2010 A.-S. Gräslund 131 Introduction In recent decades, identity has been a popular field of research in archaeology. When, following World War II, the idea of ethnicity in the sense of race became too problematic, the concept of ethnicity nevertheless continued to be used, but now rather in the sense of cultural ethnicity. However, it was increasingly replaced by the concept of cultural identity, as identity seemed to be a less problematic and less loaded concept than ethnicity. There is a comprehensive archaeological literature on ethnicity and ethnic and cultural identity, in many respects critical and full of scepticism (see, for example, Hillerdal 2009, Jones 1997). To clarify the terminology concerning ethnicity, especially for archaeologists studying the Early Middle Ages, Heinrich Härke has recently stressed the definitions: race is merely a tool of biological classification; ethnicity is a cultural concept, describing perceptions and expressions of group identity as seen by observers or the people themselves; and tribes are units of social organization and should therefore not be used in the sense of ethnic groups (Härke 2007:12). In the study of ethnicity, two main models can be perceived: primordialism and instrumentalism. Primordialism regards ethnicity and cultural identity as definite and unchangeable. Instrumentalism, on the other hand, views it as a dynamic, social construction which can change according to the situation (Jones 1997:65 ff.; Siapkas 2003:41 ff., 175 ff.). It has, however, also been argued that the dichotomy between the primordialist and the instrumentalist approaches should not be exaggerated, as the maintenance of certain aspects of ethnic identity seems to be very important to an individual’s conception of self, for example one’s language (Blanck 2006:7). Identity can be collective or individual; archaeologically, it may be easier to distinguish the collective identity, the belonging to a group. When discussing identity, it is important to point out that: a) the concept of identity is based on the person’s own perceptions and feelings, and b) one individual may have several identities, depending on the actual situation. Such a multiple identity could be made up of, for example, age, gender, household, locality, and ethnicity (Härke 2007:13). In this paper, I will reflect briefly on the popularized term “Viking identity”, i.e., a sense of cultural community in Scandinavia as well as in areas where Scandinavians settled in the Viking Age—whether it even existed and if so, what it means?1 Of course, the concept of identity can be understood in different ways. Two general propositions can be contrasted: 1) can we expect an overarching “Viking” cultural unity? or 2) must we restrict groups of cultural identity to regional spheres only? In fact, these options are not mutually exclusive; both could easily be true and probably are. Following on from this, one can also ask: to what extent did the Norse in the North Atlantic regard Scandinavia as their “homelands”? Regional vs Overarching Cultural Identity? This question of regional vs overarching cultural identity has been on my mind ever since I read Fredrik Svanberg’s thesis Decolonizing the Viking Age (Svanberg 2003a, 2003b). He adopts a post-colonial approach and situates his argument partly within the history of ideas, and partly based on a large and very thorough catalogue of all known Viking Age graves in Southern Sweden, which is of great value for further research. Svanberg’s point is that the concept of How Did the Norsemen in Greenland See Themselves? Some Reflections on “Viking Identity” Anne-Sofie Gräslund* Abstract - The concept of identity can be seen from different angles and understood on different levels. In the context of Viking identity, we can contrast two possibilities: 1) that there was an overarching Scandinavian cultural unity in the Viking Age, or 2) that there were distinct cultural identities in different parts of what is often called the “Viking world.” In fact these options are not mutually exclusive; both could easily be true and probably are. In this paper, identity is discussed based on archaeological, literary, and iconographic sources. The focus is on the North Atlantic settlements, especially Iceland and Greenland, and the extent to which Norsemen regarded their connections with Scandinavia as homeland connections. Many factors affected the sense of belonging of a Norse group with Scandinavian roots, including language, names, religious customs, and material culture. House constructions suggest that building traditions were transferred even if the materials needed were not always locally available. Comparisons are drawn with other, more recent situations, and examples are given from the emigration of Swedes to America in the 19th and 20th centuries. The Swedish-Americans have a dual identity, they feel both as Swedes and (above all) as Americans. It is suggested that something similar was true for the Norse settlers in Greenland; they were Greenlanders, but at the same time, their Scandinavian roots continued to be significant. Special Volume 2:131–137 Norse Greenland: Selected Papers from the Hvalsey Conference 2008 Journal of the North Atlantic *Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, Sweden; anne-sofie.graslund@arkeologi.uu.se. 2010 132 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2 Viking Age and the idea of a common Viking culture did not exist until the second half of the 19th century, in the days of nationalism. The concept of the Scandinavian Viking Age was created by archaeologists like Worsaae, Hildebrand, and Montelius (Svanberg 2003a:36). Of course, the archaeological term Viking Age with its chronological definition is, like all names of periods, Stone Age, Bronze Age, Migration Period, etc., a late scholarly construct. However, the term Viking is mentioned in runic inscriptions from the 11th century, and the concept Viking Age in the meaning of old fantasy time seems to have been a reality when the Legendary Sagas were told (Mitchell 2008:319) and must have been so long before they were written down in the 14th century. Frands Herschend (2006:55 ff.) has pointed out that historically there are two usages of the word Viking: one pre- and early historical (up to the 14th century) with positive and negative connotations, designating a man of Scandinavian descent and seawarrior identity, and a modern one dating back to the 17th century, more marked by the ideological standpoint of its user and by a desire to create ethnic and national identities in the Scandinavian countries. The word Viking was still in use in 17th century Iceland, when it was reintroduced in Scandinavia. There is linguistic support for this reintroduction in that there is no weakening of k to g that should have been expected in modern Danish (Herschend 2006:56). In post-colonial fashion, Svanberg also argues that it is a violation to attribute such an idea as a common culture to the people of the Viking Age. Obviously, his ideas clash with the traditional view that “the Viking World” can be defined in time and space as a cultural unity. Concerning burial customs in the province of Skåne/Scania, Svanberg uses a number of specific ritual systems to argue that there were four separate culture groups instead of a common culture. Against this, it could be argued that differences in mortuary practices are to be expected, as they often occur in the same cemetery. Examples could be taken from many Anglo-Saxon cemeteries (Howard Williams 2006:24 ff.) or Scandinavian cemeteries (for example, Valsgärde [e.g., Ljungkvist 2008] and Birka [Arbman 1943]) from the Late Iron Age/Viking Age. Variety is more common than the opposite. A single family or a village could well have their specific customs and, in my view, this does not constitute a separate “culture”, but rather a very local identity nested within the wider, larger one. If a man from Skåne, for instance, on a Viking expedition in England, met other Scandinavians there, it seems reasonable to expect that he felt a sort of fellowship with them, for good or for worse. At least, the “Vikings” from Skåne must have felt they had more in common with other Scandinavians than with the locals. The fact that Svanberg illustrates almost every cemetery in his catalogue of Viking Age graves in Southern Sweden with artifacts from Birka is to me a strong contradiction of his point of separate cultures. The artifacts from the Birka graves (Arbman 1940– 1943) have, from their first publication in the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, been a standard reference for the material culture of the Viking Age up to the last quarter of the 10th century, when Birka as town seems to have disappeared. So, the artifacts found at the Viking Age burial grounds of south Sweden speak in favor of an overarching, common material culture. After having considered the problem of an overarching identity versus a regional one for a long time, I do not want to say that one dominates the other—it is to be expected that identities are on different levels. That is exactly what it is all about—one can be a member of a regional community and at the same time a part of a wider, more overarching culture community.2 For each individual, I think that one identity may be equally important as the other. Rather, we should ask to what extent the Norse in the North Atlantic settlements regarded their connections with Scandinavia as connections with a homeland. Are titles of books and exhibitions like Cultural Atlas of the Viking World (Graham- Campbell 1994) or Vikings—The North Atlantic Saga (Fitzhugh and Ward 2000) appropriate or not? It is striking how often it is recorded in the sagas that men who had settled in Iceland sailed to western Norway and then returned to Iceland. Especially during the first two–three generations, Icelanders and Greenlanders went to Norway, to see their relatives, but also for trade. Later, the trade was mainly carried on by Norwegian ships coming to Iceland/ Greenland. The reason for this is supposed to be the difficulty in building new ships and also repairing the old ones on the North Atlantic Islands, because of the lack of timber. Important export goods from both Iceland and Greenland were walrus tusks, ropes of walrus hides, and falcons, and from Iceland, also coarse woollen cloth and sulphur. The most important import goods were grain, timber, and tar (Autén Blom 1960:515 ff., 1962:481 ff.; Jóhannesson 1969:256 ff.; Gelsinger 1981:12 ff., 61 ff., 69 on a reciprocal commercial agreement between Norway and Iceland). Archaeologically, the trade between Iceland/Greenland and Norway is supported by finds in Trondheim and Bergen of wooden labels, intended to be fastened to parcels of goods. The runic inscriptions on them give the name of the owner and sometimes also the type of goods. Some of the names indicate commercial connections with Iceland/Greenland (Hagland 1988). 2010 A.-S. Gräslund 133 On Identity in the North Atlantic Settlements Many factors contribute to the feeling of a common identity, for example, language, religion, traditions, art, and material culture like house constructions, weapons, tools, jewellery, dress, and food. Two factors in particular have been identified as general identity markers: language and religion. A common language is probably of extreme importance. According to linguists, the divergence of the Scandinavian languages did not take place until the 13th century, probably as late as the time of the Black Death. In the Viking Age, the language of Scandinavia was more or less the same (Henrik Williams 2007:232). This assertion is also supported by the sagas: when people from different parts of Scandinavia met and talked to each other, it is never mentioned that they had problems with understanding each other. Another indication of cultural unity is the use of personal names. In Landnámabók, settlers from Caithness, from the Hebrides, and from Ireland are mentioned, and either they already have Scandinavian names, or, they give their offspring Scandinavian names, as in the case of Avang the Irishman: “he was the father of Thorleif …” (Benediktsson 1986 [ÍF 1]:58–59). In the field of language, the narratives should also be mentioned; a reasonable assumption is that the emigrant families brought and told their old stories. It is striking that the people of the “Viking World” shared a mythology and a set of gods and goddesses, and probably a cult, e.g., sacrifices, based on old Scandinavian traditions. However, placenames suggest there was variation as to which gods were particularly popular in different regions, even if Thor obviously was popular everywhere. In Iceland, there are several place-names with the element (prefix) Þór (Lárusson 1939:72). This repeated reference coincides well with the fact that three Thor’s hammer amulets are found in Iceland (Hayeur Smith 2004:86). For Greenland, the loom-weight with an engraved Thor’s hammer found at Brattahlíð should be mentioned (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 338]; see figure 3 in Abrams 2009). Lárusson refers also to some Icelandic place-names with the prefixes Njörðr, Baldr, and Freyr (Lárusson 1939:72). Similarities are also obvious between the graves in the homelands and in the North Atlantic settlements, in spite of certain local variations. While the general similarities cannot be doubted, there are significant differences, like the absence of cremations in the North Atlantic. More than 300 Viking Age graves from a total of 150 sites have been found in Iceland, some of them obviously pagan, with large amounts of grave goods and even horses; none of them, however, contained cremated remains (Sigurðsson 2008:564). In Norway, there are both cremation graves and inhumation graves from the Viking Age (Solberg 2000:222). If we turn to Northern Norway, inhumations completely dominate the picture; there are cremations too, but in such small numbers that they are exceptions to the rule (Sjøvold 1974:189). Another important concern for the sense of identity of the Scandinavian emigrants, partly connected to religion, was to keep traditions and customs from their homeland alive. In this connection, we can note, as analogies, many examples from the Scandinavian emigration to North America in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The idea that material culture is important for creating identity is today generally accepted; we talk about artifacts as loaded with meaning. Strong similarities in artifacts like jewellery, weapons, and tools all over the “Viking World” are obvious— smaller differences may sometimes occur, but the similarities are absolutely dominating. Grave-goods from several Icelandic female graves (for example, Daðastaðir [Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 (FVC 325)] and Kornsá [Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 (FVC 327)]) contain jewellery and tools very similar to Scandinavian finds (Fig. 1). The similarity to Scandinavian artifacts is also obvious when it comes to the rich male grave from Hafurbjarnarstaðir: sword (type S) with a chape, axe (type K), spearhead (type K), bridle, etc. (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 324]). From Greenland, there are late Viking Age artifacts of clear Scandinavian type, in addition to the above mentioned loom-weight from Narsaq (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 339]): for example, an iron axe from Tunuarmiut, and interestingly, a whalebone copy of such an axe, found at Sandnes (see figure 5 in Kopár 2009), and two arrowheads of reindeer antler found at Narsaq (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 339–341]). These artifacts show that local raw material was used to produce Scandinavian types of artifacts (see further Kopár 2009). This probably holds for two gaming pieces of walrus ivory, dated to the 11th century, from Sandnes (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 342]), while a finger-ring of twisted thick and thin gold wire found at Garðar seems to be of Scandinavian origin (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 343]). Vessels (coopered tubs) of Scandinavian type for storing food, etc. were made of Siberian-Alaskan driftwood (Lynnerup 2000:291, fig. 21.9). An iron strike-a-light (Lynnerup 2000:293, fig. 21.11) is of a type found in the hundreds, if not thousands, in Scandinavia. It is significant that the classifications of Jan Petersen in his works Norske vikingesverd (1919), Vikingetidens smykker (1928), and Vikingetidens redskaper (1951) are still used all over the “Viking World”. When dealing with an oval brooch of the most frequent type, for instance, it is called JP 51 134 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2 (i.e., Jan Petersen’s type 51), and swords may be described as Petersen O and Petersen S, following his schedule (see, e.g., Hayeur Smith 2004:34 for swords, 2004:79 for oval brooches). When looking for comparative material to finds of tools at excavations, for instance, Petersen 1951 is still most useful. The similarities are also very pronounced in art and decoration. In this context, there are, however, obvious differences between regions. When previously uninhabited lands were settled, the art and Figure 1. Part of gravegoods from a pagan burial in Daðastaðir, NE-Iceland. Photograph © National Museum of Iceland. 2010 A.-S. Gräslund 135 artifacts exhibit a high degree of similarity to the home-country, but on the other hand, where Scandinavians settled among pre-existing populations, like in England, there was mutual impact, often resulting in a mix, like the Anglo-Scandinavian style (Graham-Campbell 1994:138 ff.). The Flatatunga panels from Northern Iceland, with their decoration in pure Ringerike style datable to the first half of the 11th century, might have originated in a church (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992 [FVC 454]). Another interesting field of investigation is the construction of houses, suggesting that building traditions continued even if the materials needed were not always locally available. Some examples of Icelandic halls are presented in a new exhibition catalogue (Vésteinsson 2006:116 ff.). Vésteinsson points out that, in the Viking Age, the halls with curved long walls are found only in Scandinavia and in Norse settlements in the North Atlantic. From the 10th century, the houses became more and more uniform. In a recent article, Guðmundur Ólafsson claims that in many cases the settlers may have brought their houses with them, deconstructed and packed for transport (Ólafsson 2008:117 ff.). The most important reason for this may have been that they could provide a roof for their families in a much shorter time, than if they had to build the house from scratch. According to the Book of Settlements, some of the immigrants settled temporarily in two or three places before they decided to stay permanently (cf. Friðriksson and Vésteinsson 2003:151 about archaeological sites of early settlements, abandoned relatively soon, probably supporting the literary evidence). The idea of taking down and transporting houses is highly interesting and strongly supports the thought of close connections between the settlers and the material culture of their homelands. It was the timber frame they brought, and probably some interior panels, but the houses were completed with locally obtained turf, etc. A more recent example of keeping homeland traditions in house construction is shown in a photo from 1872 of an immigrant couple’s first home in Minnesota (Fig. 2), with the caption “Swedish settlers on the frontier at first naturally made use of old-country skills. The log cabin is unmistakably Swedish in style and construction” (Barton 1994: plate 7). There has been considerable debate on the background of the American log building technique, but Terry G. Jordan shows in his comprehensive work on American log buildings, based on extensive field research in the European areas where log buildings are used, that the earliest log structures in the United States were erected by Scandinavian settlers, especially Swedish immigrants in the Delaware Valley in the 1630s, and that the greatest influence on Midland American log structures were exerted by settlers from the Fenno- Scandian area (Jordan 1985:41, 147). The landscape was also of essential importance to create a sense of belonging. The landscape of Western Norway is in many ways similar to that of Iceland and southwest Greenland, so it was no wonder that the Norsemen felt at home there. As Niels Lynnerup writes: “… earlier Norse research presupposes a clear identification of Greenland as an isolated entity. The Norsemen may not have held such a view themselves. To them Greenland was probably an extension of habitable lands and fjords, stretching from Norway over the Shetlands, Orkneys, Faeroes, and Iceland all the way to Labrador and Newfoundland” (Lynnerup 2000:294). An interesting example of similarities in landscape between the homeland situation and that of the new land has been pointed out by Frands Herschend (1994:171 ff.) concerning Skallagrím’s settlement at Borg at Borgarfjörður, placed on the highest position in the terrain, in the inner part of the fjord. Skallagrímr is said to have come from Hálogaland in Northern Norway, and was then certainly aware of the chieftain’s farm Borg in Lofoten, that has the same impressive and dominating position, on top of a ridge in the inner part of the fjord. Figure 2. A good example of homeland traditions in colonial house construction: a Swedish immigrant couple in front of their first home in Minnesota in 1872. ”The log cabin is unmistakably Swedish in style and construction.” (Barton 1994, plate 7). The photo is reproduced with kind permission from Svenska Emigrantinstitutet - Utvandrarnas hus - Växjö, Sweden. 136 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2 Arbman, H. 1940–1943. Birka I. Tafeln 1940, Text 1943. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien, Stockholm, Sweden. Authén Blom, G. 1960. Grønlandshandel. Kulturhistoriskt lexikon för nordisk medeltid 5:519–523. Authén Blom, G. 1962. Islandshandel. Kulturhistoriskt lexikon för nordisk medeltid 7:481–485. Barton, H. 1994. A Folk Divided. Homeland Swedes and Swedish Americans, 1840–1940. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Multiethnica Upsaliensia 10. Uppsala, Sweden. Benediktsson, J. (Ed.). 1986. Íslendingabók: Landnámabók. Íslenzk fornrit 1 (= ÍF 1). Hið íslenzka fornritafélag, Reykjavík, Iceland. 525 pp. Blanck, D. 2006. The Creation of an Ethnic Identity. Being Swedish American in the Augustana Synod 1860–1917. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL, USA. Brink, S., and N. Price. 2008. (Eds.). The Viking World. Routledge, Abingdon, UK. Fitzhugh, W.W., and E.I. Ward (Eds.). 2000. Vikings. The North Atlantic Saga. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, DC, USA. Friðriksson, A., and O. Vésteinsson. 2003. Creating a past: A historiography of the settlement of Iceland. Pp. 139–161, In J.H. Barrett (Ed.). Contact, Continuity, and Collapse. The Norse Colonization of the North Atlantic. Studies in the Early Middle Ages, Vol. 5. Brepols, Turnhout, Belgium. Gelsinger, B.E. 1981. Icelandic Enterprise: Commerce and Economy in the Middle Ages. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC, USA. Graham-Campbell, J. (Ed.). 1994. Cultural Atlas of the Viking World. Facts on File, New York, NY, USA, and Andromeda, Oxford, UK. Hagland, J.R. 1988. Runematerialet frå gravingane i Trondheim og Bergen som kjelder til islandshandelens historie. Historisk tidsskrift 67:145–156, Oslo, Norway Härke, H. 2007. Ethnicity, “race”, and migration in mortuary archaeology: An attempt at a short answer. Anglo- Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 14:12–18. Hayeur Smith, M. 2004. Draupnir’s Sweat and Mardöll’s Tears. An Archaeology of Jewellery, Gender, and Identity in Viking Age Iceland. BAR International Series 1276, Oxford, UK. Herschend, F. 1994. Models of petty rulership: Two early settlements in Iceland. Tor 26:163–191, Uppsala, Sweden. Herschend, F. 2006. Wikinger. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Herausgegeben von H. Beck, D. Geuenich and H. Steuer, Band 34. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany and New York, NY, USA. Pp. 55–59. Hillerdal, C. 2009. People in Between: Ethnicity and Material Identity—A New Approach to Deconstructed Concepts. Opia 50, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. Jóhannesson, J. 1969. Islands Historie i Mellomalderen: Fristatstida. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo-Bergen-Trondheim, Norway. Jones, S. 1997. The Archaeology of Ethnicity. Constructing Identities in the Past and Present. Routledge, London, UK. Cultural Identity of Swedish-Americans: Some Analogies Finally, even if they relate to another time and another setting, some analogies to Swedish-Americans may be useful. There are several scientific studies of Swedish-Americans, confirming that the old language was extremely important for the immigrants in the beginning. Over time, this importance decreased. Traditions and customs were and are still to a certain degree kept alive, for example, when the immigrants celebrate St. Lucia on the 13th of December and when they dance around a large pole, dressed in leaves and flowers at Midsummer. At festivals, they cook typical Swedish food and some of them are dressed in folk costumes. However, their identity is dual, both Swedish and American. It is thought-provoking that, depending on the sources, we can get two different pictures: the immigrants were forward-looking, not backward-looking, but in their letters to their relatives back in Sweden, there is palpable nostalgia. Many of these analyses of Swedish-American cultural life have shown how, while obviously being very much rooted in cultural traditions from Sweden, it was also shaped by the American context in which it existed. Swedish-American cultural patterns thus exhibit a duality, and it is possible to speak of an identity drawing on cultural elements from both Sweden and the United States while at the same time maintaining a distance from both. They also show the immigrants and their descendants as active agents in shaping these cultural patterns and ethnic identities (Blanck 2006: 6 ff.). Many of the Swedish-Americans had and still have a dream to visit the old country, but only to visit, not to move back. Sometimes they are said to be more Swedish than the Swedes (Klein 2001:67). However, even if they are very proud of their Swedish roots, they would never deny that they are Americans. By way of analogy, I can imagine that something similar held true for the Viking Age emigrants to the North Atlantic and perhaps especially for their descendants—for example, in the Norse settlements of Greenland. They were Greenlanders, but at the same time proud of their Scandinavian roots. In all probability, the Scandinavian roots were important to them, and they were more conscious of their “Nordicness” than people in Scandinavia, because they had moved outside that context and confronted environments and cultures which forced them to make a virtue of who they thought they were. Literature Cited Abrams, L. 2009. Early religious practice in the Greenland Settlement. Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2:52–65. 2010 A.-S. Gräslund 137 Svanberg, F. 2003a. Decolonizing the Viking Age 1. (Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8:o No 43), Lund, Sweden. Svanberg, F. 2003b. Death Rituals in South-East Scandinavia AD 800–1000. Decolonizing the Viking Age 2. (Acta Archaeologica Lundensia series in 4:o No 24), Lund, Sweden. Vésteinsson, O. 2006. Life in the hall. Pp. 110–123, In B. Sverrisdóttir (Ed.). Reykjavík 871 ± 2. Landnámssýningin. The Settlement Exhibition. Reykjavík City Museum, Reykjavík, Iceland. Williams, Henrik. 2007. Den vikingatida nordiskan, dess enhetlighet och variation. Pp. 231–238, In M. Reinhammar, L. Elmevik, and K. Hagren (Eds.). Från drasut till brakknut. Studier tillägnade Gerd Eklund på 65-årsdagen den 23 oktober 2007. Meddelanden från Sällskapet för svensk dialektologi 1, Uppsala, Sweden. Williams, Howard. 2006. Death and Memory in Early Medieval Britain. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Endnotes 1See, for example, the title of the new large handbook on the Viking Age, The Viking World, published in 2008 and edited by Stefan Brink and Neil S. Price. 2Before Sweden’s referendum on whether to join the European Union or not, a former prime minister wore a T-shirt saying: hallänning, svensk, europé (“coming from the province of Halland, Swede, European”). Jordan, T.G. 1985. American Log Buildings. An Old World Heritage. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Klein, B. 2001. More Swedish than in Sweden, more Iranian than in Iran, folk culture and world migrations. Pp. 67–80, In B. Sundin (Ed.). Upholders of Culture Past and Present. Lectures from an International Seminar Arranged by the Committee on Man, Technology, and Society at the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences (IVA) in 2000. Stockholm, Sweden. Kopár, L. 2009. The Use of Artistic Media in Norse Greenland. Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2:102–113. Landnámabók, The Book of Settlements. Translated with an Introduction and Notes by H. Pálsson and P. Edwards. Univerity of Manitoba Press, Manitoba, Canada. Lárusson, O. 1939. Island. Pp. 60–75, In M. Olsen (Ed.). Nordisk Kultur, Ortnamn. Albert Bonniers förlag, Stockholm, Sweden. Ljungkvist, J. 2008. Valsgärde—Development and change of a burial ground over 1300 years. Pp. 13–55, In Svante Norr (Ed.). Valsgärde Studies: The Place and its People, Past and Present. Opia 42, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. Lynnerup, N. 2000. Life and death in Norse Greenland. Pp. 285–294, In W.W. Fitzhugh and E.I. Ward (Eds.). Vikings. The North Atlantic Saga. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, DC, USA. Mitchell, S. 2008.The heroic and legendary sagas. Pp. 319–322, In S. Brink and N. Price (Eds.). The Viking World. Routledge, Abingdon, UK. Ólafsson, G. 2008. Ta din hall och gå - Med huset i släptåg. Pp. 117–123, In H. Michelsen and C. Paulsen (Eds.). Símunarbók. Heiðursrit til Símun V. Arge á 60 ára degnum. Froðskaparsetur, Faroe University Press, Tórshavn, Faroes. Petersen, J. 1919. De norske vikingesverd. En typologiskkronologisk studie over vikingetidens vaaben. Videnskapsselskapet, Kristiania, Norway. Petersen, J. 1928. Vikingetidens smykker. Stavanger Museum, Stavanger, Norway. Petersen, J. 1951. Vikingetidens redskaper. Videnskapsakademin, Oslo, Norway. Roesdahl, E., and D.M. Wilson (Eds.). 1992. From Viking to Crusader, The Scandinavians and Europe 800–1200 (FVC). Nordic Council of Ministers in collaboration with The Council of Europe. Copenhagen 1992. The numbers refer to the exhibition catalogue. Siapkas, J. 2003. Heterological Ethnicity. Conceptualizing Identities in Ancient Greece. Boreas 27, Uppsala, Sweden. Sigurðsson, G. 2008. The North Atlantic Expansion. Pp. 562–570, In S. Brink and N. Price (Eds.). The Viking World. Routledge, Abingdon, UK. Sjøvold, T, 1974. The Iron Age Settlement of Arctic Norway. A Study in the Expansion of European Iron Age culture within the Arctic Circle. II. Late Iron Age (Merovingian and Viking Periods). Tromsö Museums skrifter Vol.X.2. Norwegian Universities Press, Tromsö/Oslo/Bergen, Norway. Solberg, B. 2000. Jernalderen i Norge. Ca. 500 f.Kr.–1030 e.Kr. Cappelen Akademisk Forlag, Oslo, Norway.