Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
143
Casting in the Longhouse
The Organization of Metalworking in Late Bronze
Age Settlements in South-Eastern Sweden
Anna Sörman
Abstract
Traces of bronze casting – fragmented moulds and crucibles – frequently occur at Late
Bronze Age settlements. These traces are often assumed to represent utilitarian domestic
production , in contrast to more spe cialised workshop produc tion at ritual or elite lo cations.
Moreover, settlements have usually been reduced to overall production units, while actual
arrangements for bronze casting within sites have remained unexplored. The aim of this
paper is to provide new insight into the organization of metalworking from an empirical
and ‘bottom up’ perspective by examining the spatial and social contexts of bronze cast-
ing. The analysis draws on ten excavated sites in south-eastern Sweden and addresses three
spatial levels: site, setting and framing. The study shows that domestic arenas often hosted
varied and complex metalworking staged at various indoor and outdoor hearths located in
the core areas of settlements. Rather than being conceptualized as levels, the organization
of Late Bronze Age metalworking was a multifaceted, communicative and user-oriented
practice. These insights have consequences for excavation methods as well as for the inter-
pretation of the role of metalworking in society.
Keywords: rst millennium BC, bronze casting, craft organization, prestige goods, dwell-
ings, household production, spatial organization, spatial analysis, framing, public rituals
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3796-7066
Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies Stockholm University
Email: anna.sorman@ark.su.se
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
144
Anna Sörman
Introduction
In the Scandinavian Late Bronze Age, with its increasing repertoire of
bronze object types, bronze crafting is generally assumed to have con-
sisted of two functional spheres of production: a mundane household sphere
alongside more specialised ‘workshop’ production of politically signi-
cant weapons and ornaments (e.g. Oldeberg :; Weiler :–,
; Levy :–; Thrane , :; Björhem & Säfvestad
:; Jensen :; Kristiansen & Larsson :–; Nørgaard
:–; Kristensen ; see also Rowlands , ; Howard ;
Ó Faolaín for similar arguments in a British context). Stylistic or tech-
nical differences in prestige objects are often seen as indicative of chiey
workshops at regional centres (Ottenjahn , ; Levy :, ;
Larsson ; Rønne ; Kristiansen :–; Herner ; Kristian-
sen & Larsson :–; Nørgaard ). Specialised production has
been envisaged as taking place not only in centralised workshops (Oldeberg
:; Stenberger :; Jaanusson :–; Levy ; Vahlne
; Björhem & Säfvestad :; Weiler ; Kristiansen :–;
Nørgaard , ), but also at ritual or liminal sites such as cult houses
or enclosures (Levy :; Kaul :–; Prescott ; Goldhahn
; Melheim ), or at central places for assemblies and ceremonies
(Thedéen :; Agersnap Larsen et al. ; Melheim ; Melheim
et al. ).
Settlements and farmsteads, with their longhouses and domestic activi-
ties, are generally assumed to be associated with the production of utilitar-
ian objects (Kaul :; Björhem & Säfvestad :; Thrane :–
; Earle :; Jensen :; Björk :; Goldhahn :;
Nilsson ). This widespread occurrence of metalworking at a large num-
ber of Late Bronze Age settlements has often led to the question of whether
or not these bronze crafting skills were widely known (e.g. Agersnap Larsen
et al. :). Crafting in ‘regular’ settlements has been suggested to rep-
resent either crafting practiced by amateurs (Oldeberg :; Nilsson
) or production carried out by visiting specialists (Björhem & Magnus-
son Staaf :–, ; Eklund et al. :; Artursson et al.
a:–).
A few scholars have suggested that the wide variation in bronze types and
the spatial distribution of casting debris in the Late Bronze Age indicates
more complexity in the organization of metalworking than allowed for by
the two-tiered model outlined above (Wrang ; Levy , :).
First, the widespread occurrence of casting debris for prestige goods indi-
cates that specialised metalworking was not strictly centralised to a few re-
gional central workshops (Levy :–). Furthermore, Levy (:)
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
145
Casting in the Longhouse
has made the important observation that a variety of artefacts, including
non-utilitarian ones, were produced at habitation sites and that ‘production
of reasonably diverse metal artifacts took place at numerous communities’
(Levy :). This suggests that a division between prestige objects and
utilitarian goods is a simplication that does not seem to have been den-
ing for the organization of metalworking. As evidence of casting has been
found both at settlements and in cult houses, showing at least two differ-
ent arenas for production, Levy has advocated a multi-tiered model (Levy
:). She has subsequently elaborated on this interpretation and sug-
gested three different spheres or levels of production: one linked to stone
moulds deposited outside settlements, one based on clay moulds in settle-
ments; and, nally, the possibility of an exclusive, as yet unidentied sphere
of crafting for the most elaborate objects (Levy :). Although these
observations are both relevant and nuanced, Levy’s alternative model re-
mains an elaboration of the same idea: that bronze crafting was spatially
and socially organized in levels according to a hierarchy ranging from the
domestic sphere to prestigious political spheres.
Thus, although the dichotomic model of workshop/household craft
production has been challenged, it has remained a powerful and den-
ing concept. However attractively clear, there are several problems with
the empirical basis of two-tiered as well as three-tiered models of craft or-
ganization in the Late Bronze Age. First, settlements tend to be compared
to each other in their entirety as single units of production. Hence when
the organisation of metalworking is analyzed, sites are primarily ranked
against each other as representing either small-scale/household production
or large-scale/workshop production based on the quantity of nds related
to casting from the whole site (e.g. Oldeberg :; Eklöf :; Nils-
son :–). Casting debris, however, is typically highly fragmented
(Eriksson :) and therefore not suited to a quantitative approach.
Such accounts thus tend to overlook source critical issues including the
impact of formation processes, preservation conditions and chronological
resolution in these complex sites. Finally and above all, little attention has
been paid to the social contexts of casting-related nds when discussing
crafting in settlements. Where and how the casting was carried out within
settlements is rarely reconstructed (Sørensen ). Curiously, relationships
between casting and settlements in the Late Bronze Age have been less em-
phasized than in the Early Bronze Age (e.g. Nilsson ; Ethelberg ;
Earle :; Artursson :), despite considerable archaeologi
-
cal evidence (although see Levy ; Boddum et al. eds ). This may
be due to the increasing complexity of the settlement evidence, where size
differences between longhouses are less prominent than in earlier periods
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
146
Anna Sörman
(Karlenby :; Ethelberg :; Artursson ), and the casting
debris is more widely spread.
The central issue is therefore that the setting and spatial arrangements of
crafting within settlements, and indeed during the Late Bronze Age land-
scape in general, are almost unknown. Instead, assumptions and misunder-
standings about metalworking in settlements have been transmitted in both
excavation reports and subsequent research. For example, there are persis-
tent beliefs that the activity must have been located at the outskirts of settle-
ments for practical reasons (e.g. Thrane :, :; Carlie ;
Karlenby :; Aspeborg :; Paulsson Nord & Sarnäs :;
Goldhahn :, ), and that it demanded special arrangements such
as furnaces (e.g. Renfrew :; Vahlne ; Burenhult ed. :–
; Jensen :; Goldhahn ). Finally, the widely proposed two-
tiered organization of bronze crafting (e.g. Oldeberg :; Björhem &
Figure . Map of the sites included in the study. () Apalle, (), Bredåker, () Nibble, ()
Pryssgården, () Rambodal, () Ryssgärdet, () Skuttunge kyrka, () Tallboda, () Vrå, ()
Västra Bökestad, () Åbrunna.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
147
Casting in the Longhouse
Säfvestad :; Jensen :; Thrane :) raises questions
about the variables used to differentiate between ‘large’ and ‘small’ settle-
ments, as well as the functional categorisation of bronzes as either practi-
cal or prestigious/political.
Generally, Bronze Age settlement space seems to be structured accord-
ing to different principles from Iron Age and later farms. Late Bronze Age
settlements cover larger areas and include more diverse activity areas com-
pared to the clearly structured and condensed farmsteads of the end of the
Early Iron Age and onwards (Olausson :; Göthberg :–;
Gröhn :). The organization of Late Bronze Age settlements might
therefore be less immediately comprehensible – from a modern western
perspective – than, for example, a Merovingian farmstead. Reconstruct-
ing metalworking in settled spaces therefore entails a deeper inquiry into
the logic of Bronze Age domestic space. A detailed, contextual study of the
settings of metalworking can therefore also contribute to our more general
understanding of how settlements were organized – physically and socially
– in the Bronze Age.
Traditional hypotheses about the organization and spatial arrangements
of bronze-craf ting are here revised against a growing number of archaeolog-
ically visible production sites. Bronze casting in settlements is approached
in two steps. First, by critically reviewing common assumptions about the
technical and practical requirements of casting against the current evidence,
making use of the considerable new information that has emerged from con-
tract archaeological investigations in recent decades. Second, by examining
how and where casting was carried out at Late Bronze Age settlements in
the region corresponding to the provinces of Uppland, Södermanland and
Östergötland in south-eastern Sweden.1 The metalworking evidence in the
uniquely well-preserved settlement at Apalle in Uppland (Ullén ; Ullén
ed. ) features as a case study, and is then compared with nine other
sites in the region (gure ). Insights regarding the location, visibility and
social settings of bronze casting are then discussed as a window onto Late
Bronze Age communities, one which can inform our understandings of the
internal organisation of settlements, ritual and public space, and the role
and importance of metalworking in social and political strategies.
The overall aim is to demonstrate how a study focusing on detailed con-
textualization of bronze casting debris can provide new insights into the
organization and wider role of metalworking in social and political life in
the Late Bronze Age.
This region is also frequently referred to as mid-central Sweden, or central Sweden.
Since it is located in the southern half of Sweden and not its centre, I will use the geo-
graphica lly more accurate and geopolitically less contested term ’south-eastern Sweden’.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
148
Anna Sörman
Background
Despite the absence of detailed studies, several recurring assumptions about
how casting was arranged in domestic space during the Late Bronze Age are
commonly seen in both eldwork publications and wider research. Such pre-
sumptions impact our expectations and how we excavate in Bronze Age sites
(e.g. Björhem & Säfvestad :; Helander & Zetterlund :–;
Strucke & Holback :). Furthermore, these assumptions often carry
implications about the social and cultural conditions of crafting rooted in
historical and industrial examples of working arrangements (Budd & Taylor
; see also Sörman :–), and therefore continuously shape our
understanding of metalworking in this period. As pointed out by Rønne
(:) faulty assumptions about the technical requirements of the craft-
ing process make it unclear how to study the ties between metalworking
and settlements. Three common and problematic assumptions which will
be dealt with here are:
.
Bronze casting was performed outdoors because of re hazard (e.g.
Karlen by :; Aspeborg :; Paulsson Nord & Sarnäs :;
Stilborg :).
.
Melting bronze required furnaces (e.g. Svensson :–; Renfrew
:; Vahlne ; Burenhult ed. :–; Jensen :;
Diinhof :; Goldhahn ; Goldhahn & Oestigaard :).
. Bronze casting was located in the outskirts of settlements (e.g. Thrane
:, :; Carlie ; Goldhahn :, ; see gure
), or in enclosures and special buildings hidden from view (Goldhahn
:, , ).
When we consider that, for the Early Bronze Age, casting inside longhouses
has been an accepted hypothesis (Jensen :–; Jantzen :)
the rst assumption, that metalworking was kept outdoors due to re haz-
ard, is contradictory. Experimental archaeology demonstrates that bronze
melting with Bronze Age techniques can easily be carried out indoors (e.g.
Burrage ; Paardekooper :gure ; Manning ). The idea that
hearths used for melting are more hazardous than other indoor replaces
is perhaps also rooted in misconceptions about the technical requirements
for accomplishing higher temperatures (see discussion about ‘furnaces’ be-
low). Casting indoors may bring benets such as shelter from rain or wind,
as well as darker spaces more favourable for distinguishing the colour and
glow of the metal (Burrage ). It is, however, also possible to perform
melting and casting in full daylight; Bronze Age crafters would have re-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
149
Casting in the Longhouse
lied on several senses to distinguish the readiness and quality of the alloy
(Kuijpers ; see also Theophilius [c. AD] :).
The idea that furnaces are required for melting bronze (e.g. Svensson
:–; Jaanusson ; Renfrew :; Vahlne ; Swedberg
; Burenhult ed. :–; Jensen :; Schütz ; Diin hof
:; Goldhahn ; Goldhahn & Oestigaard :; Melheim
) is a longstanding misconception in Scandinavian Bronze Age re-
search. The stone-lined or clay-lined pits found at the famous Late Bronze
Age settlement of Hallunda in the Swedish province of Södermanland have
been particularly inuential in terms of shaping this misconception: inter-
preted as melting furnaces (Jaanusson & Vahlne ; Vahlne ), they
gained much attention at their discovery in the s and have since been
referenced in a number of important and widespread textbooks and re-
ports (e.g. Renfrew :; Coles & Harding :; Serning ;
Harding :; Burenhult ed. :; Häringe a:–; Strucke
& Holback :). The presumption of furnaces for melting bronze has
persisted, despite critique and technical arguments demonstrating faulty
assumptions in previous analyses (Hjärthner-Holdar :; Eriksson
:; Jantzen :).
There is now overwhelming evidence that Bronze Age metalwork-
ing techniques in Scandinavia relied only on melting bronze in open re
places, with the help of forced draught primarily through the use of bellows
(Thrane ; Jantzen :; Hjärthner-Holdar ed. :; Eklöv
Pettersson :, see also Sörman :–). The two main sources
of evidence for casting in open hearths are the wide and low-cut crucibles
(Eklöv Petters son :), and the L-shape of Bronze Age tuyéres or blast
nozzles (Thrane ), both indicative of direct heating through forced
draught onto the crucible from above. When identied, the hearths used are
no different in form from regular replaces (e.g. Petré ; Draiby ;
Schütz ), making indirect nds such as casting debris and small metal
droplets the keys to interpretation (Söderberg ; Kuijpers :;
Jantzen :; Sörman :–).
The third assumption, that bronze working was primarily carried out
in the outskirts of settlements, seems to have grown from two roots. First,
metalworking is often regarded as a particularly advanced activity that re-
quired specialised and complex settings. This view can be found in many
archaeological publications (e.g. Burenhult ed. :–; Jensen ;
see gure ). A special location is also implicit in traditional terminology
such as workshops or crafting places: terms that have been shown to be mis-
leading for the spatially exible and diverse organization of Late Bronze Age
metalworking (Sörman ). Second, this interpretation has been argued
on the basis that settlements sometimes feature casting refuse in peripher-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
150
Anna Sörman
ally located waste pits (Thrane :; Carlie :, ; Björhem &
Säfvestad ; Goldhahn :).
However, the picture of peripheral crafting areas builds on settlement
excavations from the s and s where dug-down features such as
pits and pit systems were the only remaining nd-bearing contexts to sur-
vive following excessive top-soil removal (Rudebeck :–; Arturs-
son :). In contrast, modern settlement excavations, where top-soil
removal is more careful, often result in preserved cultural layers (e.g. Han-
lon ; Ullén ed. ; Frölund & Schütz red. ; Seiler & Östling
; Sörman : appendix ). This results in different distributions of
remains and nds which make it difcult to compare the results of modern
projects with those of earlier excavations (Nilsson & Rudebeck :).
Recent commercial excavations – in which about – percent of identi-
ed cultural layers tend to be excavated manually – indicate much wider
Figure . Bronze smith at work. Traditional illustration of metalworking in north Euro-
pean Bronze Age settlements: (male) specialists working in designated crafting area, or in
the outskirts of the settlement, at safe distance from contemporary buildings. Illustration:
Miles Kelly. Published with permission from fotoLibra.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
151
Casting in the Longhouse
distribution of casting debris on settlements, including in the direct vicin-
ity of buildings (e.g. Hanlon ; Ullén ed. ; Seiler & Östling ;
see gure ). The notion of special crafting areas at the outskirts of dwell-
ing zones is also deeply rooted and visible in popularized illustrations pro-
duced throughout the last century (gure ), but this concept now needs
to be abandoned.
Casting within Late Bronze Age settlements
We will now turn from the nature of and spatial requirements for bronze
casting to the organization of Bronze Age settlements. In the Scandinavian
Late Bronze Age, sites of long-term habitation are characterized by one or
several longhouses surrounded by areas associated with remains of intense
and continuous daily life activities. The structure of settled space can pro-
vide important insight into the organization of domestic activities, gender
divisions, living conditions and, ultimately, the worldviews and ideology of
communities (e.g. Hillier & Hansen ; Samson ed. ; Parker Pear-
son & Richards eds ; Tringham ; Brück & Goodman eds ).
As bronze crafting has mainly been discussed on a larger scale, with whole
settlements treated as production units, this perspective is largely missing
from craft studies. The production and consumption of metalwork has
mainly been approached in large scale studies and has often been inu-
enced by structural Marxism (e.g. Levy ; Larsson ; Kristiansen
). Marxist perspectives within archaeology have frequently focused
on larger spatial and temporal scales (Hodder :). This is particularly
notable for the Nordic Bronze Age research discourse, where a strong tra-
dition of structural-Marxism, macro-economics and ecological processual
approaches can be observed (Gröhn ). By contrast, when the organiza-
tion of Bronze Age settlement space has been discussed it has typically been
at the level of individual households, with a particular focus on the long-
house as social arena (e.g. Ullén ; Skoglund ; Gröhn :chap-
ter .; Streiffert ; Kristiansen ; Oma ).
METHOD AND SOURCE CRITICISM
The approach taken here when reconstructing metalworking is to work
beyond the concept of the individual household or building, and to look at
activity areas and the dynamic between different spheres within the settle-
ment. Since clearly identiable casting hearths are rare, debris is the primary
clue to production points (Söderberg ; Jantzen :), and the main
focus of this analysis is mould and crucible fragments, above all their spatial
relation to contemporary buildings and other activities in dwelling areas.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
152
Anna Sörman
The contexts of metalworking in individual sites will be addressed at
three different spatial levels (gure ). Spatial scales and the denitions or
criteria for contexts often tend to be implicit and undened in archaeolog-
ical texts (Lyman :–). These analytical scales have therefore
been designed to dene some of the social and physical spaces assumed
to be meaningful to the people who shaped and used them in the past.
These spatial levels are dened as social spaces – given reason and mean-
ing through human interaction with past users and today’s archaeologists
(Larsson :).
The rst and most general level is the site or locale. This refers to the
broad category of archaeological sites – for example, a settlement com-
plex or a cemetery. The second level is the setting or milieu, which is used
to refer to a spatial and social context within a wider site. A setting may,
for example, be a dwelling or activity area in a settlement, or it may be a
cult-house milieu within a grave eld. Third and nally, the closest spatial
scale discussed here is dened as the immediate framing within a setting.
This refers to human-scale, lived-in spaces such as a room in a particular
house, the area around a replace in an activity area, and so on. This level
is not always possible to reconstruct based on the settlement data. Although
Figure . The proposed spatial scales of analysis in relation to the location and organiza-
tion of metalworking in settlements: () the site, () the setting, and () the framing. Illus-
tration by the author.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
153
Casting in the Longhouse
concentrations of casting debris can sometimes hint at certain social and
spatial framings, or ‘rooms’ within a space, more detailed contextual re-
construction is often hindered by the low chronological resolution and the
limited base for interpretation offered by other nd materials.
While interpretations of the rst – and to some degree the second – level
of site/locale and setting/milieu are often provided in excavation reports,
the setting and framing of the casting activity itself is rarely discussed in
detail. The human scale, based in bodily experience, is curiously under-
used in narrating archaeological reports, and settlements are often treated
as abstract, two-dimensional miniature worlds, portrayed from a bird’s-eye
view (Nilsson & Rudebeck :–). Meaningful contexts should be
expected to gure prominently in site reports, as they constitute the back-
bone of archaeological eldwork, but descriptions of bodily encounters
with sites and materials are often insufcient for further research (Lucas
:–; Papaconstantinou :). Furthermore, observations and
interpretations of metalworking activity have frequently been guided by
faulty assumptions such as those discussed above. In this paper, the analy-
sis of the spatial and social settings of casting takes into account previous
observations, but is based on reassessments and re-interpretations of both
eld documentation and published reports.
An introduction to the settlements
Inhabited Late Bronze Age landscapes in south-eastern Sweden were con-
centrated along waterways corresponding today to heights around –
ma.s.l., which at that time represented locations by lakes or the innermost
fjords of the Baltic Sea (see gure ; e.g. Jensen ; Wigren ; Lind-
ström ). Settlement foci include widespread activity areas with clusters
of houses, cultural layers, heaps of re-cracked stones (‘burnt mounds’),
stone settings, and sometimes cult houses and/or cup marks (Hyenstrand
, :–; Borna-Ahlkvist :; Thedéen ; Artursson
etal. a:; Lindström ). Excavations during the last decade have
demonstrated that dwelling milieus were located on lower sand or clay soils,
while graves and cult houses were located on adjacent, slightly higher rocky
or moraine terrain as parts of joint complexes (Forsman & Victor ;
Hjärthner-Holdar et al. eds ; Artursson et al. eds, c; Karlenby
; Larsson ed. ; see also Sörman :gure ). Thus, ritual mi-
lieus and graves were often closely related elements of settlements.
Thirty-one sites with clear nds of Bronze Age casting debris (crucible
and/or mould fragments) and thirteen sites with suspected nds of crucible
and/or mould fragments have been identied in the region under study
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
154
Anna Sörman
Table . Late Bronze Age settlement sites included in this study.
Name of Site County Primary Reference
(Excavation Report)
Excavated
area (m2)
Finds Related to Metalworking
Apalle Uppland Ullén ed. 2003 42,000 140 fragments of crucibles and
360 mould fragments.
Bredåker Uppland Göthberg & Schütz ed. 2006;
Frölund & Schütz ed. 2007
~ 5000 c. 40 fragments of crucibles and
c. 100 fragments of ceramic moulds.
c. 20 metal melts/droplets.
Nibble Uppland Artursson et al. ed. 2011 31,545 5 fragments of crucibles and
4 fragments of ceramic moulds.
Pryssgården Östergötland Borna-Ahlkvist et al. 1998 ~ 72,000 1 fragment of ceramic mould,
a few crucible fragments.
Parts of 1 ceramic blast nozzle.
Rambodal Östergötland Nyberg & Nilsson 2012 ~ 2100 1 fragment of a soap stone mould
for socketed axe of period V–VI.
1 copper melt.
Ryssgärdet Uppland Eriksson & Östling 2005;
Hjärthner-Holdar et al. eds
2008
17,000 2 fragments of crucibles,
20 fragments of ceramic moulds
and 4 melts.
Skuttunge kyrka Uppland Seiler & Östling 2008 10 ,111 6 fragments of ceramic moulds.
Tallboda Östergötland Äijä et al. 1996 19,000 2 fragments of crucibles and
1 fragmented ceramic mould for
a spectacle fibula.
Vrå Uppland Karlenby ed. 1997;
Göthberg et al. eds 2002
42,000 c. 200 fragments of ceramic
moulds.
Västra Bökestad Östergötland Helander & Zetterlund 1997 8100 c. 30 fragments of crucibles and
c. 80 fragments of ceramic moulds.
1 intact gold crucible.
Åbrunna Södermanland Strucke & Holback 2006 47,000 7 fragments of crucibles and
1 fragment of a possible ceramic
blast nozzle.
(Uppland, Södermanland and Östergötland) (appendix ; see also Sörman
:–; Nilsson & Sörman :–). These gures are based on a
comprehensive literature survey taking advantage of Sweden’s increasingly
well-digitalized excavation records, and are therefore likely present a rep-
resentative sample of Bronze Age settlements known today.2
This covers the digitalized excavation reports available online via the websites of indi-
vidual archaeological actors and also the open digital archive of the Swedish National
Heritage Board Samla (samla.raa.se). The digital catalogue of the Vitterhetsakade-
mien archaeological library has also been consulted, and from this source reports
with relevant titles and the keyword ‘Bronze Age’ have been requested and scanned
for mentions of casting nds. The exact number of excavated Bronze Age settlements
is impossible to estimate due to the lack of an all-encompassing, searchable register.
See Sörman for more details.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
155
Casting in the Longhouse
Ten of the sites with clear metalworking debris have been included in
this article (table ). This selection is based on two main factors in order to
provide a useful sample for comparative discussion: () these are sites which
have been extensively excavated and are therefore suitable candidates for
spatial analysis; and () they include the different types of crafting contexts
represented in the dataset (see Sörman ). The richest example in terms
of information, with higher chronological resolution and more contextual
data than average settlement sites, is Apalle in Uppland. The metalworking
at this site is therefore presented as a case study, followed by a comparison
with other sites for contrasts and parallels.
Case study: the Apalle settlement
One of the most informative examples of casting in a Bronze Age settle ment
in southern Scandinavia is the dwelling at Apalle, kilometres northwest
of Stockholm in central Uppland, excavated in advance of highway con-
struction (Ullén ed. ). The settlement had unusually favourable preser-
vation of organic materials and had eluded plough damage, resulting in
intact stratigraphy with cultural layers up to metre thick. These provided
vast amounts of animal bones, fragmented pottery, stone-, bone- and antler
tools, small bronze objects and more than a ton of burnt wattle daub (Ullén
:–, :, a). In combination with the extensive manual
excavation of cultural layers, these conditions provided a uniquely detailed
insight into stratigraphically distinct settlement horizons (Ullén b; see
table ), and even building interiors (Ullén :–). Moreover, with
trenches covering most of the central parts, the excavation provided a com-
prehensive and long-term picture of the site, revealing continued settlement
from the Late Neolithic until the Early Iron Age (Ullén b). Considering
the stone-settings, cup-marks and mounds of re-cracked stones continuing
to the north of the excavated area (Ullén c:–; Historic Environ-
ment Record KMR), the Apalle settlement is likely to have constituted a
large complex with linked dwelling and mortuary areas (Borna-Ahlkvist
:; Artursson :–; Sörman :–).
Each settlement phase featured several contemporary longhouses sur-
rounded by extensive outdoor activity areas: wells, pit systems, small eld
plots and mounds or heaps of re-cracked stones (Ullén b). Although
spatial organization within the settlement varied somewhat over time, the
overall settlement structure – the placement of buildings – can be described
as largely static throughout the Bronze Age (Ullén b:). With its vil-
lage-like cluster of buildings, extensive size and long continuity, Apalle has
been interpreted as one of the largest and most prominent complexes in the
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
156
Anna Sörman
region (Ullén :, Ullén b:; Karlenby :; Artursson
:–; Artursson et al. a:–; Lindström :–;
Artursson et al. :–). The site where metalworking took place here
is thus a large settlement, and the setting within this site is a dwelling zone
with several contemporary houses and a multitude of activities.
A detailed previous study of the casting debris from the Bronze Age
phases, including fragments of crucibles and mould fragments
(Eriksson ), provides a fruitful basis for assessing metalworking evi-
dence at Apalle. A rst, basic question is whether the debris represents cast-
ing on the site. Several factors illustrate that the residue does indeed repre-
sent crafting in its immediate vicinity: the debris includes broken moulds,
cores and crucibles, and many crucibles show re-lining, as well as droplets
of metal infused into the ceramic (Eriksson :, ) clearly show-
ing that they derive from production, rather than – for example – the prep-
aration of technical ceramics intended for use somewhere else. Crucibles,
which were often re-used many times (Eklöv Pettersson ) and thus had
to be kept somewhere between production events, could potentially have
been moved to the settlement for discard or storage. However, the presence
of fragmented ceramic moulds and sintered cores (Eriksson :–)
– fragile materials that tend to break after each, or almost each, casting
(Rønne :; Kuijpers :) – indicate that the production refuse
was generated on site. Due to the fragile nature of the material, the identied
fragments must be a small portion of the original amount originally used.
The casting debris is evident in the occupation deposits preserved under
the topsoil, which formed stratigraphic horizons dating from period III to
Table . Finds of casting debris in different stratigraphic layer types at Apalle. The layer types each represent
consecutive chronological horizons (Ullén ed. :–).
*The chronological intervals are based on a compilation of C-analyses: from layer type , from
layer type , from layer type , from layer type , and from layer type . For the full dataset, includ-
ing lab numbers, see Ullén b:gures –. It should, however, be noted that this source makes no ref-
erence to the calibration curve and software edition used for correcting the dates.
Layer type 1 Layer type 2 Layer type 3 Layer type 4–5
Crucible fragments
(number of finds)
45 60 23 2
Mould fragments
(number of finds)
146 117 89 8
Range of 14C-datings
per layer type, 2 sigma*
1060–350 BC 126 0 –790 B C 1320 –790 BC 1600 –830 BC
Range of 14C-datings
per layer type, 1 sigma
990 –420 BC 1200–500 BC 126 0 –810 BC 1450 –90 0 BC
Approx. chronological interval c. 900–600 BC
(period V–VI)
c. 900–800 BC
(period IV–V)
c. 1100–900 BC
(period IV)
c. 1300–1000 BC
(period III)
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
157
Casting in the Longhouse
period VI (c. – BC) (see table ; Eriksson ; Sörman :–
). The oldest layers, from period II–III (– BC), contained very
few traces, all centred on the middle of the settlement (appendix ). The
younger layers, representing Late Bronze Age periods IV–VI ( – BC),
show a successively more widespread spatial distribution across the site (ap-
pendix ). In period IV–VI, casting refuse is evident in central courtyards,
various types of buildings and at a large open area in the southern part of
the settlement (gure ). This wide distribution in occupation deposits –
across several parts of the settlement – speaks strongly against metalwork-
ing being restricted to a particular crafting area or workshop within the
Late Bronze Age settlement (Sörman :–).
Although we should not rule out the possible impact of site formation
processes such as mixing and midden spreads (Ullén :), there are
several indicators that suggest a rather low level of stratigraphic mixing,
and thus a high integrity for the layers. One such factor is the preservation
of central middens (in the earlier phases) and smaller refuse accumulations
by individual longhouses (in the later phases) (Ullén :–), and
refuse pits (Ullén b:–). Another indicator is that nd types from
the different layers typologically match the datable organic materials that
were C-analysed from each stratigraphic horizon, again demonstrating
their integrity. Apart from casting debris, the occupational layers held a
vast amount of waste from the settlement: for example, kg of broken
Figure . The Bronze Age settlement at Apalle during phase of the Late Bronze Age (pe-
riod V) with distribution of crucible and mould fragments from the corresponding strati-
graphic layer. A longhouse (K) where a casting mould fragment was recovered from the
hearth is indicated by a circle. Illustration by the author.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
158
Anna Sörman
pottery, kg of animal bones, broken tools made from bone, antler and
stone, and about fragmented bronze objects (Ullén :). A to-
tal of percent of the casting debris from Apalle was found in cultural
layers, and only percent in lls of cut features such as hearths, pits and
post-holes (Ullén ed. : CD appendix, Fyndförteckning Gjuterifynd).
However, in such unusually well-preserved stratigraphy, the distribution
and spatial relations of cultural-layer nds to buildings and other features
can also provide contextual insights.
The precise locations of metalworking within the settlement were con-
sidered difcult to reconstruct by the excavators as no casting furnaces or
special hearths for melting bronze could be identied (Ullén b:;
although see Eriksson :). The expectation of furnaces and clear
crafting areas is yet another example of the inuence of the Hallunda ‘fur-
naces’ (Jaanusson & Vahlne ; Vahlne ; see Background), and the
common misconceptions about the techniques and practical requirements
of casting as discussed in the initial parts of this article. Nevertheless, one
possible crafting area was suggested based on a concentration of casting de-
bris clustered around a circular building/enclosure (K) in the central part
of the settlement (Ullén b:, ). This suggestion was later developed
by Goldhahn (:), who proposed that this feature had functioned as
a secluded and even secret metalworking area. This postulated casting en-
closure at Apalle was used by Goldhahn () as an example in his wider
argument, in which he proposed that Bronze Age casting was a highly es-
oteric practice, hidden from view and the mundane arenas of daily life.
There are three main problems with the interpretation of K as the
main metalworking area at Apalle. First, the round enclosure or building
was dated to period IV (– BC) and thus was in use for at most a
couple of centuries during the early part of the third settlement phase, be-
ing both preceded and followed by other buildings at the same location
(Ullén b:). Although casting debris clusters around K, it is dis-
tributed throughout the stratigraphy both vertically (layer types –) and
horizontally (see appendix ), indicating that it accumulated here both be-
fore and after building K was in place. Second, this particular area rep-
resents the most central and intensely used space throughout the history
of the settlement. It features the most complex stratigraphy, the most sub-
stantial cultural layers and the highest concentrations of many nd types
(Ullén b:–, gure ). Seen in this perspective, the accumulation
of casting refuse is part of a general concentration of refuse and continuous
activities here. Third, the high representation of casting nds around K
is more obvious when considering the spread of casting debris by weight
rather than by number of nds. The concentration at the central area around
K is dominated by crucible fragments that are far heavier than moulds
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
159
Casting in the Longhouse
(Eriksson :, ). Only one quarter of the mould fragments were
recovered from this area, while the rest were recovered from a m area
(Eriksson :). To sum up: a large part of the bronze casting at Apalle
across the use phases probably occurred in association with this feature,
the other centrally located buildings and the central yard-like space. How-
ever, bronze casting was not contextually or temporally restricted to the
round enclosure/building K.
Moving to the closer scale, what were the ‘framings’ in which bronze
casting was carried out at Apalle? First, the accumulation of casting debris
in the yard-like central area with K and longhouses can be seen as a fo-
cal and strategic point throughout the use of the dwelling. This area, in-
cluding the location of one of the central heaps of re-cracked stones, was
described by the excavators as forming a ‘natural terrace’ (Ullén :).
Low-laying parts of naked bedrock surfaced here (Ullén c:gure ;
Sörman :gure ), offering the possibility to highlight, demarcate and
accentuate activities played out in this space. This is the type of spatial in-
formation from bodily experience that Nilsson and Rudebeck (:–)
have called for in excavation reports because, as mentioned earlier, it aids
interpretations at closer spatial scales. Such close-up contextual informa-
tion is not prominent in the Apalle report, which has a classic focus on gen-
eral site chronology and a synthesis for each category of features and nd
types (Ullén ed. ). However, from what we can deduce from site plans
and descriptions, it is possible to dene the terrace as an area surrounded
by buildings. This space forms a focal, open area that can be interpreted as
a central courtyard throughout the settlement phases. The integration of
the natural terrace in this ‘courtyard’ suggests that bronze casting was per-
formed in a prominent, visually accessible and centric social space within
the dwelling zone.
Castings may have been performed as both outdoor and indoor events
in Apalle. Contextual clues in the documentation can, in a few cases, give
insights into more specic settings and framings for producing bronzes in
the settlement. One of these clues is the fragment of a ceramic mould, pos-
sibly for a neck ring or a dress pin, recovered from the hearth of the north-
western room in a longhouse (K) belonging to period V (layer type of
settlement phase ; see gure and appendix ). This mould fragment in-
dicates that casting could have taken place inside longhouses during the
Late Bronze Age.
Another metalworking nd from Apalle – from the Late Bronze Age
phase of period IV–VI – was recovered from the large, open area in the
southern part of the settlement (see gure ). This m area was framed
by dwelling houses in the north and by a large pit system in the south, and
was not built upon throughout the millennia that the Apalle dwelling ex-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
160
Anna Sörman
isted (Ullén b:). The fact that it was almost encircled by buildings
and pit systems and yet kept open for centuries would t well with an in-
terpretation of this as an assembly place for the village (Ullén :;
Sörman :). Here, several crucible and mould fragments from the
cultural layer types – and to some degree from type – indicate casting
at some point(s) during the Late Bronze Age, periods IV–VI. Some of the
mould fragments found here also had imprints with decoration, suggesting
prestige items (Eriksson :–).
To sum up, the distribution and nd contexts of metalworking debris at
Apalle show production of bronzes in a settlement setting. Initially, dur-
ing period III–IV casting was mainly carried out at the central yard of the
dwelling. Later, during Late Bronze Age periods IV–IV, casting seems to
have occurred instead in various houses and activity areas in the dwelling
zone. One particularly important space for metalworking throughout the
period of the settlement seems to have been the central yard of the dwelling.
Figure . Detail of longhouse K within phase (period V) of the late Bronze Age settle-
ment at Apalle. A fragment of a casting mould possibly for a neck ring or a pin was found
in the hearth (A) of the building. Source: Ullén ed. : house catalogue.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
161
Casting in the Longhouse
The Apalle case thus provides an illustrative example of metalworking as an
integral activity that by no means required either special furnaces or hearth
constructions at a peripheral location. Rather than being restricted to spe-
cial or secluded places, this activity left traces on ground surfaces among
other litter and refuse materials, ranging from areas between houses, an
open assembly area and from within longhouses and other buildings, such
as the circular building K.
Moreover, it is not only the locations that varied through time; the
relatively well-preserved moulds in the Apalle material demonstrate that
the type of objects produced were also variable. Preserved imprints in the
moulds testify to casting of a range of different objects, from socketed
axe heads to large and exclusive dress ttings (Eriksson ). The mate-
rial includes several fragments of moulds for neck rings, a fragment for a
Late Bronze Age belt ornament (bältekupa), possible dress pins and several
likely moulds of spectacle bulas, a possible hanging vessel as well as one
uncertain imprint for a double-edged blade of a sword or dagger (Eriksson
:–). The production of bronzes at Apalle thus included highly
skilled crafting of prestige goods, and some of the most valuable and sym-
bolically signicant artefacts of this period. Items such as the conspicuous
belt ornaments, previously highlighted as belonging to a category of extra-
vagant and costly display items without known production location (Levy
:), were crafted amidst the dwelling area in the Apalle settlement.
Other sites in the region
Comparison of the bronze casting evidence at Apalle with the other settle-
ments selected for this study (table ) reveals both similarities and differ-
ences in the settings and framing of bronze casting. Characteristic of all
dwellings in this dataset is their location in ploughed elds, resulting in
low levels of chronological resolution and contextual detail and poor pres-
ervation conditions. However, the examples still provide general insights,
and in some cases even better preserved glimpses into the organization of
bronze casting. In the following brief comparison, ve sites will be consid-
ered as parallels to the Apalle case in terms of site type, milieu and spatial
framing of bronze casting. Four sites will then be introduced as representing
different sites or settings of casting, compared to that of Apalle. All these
settlements, when taken together, shed light on the intrasite differences and
various social spaces beginning to emerge within Late Bronze Age settle-
ment complexes (e.g. Hjärthner-Holdar et al. ; Karlenby ). Lo-
cating metalworking in settlements thus also provides a window into Late
Bronze Age structuration of domestic space.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
162
Anna Sörman
SETTLEMENT CASTING IN OR NEAR INDIVIDUAL LONGHOUSES
Tallboda
One example analogous to Apalle is the Tallboda settlement in the outskirts
of Linköping, a large grave and settlement complex which was partly exca-
vated in the s. The complex included dwelling areas with longhouses,
heaps of re-cracked stones, stone settings and cup marks, with dates rang-
ing from the Early Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age (Äijä et al. ). One
of the few remains of bronze casting on site was an intact crucible along-
side fragments of a ceramic mould recovered from a pit in a settlement area
with a Late Bronze Age longhouse (Äijä et al. :, ; see gure ).
The longhouse was accompanied by an activity area with pits and hearths,
and a small mound of re-cracked stones (Äijä et al. :–, ). This
is likely to have been the ‘yard’, with outdoor cooking and other activities
tied to the house. The pit containing the casting debris had a sooty ll, and
was located immediately south of the house, in front of its probable en-
trance (Äijä et al. :; see gure ). The debris included an intact cru-
Figure . Plan of late Bronze Age longhouse (house ) and activity area within the grave
and settlement complex at Tallboda, Östergötland. The circle indicates the location of the
pit containing fragments of a ceramic mould for a period V spectacle bula as well as an
intact crucible.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
163
Casting in the Longhouse
cible and a mould for an ornate spectacle bula dating to period V (Äijä et
al. :; see gure ). The casting assemblage in a dug-down feature is
likely to represent a deliberate deposit as opposed to resulting from waste
accumulation or strewn-around middening. This being the case, the depo-
sition in the pit is likely to have been made in relation to the casting event.
The location of the debris and its contemporaneity with the building both
suggest that the bula was manufactured in the house or within its yard.
Skuttunge kyrka
The settlement of Skuttunge kyrka in central Uppland may offer a similar
case (Seiler & Östling ). This multi-period settlement site featured a
longhouse from the Late Bronze Age (see discussion of dating in Sörman
:) where the oor layer/cultural layer within the building contained
fragments of a ceramic casting mould, again possibly for a spectacle bula
(Seiler & Östling :–; Grandin & Hjärthner-Holdar :–).
The surrounding settlement was a dwelling in use throughout the Bronze
Age, however this was not fully covered by the excavation and had been
heavily disturbed by ploughing and later Iron Age settlement (Seiler & Öst-
ling ). Spectacle bulas require highly complex casting as well as be-
ing exclusive and symbolic objects (Oldeberg ; Melheim ). The
nds from Tallboda and Skuttunge kyrka thus demonstrate that longhouses
were sometimes the arenas of specialised production of prestigious objects
of high economic, symbolic and political value.
Pryssgården and Vrå
Two Late Bronze Age settlements of similar size and character as Apalle,
but where settings and particular framings are harder to reconstruct, are
the large-scale excavations of Pryssgården near Norrköping and Vrå, south
of Uppsala. They are both equivalent to Apalle in terms of size and holistic
excavation areas (Borna-Ahlkvist et al. ; Karlenby ed. ; Göthberg
et al. ed. ; see table ), which allows insights into the settlement dy-
namics over time. It is likely that at least Pryssgården, with its village-like
structure and strategic position in the landscape (Borna-Ahlkvist :–
), is one of the more prominent settlements of this period in the region.
Waste materials in general, and casting debris in particular (Borna-Ahl-
kvist et al. :–; Thrane ; Häringe a), were much less
frequent in Vrå and Pryssgården than Apalle. At both sites, top-soil re-
moval with machine was chosen instead of careful hand digging of cultural
layers. Moreover, in Pryssgården only a few patches of cultural layers re-
mained due to ploughing (Borna-Ahlkvist :). In Vrå, approximately
m or percent of the cultural layers were excavated by hand; how-
ever several of these were probably former eld plots fertilized with house-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
164
Anna Sörman
hold waste rather than occupation deposits (Häringe b:, ; Sörman
:–). This is probably the key factor behind the relatively low
amounts of casting debris and other nds compared with Apalle (Eriksson
; Sörman :). Thus casting of bronzes was carried out within
the settlement arena in Vrå and Pryssgården, but as the nds primarily de-
rived from large pit-systems with secondary ll and single cultural layers
without stratigraphic relations to houses or other structures, their relation
to individual houses and phases is unclear. It is not possible to examine the
settings and framings of these sites in closer detail.
Bredåker
In the Bredåker settlement north of Uppsala, it was possible to reconstruct
the context of bronze casting at a more detailed spatial scale. This is the only
clear case in this region where a specic hearth for melting bronze has been
identied at a Late Bronze Age settlement (Frölund & Schütz ed. :–
; Schütz ). The casting hearth could be identied thanks to the
occurrence of small metal droplets found in and by a particular replace
(Frölund & Schütz ed. :; Schütz :–; see also Söderberg
). Attention was drawn to that hearth due to a cluster of ceramic casting
debris in the surrounding cultural layer. The casting activity has been dated
to periods IV–VI (c. – BC), with a more intense phase during period
V (Frölund & Schütz ed. :, , –), with evidence including the
casting moulds for a typologically datable dress pin (Eriksson :).
Although one of the casting hearths could be identied, the immedi-
ate framing of the metalworking in the settlement remains somewhat un-
clear. The area featured several possible buildings – including one pit house
– within a radius of less than metres from the casting hearth. The pit
house was described by the excavators as a possible ‘workshop’ (Frölund
& Schütz ed. :; Schütz :; see gure ). However, the strati-
graphic and chronological relationship between the buildings and the cul-
tural layer with the metalworking debris was unclear (Frölund & Schütz
ed. :). Whether contemporary with the buildings or not, most of
the casting was probably performed out in the open (see gure ). The ex-
cavated settlement area was interpreted as a small part of a larger, diffuse
settlement complex (Frölund & Schütz ed. :–, ) thought to
extend metres to the south and east, as indicated by adjacent stone-
settings and mounds of re-cracked stones. Although only one Bronze Age
longhouse was identied in this primarily Iron Age part of the settlement
(Frölund & Schütz ed. :), the Late Bronze Age casting at Bredåker
– in the low terrain with graves and burnt mounds registered on adjacent
hillocks – is likely to have taken place in a dwelling area within a larger
grave and settlement site.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
165
Casting in the Longhouse
Nibble, Ryssgärdet, Åbrunna and Västra Bökestad: evidence of
non-longhouse casting in large settlement complexes
Turning to sites with evidence of other settings for bronze casting, the fol-
lowing case studies include casting associated with the cult-houses and
other ritual milieus found within larger Late Bronze Age settlement com-
plexes. There are primarily four large-scale excavations of such sites that
have yielded metalworking evidence in the region: Nibble (Artursson et al.
ed. c), Ryssgärdet (Eriksson & Östling ; Hjärthner-Holdar et al.
ed. ), Åbrunna (Strucke & Holback ) and Västra Bökestad (He-
lander & Zetterlund ).
Nibble, Ryssgärdet and Åbrunna are large complexes that all included
dwelling areas in lower, ploughed terrain as well as graves or grave-like
structures on rocky hillocks within or directly beside the habitation areas.
Figure . Distribution of casting debris around a cluster of features in the Bredåker settle-
ment, includ ing a replace used for bronze casting during period IV–V. The contextual and
chronological relation s between the casting rem ains and the two bu ildings are unclear. The
area is part of a larger (as yet unexcavated) settlement complex.
0-5 m
bronze knife
melt/droplet
crucible
mould
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
166
Anna Sörman
While the dwelling areas were heavily plough-damaged at all these three
sites, the cult-houses and ritual settings on higher ground were better pre-
served (e.g. Eriksson & Östling :, –; Strucke & Holback :,
; Artursson et al. b:–). It was in the ritual settings that most of
the evidence for metalworking was found. In Åbrunna crucible nds – in-
cluding one located in a particular hearth – occurred at a platform beside
a cult-house (Strucke & Holback :). In Ryssgärdet, casting debris
mainly occurred by two cult-houses and grave milieus located on two sep-
arate hillocks in the settlement (Eriksson & Östling :; Eriksson &
Grandin :). The cult-house areas at these sites were accessible from
the adjacent longhouse areas by a stone-lined passage, and were visually di-
rected by and exposed to the dwelling (Strucke & Holback :–, ;
Östling et al. :; Sörman :–). The same situation – but
where the excavation concerned graves and cult-house only3 – was found
in Västra Bökestad. Here, ceramic casting debris was found in an activity
area among a sprinkling of graves with stone-settings (Helander & Zetter-
lund :–). The accumulation of casting debris was concentrated to
a small house or hut between the graves, exposed at the edge of the hill.
Such cult sites have been associated with the handling of human remains
(e.g. Victor ; Eriksson a; Karlenby ), as well as ne-ware ce-
ramics, indicating that ritualized drinking and food consumption occurred
here (e.g. Eriksson , b); the sites have also been associated with
the handling of bronze and, in a few cases, gold (e.g. Helander & Zetter-
lund :; Eriksson & Grandin ; Sörman :–). Such cul-
tic or ritual milieus were thus important arenas for metalwork production,
alongside the dwelling areas, within Late Bronze Age settlement complexes.
Rambodal: metalworking at a small settlement
All examples so far have shown bronze casting at dwellings or cult sites
within large Late Bronze Age settlement complexes. There is one other site
type represented in this dataset: a small single-farm at Rambodal close
to Norrköping in Östergötland has yielded evidence of the production of
bronzes (Nyberg & Nilsson ; Nilsson & Sörman ). This site is
more limited spatially and chronologically than the other settlements in-
cluded in this study, covering an area of just m and featuring only
one longhouse, one pit house and one four-post house, all dated primarily
to periods V–VI (Nyberg & Nilsson :). The dwelling was conned
Test-trenches revealed indications of settlement (a socketed axe and post-holes dated to
the Late Bronze Age) in the surrounding eld located metres east of the hillock with
evidence of bronze casting, but these trenches were not excavated further (Helander &
Zetterlund :).
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
167
Casting in the Longhouse
to a sandy plateau and, although located in a rich Bronze Age landscape
(Nilsson & Sörman :–), it did not form part of a larger complex.
Not only was the Rambodal settlement unusually well-delimited in size
and use-period, but the metalworking waste also differed from the usual
assemblages of ceramic casting debris found at the other Late Bronze Age
settlement complexes described. A fragment of a broken soap-stone mould
for a small socketed axe from period V–VI (Nyberg & Nilsson :) was
recovered from cultural layers located less than metres from the long-
house (Nilsson & Sörman :gure ). Other nds in this layer included
typical Late Bronze Age ceramics, but there were no other nds related to
metalworking apart from a nd of melted copper which was retrieved from
the interface between the cultural layer and top-soil and so was considered
of unclear provenance (Nyberg & Nilsson :, ). The deposition of
a broken mould in a cultural layer close to the longhouse indicates that the
casting was carried out within the farm rather than in the outskirts of the
settlement or a different site. The nds metalworking debris in this context
thus indicates small-scale production of one or several axes within a small
dwelling area during the Late Bronze Age.
CONCLUSIONS: SITES, SETTINGS AND FRAMINGS OF LATE BRONZE
AGE BRONZE CASTING
With the exception of Rambodal, all the sites discussed above qualify as
dispersed settlement complexes. They were composed of several settings:
areas for dwelling and longhouses, as well as graves and cultic activities.
Evidence of metalworking is present in each of these types of settings.
Rambo dal, however, seems to represent a slightly different type of site.
Its limited use-period and size indicate small-scale production at a single
farm. This dwelling, with a single longhouse and two smaller buildings,
possibly represents a satellite farm, collaborating with or dependent on a
larger settlement nearby (Nilsson & Sörman ; Sörman :–).
Dependence on metalworkers from a different site is an interpretation that
aligns well with the fact that the mould found at Rambodal was made of
soap stone. Stone moulds are less fragile than ceramic moulds, and thus
a better choice if crafters were visiting from elsewhere and bringing their
own tools. The re-usability of stone tools probably meant that they were
normally removed from the site after use, rarely leaving any traces behind
to indicate that casting had taken place.
This observation opens up an interesting line of interpretation in relation
to the organization of metalworking in Late Bronze Age settlements. Al-
though the crafters were presumably based at larger settlement complexes,
the axe was nevertheless produced at Rambodal rather than brought there
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
168
Anna Sörman
as a nished product. This suggests that the actual performance of mak-
ing the object had a social signicance beyond meeting a practical need.
The axe could have been more conveniently cast elsewhere, but the satellite
farm – where it was presumably going to be used – was chosen as the place
for making it. In other words, the process of casting the object, as opposed
to just the nished object itself, was signicant.
In terms of the setting and framing of bronze working, the evidence
from the Rambodal settlement seems to suggest a similar picture to that
observed more widely. The casting residue is not found in special or periph-
eral places. On the contrary, as we have seen in the examples above, it typi-
cally occurs within strategic and central spaces, close to or inside buildings
(table ). In Rambodal, the location of the mould fragment in a cultural
layer just next to the house gives few clues as to the exact framing but it
does, however, suggest that the mould was used within the immediate set-
tlement (Nyberg & Nilsson :). Bronze casting in Late Bronze Age
settlements of south-eastern Sweden was thus a craft performed in many
of the focal spaces used daily by the inhabitants at these sites.
Table . The contexts of metalworking as seen at different spatial scales.
Site Setting Framing
Apalle Village-like settlement complex (large
settlement)
Longhouse dwelling Central ‘yard’
Longhouses
Circular building (K33)
Large assembly area
Tallboda Grave and settlement complex (large
settlement)
Longhouse dwelling Longhouse ‘yard’
Skuttunge kyrka Unknown Longhouse dwelling Longhouse
Pryssgården Village-like settlement complex (large
settlement)
Longhouse dwelling Unknown
Vrå Grave and settlement complex (large
settlement)
Longhouse dwelling Unknown
Bredåker Probably grave and settlement complex
(large settlement)
Longhouse dwelling Outdoor activity area
Nibble Grave and settlement complex (large
settlement)
Cult-house with graves Unknown
Ryssgärdet Grave and settlement complex (large
settlement)
Cult-house with graves
Longhouse dwelling
Cult-house ‘yard’
Åbrunna Grave and settlement complex (large
settlement)
Cult-house Cult-house ‘yard’
Västra Bökestad Probably grave and settlement complex
(large settlement)
Cult-house with graves Cult-house (small hut
among graves)
Rambodal Single farm (small settlement) Longhouse dwelling Unknown
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
169
Casting in the Longhouse
Discussion: casting in settled spaces
METALWORKING AND THE SPATIAL ORGANIZATION OF
SETTLEMENTS
The varied and exible metalworking shown by this study indicates that
craft was performed in more dynamic ways than are usually portrayed for
Bronze Age settlements (compare gure ). Bronze crafting in Late Bronze
Age settlement complexes was performed inside individual longhouses, in
yards, in smaller buildings, at gathering places and activity areas or by the
graves at the settlement cult sites – in fact, in a variety of focal points for
the Bronze Age inhabitants of these sites. Understandings of settlements in
the Late Bronze Age are still largely coloured by expectations rooted in the
organizational principles of modern and historical farms (Brück & Good-
man :; Gröhn :) and the ideological signicance of the home
in European history (Brück & Fokkens :). From a historical or mod-
ern horizon, we often expect a central residential house, surrounded by a
set of outbuildings and workshops reserved for specialized tasks and func-
tions (e.g. Borna-Ahlkvist :). The organization of bronze work-
ing demonstrates the inadequacy of these terms in the encounter with pre-
historic, or at least pre-Iron Age, settlements. Late Bronze Age settlement
complexes, with their cacophony of activity areas, small buildings, multi-
purpose longhouses, cult places and intricate waste disposal in heaps of
re-cracked stones, are the results of another way of structuring rural set-
tlements (see Göthberg :–). As I have demonstrated above, places
for metalworking at such ‘farms’ similarly fail to meet the expected notions
of designated workshops or special crafting areas. Even though structur-
ation of settlement space with smaller buildings for specialised activities
started to emerge during the Late Bronze Age (Borna-Ahlkvist :),
it is clear that metalworking did not follow this trend.
The analysis also reveals a rather different picture than that set out
by traditional assumptions of marginal, hidden or specic crafting places
(e.g. Thrane :, :; Carlie ; Karlenby :; Aspeborg
:; Paulsson Nord & Sarnäs :; Goldhahn :, , ,
, ). For example, the well-preserved casting evidence from various
buildings and areas within the Apalle settlement during period V indicates
several contemporary crafting loci within the central settlement area (gure
), rather than in a particular area or at the outskirts of the site. Evidence
of casting was found accumulated in various refuse pits and spread in cul-
tural layers, as well as deposited in and around replaces within longhouses
and other buildings. This challenges common assumptions about bronze
crafting in settlements as an activity that was only conducted outdoors,
in the outskirts of settlements or in special areas or enclosures due to a ta-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
170
Anna Sörman
boo (Goldhahn :, ) or re hazard concerns (Karlenby :;
Paulsson Nord & Sarnäs ; Stilborg :; Thrane :). These
observations literally and guratively shift the understanding of metal-
working from a peripheral activity into a central activity performed in do-
mestic space.
This observation also ties in to debate about settlements as arenas for
public and communal events, such as collaborative cooking and ceremonial
practices. Ullén () has argued for a shift in spatial organization from a
more ‘public’ use of space to a more ‘private’ use in the course of the Late
Bronze Age. This suggestion is based on three differences observed between
the Early versus the Late Bronze Age phases of the Apalle settlement: ()
a change in the internal structure of longhouses from distinct boundaries
between different (usually two) rooms to a more open layout, () the shift
from communal heaps of re-cracked stones to smaller middens shared by
fewer households, and () a decrease in large outdoor cooking pits from
the Early to Late Bronze Age (Ullén :–). Ullén’s interpretation
of these patterns is summarised in the following section:
In the time of the earlier houses, the division between private and public was
strictly emphasised indoors, whereas there was a collective spirit outwards,
in the outer space, through the management of food and refuse. The later set-
tlement, by contrast, established private spheres outside its houses, between
households, but showed greater openness when inside the social sphere of the
house. The later settlement put more emphasis on the individual household.
(Ullén :)
However, looking at the distribution of casting debris and the settings and
framings chosen for metalworking in the Late Bronze Age set tlements we see
an almost opposite tendency: it was being performed in the more conned
rooms of longhouses in the early Bronze Age (as far as the examples known
so far suggest, e.g. Nilsson ; Ethelberg ; Jensen :–;
Kristensen :). In the Late Bronze Age, however, it was performed
in more diverse and sometimes visually accessible loci out in the open. As
argued above using evidence from the Apalle case, Late Bronze Age casting
still took place within different buildings, but the choice of casting places
also became more pluralistic. This pattern could support Ullén’s () sug-
gested model, in the sense that the longhouse was a more public space in
the Early Bronze Age and thus used for collective or even supra-household
ceremonies, which might have included an important casting event. A dif-
ferent interpretation is that the ‘public’ space and communal rituals – as
assumed by the framing of castings in Apalle’s central ‘yard’ and large as-
sembly area – indicate a more varied use of strategic and communal spaces
in Late Bronze Age settlements. Instead of representing a shift from a public
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
171
Casting in the Longhouse
to a more private sense of space, it could indicate a development towards a
more varied use and denition of public space. The diversity in the spatial
organisation of metalworking – and of settlement space more generally – in
the Late Bronze Age also correlates with more elaborate ritual arenas and
cult-house areas within these settlements. As cult-house milieus became
part of settlements, the complexity of social space within settlements in-
creased. It is important to note that this was unknown at the time of Ulléns
work, and that this suggests more differentiated use of communal arenas
rather than a tendency towards privatisation.
The practical and spatial arrangements of casting within settlements
show no signs of efforts being made to hide production from view, thus con-
tradicting the esoteric and secret character of bronze working suggested by
Goldhahn (). Crafters acted in the middle of their community, in are-
nas that were visible or at least known to all residents and possible visitors
at complexes like Apalle, Åbrunna, Ryssgärdet and Tallboda. The ques-
tion of which parts and stages of the production process were surrounded
by taboos and restrictions needs further study, and although this avenue
of research is not the main focus here, it is interesting to note that casting
is the most dramatic and sensational step in the chaîne opératiore of pro-
duction and can be exposed without risk of spreading the knowledge and
skills involved (Sörman :–). The time-limited and climactic epi-
sode from melting to casting is the part of the production process that most
easily lends itself to display. In order to evaluate such factors further, and
to better understand the framing of bronze casting nds, eld archaeology
could benet from registering observations through bodily experiences at
a more human scale when approaching these sites. Aspects of visibility and
staging are particularly relevant when reconstructing how casting played
out in the settlements (gure ).
METALWORKING ORGANIZATION AND THE CLASSIFICATION
OFBRONZES
The examples above also demonstrate that, rather than simple tools and
trinkets for household use, production in settlement and longhouses some-
times included the creation of exclusive prestige goods; this observation has
also been pointed out by Levy (:). However, unlike Levy’s hypo-
thesis that ‘the most elaborate, costly display items were manufactured in
special locations’ (Levy :), the production of such objects could evi-
dently take place at settlements. The examples above demonstrate the mak-
ing of complex belt attributes in the settlement arena at Apalle (Eriksson
:–), as well as the casting of large spectacle bulas associated
with longhouses at the Tallboda (Äijä et al. :) and Skuttunge kyrka
(Seiler & Östling :) settlements. Such prestige goods, which in these
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
172
Anna Sörman
cases took the form of large, ornate costume attributes, were highly com-
plex to make, often decorated with elements from Bronze Age iconography,
and have been associated with the ceremonial costumes used by certain
members of the elite (Sørensen ; Jensen ). Considering the use,
role and placement on the body, objects like spectacle bulas were proba-
bly used by performers of ceremonies and other activities that were public
in scale (Sørensen :–; Levy :). The production of such
public markers urges us to envision more dynamic production, in terms of
visibility, political signicance and public ritualization, than that which is
usually envisaged for Bronze Age ‘farmsteads’. The organization of cast-
ing practices also encourages reection on the arrangements of settle ment
space in general.
Many bronzes, such as spectacle bulas, were presumably worn as public
markers by a select few, and so are likely to have been tied to special social
identities within the elite collective. Such prestigious personal attributes –
such as large belt and dress ornaments, weapons and personal adornments
like elaborate neck rings – were then likely to have been acquired at a cer-
tain age or other social threshold (as observed from attributes combined
in costumes in Early Bronze Age barrow burials, see Bergerbrant ). If
so, the casting of new prestige objects would have been motivated by the
initiations of the persons with particular, relevant attributes (and public
functions) into their new roles. Interestingly, a possible spatial division has
been observed bet ween the production of weapons (at cult-houses) and large
ornaments (at longhouses) within larger settlements (Sörman :–
Figure . Rec onstruction of a c asting event at the L ate Bronze Age set tlement at Pryssg ården,
Östergötland, south-eastern Sweden. Interpretation by Katarina Botwid (). Illustra-
tion: Henning Cedemar-Brandkvist. Published with permission.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
173
Casting in the Longhouse
). This could be a reection of a difference in the orientation and cir-
cumstances for the production – and thus the initiation rituals – for differ-
ent persons/institutions who were to wear these insignia. This observation
supports the idea that valuables and prestige goods must be understood as
a varied and heterogeneous category of artefacts – with different meanings,
functions, owners and life courses (e.g. Kopytoff ; Brück & Fontijn
; Kovace vich & Callaghan ). To this we can now add a further
stage: that of different production contexts, that is to say, places of creation.
Thus, bronze crafting was not supplied from a special ‘crafting place’ or
centralised workshop, but performed where the object would be used. The
variety of production loci within Late Bronze Age settlements suggests that
production was oriented towards a range of objects tied to various means
and customers. Formulated differently, the varied spatial organization of
casting seen in Late Bronze Age settlements mirrors its clients rather than
its crafters and their ‘workshops’. Such loosely structured production for
the multitude of artefacts circulating in the Late Bronze Age would dismiss
the idea of dened spatial, technological and social spheres or levels such as
a household versus workshop production. Rather than hierarchical mod-
els, other types of frames of reference are needed in order to understand
this craft and its organization. The heterogeneity seen in this production
challenges the functional spheres traditionally believed to have structured
metalworking activities as either utility or prestigious/political (e.g. Levy
:–; Björhem & Säfvestad :; Thrane :), when con-
sidering bronze casting in settlements in particular, and Bronze Age society
in general. Accordingly, new alternatives to the classic categorisations are
necessary. Further elaboration on alternative categorisations such as ‘per-
sonal attributes’, ‘symbols of power’ and ‘tools’ (Sörman :–)
might be one way forward.
Conclusions
How bronze crafting was organized in society remains a relevant and vital
question in Scandinavian Bronze Age research. However, as the results of
this paper show, while the question is well motivated, the answer may some-
times have been sought in the wrong places – or rather, at the wrong spa-
tial scale. Discussing settlements as overall production units has obscured
the importance of crafting arrangements and spatial organization within
these sites. The concepts of site, setting and framing were presented here
as analytical tools to differentiate observations in these signicant spatial
arenas. The complexity of Late Bronze Age settlements and the way cast-
ing debris is distributed in them underlines the inadequacy of treating set-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
174
Anna Sörman
tlements (and their craft production) as monolithic units. Apart from occa-
sional single farms, these settlement complexes did not only contain dwell-
ing areas, but several types of settings including grave-elds, cult-sites, and
other zones for ritual activities. Bronzes were produced in all these settings.
This paper shows that the settings and framings of bronze casting within
sites provide important clues to how Bronze Age people produced, used
and categorized their metalwork. However, as these examples have demon-
strated, it is also crucial to move beyond fallacious assumptions about prac-
tical requirements for bronze casting – such as the beliefs that it required
special furnaces, was carried out at a distance from contemporary build-
ings, or was concentrated in special crafting areas or workshops – when
approaching these sites. The exible and mobile craft of melting bronze in
open hearths allowed a varied and elaborate staging of production. These
observations have implications for how and where metalworking debris is
anticipated during excavation. Production loci are often inconspicuous and
melting hearths can only be inferred from indirect evidence of small metal
droplets (Söderberg ). Indoor hearths must also be considered as po-
tential casting hearths. This approach has methodological consequences
for both excavation and metal detecting strategies (see Söderberg ;
Schütz :; Eriksson & Grandin ; Nyberg & Nilsson :).
Following on from this, we must also be open to production debris in set-
tlement contexts even when it does not stand out clearly as part of a well-
dened activity area.
The picture that emerges from the settlement material is not one of as-
signed crafting areas and workshops – an industrial or at least historically
rooted image – but more uid and embedded production, present at dif-
ferent sites, staged in various rooms and, presumably, targeted towards a
range of various users. Furthermore, the production of socio-political par-
aphernalia in the ‘domestic sphere’, amidst the arenas of daily life, points
to the fact that settlements incorporated important political activities. The
need to acknowledge settlements as political arenas rather than just low-
key, domestic spaces for everyday activities has been repeatedly emphasised
(e.g. Gröhn :; Brück & Fokkens :) but rarely linked to actual
archaeological evidence of spectacular and public events. I suggest that the
casting of attributes for ceremonial elite costumes, such as belt domes and
spectacle bulas, is one example of such signicant public power displays
in dwellings.
The setting and staging of casting objects form one empirical window
through which we can begin to reconstruct how bronzes were categorized
and used by Bronze Age people; this perspective differs from the conven-
tional route of approaching this type of material culture from a precon-
ceived (modern) division of utility versus political goods. That categoriza-
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
175
Casting in the Longhouse
tion may be more reective of our society than of the societies we try to
study. Although fragmented in nature, the evidence reviewed in this paper,
when considered as a whole, shows patterns that can provide new ways of
addressing one of the key questions in Scandinavian Bronze Age research.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank the editors for their constructive and stimulating feedback
on earlier versions of this paper. I would also like to thank the anonymous
reviewers for useful comments, and Anna Wessman for inspirational dis-
cussions during the writing process. Finally, an acknowledgement to Char-
lotte Mulcare for English revision and to the Greta Arwidsson Foundation
for nancial support for language editing and image fees.
References
Agersnap Larsen, L., Kieldsen, M. & Mikkelsen, M. . Løgstrup SØ: Bronzestøbning
på en lokalitet med gårdsanlæg og samlingsplads. In: Boddum, S., Mikkelsen, M. &
Terkildsen, N. (eds). Bronzestøbning i yngre bronzealderns lokale kulturlandskab, pp.
–. Viborg: Viborgs museum & Holstebro museum.
Artursson, M. . Gårds- och bebyggelsestruktur. In: Lagerås, P. & Strömberg, B . (eds).
Bronsåldersbygd 2300–500 f.Kr. Skånska spår: Arkeologi längs Västkustbanan, pp.
–. Lund: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Artursson, M. . Bebyggelse och samhällsstruktur: Södra och mellersta Skandina-
vien under senneolitikum och bronsålder 2300–500 f.Kr. Gothenburg: Gothenburg
University.
Artursson, M. . Inledning. Slutkommentar. In: Artursson, M., Karlenby, L. & Lars-
son, F. (eds). Nibble: En b ronsålde rsmiljö i Uppla nd. Särski ld undersök ning, 2007, E18
sträckan Sagån–Enköping. Uppland, Tillinge socken, Tillinge-Nibble 1:9 & Tillinge-
Mälby 5:1, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Art ursson, M., K arlenby, L. & Larsso n, F. a. Samma nfattnin g och slutsats. In: A rturs-
son, M., Karlenby, L. & Larsson, F. (eds). Nibble: En bronsåldersmiljö i Uppland. S är-
skild undersökning, 2007, E18 sträckan Sagån–Enköping. Uppland, Tillinge socken,
Tillinge-Nibble 1:9 & Tillinge-Mälby 5:1, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarie-
ämbetet.
Artursson, M., Karlenby, L. & Larsson, F. b. Områdesbeskrivningar och fasindel-
ning. In: Artursson, M., Karlenby, L. & Larsson, F. (eds). Nibble: En bronsåldersmiljö
i Uppland. Särskild undersökning, 2007, E18 sträckan Sagån–Enköping. Uppland,
Tillinge socken, Tillinge-Nibble 1:9 & Tillinge-Mälby 5:1, pp. –. Stockholm:
Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Art ursson, M., K arlenby, L. & Larsson , F. (eds). c. Nibble : En bronsål dersmiljö i Up p-
land. Särskild undersökning, 2007, E18 sträckan Sagån–Enköping. Uppland, Tillinge
socken , Tillinge-Nibble 1:9 & Tillinge- Mälby 5:1. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Artursson, M., Björck, N. & Larsson, F. . Hus, gård och bygd: Bebyggelse, landskap
och sam hällsorgan isation – BC. I n: Arturs son, M., Kali ff, A. & Larsson, F. (eds).
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
176
Anna Sörman
Rasb obygden i et t långtid sperspekti v: 1100 BC –1100 AD – kontinu itet och förän dring,
pp. –. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet & Arkeologerna SHM.
Aspeborg, H. . Anläggningsfrekvenser i tid och rum. In: Frölund, P. (ed.). Boplatser i
Uppsala och Västmanlands län, del II: Rapport över ett FoU-projekt, pp. –. Upp-
sala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Äijä, K., L indborg, H. & S chönbeck, M. . Tallboda . RAÄ 16, 18, 258, 269, 270 Rystad
socken, Östergötland. Linköping: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Bergerbrant, S. . Bronze Age Identities: Costume, Conict and Contact in Northern
Europe 1600 –1300 BC. Lindome: Bricoleur Press.
Björhem, N. & Magnusson Staaf, B. . Långhuslandskapet: En studie av bebyggelse
och samhälle från stenålder till järnålder. Malmö: Malmö kulturmiljö.
Björhem, N. & Säfvestad, U. . Fosie IV: Bebyggelsen under brons- och järnålder.
Malmö: Malmö Museer.
Björk, T. . Kring förfädernas bopålar: Om bronsålderns och den äldre järnålderns
bosättningar i Vætland. In: Artursson, M. (ed.). Vägar till Vætland: En bronsålders-
bygd i nordöstra Skåne 2300–500 f.Kr., pp. –. Lund: Riksantikvarieämbetet &
Regionmuseet Kristianstad/Landsantikvarien i Skåne.
Boddum, S., Mikkelsen, M. & Terkildsen N. (eds). . Bronzestøbning i yngre bronze-
alders lokale kulturlandskab. Seminarrapport fra seminaret ‘Bronzestøbning i yngre
bronz ealders lok ale kulturl andskab’ af holf i Viborg, 6. M arts 2014. Vibor g/Holst ebro:
Viborg museum & Holstebro museum.
Borna-A hlkvist, H . . Hällri starnas hem: Gårdsbebyggelse och struktur i Pryssgården
under bronsålder. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Borna-Ahlkvist, H., Lindgren-Hertz, L. & Stålbom, U. . Pryssgården från stenålder
till medeltid: Arkeologiska undersökning av RAÄ 166 och 167 Östra Eneby socken,
Norrköpings kommun, Östergötland. Lindköping: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Botwid, K. . The Artisanal Perspective in Action: An Archaeology in Practice. Lund:
Lunds universitet.
Brück, J. & Fokkens, H. . Bronze Age Settlements. In: Fokkens, H. & Harding, A.
(eds). The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age, pp. –. Oxford: Ox-
ford University Press.
Brück, J. & Fontijn, D. . The myth of the Chief: Prestige Goods, Power and Person-
hood in the European Bronze Age. In: Fokkens, H. & Harding, A. (eds). The Oxford
Hand book of the Europea n Bronze Age, pp. –. Oxford: Oxford Univer sity Press.
Brück , J. & Goodman , M. . Introduction: T hemes for a Critic al Archaeolog y of Prehis-
toric Settlement. In: Brück, J. & Goodman, M. (eds). Making Places in the Prehistoric
World: Themes in Settlement Archaeology, pp. –. London: UCL Press.
Brück, J, & Goodman, M. (eds). . Making Places in the Prehistoric World: Themes in
Settlement Archaeology. London: UCL Press.
Budd, P. & Taylor, T. . The Farie Smith meets the Bronze Industry: Magic versus Sci-
ence in the Interpretation of Prehistoric Metal-making. World Archaeology. Vol. ()
pp. –.
Burenhult, G. (ed.). . Arkeologi i Norden, del 2. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur.
Burrage , N. . An Int roduction t o Early Bronze A ge Metalwork ing. http://w ww.bronze-
age-craft.com/intro.htm. [Accessed December ].
Carlie, L. . Brogård – ett brons- och järnålderskomplex i södra Halland: Dess krono -
logi och struktur. Lund: Stiftelsen Hallands Länsmuseer.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
177
Casting in the Longhouse
Coles, J.M. & Harding, A .F. . The Bronze Age in Europe: An Introduction to the Pre-
history of Europe c.2000–700 BC. London: Methuen & Co Ldt.
Diinhoff, S. . Fre mre Øygarden: En bosætn ing med bronze støbning fra æl dre bronze-
alder ved gården Kvamme i Lærdal. Rapport fra arkæologiske undersøgelser 2000.
Bergen: Bergen museum.
Draiby, B. . Fragtrup: En boplads fra yngre bronzealder i Vesthimmerland. Aarbøger
for nordisk oldkyndighed og historie. Vol. pp. –.
Earle, T. . How Chiefs come to Power: The Political Economy in Prehistory. Stan-
ford: Stanford University Press.
Earle, T. . Bronze Age Economics: The Beginnings of Political Economies. Boulder,
Colorado: Westview Press.
Eklund, S., Onsten-Molander, A. & Wikborg, J. . Hem till gården: Förhistoriska
gårdsstrukturer i Tiundaland. In: Göthberg, H. (ed.). Hus och bebyggelse i Uppland:
Delar av förhistoriska sammanhang, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eklöf, N. . En bronsåldersboplats vid Bornsjön. Södermanland, Salems socken,
Söderby 5:1, RAÄ 326 och 329. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eklöv Pet tersson, P. . En hållba r utveckling ? Hållbarhete n för bronså ldern s deglar. Un-
published Masters thesis. Lund University: Dept. of Archaeology and Ancient History.
Eriksson, T. . Gjuterifynden i Apalle. In: Ullén, I. (ed.). Arkeologi på väg: Undersök-
ningar för E18. Bronsåldersboplatsen vid Apalle i Uppland. Uppland, Övergrans
socken, Apalle RAÄ 260, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eriksson, T. . Riter och keramik i Mälardalen under bronsålder. In: Herva, V-P. (ed.).
People, Material Culture and Environment in the North: Proceedings of the 22nd
Nordic Archaeological Conference, University of Oulu, 18–23 August 2004, pp. –
. Oulu: Oulun yliopisto.
Erik sson, T. . Specialreg istrering av keram ik och gjuterif ynd. In: Frölund , P. & S chütz,
B. (eds). Bebyggelse och bronsgjutare i Bredåker och Gamla Uppsala: Arkeologisk
under sökning, fornlämning 134, 596 & 599, Uppsala socken, Uppland, pp. –.
Uppsala: Upplandsmuseet.
Erik sson, T. a. Gravar och mä nniskoben. In : Hjärthner- Holdar, E., Er iksson, T. & Öst-
ling, A . (eds). Mella n himmel och jord: Ryssgärdet, e n guldskim rande b ronsålde rsmiljö
i centrala Uppland, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eriksson, T. b. Kr ukor och serviser. In: Hjär thner-Holdar, E ., Eriksson , T. & Östling,
A. (eds). Mella n himmel och jo rd: Ryssgärdet, en g uldskimran de bronsål dersmiljö i c en-
trala Uppland, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eriksson, T. & Grandi n, L. . Brons: Den g yllene metallen. In: E Hjär thner-Holdar, E.,
Erik sson, T. & Östling, A . (eds). Mella n himmel och jo rd: Ryssgärdet, en g uldskimran de
bronsåldersmiljö i centrala Uppland, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Eriksson, T. & Östling, A. . Ryssgärdet i Onslunda: Ett fornlämningskomplex från
senneolitikum till och med 1700-talet med tyngdpunkt i bronsålder. Väg E4, sträckan
Uppsal a–Me hedeby. Uppla nd, Tensta soc ken, Onsl unda 5:1 och 3:1, R AÄ 435. Arkeo-
logisk undersökning. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Ethelberg, P. . Den fjerde kæmpehal. Skalk. Vol. () pp. –.
Ethelber g, P. . Bronze alderen. In: Et helberg, P., Jørgensen, E ., Meier D. & Robinson D.
(eds). Det Sønderjyske Landbrugs Historie: Sten- og bronzealder. Haderslev: Haders-
lev Museum & Historisk Samfund for Sønderjylland.
Forsman, C. & Victor, H. . Sommaränge Skog: Begrav ningar, ritualer och beb yggelse
från senneolitikum, bronsålder och folkvandringstid. Rapport del 1: De förhistoriska
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
178
Anna Sörman
lämningarna vid Sommaränge skog, RAÄ 211, Viksta sn, Uppland. Uppsala: Societas
Archaeologica Upsaliensis.
Frölund, P. & Schütz, B. (eds). . Bebyggelse och bronsgjutare i Bredåker och Gamla
Uppsala. Arkeologisk undersökning, fornlämning 134, 596 & 599, Uppsala socken,
Uppland. Uppsala: Upplandsmuseet.
Goldhahn, J. . Dödens hand: En essä om brons- och hällsmed. In: Goldhahn J. &
Østigård, T. (eds). Rituelle spesialister i bronse- og jernalderen, pp. –. Gothenburg:
Gothenburg University.
Goldhahn, J. & Oestigaard, T. . Smith and Death: Cremations in Furnaces in Bronze
and Iron Age Scandinavia. In: Chilidis, K., Lund, J. & Prescott, C. (eds). Facets of
Archae ology: Essays in Honour of Lotte Hedeager on her 60th Birthday, pp. –.
Oslo: Unipub.
Göthberg, H., Forenius, S. & Karlenby, L. (eds). . I en liten Vrå av världen. Arkeo-
logiska undersökningar, Vrå, Knivsta socken, Uppland. Del 2. Uppsala: Riksantik-
varieämbetet.
Grandi n, L. & Hjärth ner-Holdar, E. . Järn- och metall hantverk vid Sk uttunge kyrka:
Rester från äldre bronsålder och yngre järnålder. Uppland, Skuttunge socken, Skut-
tunge 11:1, fornlämning 317. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Gröhn, A. . Positioning the Bronze Age in Social Theory and Research Contexts.
Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
Göthberg, H. . Bebyggelse i förändring: Uppland från slutet av yngre bronsålder till
tidig medeltid. Uppsala: Uppsala University.
Göthberg, H. & Schütz, B. (eds). . I närheten av E4. 2005. Arkeologiska schaktöver-
vakningar och undersökningar. Gamla Uppsala och Vaksala socknar. Uppsala kom-
mun, Uppland. Uppsala: Upplandsmuseet.
Hanlon, C. . Årup: Boplats- och bebyggelselämningar från senpaleolotikum, tidig-
mesoli tikum och yng re bronsåld er. Skåne, Ive tofta socke n, Väg E22 Gu alöv– Bromölla ,
Årup 1:1. Dnr 423-2177-2002. Lund: Riksantikvarieämbetet & Regionmuseet i Kris-
tianstad.
Harding, A. . European Societies in the Bronze Age. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Helander, A. & Zetterlund, P. . Västra Bökestad, gravfält och bronsgjuteri. Arkeo-
logisk slutundersökning. R AÄ 117–118, Linköpings s tad och kommun, Östergötl and.
Linköping: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Herner, E. . Spiral Decoration in Early Bronze Age Scandinavia: A Technical and
Qual itative An alysis and St udy of Producti on. Oxford: Briti sh Archaeologica l Reports.
Hillier, B. & Hansen, J. . The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Histori c Environment Rec ord [Swe Kulturmiljöre gistret – Forns ök] http s://app.raa.se/open /
fornsok/. [Accessed December ].
Hjärthner-Holdar, E. . Järnets och järnmetallurgins introduktion i Sverige. Uppsala:
Uppsala universitet.
Hjärthner-Holdar, E. (ed.). . Gjutning och smide på Skeke und er bronsålder och folk-
vandr ingstid: Arkeo metallu rgiskaan alyser av me tall, slag g och teknisk ke ramik samt re-
konstr uktion av et t folkvandrings tida gjute ri. Väg 288, Uppla nd, Rasbo so cken, Skeke
2:4, 1:3, fornlämning 669. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet UV GAL.
Hjärthner-Holdar, E., Eriksson, T. & Östling, A. (eds). . Mellan himmel och jord:
Ryssgärdet, en guldskimrande bronsåldersmiljö i centrala Uppland. Uppsala: Riks-
antikvarieämbetet.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
179
Casting in the Longhouse
Hodder, I. . The Contextual Analysis of Symbolic Meanings. In: Hodder (ed.). The
Archae ology of Contextual Meanings, pp. –. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Howard, H. . The Bronze Casting Industry in later Prehistoric Southern Britain: A
Study ba sed on Refrac tory Debr is. Unpublished PhD t hesis, Universit y of Southampton.
Hyenstrand, Å. . Skärvstenshögar och bronsåldersmiljöer: Preliminär översikt över
undersökningar i Mälarområdet. Tor. Vol. XII pp. –.
Hyenstrand, Å. . Fasta fornlämningar och arkeologiska regioner. Stockholm: Riks-
antikvarieämbetet och Statens historiska museer.
Häringe, K. a. Nedgrävningar. In: Göthberg, H., Forenius, S. & Karlenby, L. (eds). I
en liten Vrå av världen. Arkeologiska undersökningar, Vrå, Knivsta socken, Uppland.
Del 2, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Häringe, K. b. Kulturlager. In: Göthberg, H., Forenius, S. & Karlenby, L. (eds). I en
liten Vrå av vä rlden. Arkeo logiska und ersökningar, Vrå, Kni vsta socken , Uppland. D el
2, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Jaanusson , H. . Bronsåldersboplats en vid Hallunda : Ett prelimi närt meddela nde. Forn-
vännen. Vol. pp. –.
Jaanusson, H. . Hallunda: A Study of Pottery from a Late Bronze Age Settlement in
Central Sweden. Stockholm: Statens historiska museum.
Jaanusson, H. & Vahlne, G. . Arkeologisk undersökning 1969–71: Hallunda, Bot-
kyrka sn, Södermanland. Del II: fornlämning 13, boplats. Stockholm: Riksantik-
varieämbetet.
Jantzen, D. . Quellen zur Metallverarbeitung im Nordischen Kreis der Bronzezeit.
Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Jensen, J. . Danmarks Oldtid: Bronzealder. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.
Jensen , R. . Skär vstenshögar och b osättning smönster i Mäla rdalen under bronså ldern.
Bebyggelsehistorisk tidskrift: Fornlämningar och bebyggelse. Vol. pp. –.
Karlenby, L. . The Bronze Age House in Central Sweden. Tor. Vol. pp. –.
Karlenby, L. ed . . I en liten Vrå av värld en. Arkeolog iska unde rsökningar, Vrå, Knivs ta
socken, Uppland. Del 1. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Karlenby, L. . Ett arkeologiskt återbesök i Lilla Härnevi. Arkeologisk slutundersök-
ning. Lill a Härne vi 1:5, RA Ä 35, Här nevi socke n, Enköpings kom mun, Uppla nd. Upp-
sala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Karlenby, L. . Kolonisation, kontinuitet och kulturlandskapsutveckling på Håbo-
landet. In: Anund, J. (ed.). Gården, tingen, graven: Arkeologiska perspektiv på Mälar-
dalen, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Karlenby, L. . Stenbärarna: Kult och rituell praktik i skandinavisk bronsålder. Upp-
sala: Uppsala University.
Kaul, F. . S andagergård: A Late Bronze Age Cultic Bu ilding with Rock E ngravings and
Menhirs from Northern Zealand, Denmark. Acta Archaeologica. Vol. pp. –.
Kaul, F. . Ships on Bronzes: A Study in Bronze Age Religion and Iconography. Copen-
hagen: Nationalmuseum.
Kovacevich, B . & Callaghan , M.G. . Introduction: Inalienability, Value, and the Con-
struc tion of Social Dif ference. Archaeological Papers of the A merican A nthropologic al
Association. Vol. () pp. –.
Kopytoff, I. . The Cultural Biography of Things. In: Appadurai, A. (ed.). The Social
Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, pp. –. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
180
Anna Sörman
Kristensen, I.K. . Spor efter bronzehåndværk i Salling og Fjends. In: Boddum, S.,
Mikkel sen, M. & Terkildsen, N. (eds). Bronzestøbning i yngre bronzealders lokale
kulturlandskab: Seminarrapport fra seminaret ‘Bronzestøbning i yngre bronzealders
lokale kulturlandskab’ afholf i Viborg, 6. Marts 2014, pp. –. Viborg & Holste-
bro: Viborg museum & Holstebro museum.
Kristiansen, K. . From Stone to Bronze: The Evolution of Social Complexity in North-
ern Europe, – BC. In: Brumel, E.M. & Earle, T.K. (eds). Specialization, Ex-
change, and Complex Societies, pp. –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kristiansen, K. . Europe before History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kris tiansen, K. . Households in Contex t: Cosmology, Economy a nd long-term Chan ge
in the Bronze Age of Northern Europe. In: Madella, M., Kovács, G., Kulcsarne-
Berzsenyi, B. & Briz i Godino, I. (eds). The Archaeology of Household, pp. –.
Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T.B. . The Rise of Bronze Age Society: Travels, Transmis-
sions and Transformations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuijpers, M.H.G. . Bronze Age Metalworking in the Netherlands (c.2000–800 BC):
a Research into the Preservation of Metallurgy related Artefacts and the Social Posi-
tion of the Smith. Leiden: Sidestone Press.
Kuijpers, M .H.G. . The Sound of Fire , the Taste of Coppe r, Feel of Bronze, and Colou rs
of the Cast: Sensory Aspects of Metalworking Technology. In: Sørensen, M.L.S. &
Rebay-Sal isbury, K. (eds). Embodied Kn owledge: Histo rical Perspectives on Belief and
Technology, pp. –. Oxford: Oxbow.
Lars son, F. (ed.). . Skeke – gu dar, männi skor och gjuta re: Rituell a komplex från bro ns-
ålde r och äldre järnålder samt en höjdbosättni ng från yngre järn ålder med gjuteriverk-
stad . Utbyggn ad av väg 288, sträck an Jälla– Hov, Uppsal a län, Uppl and, Uppsa la kom-
mun, R asbo socken , Skeke 1:3, 2:6, R asbo 55:1–2, 654, 655, 669, 695, 696, 697, 626:1–
627:1, 682–688 samt delar av Rasbo 628:1 och 629:1. Dnr 423-236-2010. Hägersten:
Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Larsson, S. . Stadens dolda kulturskikt: Lundaarkeologins förutsättningar och
förståelsehorisonter uttryckt genom praxis för källmaterialsproduktion 1890–1990.
Lund: Kulturhistoriska museet & Lunds universitet.
Lars son, T.B. . The Bron ze Age Metalwo rk in Souther n Sweden: A spects of Soci al and
Spatial Organization 1800–500 B.C. Umeå: Umeå universitet.
Levy, J.E. . Social and Religious organization in Bronze Age Denmark: An Analysis
of Ritual Hoard Finds. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Levy, J.E. . Metalworking Technology and Craft Specialization in Bronze Age Den-
mark. Archaeomaterials. Vol. () pp. –.
Levy, J.E. . Heterarchy in Bronze Age Denmark: Settlement Pattern, Gender, and
Ritual. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association. Vol. ()
pp. –.
Levy, J.E. . Metals, Symbols, and Society in Bronze Age Denmark. In: Rodd, J. (ed.).
Material Symbols: Culture and Economy in Prehistory, pp. –. Carbondale:
Southern Illinois University.
Lindst röm, J. . Norra Mälarda len under bronsålder n: En landskapsa rkeologisk analys .
In: A rtursson, M ., Karlenby, L. & Lar sson, F. (eds). Nibble : En bronsål dersmiljö i Upp -
land. Särskild undersökning, 2007. E18 sträckan Sagån–Enköping. Uppland, Tillinge
socken, Tillinge-Nibble 1:9 & Tillinge-Mälby 5:1, pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantik-
varieämbetet.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
181
Casting in the Longhouse
Lucas, G . . Critical Approaches to Fieldwork: Contemporary and Historical Archae-
ological Practice. London: Routledge.
Lyman, R.L. . A Historical Sketch on the Concepts of Archaeological Association,
Context, and Provenience. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. Vol. ()
pp. –.
Mann ing, S . . When the Br onze is L ike a Mir ror. https: //bo okands word.com ////
when-the-bronze-is-like-a-mirror/. [Accessed February ].
Melheim, A.L. . Right and Left: Directions in Bronze Age Cosmology seen through a
Pair of Spectacle-bulas . In: Chilidi s, K. Lund, J. & Prescott , C. (eds). Facets of Archa e-
ology: Essays in Honour of Lotte Hedeager on her 60th Birthday, pp. –. Oslo:
University of Oslo.
Melheim, A.L . . Recycling Ideas: Bronze Age Metal Production in Souther n Norway.
Oslo: University of Oslo.
Melheim, A.L. . Støpeplasser og handelsplasser: To sider av samme sak? In: Boddum,
S., Mi kkelsen, M. & Terkildsen , N. (eds). Bronzestøbning i yng re bronzeald erns lokale
kulturlandskab, pp. –. Viborg: Viborgs museum & Holstebro museum.
Melheim, A.L., Prescott, C. & Annset, N. . Bronze Casting and Cultural Connec-
tions: Bronze Age Workshops at Hunn, Norway. Prähistorische Zeitschrift. Vol. ()
pp. –.
Nilsson, A. . Making a Simple Tool: Bronze Casting for Personal use in the latter Part
of the Scandinavian Bronze Age. Lund Archaeological Review. Vol. pp. –.
Nilsson, T. . Store Thyrrestrup: En vendsysselsk storgård med bronzedepot fra ældre
bronzealder. Kuml. Vol. – pp. –.
Nilsson, B. & Rudebeck, E. . Arkeologiska världar. In: Nilsson, B. & Rudebeck, E.
(ed.). Arkeologiska och förhistoriska världar.: Fält, erfarenheter och sten åldersboplat-
ser i sydvästra Skåne, pp. –. Malmö: Malmö Museer.
Nilsson , P. & Sör man, A. . En gjutform av täljsten f rån den yngre bronså ldern: Spår av
bronshantverk vid Rambodal i Norrköping. Fornvännen. Vol. pp. –.
Nørgaard, H.W. . Are Valued Craftsmen as Impor tant as Prestige Goods? Ideas about
Itinerant Craftsmanship in the Nordic Bronze Age. In: Reiter, S.S., Nørgaard, H.W.,
Kölcze, Z. & Rassmann, C. (eds). Rooted in Movement: Aspects of Mobility in Bronze
Age Europe, pp. –. Højberg: Jutland Archaeological Society.
Nørgaard, H.W. . Tracing the Hand that Crafted: How Individual Working Traces
make Bronze Age Ornaments talk. In: Suchowska-Ducke, P., Reiter, S.S. & Vandkilde,
H. (eds). Forging Identities: The Mobility of Culture in Bronze Age Europe. Report
from a M arie Curi e Project 2009 –2012 with C oncluding C onferenc e at Aarhus Un iver-
sity, Moesgaard 2012. Volume 1, pp. –. Oxford: B ritish Archaeolog ical Reports.
Nørgaa rd, H.W. . Craft smanship a nd Metalwo rk in the Nordic Bronz e Age: Craft Or -
ganis ation, Craf tspeople an d their Areas of C ontact . Volume 1. Århu s: Århus Universit y.
Nyberg, P. & Nilsson, P. . En bronsåldersgård och gåtfulla medeltida gravar. RAÄ
151, Rambodal 1:3 m.., Styrstad socken, Norrköpings kommun, Östergötlands län.
Särskild arkeologisk undersökning. Linköping: Östergötlands museum.
Ó Faolaín, S. . Bronze Artefact Production in Late Bronze Age Ireland: A Survey.
Oxford: Archaeopress.
Olausson, M. . Hus och tomt i Uppland och Södermanland under yngre bronsålder
och äldre järnålder. Bebyggelsehistorisk tidskrift. Vol. pp. –.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
182
Anna Sörman
Oldeberg, A. . Det nordiska bronsåldersspännets historia: Med särskild hänsyn till
dess gjuttekniska utformning i Sverige. Stockholm: Kungliga vitterhets-, historie-, och
antikvitetsakademien.
Oldeberg, A. . Metallteknik under förhistorisk tid. Del 2. Lund: Håkan Ohlssons
boktryckeri.
Oldeberg, A. . Skälbyfyndet: En boplatslämning från den yngre bronsåldern. Stock-
holm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Oma, K.A. . The Sheep People: The Ontology of Making Lives, Building Homes and
Forging Herds in Early Bronze Age Norway. Shefeld: Equinox.
Östling, A., Eriksson, T. & Hjärthner-Holdar, E. . Mellan himmel och jord: En av-
slutande diskussion. In: Hjärthner-Holdar, E., Eriksson T. & Östling, A. (eds). Mellan
himmel och jord: Ryssgärdet, en guldskimrande bronsåldersmiljö i centrala Uppland,
pp. –. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Ottenjahn, H. . Werkstätten nordischer Vollgriff-Schwerter der älteren Bronzezeit.
Hamburg: Bericht v. intern. Kongr. für Vor- und Frühgeschichte.
Ottenjahn, H. . Die nordischer Vollgriffschwerter der Älteren und Mittleren
Bronzezeit. Berlin: Römisch-Germanische Forschungen.
Paardekooper, R. . VAEE Celebrates Years. EXARC (). https://exarc.net/
issue--/mm/vaee-celebrates--years. [Accessed February ].
Papaconstantinou, D. . Deconstructing Context: A Critical Approach to Archaeo-
logical Practice. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Parker Pearson, M. & Richards, C. (ed.). . Architecture and Order: Approaches to
Social Space. London: Routledge.
Paulsson Nord, J. & Sarnäs, P. . Öresundsförbindelsen. Skjutbanorna 1B & Eline-
lund 2 A–B. R apport över a rkeologisk slutu ndersökning. Malmö: Malmö Kulturmiljö.
Petré, R. . En bronsåldersby i Bromölla. Skånes hembygdsförbunds årsbok. pp.
–.
Prescott, C. . Symbolic Metallurgy: Assessing Early Metallurgical Process in a Peri-
phery. In: Olausson, D. & Vandkilde, H. (eds). Form, Function and Context: Mate-
rial Culture Studies in Scandinavian Archaeology, pp. –. Stockholm: Almqvist
& Wiksell.
Renfrew, C. . Before Civilization: The Radiocarbon Revolution and Prehistoric Eu-
rope. Hamondsworth: Penguin.
Rowlands, M.J. . The Archaeological Interpretation of Prehistoric Metalworking.
World Archaeology. Vol. pp. –.
Rowlands, M .J. . The Produc tion and Di stributio n of Metalwork i n the Middle Br onze
Age in Southern Britain. BAR. :i–ii. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Rudebeck, E . . Mots ägelser och nytän kande i svensk uppdra gsarkeologi. In : Berggren,
Å. & Burström, M. (eds). Reexiv fältarkeologi? Återsken av ett seminarium, pp. –
. Stockholm & Malmö: Riksantikvarieämbetet & Malmö Museer.
Røn ne, P. . Stilvariationer i æld re bronzealder: Un dersøgelser over lokalfor skelle i brug
af ornementer og oldsager i ældre bronzealders anden periode. Aarbøger for Nordisk
Oldkyndighed og Historie. Vol. pp. –.
Rønne, P. . Problemer omkring bronzealderens metallhåndværkere. In: Fornsberg,
L. & Larsson, T.B. (eds). Ekonomi och näringsformer i nordisk bronsålder: Rapport
från det 6:e nordiska bron sålderss ymposiet, N ämforsen 1990, pp. –. Umeå: Umeå
University.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
183
Casting in the Longhouse
Samson, R. (ed.). . The Social Archaeology of Houses. Edingburgh: Edinburgh Uni-
versity Press.
Schütz, B. . Ett bronsgjuteri från yngre bronsålder. In: Frölund, P. & Schütz, B. (eds).
Bebyggelse och bronsgjutare i Bredåker och Gamla Uppsala: Arkeologisk undersök-
ning, fornlämning 134, 596 & 599, Uppsala socken, Uppland, pp. –. Uppsala:
Upplandsmuseet,
Seiler, A. & Östling, A. . Bönder, stormän och bronsgjutare: Senneolitikum, brons-
ålder, järnålder och historisk tid vid Skuttunge kyrka. Uppland, Skuttunge socken,
Skut tunge 11:1, RA Ä 317. Arkeologis k undersökn ing. Uppsala: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Serning, I. . Malm, metall, föremål: Kompendium i arkeometallurgi. nd edition.
Stockholm: Stockholms universitet, Arkeometallurgiska institutet.
Skoglund, P. . De enskild a hushållens bet ydelse för landskapsut vecklingen u nder brons-
åldern. In: Olausson, M. (ed.). Spiralens öga: Tjugo artiklar kring aktuell bronsålders-
forskning, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Stenberger, M. . Det forntida Sverige. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Stilborg, O. . Källorna: Möjligheter och kritik. In: Lindahl, A., Olausson, D. & Car-
lie, A. (eds). Keramik i Sydsverige: En handbok för arkeologer, pp. –. Lund: Kera-
miska forskningslaboratoriet.
Streiffert, J. . Gårdsstrukturer i Halland under bronsålder och äldre järnålder. Göte-
borg & Mölndal: Göteborgs universitet & Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Strucke , U. & Holback, T.J. . Järn oc h brons: Met allhantve rk och boende v id Åbrunn a.
Väg 73, sträckan Jordbro–Fors. Södermanland, Österhaninge socken, Åbrunna 1:1,
RAÄ 201. Arkeologisk undersökning. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Svensson, B. . En gjuteriverkstad från bronsåldern. Göteborgs och Bohusläns forn-
minnesförenings tidskrift. Vol. pp. –.
Swedberg, S . . Smältugna r för bronsgjutnin g. Bohuslän: Bohusläns hembygdsförbund
och Bohusläns museums årsbok. Vol. pp. –.
Söderberg, A. . Metalliska spår efter gjuteriverksamhet. En skiss till en arkeologisk
fältmetod. Fornvännen. () pp. –.
Sørensen, M.L.S. . Reading Dress: The Construction of Social Categories and Iden-
tities in Bronze Age Europe. Journal of European Archaeology. Vol. () pp. –.
Sørensen, M.L .S. . Forankring af metallproduktion. Betydningen af bopladsfundene.
In: Boddum, S., Mikkelsen, M. & Terkildsen, N. (eds). Bronzestøbning i yngre bronze-
alders lokale kulturlandskab. Seminarrapport fra seminaret ‘Bronzestøbning i yngre
bronzealde rs lokale kulturland skab’ afholdt i Viborg, 6. marts 2014, pp. –. Viborg
& Holstebro: Viborg museum & Holstebro museum.
Sörma n, A. Gjutninge ns arenor: B ronshantve rkets rums liga, social a och politiska o r-
ganis ation i södra Skan dinavie n under bro nsålder n. Stockholm: St ockholm Universit y.
Sörman, A. . A Place for Casting? Late Bronze Age Metalworking in Southern Scandi-
navia and the Issue of Workshops. In: Brysbaert, A. & Gorgues, A. (eds). Artisans ver-
sus Nobility? Multiple Identities of Elites and ‘Commoners’ Viewed through the Lens
of Crafting from the Chalcolithic to the Iron Ages in Europe and the Mediterranean,
pp. –. Leiden: Sidestone Press.
Thedée n, S. . Grän ser i livet – g ränse r i landsk apet: Gene rationsrela tioner och r ituella
praktiker i södermanländska bronsålderslandskap. Stockholm: Stockholm University.
Theophilus [c. AD ] . On Divers Arts: The Foremost Medieval Treati se on Paint-
ing, Glassmaking and Metalwork. New York: Dover.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
184
Anna Sörman
Thrane, H. . En broncealdersboplads ved Jyderup Skov i Odsher red. Nationalmuseets
arbejdsmark. Vol. pp. –.
Thrane, H. . fynske broncealderlurer of nogle lerstumper. Fynske minde r. Vol.
pp. –.
Thrane, H. . ‘Figurinen’ fra Pryssgården. Et alternativt tolkningsforslag. Fornvän
-
nen. Vol. () pp. –.
Thrane, H. . Scandinavia. In: Fokkens, H. & Harding, A. (eds). The Oxford Hand-
book of the European Bronze Age, pp. –. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thrane, H. . Kirkebjergbopladsens støbeaktiviteter. In: Boddum, S., Mikkelsen, M.
& Terkildsen, N. (eds). Bronzestøbning i yngre bronzealders lokale kulturlandskab.
Semi narrappor t fra semina ret ‘Bronze støbning i yng re bronzeal ders lokale k ulturland -
skab’ afholf i Viborg, 6. Marts 2014, pp. –. Viborg & Holstebro: Viborg mu-
seum & Holstebro museum.
Tringham, R. . Engendered Places in Prehistory. Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal
of Feminist Geography. Vol. () pp. –.
Ullén, I. . The Power of Case-studies: Interpretation of a Late-Bronze-Age Settlement
in Central Sweden. Journal of European Archaeology. Vol. () pp. –.
Ullén , I. . Food Ethics, D omestication and Together ness: A Close-up St udy of the Rela-
tion of Horse and Dog to Man i n the Bronze Age Settlement of Apalle. C urrent Swedish
Archaeology. Vol. pp. –.
Ullén, I. (ed.). . Arkeologi på väg. Unde rsökningar för E18. Bron såldersbopl atsen vid
Apalle i Uppland. Uppland, Övergrans socken, Apalle, R AÄ 260. Stockholm: Riks-
antikvarieämbetet.
Ullén , I. a. Presentat ion av fyndmateria let. In: Ullé n, I. (ed.). Arkeologi på väg. Unde r-
sökningar för E18. Bronsåldersboplatsen vid Apalle i Uppland. Uppland, Övergrans
socken, Apalle RAÄ 260, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Ullén, I. b. Lager och hus. In: Ullén, I. (ed.). Arkeologi på väg. Undersökningar för
E18. Bronsåldersboplatsen vid Apalle i Uppland. Uppland, Övergrans socken, Apalle
RAÄ 260, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Ullén, I. c. Genomförande. In: Ullén, I. (ed.). Arkeologi på väg. Undersökningar för
E18. Bronsåldersboplatsen vid Apalle i Uppland. Uppland, Övergrans socken, Apalle
RAÄ 260, pp. –. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Vahlne, G. . The Workshop at Hallunda: A Presentation. In: Ambrosiani, B. (ed.). Die
Bronzezeit im Ostseegebiet : Ein Rapport der Kgl . Schwedischen Aka demie der Litera-
tur, Geschi chte und Alt ertum sforschung übe r das Julit a-Sy mposium 1986, pp. –.
Stockholm: Kungliga Vitterhets-, Historie- och Antikvitets Akademien.
Victor, H. . Med graven som granne: Om bronsålderns kulthus. Uppsala: Uppsala
University.
Weiler, E. . Brons- och järnålder: Tiden f.Kr.– e.Kr. In: Furingsten, A., Jon-
säter, M. & Weiler, E. (eds). Från intverkst ad till processindu stri: De först a 9000 åren
i Västs verige spegla de av UV Västs u ndersökni ngar 1968–1980, pp. –. Stockhol m:
Riksantikvarieämbetet.
Weiler, E. . Innovationsmiljöer i bronsålderns samhälle och idévärld: Kring ny
teknologi och begravningsritual i Västergötland. Umeå: Umeå University.
Wigren , S. . Sörmlän dsk brons åldersbygd : En studie a v tidiga cent rumbildn ingar date -
rade med termoluminescens. Stockholm: Stockholm University.
Wrang, L. . Bronze Age Workshops: A spects of Met allurgical Production in Souther n
Scandinavia. Unpublished Bachelor thesis. Dept. of Archaeology, Uppsala University.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
185
Casting in the Longhouse
Appendix 1. Sites with finds of casting debris in the
regions of Södermanland, Uppland and Östergötland
Name of site ID in the Historic
Environment Record
[Kulturmiljöregistret]
Province Bronze Age
casting finds
1Bornsjön L2015:3144 Södermanland Ye s
2Galtbacken L1985:6 339 Södermanland Yes
3Hallunda L2017:2 25 2,
L2017:2770
Södermanland Yes
4Hästhagen, Igelsta L2014:9132 Södermanland Yes
5Karleby/Gärtuna L2014:9017 Södermanland Ye s
6Vårberg L2016:201 Södermanland Possible
7Åbrunna L2014:3195 Södermanland Yes
8Åkra Grindstugan L1984:6240 Södermanland Ye s
9Alsta L1942:4396 Uppland Yes
10 Apalle L19 41: 9174 Uppland Yes
11 Bredåker L1941:964 Uppland Yes
12 Broby L194 4:8 824 Uppland Yes
13 Darsgärde L2016:8971 Uppland Possible
14 Fansta L194 4:8 922 Uppland Possible
15 Fullerö L1941:3266 Uppland Yes
16 Håga by L1941:314 8 ,
L1941:2979 ,
L1941:26 43
Uppland Yes
17 Hällby L1942:28 55 Uppland Yes
18 Kalvshälla L 2017:9131 Uppland Yes
19 Kyrsta L1941:5446,
L1941:4925
Uppland Possible
20 Kälvesta L2017:16 Uppland Possible
21 Lilla Härnevi L1943:83 92 Uppland Yes
22 Lunda, Lovö L2016:5217 Uppland Yes
23 Molnby L2014:2730,
L2014:2444
Uppland Yes
24 Nibble L1940:739 Uppland Yes
25 Nyvla L194 4:9169,
L1940: 8752,
L1940: 8753
Uppland Possible
26 Plaisiren/Vinsta L 2013:1279 Uppland Yes
28 Ryssgärdet L19 42:52 39 Uppland Yes
29 Skeke L1940:5093 Uppland Ye s
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
186
Anna Sörman
Name of site ID in the Historic
Environment Record
[Kulturmiljöregistret]
Province Bronze Age
casting finds
31 Skuttunge kyrka L1942:8118 Uppland Yes
32 Skälby L1941:7 74 6,
L1941:7019
Uppland Yes
33 Skämsta L19 42:53 66 Uppland Possible
34 Skölsta L1940:5542 Uppland Possible
35 Sommaränge skog L19 41: 6658 Uppland Possible
36 Stenvreten L1943:313 4? Uppland Possible
37 Trekanten L19 41:2504 Uppland Possible
38 Trollbo L1939:176 Uppland Ye s
39 Vrå L1943 :9161 Uppland Yes
40 Årby L19 42:213 8,
L1942:2268
Uppland Possible
41 Kallerstad L2 011:36 6 0 , Östergötland Yes
42 Pryssgården L2009:6074 Östergötland Yes
43 Rambodal L2009:9697 Östergötland Yes
44 Stora Sjögestad L2008:434 Östergötland Possible
45 Tallboda L2011:8 9 45,
L2011:8 3 41,
L2011:9 3 81 etc.
Östergötland Yes
46 Västra Bökestad L 2011:4147 Östergötland Yes
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
187
Casting in the Longhouse
Appendix 2. Distribution of casting debris in Apalle
Distribution of casting debris from different stratigraphic horizons (layer
types –) corresponding to occupation phases at the Apalle settlement
(Ullén ed. ). Stratigraphic information regarding casting nds was
extracted from the nd lists available in the CD Appendix of the excava-
tion report. The nd coordinates provided were digitalised, processed and
plotted in GIS software onto slightly modied versions of the phase plans
published in the report (Ullén a:gures –).
Figure A. Settlement phase (layer types and ), roughly dated to Early Bronze Age pe-
riods II–III. Grey-marked structures indicate the houses in use during this phase. Horizon-
tally striped areas indicate eld plots and the vertically striped circular feature is a mound
of re-cracked stones.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019
188
Anna Sörman
Figure A.. S ettlement pha se (layer type ), roughly dat ed to the transition be tween Early
to Late Bronze Age periods III–IV. Grey-marked structures indicate the houses in use dur-
ing this phase. The vertically striped circular feature is a mound of re-cracked stones.
Figure A.. Settlement phase (layer type ), roughly dated to Late Bronze Age period I V.
Grey-marked structures indicate the houses in use during this phase. The vertically striped
circular features are two mound of re-cracked stones. Areas marked in black to the south
are large back-lled pit systems. The circular building K is indicated at the top centre. It
is superimposed by another longhouse from the same phase.
CURRENT SWEDISH ARCHAEOLOGY VOL. 27 2019 | https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2019.08
189
Casting in the Longhouse
Figure A.. Settlement phase (layer type ), roughly dated to Late Bronze Age period
IV–V. Grey-marked structures indicate the houses in use during this phase. The vertically
striped circular feature is a mound of re-cracked stones.
Figure A
.. Settlement phase (layer type ), roughly dated to Late Bronze Age period
V–VI. Grey-marked structures indicate the houses in use during this phase. The vertically
striped c ircular feat ure is a mound of re -cracked stones. T he buildings i ndicated with nu m-
bers are longhouses with casting debris in the hearths (K and K) and oor layer (K).
