Viking Age tar production and outland exploitation

Hennius, Andreas

doi:10.15184/aqy.2018.22

Cited by 36 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the new chronology of the pitfalls shows great similarities with the chronology of other types of hunting equipment from Oppland, Norway, presented by Pilø et al (2018: 5). The exploitation of non-cultivated resources, however, not only involves hunting; similar developments can be seen, for example, in the production of iron (Magnusson, 1986: 221-22) and tar (Hennius, 2018), whose production increased during the sixth and seventh centuries. These studies not only strengthen the relevance of the new pitfall chronology, but also bear witness to major societal changes in Scandinavia in the centuries before the Viking Age expansion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Towards a Refined Chronology of Prehistoric Pitfall Hunting in Sweden

Hennius

2020

Eur. j. archaeol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the most prominent prehistoric features in the boreal forests of northern Sweden are trapping pits or pitfalls used for hunting elk and/or reindeer. Even if often ascribed to the Viking Age and its trade in furs and other animal products, the chronology of these features has long been a matter of debate. In this article, a database of 370 dated radiocarbon samples from excavated pitfalls has been compiled and analysed using Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) modelling to create the most elaborate chronology of Swedish trapping pit systems so far. The analysis shows that the most intensive period of construction of trapping pits was in the centuries before the Viking period. This challenges previous interpretations of Viking Age resource exploitation but is in line with several other recently published studies concerned with resource exploitation, non-agrarian production, and trade connecting northern Scandinavia with inter-regional trade networks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Towards a Refined Chronology of Prehistoric Pitfall Hunting in Sweden

Hennius

2020

Eur. j. archaeol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the production of charcoal, and sometimes also tar as byproduct in charcoal production pits, local branch wood and root material was collected (von Berg, 1860). Charcoal production pit that were solely used for the production of tar have a similar morphology to charcoal pits but tar pits have a small bulge for a collecting vessel at their base (Hennius, 2018 Hildebrandt et al (2007) given no excavations were made and type 2a RCHs are situated on low-angled slopes rather than unstable or wet ground. Archaeological excavations further indicate that there was also ã 1 m wide area between the circular ditch and the wood stack that Ore Mountains in Germany (Hardy & Dufey, 2015;Swieder, 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An initiative for a morphologic‐genetic catalog of relict charcoal hearths from Central Europe

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing availability of high-resolution topographic data, coupled with image analysis and machine learning techniques, is rapidly changing the way archaeological sites are digitally identified and mapped. We present a catalog of common forms of relict charcoal hearths (RCHs) in Central Europe to improve the evaluation of morphologic and genetic features in future mapping approaches. RCHs are important historical landscape features created from the production of charcoal. RCHs are noted in Central Europe from the Medieval Period, but also are widespread near (pre-)industrial mining centers. Different forms of charcoal hearths were created by workers known as colliers, and their hearth building techniques may have differed on a regional scale. Our catalog is based on a morphologic-genetic grouping of RCHs. Due to topographic effects, reuse of production sites, or local techniques, this catalog is nonexhaustive, but most RCHs in Central Europe can be grouped into one of seven types. K E Y W O R D S anthropogenic relief features, charcoal kilns, charcoal pits, digital mapping, pre-industrial charcoal production platforms 1 | INTRODUCTION The study of relict charcoal hearths (RCHs), also referred to as charcoal kiln sites, is an emerging topic in environmental sciences and archaeology. The charcoal/biochar enriched substrate found in these sites not only affects carbon sequestration in soils (Kerré, Bravo, Leifeld, Cornelissen, &

show abstract

“…From AD 400-500, there was an expansion of iron production, for example in the provinces of Dalarna (Hyenstrand, 1974) and Jämtland (Magnusson, 1986), located in the mostly forest inland of Scandinavia (Figure 2). Later, tar became another important product in the trade from the forests (Hennius, 2018).…”

Section: Synthesis: Why Were Managed Infield Meadows Developed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin and Development of Managed Meadows in Sweden: A Review

Eriksson

2020

Rural Landscapes: Society, Environment, History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review concerns when and why infield meadows developed, i.e. enclosed land, constructed and managed for production of livestock fodder. Meadows have been associated with 'stalling' of livestock, in turn associated with, for example, protection from adverse weather conditions, increasing efficiency of milk and manure production, or changing human-animal relationships. The suggested timing for origin of meadows ranges from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. Meadows are embedded in a complex of interactions, including aspects of culture, material conditions and the environment, and these were treated as different components, unfolding over time: harvesting fodder, stalling livestock, milk production, use of manure, crops and permanent fields, fencing systems, tools, and settlements and land ownership. The interpretation is based on Hodder's entanglement theory. It is concluded that these component's appearance is distributed over a very long time, from the Neolithic to the first centuries AD, when meadows, viewed as a 'complete' system, appeared. People most likely for long knew the advantages of feeding livestock, and the means to achieve this: collecting additional fodder, keep livestock in close quarters, eventually indoors, and collect and distribute manure on crop fields, but the introduction of iron tools during the centuries around AD was the key to develop meadows. Stalling livestock and construction of infield meadows may have been partly decoupled. Although climate change was not a driver behind development of meadows, the agricultural system with meadows and livestock stalling was adaptive during later periods of climate deterioration, and for colonization of northern forests in Sweden.

show abstract

Viking Age tar production and outland exploitation

Cited by 36 publications

References 13 publications

Towards a Refined Chronology of Prehistoric Pitfall Hunting in Sweden

Towards a Refined Chronology of Prehistoric Pitfall Hunting in Sweden

An initiative for a morphologic‐genetic catalog of relict charcoal hearths from Central Europe

Origin and Development of Managed Meadows in Sweden: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About