hillforts in Fig. 4). In fact, these centres can be joined together into a schematic, hypothetical well line, dividingthe areasurprisingly boundary in accordance indicatedby the with the territories as (Fig. 10). groupsof barrows well as thehundreds Withthe exceptionof G6stringhundred, possibly the once dividedinto two territories, only discrepancy worthmentioningconcernsthe two parishes of Hov andAllhelgona.Here the boundaries hundredsandparishesintersecteach other,thusdividing Hov into three and Allhelgonainto two parts (Fig. 11). A territorialdivision, however, with includedinAskaandAllhelgHov'sentireterritory thus the ona'sin Gaistring, eliminating intersection, would be almost identical with the hypothetical boundary.If this boundaryhas any relevance,it
Geografiska Annaler 83 B (2001) 2

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL IN LANDSCAPE y 80 Y 80-

60 -

60

40-

40-

20-

20-

II

X x -25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85

The crosseswithcentres(Fig. 7) oftenlocatednearhundreds' formcardinal boundaries Fig. 8. Two simulation experiments. barrows the area (Fig. 9). In orderto see if this was likely to be a coincidence investigation was dividedintotwo equallylargeparts,one part neara hundred's of the The material barrows boundary, otherfarfromsucha boundary. authentic provedto have83.7%of thecrosses neara boundary. barrows locationsandeverytimean equivalent wererandomized times250-1000 m fromtheiroriginal 350 The perThe was The was centagewas calculated. highestpercentage amongthe 350 simulations 81.3%(left diagram). sameexperiment reand in 2001 afteradditions corrections the inputof coordinates material 83.7% (note 1). The authentic peatedin February displayed in as before,compared the highestsimulated to value76.4%(rightdiagram). of boundaries each x=percentage crossesnearhundreds' of 350 simulations; of y=number crossesin eachsimulation.

werecontained catedat intertribal whichalso appears boundaries, suggeststhatprehistoric 'parishes' within an earlierterritorial struc- to be the case here. as subpartitions of in ture,the boundaries which were laterconverted Territoriality itself cannot be linked to any - with certain adjustments (= intersections) - into a specificlevel of social integration, even if it stands incitement socialhierformal hundreds'division as identifiablein the out as an important towards archization. territorialiMiddleAges. OpinionsaboutAboriginal with a prefixor a suffix, ty in Australia,for example,differwidely, its sigFurthermore, toponyms signifyinga pre-Christian placeof worship,suchas nificancebeingrelatedby some scholarsto a tribal Ullevi 'place of worship for the god Ull' (cf. organizationand by others to subtribalor still Vikstrand, 2001), are attachedto locationswhich smaller groups (Berndt, 1976; Peterson, 1976). can also be joined togetherinto lines, roughlyde- However,westernOsterg6itland duringthe Bronze of controlled a number by limiting the same territoriesas the hundreds' Age was most probably or boundaries the crosscentres(Sahlqvist,2000, p. tribes, organizedin a chiefdom with well-develboth fromthe opedcommunicative territorial and behaviour. This 118). As toponymsareindependent barrows themedievalboundaries, confirm generalview is largelycoherentwith the opinions and they in archaeoof the significance ritually basedterritoriality the of an increasingnumberof Scandinavian in area.Supertribal centreswould ideally be lo- logists (Kaliff,2000) andconfirmed specificrecult
Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

89

LEIF SAHLQVIST

1435 1445 1445 1435

* 6490 o Barrows Barrowsin crosses

1455 1455

146
MOTALA
Eb82 Ask2O

/
BOREN LAKE 31
B32

,f / NjK (Eb17 etc)

O Crosscentres
VS38 Hag37 Hag8

ASKA HUNDRED

BOBERG HUNDRED

Fo22

DL VADSTENAV50 VATTERN HUNDRE6480 LAKEVATTERN LAKE 6480 NDRE VadHaVKDVad St7 HaVK Sk6 2

Rog

18,

19

013
Rog27 Vav33 LAKE

S
HovG

IVsVK
V

AVK
V978

lKANIN

N5V15
Viby9 H8

/ /
HVK,

HoVK

BjVK

6470

TAKERN

/
KS K

TVK
AppA
-

Hog KVK 1
Mj134

EVK1

42

Rbk37

Sv42 v fMj58:3
OVK
RVK

M-TB T.Mj13
j

He

VA LYSING HUNDRED Ek1 Ek268 GONHUNDRED HUNDRED

j3 VIFOLKA Ri261

646

ODESHOG

1435

14 5

i 1455

As57 1 65

Fig. 9. Some of the cardinal crosses (model A or B in Fig. 7), interpretedas partof a ritually based alliance system between tribes/clans in the area. Adjacent crosses form so-called cross complexes (e.g. TVK) often containing several crosses. All cross complexes are shown in Fig. 10. Only a few crosses have probably been used at the same time (complementary crosses).

Scandinavia searchfor variousregionsof southern (e.g. Larsson, 1993, 1995; Thrane,1991; Weiler, 1994;Wigren,1987). The planningandthe laying structure out of a rituallandscapewith a territorial connected with barrows in cardinal alignments moreor less imply a specialization an overall and which wouldprobablyrequiresome organization, A kindof supertribal structurleadership. territorial ing of this kind ought to have been significantly of linkedto thedevelopment a chiefdomin western Osterg6tland. Thus, the barrowbuildersseem to have constructedbarrowsin a territorialized, ritual landin them geographically cardiscape, interrelating nal alignmentsandcrosses. In most cases such an orientation was probablycarriedout keeping the 90

barrows withinthevicinityof settlements often and with a visual capacityas well. One reasonfor the visual linkagebeing set apartin certaincases may be that a cardinalalignmentwith anotherbarrow was prioritized. Thus,visibilitywas notnecessarily an end in itself, considering factthatritualsofthe tenincludeinvisibleelementsto be revealed only to or northoseinitiated invitedfor initiation. Certain mally invisible alignmentsmay in this way have been savedfor displaywith fires on special occasions (cf. Bradley,1993, p. 64) andobservedfrom In hilltopssuchas the Crownof Omberg. anycase, thelocationof eachbarrow musthavebeenseriously reflected upon, probablymarkedout with a woodenstickandtestedoverandoveragainbefore the priorities been settledandthe construction had
Geografiska Annaler 83 B (2001) 2

BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL IN LANDSCAPE TERRITORIAL

1435 6490 0 Crosscentre(s) [3 Earliest thing-placeBOBER

1445

1455

146

KEBOREN

ASKA

Boberg's

thing

VATTERN LAKE Askagthing

DAL

LUVK

HaVK

(3)

NVK

(5)

roVK

S6480

(1)

LB Thing-place
unknown
in

3) VsVK (1) SVK (3) GULLBERG

(2) BrtVK AVK1-3 (9)

Dal

HVK (3)

HoVK (1 * 7 /

BJVK (3)VAL
(3) t KVK (9) , 3d Hogstad's thing(1)
f

/LVK

EVK (16)

Vibything -

LuVK VK

(1

BVK (2) RVK (3) thing Heda LYSING

Ryckelsby thing?

VIFOLKA

1435

1 .5

1 1455

165

crosses with one name,e.g. Fig. 10. Cross centresand complexeson nearestneighbour map (Fig. 4). A cross complex=adjacent of in afterabbreviated 'Thkern cardinalcross'.Number centresin eachcomplexis indicated brackets vdiderstreckskors TVK=Tikerns name.Thick,straight linesbetweenthecentres forma schematic, line with boundary of nodesto be compared hypothetical, prehistoric line for a the hundreds' boundaries. boundary suggeststhatsouthern This Gostring sometimemayhaveconstituted separate territory in recorded themid-19thcentury knewof an oldthing-place Ryckelsby southern in at also (southof thick,broken line).Localtradition even if Ljungathingis the earliestrecorded, uncertain rejected T. Andersson and (1965). In Vifolkahundred, although by G6string, is to the 1965;Vikstrand, (Andersson, 2001).Askabarrow probably ancient thingVibyhasbeenconsidered be theearliest thing-place in It placeof Askahundred. is one of the veryfew barrows the area,securelydatedto the IronAge (680 AD?100years).Onlypartly it excavated, although, can still containearliergraves.

couldbe started.'A place-bound of the monument sense of being' (Barrett, 1994, p. 147) seems to be attributed a relevant for the importance description to the choice of location. Astronomicalevents like the midwintersunset on the Dorset Cursus,or the equinoctial sunriseon the StonehengeCursus,could only be seen from one carefully chosen position, and access to this mighthave been controlled et (Barrett al., 1991, 58). Thusthe restrictions that seem to be implicit in the very layout of
Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

certainmonuments beyondthe questionof go access and unimpededmovement.They also extend to specialised knowledge, the knowhiddenin the deledge of thebasic alignments sign. This would not be accessible to outsiders,who couldnothaveobservedthephenomena (Bradley,1993, p. 64). The ritual significanceof prehistoricmonuments andsanctuaries to apparently depended a largeextenton preciselytheirgeographical locations.Once properlydetermined, they seem to havebeen open
91

LEIF SAHLQVIST

DAL BOBERG ASKA

!f
Hov

'Ai!pairish

/inAsa

parish
in

Askprish
Hov
sr
*

in

Gastring

ari n rit nh

n
GOSTRING

YSING

zVIFOLKA

Vistad o
0P

~*
Fig. 11. Hypothetical, prehistoric boundary (Fig. 10) on nearest sight map (Fig. 5). For the two parishes Hov and Allhelgona, the boundaries of hundreds and parishes intersect each other. A territorial division, where Hov entirely belonged to Aska and Allhelgona to GSstring, would be almost identical with the hypothetical boundary with the exception of southern Gostring (cf. Fig. 10). Vistad: cf. Fig. 2.

over for continuoususe and recontextualisation centuriesand millenia.Such longevity and recurrentveneration ancientplaces of worshiphave for in been verifiedarchaeologically variouspartsof the world (e.g. Edlund,1987). Identicalplaces in bogs and otherkinds of wetlandsin Scandinavia havebeen used for offeringsoverseveralthousand years(Fabech,1991),evenif thisvastspaceof time musthave spanneddifferentculturalandreligious contexts. In Roman England Late Bronze Age (so-called urnfields)have been saved grave-yards in andincorporated the Romancultural landscape, in spiteof their'barbaric' origin(Roymans,1995). The factthatmanyChristian churches werebuiltat can in older,heathensanctuaries alsobe considered thiscontext.Inotherwords,sacredplaceshavesurvived within a wider cosmological framework, of or largelyindependent theirspecificcultural rebasedon the sacredness ligious contextsandrather attributed thesite, once chosenon ritualgrounds. to This background ought to be relevantalso for fromtheirplace-names. There cult-placesinferred is nothingwhichexcludescertainname-types from being of Bronze Age origin, such as the abovementioned Ullevi and others ending in vi 'cultit place', although is nextto impossibleto prove.In any case there is general agreementabout the vi
92

namesbeing amongthe oldest in Scandinavia and in (Vikstrand, 2001). But particularly Osterg6tland even if a namelike Hov 'cult-place' considered is to originatein the later IronAge, its sacred site could be older,originallybearingan other name 2001, p. 51). (cf. Vikstrand, As some of thebarrows involvedin the cardinal of alignments thecrosseshavebeensafely datedto the Late Neolithic or the Early Bronze Age and are mostof theothers,undated assumedto havethe sameorigin(Sahlqvist, 2000), animportant of part this ritual landscapehas in all probabilitybeen conceived and realized in these periods. A few crosses may have been constructedin the Late BronzeAge or the IronAge withone or two Early How BronzeAge barrowsas points of departure. often such reuse and possibly contextualreinterpretationof older barrowsmay have occurredis difficultto say.A continuousveneration older for graves is confirmedby the fact that severalLate NeolithicandBronzeAge barrows havebeen used for new burialsduringthe IronAge. The dateof a cross will thereforealwayshave to be the date of the youngestbarrowinvolved,even if one of the axes may be earlier (e.g. an east/west cardinal cf. alignmentbetweenstone cists in barrows; below, next heading). It is not clear at this point, though,to whatextentknowledgeaboutearlierritual activitiescould have survivedinto laterperiods, such as the VikingAge (800-1050 AD).The in church-builders the 11lthand 12th centuries could very well havechosentheirlocationsat earlier cult-placeswithoutanyknowledgeof theirastronomicalsignificancein a rituallandscape,apconstructed muchearlier. parently The construction cardinalalignmentslinked of to territorial structure does not necessarilyinvolve any previouslythought-outmasterplan. On the the of contrary, complexityof the network crosses, deducedfromtheremaining material today,is certainly the result of severalchronologicallyindependentlayers, most of them implemented sepaand ratelyovermanycenturies impossiblefor any to single individualin prehistory see or grasp. I havediscussedthe material termsof alternative in andcomplementary crosses.The alternative crosses could hypothetically have replacedeach other, whereas complementary ones would have been used together.If more than four tribalterritories were to be involvedin rituallyconsecrated alliances of this kind at the same time, complementary crosseshadto be used.Inthiswayonly 2-4 ora few more crosses may have been activelymaintained
Geografiska Annaler ? 83 B (2001) ? 2

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION IN A RITUAL LANDSCAPE

--1

i-AP lb

"=qk"

rJvZt

Fig. 12. The Swedish archaeologist Oscar Montelius demonstrates in 1907 the Late Neolithic gallery-grave at Oringe, Ekeby parish, Ostergotland, Sweden (registered at the Swedish Board of National Antiquities as rai Ekeby 4; E4 in Fig. 13). The grave has a characteristic so-called port-hole in the middle, here partly destroyed. It is one of seven gallery-graves in Osterg6tland with such holes (four in Fig. 13: E4, Svl, Sk16, 023), a type possibly originating in the Paris basin, France. Finds from the grave: two flint daggers with square cross-sections, two spear points and a flake (pictures from Montelius, 1907).

in If simultaneously the area2. thesecrossesareinof withinthe framework an alliancesysterpreted tem with one tribeor clan representing each cardinal point in a cross, the changesover time can be explainedas the resultof powerstruggleswithina society.New families,buildingtheir lineage-based had own barrows, to gain powervia cosmographical reproduction, thus using astronomy link up to with the divine spherewithin a BronzeAge solar realizedin cardinal becult, apparently alignments tween barrows in the landscape. The barrows would then also have had territorial significance and actedas tokensfor ownershipof land.In fact, the Old Norse cettmeansboth 'lineage'and 'point of thecompass',a semanticcombination whichhas not so far been satisfactorily explained.If the family/clan,whose ancestorsareburiedin a barrow, also represents of the cardinal one pointsof a cross in which the barrowtakespart,it is fully comprehensiblethat 'lineage' and 'pointof the compass' havethe sameword.
Annaler- 83 B (2001) - 2 Geografiska

Late Neolithic cardinal alignments To what extent were cardinalalignmentsused in Osterg6tland alreadyin the Late Neolithic (23001700 BC)? Some of the investigatedbarrows,involved in the crosses, containLate Neolithic gal(stonecists;Fig 12), oftenalso withlatlery-graves er secondaryburials.Most probably, severalother in barrows the area- andin the crosses- also contain gallery-graves withoutourknowledge,as this is often impossibleto discoverwithoutan excavation. On the other hand gallery-gravesalso exist inwithoutbarrows. theypositionedin cardinal Are In to alignments? order answerthisquestiona separate investigationwas carried out, the result of which is publishedhere. In the investigationarea there are 35 gallery-graves with known locations Kaliff, 1999,p. 44), in(in total54 in Ostergdtland; in of (thirteen 35). cludingthosecontained barrows A few more arementionedin topographical literature and other documents but have later disappeared without an adequateindicationof where 93

LEIFSAHLQVIST

1435
- 6490

1445

1455
ASKA

146 6

-RE

L13

6480

m GOSING / 15275 SkA OMBERG , OmbergLYSING

K 6470E K4 CrownofS

H3 H8 N 0.48* DAL 23265m R39:2 83N6 R20 R41 R14

LAKE VATTERN H37:2 H37 9'WofN H27 R83 O28 W of N

BOSERG

W R140.12* of

G\

Sk27

NSm

GUL BERG VALKEST

-25850m-68 E

o Sv 6.

M12

"

------O--

7 4 S
-0.33.

NofE

646E4

99 023994 01039670/33210m 082

1 m

E2960.27Sof

E--25228m

--

----o 0.50 N of E

023

04
21856 m

A
A120 ,4 0.86 N of E 0.7O N of E VH131 0.54' S of E (037) o0.7r N of E (SA100)

25113
1435 SAQOo

SE of 0.56
E68 144 47 1455

037

146

on Cardinal witha deviation <10 areindicated straight of as Fig. 13. Gallery-graves a nearest neighbour mapof barrows. alignments lines betweenthe gallery-graves. two broken The two area.Unfilledrings east/westlines incorporate gravesoutsidetheinvestigation = gallery-graves or withouta barrow. with Filledrings=barrows withoutanydiscovered gallery-grave.

be theywerefoundandcannottherefore usedhere. Inorderto obtainas chronologically homogeneous a material possible,i.e. fromthe LateNeolithic, as with a collective burialwere only gallery-graves taken into account,as smallercists with remains fromonlyoneortwo individuals be datedto the can Bronzeage as well. All 35 graves,includingthoseknownto be containedin barrows, wereplottedas unfilledringson a maptogether for withthebarrows reference(Fig. 13). A roughdivisionof the gravesinto a southern soils in or nearwoodlandsanda groupon marginal one northern on morefertilesoils in an open landscape can be done, using a dividingline along the 6460 horizontal coordinate line. In the south,thirteen out of 14 gravesare then locatedin cardinal alignmentswith anothergrave, within 10 (maximum deviationallowed also for the barrows;cf. note 1), evenif noneof themareintervisible this in hilly woodland,whereasonly five out of 21 in the
94

north. difference The betweenthetwo groups obis vious andcan hardlybe explainedawayas a coinif cidence.On the contrary, the graveswere deliberatelyalignedto anequalextentin the wholearea, sucha difference couldbe expected.Manygallerybeendestroyed with graveshavecertainly together on possiblealignments the fertilelandin thenorth, whereasin the southern woodlandsa muchhigher couldbe anticipated. degreeof preservation Theonly grave(oneof 14)in thesouthwithouta cardinal withanother alignment gravein theinveshowtigationareais E4 (Fig. 12, 13).Interestingly, ever,two othergallery-graves (N83, S47) arelocated a few kilometers of theinvestigation in east area withE4 andM12 (broken linesin perfectalignment Fig. 13). They are isolatedgravesof theirkind in the sameway as E4 andM12.All gallery-graves in thesouthof westernOsterg6tland thuscardinalare ly aligned,andall exceptone (El 18) in east/west. Thisverifiestheimportance cardinal of alignments
Geografiska Annaler . 83 B (2001) - 2

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION IN A RITUAL LANDSCAPE

in prehistoric Ostergitland,alreadydemonstrated for the barrows (Sahlqvist,2000). If the age of sevthusrendering deeralbarrows maybe questioned, less tailed interpretations, involving chronology, secure(Kaliff,2000, p. 288), this is hardlythecase in for the gallery-graves Osterg6tland. investiThe thereforeconfirmsthatcardinalalignments gation were used systematicallyover distancesof about 20-40 km in Late Neolithic Scandinavia(2300the for 1700).It strengthens plausibility suchalignments being also used in cardinalcrosses in the sameareaduringthe BronzeAge (1700-500 BC). Archaeological and anthropologicalparallels The reasonwhy peopletook an interestin cardinal as well as otherastronomical can alignments be exfroma moregeneralstandplainedandunderstood studiesin different pointby meansof comparative partsof the world.Basedon suchstudiesintentionin ally conceivedastronomical alignments a cultural landscapecan be interpreted a cosmographic as Timeless,cosmologicallysignificant phenomenon. elementshave been reproduced people'sdownin to-earthreality,which was in this way endowed with an ideologicalfoundation, linkednot only to cultsof the deadandtheirspiritsbutalsojustifying and explainingrelationsof power and territorial seem to be coherent rights. Such interpretations with present researchin prehistoricritual landAmericaandelsewhere. scapesin GreatBritain, in Investigations theBritishIsles andin Brittany, on France,have focussedprincipally astronomical alignments,involvingthe solstices, the equinoxes andthemoon'sstandstills (Burl,1981, 1987;Thom et al., 1990;Ruggles, 1999).Theyhavebeenlinked to ritualactivitiesduringtheLateNeolithicandthe BronzeAge, thusperfectlycoincidingin time with Mawhathas been demonstrated Osterg6tland. for the jor problems,however,haveconcerned reliability of the source material.As an example,when orientationsbetween raised stones are measured, only a slight change in their uprightpositions, causedeitherby humansor by natureitself, could give an orientation entirelydifferentfromthe one originallyintended.Also, when consideringboth the sun andthe moon,therearemanymoresignificant alignments at odds than the four cardinal points, which increasesthe risks of having alignmentsby chance.In spite of these and otherdifficulties, pointed out by several scholars(Heggie, of now material 1981),the amount well-researched availableconfirmsextensive astronomical activiGeografiska Annaler ? 83 B (2001) ? 2

ties in the BritishIsles and in Brittanyduringthe Neolithic and the Bronze Age (Ruggles, 1984, 1989, 1998, 1999). is In NorthAmericacardinality particularly significantamongthe PuebloIndiansandtheirancesto referred tors in the Southwest,archaeologically within the Anasazi and Mogollon culturalconcepts. Althoughthe AncestralPueblos were split into differenttribes with several languages,they were all agriculturalists relativelyuniformin and burial etc. customs,architecture with,mosttypicalcircular kivas(Fig. 14; ly, theirnorth/south-aligned Ferguson/Rohm1986). Not only cardinalalignmentsbutalso a cardinal crosswithone axisbisected (cf. Fig. 7) have been discussedamongthe 14 most important buildingsin Chaco Canyon,New Mexico (Fig. 15; Fritz,1978, 1987;Sofaer,1997). In the periodc. 900-1125 ChacoCanyonwas the most importantceremonialcentre for Ancestral Pueblos.It was probably usedas a distribution also and storagecentre, particularly valuablein a reunreliable agriculture for (Schelgion, climatically was the berg,1992).Severedrought apparently reason for eventuallygiving up the site (c. 1125) and to moving 90 km northwards Aztec Ruins, where was large-scalemainlyChacoanstyle architecture constructed theperiod1110-1275 (Lekson, during 1999). AncestralPueblo astronomyhas been studied by a multidisciplinary teamfor over a decade in theso-calledSolsticeproject,andthesun-watchalso ing practices amongtheirdescendants by other scholars (McCluskey, 1977; Hadingham, 1985 etc.). The geometrical layoutin Chacoanarchitecturehas been investigated a teamof archaeoloby gists (Fowlerand Stein, 1992; Stein and Lekson, 1992;Steinet al., 1997).It seemsthatthe locations of important buildingsor sites have been chosen of withtheintention attaining interregeographical alignments,oflationshipsbased on astronomical ten cardinal directions. Paquime (or Casas Grandes; mainly 1250is 1450), 100 km southof the Mexican/USborder, the second most important site archaeological in the ancientSouthwestafterChacoCanyon.It containsa significant of structure five barrows, fourof which are roundand with the fifth in the middle constructedas a cross (Fig. 16; Di Peso et al., 1974). Paquime is located due south of Chaco of line Canyon,in the prolongation thenorth/south of the Chacoancross (Fig. 15). Based on archaeoconnectingthe sites, the American logical support archaeologist StephenH. Leksonhas recentlyput forward ahypothesis(1997, 1999)thatthiscardinal 95

LEIF SAHLQVIST

I,~~r-~---2

,-

~~/5

Fig. 14. Casa Rinconada, a great kiva, ceremonial building orientated at the cardinal points, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Kivas are typical of the Pueblo culture. - From the book entitled LIVING THE SKY by Ray A. Williamson. Line illustrations copyright ?1984 by Snowden Hodges. Reprinted by permission of Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

S,'"* PuebloAlto
...l , 0.60 E of N .
00oNARIZONA

UTAH
0

COLORADO
Aztec Ruins
-

/s
Pueblo SBonito ,-c\%

z1.30 N of E

ChetroKet ChetroKetl

ChacoCany +Road Pueblouebloo

Great North

Casa Rinconada .
-....

a AcomaPueblo

(I

, N

N/S c. 3700 , m.--

G"`

USA/ NEWMEXICO
MEXICO

Tsin Kletzin Paquime

Paquime (CasasGrandes)100

Fig. 15. Chaco Cardinal Cross (left; cf. model A in Fig. 7) in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, USA (Fritz, 1978, Sofaer, 1997; Lekson, 1999) and Chaco Meridian (right; Lekson, 1997, 1999). Pueblo Alto and Tsin Keltzin are intervisible. Schematical drawings after hypotheses and maps in works within brackets. Geografiska Annaler 83 B (2001) - 2

96

IN LANDSCAPE TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL

the preserved myths then referring to migrations along this so-called Chaco Meridian (1999). Interestingly, an importantpartof the Chaco Meridian in fact separates the two above-mentioned tribes from each other (Fig. 15). It runs along the traditional boundary, both ancient and modern, between Zuni and Acoma tribal territories and could thus have had territorialsignificance (Ruppe, 1953; Ferguson and Hart, 1985; Lekson, 1999). Lekson argues that 'the Chaco meridian structuredthe political history of the Pueblo Southwest' (1999, p. 114). His theory synthesizes and integrates investigations by different Southwestern scholars, including his own research, thus offering an intriguing explanation of circumstances, hitherto understood less well. He notes (1999), however, that as long as the structure 0 lOm is unique in its geographical context, it remains difarchitec- ficult to evaluate statistically. Scholars may hesitate Fig. 16:Moundof the Cross,cardinally alignedearthen ture Paquime at Mexico the (Casas Grandes), (near USborder), because of the large distances involved, 630 km round of barrows a fifthearthen and construction from Chaco to consisting four Paquime and 90 km from Chaco to in the shape of a cross in the middle (Di Peso et al., 1974). was ceremonial intheSouth- Aztec Ruins. centre Paquime themost important west during period1250-1450. the There is, however, some very tangible support for his hypothesis. Among the many ancient roads in the area, the Great North Road (Fig. 15) is more alignment Chaco-Paquime was deliberately crea- remarkable than the others. Constructed around ted within a cosmographical framework, thus 1100 ADand measuring 56 km in length, it is the maintaining Chaco's ritual significance well after longest and most impressive route discovered so its abandonment. He also argues that Aztec Ruins far. Starting at Pueblo Alto in Chaco Canyon with (cf. above), the third most important ceremonial its first 3 kilometres orientated 13' east of north, it site in the Southwest and roughly due north of continues 16 km at 0.50 from true north and finally Chaco Canyon, was probably incorporated in the c. 2' east of north for 31 km (Sofaer et al., 1989; same cosmographical scheme. As the three sites Marshall, 1997). Some scholars argue it was probappear to have been used more or less subsequent ably extended 6 km to Twin Angels Pueblo, or even to each other, this involves major migrations of to Salmon and Aztec Ruins furtherto the north (Lepeople due to severe periods of drought on the kson, 1999), although firm evidence seems to be Colorado Plateau and the assumption that the new lacking here. Averaging 9 m in width and with cersites were chosen after considering cosmographi- tain segments having two and occasionally even cal factors (Lekson, 1999, 2001). four parallel lanes, the road could hardly have been There are preserved accounts from several Pue- justified from a purely utilitarian perspective, on blo tribes about an ancient seminal centre, called the contrary it rather appears to be 'overbuilt and the White House. The Acoma tribe is said to have underused' (Sofaer et al., 1989, p. 365). There is no once left this White House, migrating towards a evidence that it was ever used for extensive transplace in the south called Ako in order to raise par- portation, and very few communities existed along rots (macaws) (White, 1932). Similar accounts are the road, traversing the least developed region of known also from the Zuni tribe (Cushing 1896). In the Chaco cultural area. Its existence, although, fact, Paquime, representing the south seen from confirms that cardinal alignments over long disChaco, became the centre of so-called kachina tances were in fact realized in the landscape and ceremonialism and its extensive trade in macaws fully possible to achieve with Chacoan surveying and macaw feathers. In contemporary Pueblos ma- techniques. With its primary function apparently caws also symbolise the direction south as well as being ritual, it also offers an intriguing example of the sun (Dozier 1970, Tyler 1991, Lekson 1999). how a cardinal direction was implemented cosmoLekson argues the mythical White House could graphically in the landscape (Sofaer et al., 1989, stand for the ceremonial centre at Chaco Canyon, Lekson 1999).

0410

Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

97

LEIF SAHLQVIST

No advanced technique or special equipment is required to survey a long north/south line except a couple of wooden poles (gnomons) and preferably the use of fire signalling (Calvin, 1997). Gnomons were both simple and efficient and thus used for different kinds of measurements even in astronomically more advanced cultures, such as along a meridian line, created by the Chinese astronomer and Buddhist monk I-Hsiang in 721-725 AD.Stretching from Indochina to Siberia (from 17.4' to 400 polar altitude), it measured 7973 ii or just over 3500 km. Gnomons were used at each of the nine stations along the line for simultaneous measurements of summer and winter solstice shadow lengths, probably 'the most remarkable piece of organised field research carried out anywhere in the early Middle Ages' (Needham 1959, p. 293, 1974). The Chinese interest in cardinal alignments, although, is of ancient origin, and, as an example, the Bronze Age capital Shang-An from the early Shang dynasty (1523-1028 BC) was orientated at the cardinal points (Wheatley, 1971). Among the Tewa Indians, another Pueblo tribe in New Mexico, a creation myth is preserved in which six pairs of brothers are linked to the four cardinal points, zenith and nadir as well as to colours. According to this myth the 'cardinalbrothers' threw a handful of earth in each cardinal direction and thus created four tsin 'mounds, barrows'. The Tewa conception of space and their social structure is still related symbolically to this myth. The geographical locations of villages are linked to certain hill tops, mounds etc., representing the cardinal ritual points. In the centre of the cross in San Judin dances are performed at certain intervals and there is a circle of stones, called 'Earth's navel, centre' with openings in each cardinal direction (Ortiz, 1969). A similar cosmological scheme is preserved among the Keres Indians, also descendants from Ancestral Pueblos (White, 1960; Snead and Preucel, 1999). This could be called a totemic landscape, a concept used also for hunter-gatheringAborigines in Australia (Strehlow, 1970, p. 128). A clan system with totemic connections such as in the Pueblo cultures has hitherto not been seriously discussed for Scandinavia, but the ritual landscape presented here opens up new possible interpretations (cf. Old Norse aettabove). Also in ancient India space was geometrically conceived and structuredaccording to the cardinal directions. Such principles were foreseen already in ancient Hindu texts, including Rig Veda, the oldest of them all. The gods were thought to reign over

geographical areas, so Varunawas the protector of the west and Indra of the east (Singh and Khan, 1999). Rig Veda is difficult to date accurately, although it could have been written around 1200 BC and in any case it certainly reflects even older thinking. The Neolithic city of Mohenjodaro in the Indus civilization was orientated at the cardinal points already by 2600 BCand although rebuilt several times never changed its grid-pattern(Possehl, 1999). This ancient Hindu cosmology was linked to the pan-Indian caste hierarchy and cosmographically implemented in the landscape. Thus, rural settlements recently investigated are still related to a cosmographical scheme, according to which the higher castes built their houses preferably in the west and the lower castes in the east or the south. In this way social order was harmonized with cosmic order. The cardinal points are also still used for orientation of other features in the cultural landscape, such as haystacks, which have their long axis east/ west and their short one north/south, whereas funeral pyres have the opposite (Singh and Khan, 1999). In Atharva-Veda (111:24,3) pafica janah 'five peoples' are mentioned, explicitly linked to paica pradishah 'five directions'. This passage can be interpreted as a ritual model for tribal territoriality, cosmographically linked to the cardinal points and a cross-centre with a vertical axis towards the zenith (cf. Hillebrandt 1928, p. 176f). Such a vertical axis is well known among native American tribes (Hadingham 1985; Williamson 1984) and elsewhere, but also recognized in ancient Scandinavian cosmology (Meletinskij, 1973; Schjodt 1990). Significantly emanating from a middle-point, it symbolically connects the mundane structureupwards with its divine prototype and in many religions also downwards with its nadir and the underworld. According to Vedic rituals related to the most important sacrificial ceremony of ancient India, the socalled asvamedha sacrifice, the king should be surrounded by his four consorts, symbolizing the cardinal points (Dumont, 1927; Meurling, 1949) and possibly also associated with geographical regions.

Conclusion
Research in this multidisciplinary field in a Scandinavian context is only in its beginnings and interpretations remain to be confirmed and discussed. The territorialbehaviour and structure as deduced and interpreted from the present material will have to be investigated further.There is certainly more
Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) ? 2

98

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION A RITUAL IN LANDSCAPE

informationto be obtainedfrom the materialalready available and good reason for continued work. The problem of alignmentsoccurringby chancehas alsobeenpossibleto tacklestatistically, even if a statistical methodas used hereneverproduces conclusiveconfirmation individual of alignments.Whenwrittensourcesarenon-existent, anin parallelswill remainimportant orthropological derto backupreasonable Ancestral interpretations. Pueblo culturesprovide an example where such An parallelsseem to be fruitful. important general conclusionto be drawn,finally,is thatthe relevant contextfor an ancientmonument a site couldinor clude a much largerarea than hithertoacknowledgedandenvisagedby manyscholars. E-mail:Leif.Sahlqvist@telia.com Notes
The new experiment February in out 2001 was carried after the correction coordinates five barrows well as the of for as of for left addition coordinates two barrows, out by mistake in the firstexperiment,andfor five new barrows, included in list of barrows Sahlqvist, in 2000 (p. 199ff)butregistered Antiquities only aftermy firstexby The Boardof National The authenticcrosses remained86 (minorreviperiment. sion of crossesincludedin Fig. 10) with the same percentas boundaries before, thus age of crosses near hundreds' the The and only strengthening confirming firstexperiment. same premiseswere used in both simulationexperiments. Giventhe precisionat Isberga(Fig. 6), only alignments deviatingless than1Vfromthe cardinal pointswere accepted and the maximaldifferencebetweenthe two ideally equal partsof the bisectedaxis only less than 1.5%of the total the lengthof the bisectedaxis. However, max. valueswere not allowed together,so as an exampleonly max. 0.05% was allowedfor the bisectiontogetherwith a deviationof 0.75-0.990, whereasa bisectionvalueof max. 1-1.5% was of acceptedonly with a deviation max. 0.250 (exactpremises in Sahlqvist, 2000, p. 128). All 86 crossesexcepttwo (BVK1-2)havetheirfourbarrows thus locatedin fourdifferent hundreds, perfectrespectively of to ly corresponding an interpretation an alliancesystem if betweentribalterritories. Eventhis exceptiondisappears, is which is G6stringhundred divided into two territories, however,IsbergaCardisuggestedin Fig. 11. Interestingly, threeof its churches nal Cross(Fig. 4) is also exceptional, and being locatedin Lysing hundred one (Viversunda)in Dal. This couldbe explained a similarway. If pre-Chrisin tian 'parishes' existedas subpartitions earliertribalterriof the toriesandtheyweretakenoverby Christianity, churches have beenbuilton or at the sacralcentres wouldprincipally of the ancient'parishes', manyof whichcouldhave formed in the IronAge. Hypothetically, the during LateNeolithicor the BronzeAge, tribalterritories could have been divided into clan areas(Sahlqvist,2000, Fig. 56) and, in a second or into subdivided reorganized ancient'parphase,further also withchangesin ishes', processeslikely to be connected A social and/orpolitical structure. formalhundreds' diviin sion could have been implemented a thirdphase,princi-

an structure, pally maintaining earlierterritorial although witha few intersections betweenancient'parishes' adjusted If and 'new' hundreds. such a development took place, IsCrossmaybe connected cult-places anto of bergaCardinal otherscope and from a laterperiodthanwhat is probably the case formostof the 86 crosses,withbarrows frommainly the Late Neolithicor the EarlyBronzeAge. This cross would ratherreflect subpartitions Sahlqvist,2000, p. (cf. or 173),suchas clanareasor already developed developing, ancient 'parishes'with their centres, later continuedas church-sites. Whatever marked sacralcentreof suchanthe cient 'parishes' the mayin most cases havebeen destroyed, than sanctityof the site as well as its social functionrather the monument itself beingrespected the new religion.In by in as fact,manyof the churches the areaappear outpostsin the nearestneighbourchains of barrows,completingthe chains as if replacingearlierbarrows(Sahlqvist,2000, p. 123f andFig. 61). As an example,Vaiversunda church(Fig. located 4) couldbe mentioned, just 1 km southof the southin barrow Dal hundred. ernmost Withincrosscomplexes(Fig. 10) suchas EVK (16 crosses) and KVK (9 crosses) the differentcrosses ought to have been mainlyalternative. not Probably morethanone cross of eachcomplexwouldthenhavebeenfunctional a time. at Also, severalcross-complexes may have been alternative. Thusterritorial for significance the centresas nodesalonga does not meanthatall nodes were equallyactive boundary at the sametime. Priorto such a system,one or bothcardinal axes - perhaps the primarily bisectedone - may have in hadterritorial significance theirentirelengths,alternative use thusreflecting territorial changesover time.Mostof the axes arelocatedso in relation the barrows suchan into that would be possible (cf. Fig. 9 and Sahlqvist, terpretation werebuilt 2000, p. 174f),given the fact thatnot all barrows at the same time. The construction new barrowswould of have involved claims to increasedterritoryand, in fact, in manybarrows the crossesseem to hold - or could have held - an outpostpositionrather thanbeing locatedin the The of centreof theterritories. cross-centres EVKandKVK fall (25 of the 86 cross-centres) in (KVK,9) or near(EVK, the 16) Kungsh6ga cemetery grave-yard, largestprehistoric of westernOsterg6tland with graves from all periodsbetweenthe LateNeolithicandthe LateIronAge. A continuous use of differentalternative crosses within these comof plexes wouldthusbe logicalgiven thelong continuity the cemetery.

References
T. NominaGerANDERSSON, (1965): Svenskahiradsnamn. T. hundare hiirad sprf.klig och frin ANDERSSON, (1982):Hund,
synvinkel. Bebyggelsehistorisk tidskrift 4. manica. Arkivfor germansk ortnamnsforskning. Uppsala.

frin T. ANDERSSON, (1988):Den medeltida sockenbildningen

spriklig synpunkt. Kungliga Vitterhets-, historie- och antikvitetsakademiens drsbok. Stockholm. ATHARVA-VEDA (1992): Hymns of the Atharva-Veda Together with Extractsfrom the Ritual Books and the Commentaries;

translated MauriceBloomfield.Delhi: MotilalBanarsiby dass. BACH,A. (1953):Ahd.hunto, hunria, mhd. hunno-htintari-mlat.

*hunrie sprachlich betrachtet.Rheinische Vierteljahrsblatter. Mitteilungen des Institutsfir geschichtliche Landeskunde der Rheinlande an der Universitit Bonn. Rihrscheid, Bonn. BALDIA, M. 0. (1995): A Spatial Analysis ofMegalithic Tombs.

Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

99

LEIF SAHLQVIST Diss. Southern Methodist University, Dallas. - Updated 2001 at the Comparative Archaeology Web (www.comp-archaeology.org.). BARRETT, J.C. (1994): Fragments from Antiquity. An Archaeology of Social Life in Britain, 2900-1200 BC. Oxford: Blackwell. BARRETT, J., BRADLEY and R./GREEN, M. (1991): Landscape, Monuments and Society: the Prehistory of Cranborne Chase. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BERNDT, R. (1976): Territoriality and the problem of demarcating sociocultural space, in PETERSON, N.: Tribes and Boundaries in Australia. Canberra:Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. BOOK, T. (2000): Symbolskiften i det politiska landskapet. Vaxjo: Vdxj6 University Press. BRADLEY, R. (1993): Altering the Earth. The Origins of Monuments in Britain and Continental Europe. The Rhind Lectures 1991-92. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland Monograph Series. Number 8. BRINK, S. (1990): Sockenbildning och sockennamn. Studier i territoriell indelning i Norden. Acta Academiae Regiae Gustavi Adolphi 57. Studier till en svensk ortnamnsatlas 14. Uppsala. BRINK, S. (1996): Tidig kyrklig organisation i Norden - aktirerna i sockenbildningen, in NILSSON, B. (ed.): Projektet Sveriges kristnande. Publikationer 5. Uppsala. BURL, A. (1981): By the light of the cinerary moon: Chambered tombs and the astronomy of death, in RUGGLES, C.L.N. and WHITTLE, A.W.R. (eds): Astronomy and Society in Britain During the Period 4000-1500 BC. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, British Series no. 88, pp. 243-274. BURL, A. (1987): The Stonehenge People: Life and Death at the World's Greatest Stone Circle. London: Dent & Sons. CALVIN, W.H. (1997): Leapfrogging Gnomons. A method for surveying a very long north-south line without modern instruments. http://faculty.washington.edu/wcalvin. CLAREUS, C. and FERNHOLM, F. (1999): Askahigen. Frin dittebacke - till naturbildning - till en av Ostergotlands storsta gravh6gar, in ANDERSSON, K. et al., (eds): Forskaren ifialt. RAA, Arkeologiska undersdkningar. Skrifter Nr 27. Stockholm: RAA. CARLSSON, D. (1981): Kulturlandskapets territoriella framArkiv, pp. 13-20. viixt. Gotldindskt COSGROVE, D. (1993): The Palladian Landscape. Geographical Change and its Cultural Representations in SixteenthCentury Italy. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press. COSGROVE, D. (1998): Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Originally published: Croom Helm, London 1984 in series: Croom Helm Historical Geography Series. CUSHING, F.H. (1896): Outlines of Zuni Creation Myths. Thirteenth Report of the Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, 1891-92, pp. 321-447. Printing Office, Washington. DILKE, O.A.W. (1971): The Roman Land Surveyors: an Introduction to the Agrimensores. Newton Abbot. DI PESO, C.C., RINALDO and J.B./FENNER, G. (1974): Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Grand Chichimeca. Parts 4-8. Rangoon: Amerind Foundation. DOZIER, E.P. (1970): The Pueblo Indians of North America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. DUMONT, P.E. (1927): L'Asvamedha: description du sacrifice solennel du cheval dans le culte vedique: d'apres les textes du Yajurveda blanc (Vajasaneyisamhita, Satapathabrahmana, Katyayanasrautasutra). Paris: Geuthner. EDLUND, I.E.M. (1987): The Gods and the Place. Location and function of sanctuaries in the countryside of Etruria and Magna Graecia (700-400 BC).G6teborg: Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Rom, 4*, XLIII. ELIADE, M. (1959): Patterns in Comparative Religion. London: Sheed and Ward. ERSSON, (1974): Kolonisation och ddeliiggelse pad Gotland: studier av den agrara bebyggelseutvecklingen frdn tidig medeltid till 1600-talet. (Kolonisation und Wiistlegungen auf Gotland. Studien iiber die agrare Siedlungsentwicklung vom Friihmittelalter zum 17. Jahrhundert). Stockholm: Meddelanden frin kulturgeografiska institutionen vid Stockholms universitet. FABECH, C. (1991): Samfundsorganisation, religiose ceremonier og regional variation, in FABECH, C. and RINGTVED, J. (eds): Samfundsorganisation og regional variation i Norden i romersk jernalder og folkevandringstid. Beretning fra 1. Nordiske jernalderssymposium pASandbjerg slot 11-15 april 1989. Jysk arkaeologisk selskabs skrifter 27. Arhus. FERGUSON, T.J. and HART, R. (1985): A Zuni Atlas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. FERGUSON, W.M. and ROHN, A.H. (1986): Anasazi Ruins of the Southwest in Color. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. FLEMING, A. (1987): Coaxial Field Systems: some questions of time and space. Antiquity 61. FLEMING, A. (1988): The Dartmoor Reaves. Investigating Prehistoric Land Divisions. London: Batsford Ltd. FOWLER, A.P. and STEIN, J.R. (1992): The Anasazi Great House in Space, Time, and Paradigm, in DOYEL, D. E. (ed.): Anasazi Regional Organization and the Chaco System. Papers of the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology 5. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, pp. 101-122. FRITZ; J.M. (1978): Palaeopsychology Today: Ideational Systems and Human Adaptation in Prehistory, in REDMAN, C. L. (ed.): SocialArchaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating. New York: Academic Press, pp 37-59. FRITZ, J.M. (1987): Chaco Canyon and Vijayanagra: Proposing Spatial Meaning in Two Societies, in INGERSOLL, D.W. and BRONITSKY, G. (eds): Mirror and Metaphor: Material and Social Construction of Reality. Lanham:University Press of America, pp. 313-348. GORANSSON, H. (1995): Firhistoriska kalendrar och forntida in skogsbrdinder, Larsson, B. (ed.): Svedjebruk och rojningsbrainning i Norden - terminologi, datering och metoder. Skrifter om skogs- och lantbrukshistoria7. Stockholm: Nordiska museet. HADINGHAM, E. (1984): Early Man and the Cosmos. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. HAFSTROM, G. (1949): Ledung och marklandsindelning. Diss. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell. HAGGETT, P., CLIFF, A.D. and FREY, A. (1977): Locational Analysis in Human Geography. London: Arnold. HARDING, A. (ed.) 1982): Climatic Change in Later Prehistory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. HEGGIE, D.C. (1981): Megalithic Science. Ancient Mathematics and Astronomy in North-West Europe. , London: Thames and Hudson. HELMFRID, S. (1962): Osterg6tland "Vistansting". Studien iiberdie iltere Agrarlandschaftund Ihre Genese. Geografiska Annaler, vol. 44. HILLEBRANDT, A. (1928): Paficajanah. Zeitschriftfiir Indologie und Iranistik, Band 6. Leipzig.

100

Geografiska Annaler ?

83 B (2001) - 2

TERRITORIAL BEHAVIOUR AND COMMUNICATION IN A RITUAL LANDSCAPE JONSSON, C., TAGIL, S. and TORNQVIST, G. (2000): Organizing European Space. London: SAGE Publications. KALIFF, A. (1999): Arkeologi i Osterg6tland. Scener ur ett landskapsf6rhistoria. Uppsala: Institutionen f6r arkeologi och antik historia, Uppsala universitet. KALIFF, A. (2000): Review of Leif Sahlqvist: Det rituella Landskapet. Kosmografiska Uttrycksformeroch territoriell struktur. Aun 28. Uppsala 2000. Fornvinnen 95. KRISTIANSEN, K. (1998a): Europe before history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. KRISTIANSEN, K. (1998b): The Construction of a Bronze Age Landscape. Cosmology, Economy, and Social Organization in Thy, North-western Jutland, in HANSEL (ed.): Mensch und Umwelt in der Bronzezeit Europas: Die Bronzezeit: Das erste goldene Zeitalter Europas. Kiel: Oetker-Voges. KYHLBERG, 0. (1991): Gotland mellan arkeologi och historia. Om det tidiga Gotland. Theses and Papers in Archaeology, New Series A. Stockholm. LARSSON, T. (1993): Vistad. Kring en befast gcrd i Ostergdtland och dstersjdkontakter under yngre bronsaolder.Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Umensis 4. Umea: Arkeologiska Institutionen, Umea Universitet. LARSSON, T. (1995): Maktstruktureroch allianssystem i tistg6tsk bronsilder, in LARSSON, M. and TOLL, A (eds): Samhiillsstruktur och frdindring under bronsdlder. Rapport frin ett seminarium 29-30 september 1994 pi Norrk6pings Stadsmuseum i samrbete med RAA UV Link6ping. RAA Arkeologiska unders6kningar. Skrifter nr 11. Norrktiping:RAA UV Link6ping. LEKSON, S.H. (1997): Rewriting Southwestern Prehistory. Archaeology January/February,pp. 52-55. LEKSON, S.H. (1999): The Chaco Meridian. Centers of Political Power in the Ancient Southwest. Lanham and Oxford: Altamira Press. LINDQUIST, S-O. (1981): Sockenbildningen pi Gotland. En korologisk studie. GotldndsktArkiv. MARSHALL, M.P. (1997): The Chacoan Roads: A Cosmological Interpretation, in MORROW, B.H. and PRICE, V.B.: Anasazi Architecture and American Design, pp. 62-74. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. McCLUSKEY, S. (1977): The Astronomy of the Hopi Indians. Journal for the History ofAstronomy, vol. 8. MELETINSKIJ, E. (1973): Scandinavian Mythology as a System. Journal of Symbolic Anthropology 1-2. The Hague. MELS, T. (1999): Wild Landscapes. The Cultural Nature of Swedish National Parks. Meddelanden frin Lunds Universitets Geografiska Institutioner. Avhandlingar CXXXVII. Lund:Lund University Press. MEURLING, P. (1949): Defyra viiderstrecken. Diss. Stockholm: Caslon Press. MONTELIUS, 0. (1907): Graf frAn stenAldern, upptickt vid Oringe i Ekeby socken. Meddelanden frdn Ostergitlands fornminnesfi6rening. Link6ping. MOLLER, S. (1904): Vei og Bygd i Sten- og Bronzealderen.Aarbogerfor Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie. Kobenhavn. NEEDHAM, J. (1959): Science and Civilization in China. Volume 3, Mathematics and the Sciences of Heaven and Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. NEEDHAM, J. (1974): Astronomy in Ancient and Medieval China. In The place of Astronomy in the Ancient World. Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 276, No.1257, London. OLWIG, K. (1984): Nature's Ideological Landscape. A literary and - geographic perspective on its development and preservation on Denmark's Jutland heath. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Geografiska Annaler - 83 B (2001) - 2

ORTIZ, A. (1969): The Tewa World. Space, Time, Being & Becoming in a Pueblo Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. PETERSON, N. (1976): Introduction, in PETERSON, N.: Tribes and Boundaries in Australia. Canberra:Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. POSSEHL, G.L. (ed.) (1999): Indus Age: The Beginnings. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. RENFREW, C. (1994): Towards a Cognitive Archaeology, in RENFREW, C. and ZUBROW, E.B.W. (eds): The Ancient Mind. Elements of Cognitive Archaeology. New Directions in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ROYMANS, N. (1995): The cultural biography of urnfields and the long-term history of a mythical landscape. Archaeological Dialogues. Vol. 2.1. Leiden. RUGGLES, C.L.N. (1999): Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland. New Haven: Yale University Press. RUGGLES, C.L.N. et al., (1984): Megalithic Astronomy: A New Archaeological and Statistical Study of 300 Western Scottish Sites. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports 123. RUGGLES, C.L.N. (1989): Recent Developments in Megalithic Astronomy, in AVENI, A. (ed.): World Archaeastronomy. Oxford. RUGGLES, C.L.N. (1998): Ritual Astronomy in the Neolithic and Bronze Age British Isles: Patterns of Continuity and Change, in GIBSON, A. and SIMPSON, D. (eds): Essays in Honour of Aubrey Burl. Prehistoric Ritual and Religion. Stroud. RUGGLES, C.L.N.and BARCLAY, G. (2000): Cosmology, calendars and society in Neolithic Orkney: a rejoinder to Euan MacKie. Antiquity 74, pp. 62-74. RUPPE, R.J. Jr. (1953): TheAcoma Culture Province. Diss. Cambridge: Harvard University. SAHLQVIST, L. (2000): Det rituella landskapet. Kosmografiska uttrycksformer och territoriell struktur (The Ritual Landscape. Cosmographic Expression and Territorial Structure). Aun 28. Uppsala: Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University. SCHELBERG, J.D. (1992): Hierarchical Organization as a ShortTerm Buffering Strategy in Chaco Canyon, in DOYEL, D.E. (ed.): Anasazi Regional Organization and Chaco System, pp. 59-74. Anthropological Papers No. 5. Albuquerque: Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico. SCHJODT, J.P. (1990): Horizontale und vertikale Achsen in der vorchristlichen skandinavischen Kosmologie, in AHLBACK, T. (ed.): Symposium on Encounters between Religions in Old Nordic Times and on Cultic Place-Names, held at Abo, Finland, on the 19th-21st ofAugust 1987. Abo. SINGH, J.P. and KHAN, M. (1999): Hindu cosmology and the orientation and segregation of social groups. Geografiska Annaler, 81B (1): pp. 19-39. SNEAD, J.E. and PREUCEL, R.W. (1999): The Ideology of Settlement: Ancestral Keres Landscapes in the Northern Rio Grande, in ASHMORE, W./KNAPP, A. B. (eds.): Archaeologies of Landscape. Contemporary Perspectives. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers. SOFAER, A. (1997): The Primary Architecture of the Chacoan Culture: A Cosmological Expression, in MORROW, B.H. and PRICE, V.B.: Anasazi Architecture and American Design; pp. 88-132. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. SOFAER, A., MARSHALL, M.P. and SINCLAIR, R.M. (1989): The Great North Road: A Cosmographic Expression of the Chaco Culture in New Mexico, in AVENI, A. (ed.): WorldArchaeoastronomy: Selected Papersfrom the 2nd Oxford International Conference ofArchaeoastronomy; pp. 43-70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

101

LEIFSAHLQVIST I.J. to Site STEIN,J.R. andLEKSON,S.H. (1992): AnasaziRitualLand- THORPE, (1997):FromSettlements Monuments: Succession in Late NeolithicandEarlyBronzeAge Jutland, in scapes,in Doyel, D.E. (ed.):AnasaziRegionalOrganization of University New MexicoPress. Albuquerque: J.E: STEIN, J.R:,SUITER, andFORD,D. (1997):HighNoon in Old Bonito:Sun, Shadow,and the Geometry the Chaco of in B.H. andPRICE, V.B.:AnasaziArComplex, MORROW, of University New MexicoPress. and T.G.H.(1970):Geography theTotemic LandSTREHLOW, a Australia: Functional scapein Central Study,in BERNDT, lands:University Western of Australia Press. S. SODERLIND, (1968): Hiradet.HistoriskTidskrift,pp. 103172. don.
THOM, A. (1973): Megalithic Lunar Observatories. Reprinted standing stones: Britain, Ireland and Brittany. British ArR.M.: Australian Aboriginal Anthropology. Modem Studies in the Social Anthropology of the Australian Aborigines. Nedchitecture andAmerican Design; pp. 133-148. Albuquerque: and the Chaco System. Papers of the Maxwell Museum ofAnthropology 5; pp. 87-100. Maxwell Museum ofAnthropology. NASH, G. (ed.): Semiotics of Landscape: Archaeology of

Mind. BritishArchaeological Series Reports.International 661, Oxford: Archaeopress.

TYLER, H.A. (1991): Pueblo Birds and Myths. Norman: Univer-

Press. sity of Oklahoma

VIKSTRAND, P. (2001): Gudarnas platser. Fdrkristna sakrala ortnamn i Mdlarlandskapen (The Places of the gods. PreChristian sacral place-names in central Sweden). Acta

Academiae till RegiaeGustaviAdolphiLXXVII.Studier en svenskortnamnsatlas Uppsala. 17.

WALDE, A. (1965): Lateinisches Etymologisches Wdrterbuch.

VierteAuflage.Heidelberg: Winter.

WARD-PERKINS, J.B. (1987): Cities of Ancient Greece and Italy: Planning in Classical Antiquity. New York: George Bra-

ziller.

THOM, A. (1967): Megalithic Sites in Britain. Oxford: Claren-

withcorrections. Oxford,Clarendon. THOM, THOM,A.S. andBURL,A. (1990):Stonerowsand A., International Series,560. Oxford. chaeological Reports.

WEILER, E. (1994): Innovationsmiljder i bronsdlderns samhiille och idivitrld: kring ny teknologi och begravningsritual i Viisterg6tland. (Innovative environments within society and concepts during the Bronze Age: new technologies and burial rites in Viistergotland). Studia Archaeologica Universitatis

WHEATLEY, P. (1971): The Pivot of the Four Quarters. A PreTHRANE, C. (1991): Territoriality in a Bronze Age Landscape liminary Enquiry into the Origins and Character of the AnIn in of cient Chinese City. Edinburgh. (Odsherred). RegionsandReflections honour Mdirta

Umensis5. Umei.

Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. Seriesin 8' No Stromberg. 20. Lund.

L.A.(1932):TheAcomaIndians. Annual 47th WHITE, Report of pp. 17-192. Washington L.A. (1960):TheWorldof the Keresan PuebloIndians, WHITE,
the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1929-1930,

TILLEY, C. (1991a): Material Culture and Text. The Art ofAm-

biguity.London,Routledge. C. a in TILLEY, (1991b):Constructing RitualLandscape, JENNBERT, K. et al., (eds): Regions and Reflections in honour of MartaStromberg. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. Seriesin

8' No 20. Lund:Almqvist& WiksellInternational.

in DIAMOND, S. (ed.): Culture in History. Essays in Honor of Paul Radin. New York. WIGREN, S. (1987): Sormliindsk bronsdldersbygd: en studie av tidiga centrumbildningar daterade med termoluminiscens.

TILLEY, C. (1994): A Phenomenology of Landscape. Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford: Berg. TILLEY, C. (1999): Metaphor and Material Culture. Oxford:

Theses and Papers in North-European Archaeology 16. Stockholm.

BlackwellPublishers.

WILLIAMSON, R. A. (1984): Living the Sky. The Cosmos of the

American MifflinCompany. Indian.Boston:Houghton

102

Geografiska Annaler- 83 B (2001) - 2