rock art studies in northernmost europe, 2000 - Joakim Goldhahn

2. ROCK ART STUDIES IN NORTHERNMOST 

EUROPE, 2000–2004 

Introduction 

This article tries to present the most important developments 

within rock art research in northernmost Europe during the 

first five years of the new millennium. During this time 

span more than 500 articles, reports, debates, monographs, 

anthologies and PhD dissertations have been published. 

I have published a more profound regional overview of 

this vast material elsewhere (Goldhahn 2006, see also 

Bradley et al. 2001; Sognnes 2003), and so I will not 

deal with this material here. Instead this brief outline will 

present some current themes and debates within this field 

of knowledge. 

In an enquiry about the present field of rock art research, 

I asked several colleagues about work that had made some 

impact on their research. The answer I received was rather 

consistent and it was argued that Chris Tilley’s (1991) work 

on Nämforsen, Klavs Randsborg’s (1993) thesis on the 

Kivik cairn and Flemming Kaul’s (1998, 2004a) work on 

Bronze Age (BA) religion were the most important source 

of inspiration. All colleagues also mentioned archaeological 

excavations as an important and significant contribution to 

an understanding of this field of study. 

The above-mentioned researchers represent different 

fields that have been explored during the beginning of 

the new millennium. Tilley’s influential work has led to a 

theoretical interest and awareness among Nordic rock art 

scholars. Randsborg’s work on the Kivik cairn has led to an 

insight that it is worthwhile to spend time in archives and to 

revisit various archaeological sites and finds with different 

theoretical perspectives. Randsborg’s interpretation of the 

monument in Kivik as a commemoration of a “Nordic 

Odysseus”, has led to an awakening of interest in longdistance 

contacts during the BA, sometimes with rather 

exotic cultures. Kaul’s thought-provoking research has led 

to an interest in different eschatological and cosmological 

aspects of BA societies. 

Joakim Goldhahn 

Thoughts on interpretation 

When we deal with the meaning and significance of rock 

art, which have been discussed more thoroughly by several 

researchers (see Helskog 2001; Goldhahn 2002a, 2005a, 

2005f; Vogt 2002, 2006; Wahlgren 2002; Fredell 2003a; 

Kaleas 2004; Kaul 1998, 2004a; Nordenborg Myhre 

2004), no safe paths are to be found. Different theoretical 

perspectives provide different answers, and leave us with 

different kinds of pictures of reality (e.g. Tilley 1991). 

From historical and anthropological case studies, we have 

now learned that both the rock art sites themselves as well 

as specific images can signify different kinds of meanings 

to different people, genders and other social identities 

(e.g. Morphy 1991; Lewis-Williams 2001; Whitley 2000; 

Goldhahn 2004). These circumstances leave us with both 

positive and negative prerequisites when we try to study 

rock art traditions that lack this kind of informed knowledge 

(e.g. Chippindale 2001; Bradley 2002). 

In Scandinavia there is a long tradition of gender critical 

studies, reaching back to the 1970s (Sørensen 2000). This 

has led to an awareness of contemporary societies’ influence 

and impact on our interpretations, especially those aspects 

that concern the gender politics of the past and present 

(Engelstad 2001; Mandt 2001, 2002). This awareness also 

includes the delicate question about how research history 

affects our contemporary understanding of the phenomenon 

we call rock art (Goldhahn 2005e). 

The interpretation of rock art has its epistemological 

problems, and possibilities, which also include the use 

of other researchers’ documentation. Still, it is far too 

common to find interpretations based on century-old 

documents, despite the fact that there are more accurate 

and sound ones to consult. For instance the famous cairn 

in Kivik is sometimes discussed and interpreted through 

the use of a rather treacherous documentation made in 

the later 19th century. Sometimes it is obvious that the

esearcher has never visited the sites and images she or 

he is “investigating”. This habit is very dubious, not least 

because most people tend to see different things on the 

same panel (see Nordbladh 1981; Mandt 1991: 81; Sognnes 

2001b; Olofsson 2004 for striking examples). 

Another problem concerning the interpretation of rock 

art is that it was made over a vast time span. The oldest 

rock art in northernmost Europe dates to the Mesolithic, 

and the latest was made (Lundin 1999; Edgren 2000; 

Innselset 2005; Vogt 2001) and used (Grundberg 2000; 

Bengtsson 2004a: 78–84) in modern times. During this 

vast time span both the landscape and the societies that 

dwelt in them altered considerably, which means that the 

rock art was made and used in several different social and 

ideological contexts (e.g. Mandt 2005). Consequently, the 

understandings and meanings of the rock art ought to have 

altered in a similar way (see Helskog 2000; Engelstad 

2001; Wahlgren 2002 for some rare attempts to exemplify 

this). 

To make this picture even more tantalizing, we find 

several well distinguished regional traits within one and the 

same rock art tradition; for instance, the well discussed BA 

rock art in Stjørdal and Østfold in Norway, and Bohuslän 

in Sweden, has a broader geographical distribution than 

the contemporary rock art in Rogaland, Scania, Småland, 

Uppland, Södermanland and Östergötland, which is more 

concentrated in distinct core areas. How these very obvious 

regional differences could and/or should be understood has 

not been discussed since Mats P Malmer’s “chorological 

study” of 1981 (but see Skoglund 2005 for a theoretical 

discussion). 

These considerations become even more challenging 

when we discover that it is often the same theoretical 

framework that is used to study all these diverse economic, 

social and ideological settings, from the hunter-gatherer 

bands of the Mesolithic and Neolithic, through the 

chiefdoms of BA societies, to historical and even modern 

times. Is this wise? Why are we not more surprised that 

our interpretations of the meaning and significance of these 

rather different rock art traditions are so analogous and 

repetitive? 

After these short critical reflections I will now turn to 

describing some of the current trends and traditions within 

rock art research in northernmost Europe. 

Enigmatic images 

Most rock art studies are still very focused on different 

images and their connotations in the everyday world. A 

ship is mostly interpreted as – a ship. Even though several 

researchers have raised their voices to criticise this rather 

functionalistic and simplistic type of interpretation (e.g. 

Walderhaug 2000; Wahlgren 2002; Goldhahn 2005f), most 

rock art studies are still very heavily dependent on the 

images and their referents, such as: 

2. Rock Art Studies in Northernmost Europe, 2000–2004 17 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Adorants and voltigeurs (Fuglestvedt 1999; Bengtsson, 

N. 2001; Winter 2005); 

Bears (Helskog 1999, 2004); 

Boats and/or ships (Kaul 1998, 2003a, 2004a, 2004b; 

2005; Thedéen 2003; Ballard et al. 2004; Østmo 2003, 

2005a; see also Skoglund 2005); 

Boats and/or ships and travels (Kvalø 2004; Kristiansen 

2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b; Larsson 2002; Ling 2004, 

2005; Nordenborg Myhre 2004; Berntsson 2005; 

Ericsson 2005; Kristiansen and Larsson 2005; Østmo 

2005a); 

Bulls (Nistad 2005); 

Capes (Goldhahn 2005f: 65–126); 

Cup marks (Grundberg 2000; Wahlgren 2002; 

Bengtsson 2004a; Innselset 2005); 

Elks (Lindgren 2001, 2002; Lofterud 2002; Sognnes 

2002b); 

Foot soles (Bradley 1999; Coles 1999; Wahlgren 2002; 

Tilley 2004; Nilsen 2005; Simonsen and Vogt 2005; 

Skoglund 2005, 2006); 

Hieros-Gamos (Fari 2003); 

Historic rock art and historical use of rock art (Lundin 

1999; Edgren 2000; Grundberg 2000; Bengtsson 

2004a); 

Horses (Kaul 1998, 2004a, 2004b; Goldhahn 1999a; 

2000); 

Human beings (Engelstad 2001; Mandt 2001, 2002; 

Mulk and Bayliss-Smith 2001, 2006; Andersson and 

Toreld 2003; Fredell 2003a, 2004b; Karlsson 2005; 

Skogstrand 2005; Winter 2005); 

Killer whales (Helberg 2001); 

Ploughs and plough scenes (Bradley 2005: 81–88); 

Processions (Andersson 2001; Coles 2003a; Mandt 

and Lødøen 2005: 207–219); 

Shields (Coles 2001a); 

Snakes (Kaul 1998, 2004a, 2004b; Autio 2000: 

188–200; Mandt 2000; Huggert 2002); 

Sun motifs and sun-crosses (Kaul 1998, 2000, 2002, 

2004a; 2004b; Forsberg and Walderhaug Sætersdal 

2004); 

Wagons (Coles 2002; Larsson 2004; Nilsson 2005; 

Wrigglesworth 2005); 

Etcetera. 

Among other topics that have been discussed at some 

length we find the use of fire and explicit fire damage 

to rock art panels in prehistory (Widholm 1998, 2001; 

Bengtsson 2004a, 2004b; Melheim 2001, 2004; Wahlgren 

2002; Fredell 2003b, 2004c; Kaliff and Oestigaard 2004; 

Goldhahn 2005c; Kaliff 2005); questions of how different 

gestures and scenes should be interpreted (Helskog 1999, 

2004; Fredell 2003a, 2004a, 2004b; Wahlgren 2002, 2004), 

and how different images were related to BA religion and 

cosmology (e.g. Kaul 1998, 2004a; Goldhahn 1999a, 2005f; 

Wahlgren 2002; Fredell 2003a; Kristiansen 2004, 2005b; 

Kristiansen and Larsson 2005).

18 

Gender 

Gender studies have a long history within Scandinavian 

archaeology (Sørensen 2000; e.g. Mandt 1986, 1987, 1995). 

Even though the early studies have been criticised (e.g. 

Yates 1993), they managed to establish this perspective 

as an important part of Scandinavian rock art research, 

not least by raising an awareness of the andocentric biases 

within this field (see Goldhahn 1999b; Arwill-Nordbladh 

2001; Mandt 2001, 2002). 

During the last few years several important articles have 

been published discussing gender-related issues: including 

different landscape perspectives (Mandt 1998, 2001, 2002; 

Olsrud 2001; Thedéen 2004); interpretation of human 

figures (Fuglestvedt 1999; Engelstad 2001; Karlsson 2005, 

cf. Fredell 2003a, 2004b); the construction of manhood 

during the BA (Skogstrand 2005, also Yates 1993), and 

how different life-course rituals could be related to this 

medium (Thedéen 2003, 2004; Wahlgren 2002; Nilsen 

2005). A common thread in these perspectives is that a 

person’s gender is thought to be constructed and changing 

during a person’s life (Goldhahn 2004). 

“Digging rock art” 

One of the best ways to contextualise the images is to 

investigate them by traditional archaeological methods with 

the goal of trying to grasp some traces of the ceremonies 

and rituals that we like to think were related to this medium. 

During the last few years this method has been widely used, 

including excavations in caves (Økland 2000; Lindgren 

2004) and the areas below panels with paintings (Taskinen 

2000; Lindgren 2004; Hansson 2005) and carvings (Lødøen 

2001a, 2001b, 2003; Lindgren 2004; Mandt and Lødøen 

2005) associated with the northern traditions, as well as 

different panels associated with pecked engravings from the 

southern BA traditions (Lødøen 2000; Bengtsson 2004a; 

Bengtsson et al. 2005; Kaul et al. 2005). 

Broadly speaking the excavated rock art sites associated 

with the northern traditions have been more successful in 

meeting our expectations. Here we shall just mention the 

Mesolithic huts and the hammerstone found at Vingen in 

western Norway (Lødøen 2003; Mandt and Lødøen 2005: 

141); traces of production of red ochre at Nämforsen and 

the finds of similar red ochre underneath the paintings at 

the entrance of the artificial cave at Högberget III some 60 

km away (Lindgren 2004); the arrowheads that had been 

shot at the painted animals at Flatruet in northern Sweden 

(Hansson 2005), and the anthropomorphic amber pendants 

and arrowheads of slate and quartzite found at the bottom 

of the lake beneath the Astuvansalmi panels in Finland 

(Taskinen 2000: 28). 

The material found at the engraved sites associated with 

the southern BA traditions, including stone pavements, 

smashed pots, quartzes, flint, charcoal, burnt clay, etc. (see 

Bengtsson 2004a: 103–130), has been harder to grasp. In 


Bohuslän more than 15 sites have now been investigated, 

and an interesting pattern has started to emerge: smaller 

and more “simple” rock art sites, dominated by cup marks, 

seem to produce “more and richer finds”, than “larger and 

more complex” sites that are dominated by figurative motifs 

(ships, humans, animals, sun crosses, etc.). The latter sites 

are described as “empty and without any finds” (Bengtsson 

et al. 2005). How this pattern should be interpreted is not 

clear at the moment. Bengtsson (2004c) suggests that the 

former less complex sites were associated with “common 

people” and offerings conducted at their settlements, and 

the latter with the “elites” – i.e. chiefs and/or warriors (a 

comparable hierarchical pattern of rock art sites in Uppland 

has been interpreted in a similar way by Coles 2000: 

109–121). 

These interpretations are highly interesting but, if we 

consider the results of more than 20 years of large-scale 

contract archaeology, we soon discover that we have to 

alter our perspectives. First and foremost, in different 

areas of Scandinavia it has been possible to link cup mark 

sites to contemporary BA settlements, but so far figurative 

images or complex panels are missing. The latter seem 

to be found about 400–800 m away from contemporary 

settlements (Goldhahn 2006: 94–98). The described pattern 

from Bohuslän fits very well with some of the results of 

Wahlgren’s (2002) profound study of the rock art of eastern 

Östergötland in southeast Sweden, where figurative images 

on complex panels tend to be pecked much more deeply 

than cup marks. On less complex sites cup marks are 

usually pecked more deeply than figurative images. The 

same pattern has been found in Askum parish in Bohuslän 

(Bengtsson 2004a: 61–84). Wahlgren suggests that this 

pattern is an outcome of different uses and re-peckings 

of the images, when the images have been “switched on 

and off” in connection with different life-course rituals 

(Wahlgren 2004). 

Seen from this perspective, the described pattern from 

the excavations can be interpreted as a result of different 

uses of different rock art images and sites. At settlements, 

or nearby, different cup marks were used for smaller 

offerings and rituals, leaving traces of pots, burnt clay, 

etcetera, but at larger, more complex sites, the production 

and re-production of rock art, switching images on and 

off, were the main purposes for attending these places. 

Maybe the latter sites were associated with some kind of 

ancestral knowledge, though they seem to be managed 

and kept clean. Maybe these panels were associated with 

esoteric knowledge and bounded by a taboo against leaving 

traces from more deadly human beings, only to be visited 

at certain times, and in case of certain specific ceremonies 

and rituals. This interpretation is in line with the interesting 

results of the investigation of the largest rock art site on 

the island of Bornholm, Madsebakke, which seems to 

have been fenced off, or surrounded by a massive wooden 

palisade, during the BA (Kaul et al. 2005).

Picturing the dead 

One particular feature of the BA rock art tradition in this 

part of the world is that rock art images were sometimes 

made during different ceremonies and rituals associated 

with death and burials. Even after 3300 years, many of 

them were described as “freshly made” when they were 

discovered (e.g. Goldhahn 1999a). The four largest finds of 

rock art in different burials have all been revisited during 

the last few years, including the Kivik cairn (Randsborg 

1993; see also Kristiansen 2004, 2005a, 2005b; Kaul 2004a: 

173–180; Goldhahn 2005d, 2005e, 2005f; Kristiansen and 

Larsson 2005); the Sagaholm barrow (Goldhahn 1999a, 

also Kaul 2004a); the Hjortekorg cairn (Widholm 1998, 

2001; also Bengtsson 2004a; Fredell 2003a; Goldhahn 

2005c) and Mjeltehaugen (Linge 2004, 2005; also Mandt 

and Lødøen 2005: 123–133). Besides these case studies, 

Syvertsen (2002, 2003, 2005) has analysed the portable 

burial slabs from Rogaland (also Nordenborg Myhre 2004), 

while Kaul (2004a) has discussed the finds that appeared 

in Denmark after Glob’s (1969) important survey from 

the late 1960s. Other important finds from different parts 

of Scandinavia are discussed elsewhere (see Goldhahn 

2006: 103–107). 

The relationship between rock art and burials is also 

very evident through their placing in the landscape. In 

contemporary Sweden 973 out of 6000 rock art sites (about 

15,000 are known) are found within 15 m of prehistoric 

remains that are interpreted as grave structures – about 18 

percent (see Widholm 1998: 80–93 for a discussion). In 

western Norway this relationship is very evident (Fig. 2.1), 

and it has been discussed and analysed by Wrigglesworth 

(2000, 2002, 2005; also Mandt and Lødøen 2005: 173– 

181). 

Landscapes and mindscapes 

One of the most tangible qualities of rock art is that it 

is usually found where it was made. This phenomenon 

has led to a number of landscape analyses, lately under 

the influence of anthropological and phenomenological 

perspectives (e.g. Tilley 1994; Bender 2006) and a number 

of thought-provoking analyses have been presented (see 

Bradley 1997, 2000; Nash 2000; Helskog 2001; Lewis- 

Williams 2002a; Nash and Chippindale 2002; Chippindale 

and Nash 2004). 

In northernmost Europe, landscape analysis has 

traditionally been based on the distribution of different 

prehistoric remains, such as rock art, cairns and stone 

settings (graves), heaps of fire-cracked stones, settlements, 

hunting pits, hoards, stray finds, etc. (e.g. Almgren 1927; 

see Mandt 1972, 1991; Kjellén and Hyenstrand 1977; 

Nordbladh 1980; Larsson 1986; Bertilsson 1987). This 

is also the case during the period in question here (see 

Bertilsson 2000b; Coles 2000, 2004a, 2005a; Forsberg 

2000; Wrigglesworth 2000, 2002; Groseth 2001; Sognnes 


Fig. 2.1. Cairns, sea and rock art (on the panel inbetween) at 

Unneset in West-Norway. Photo: Joakim Goldhahn. 

2001a, 2003b; Andersson 2002; Kare 2002; Nord Paulsson 

2002; Ramqvist 2002a; 2003; Eriksen 2003; Bengtsson 

2004a, 2004c; Heimann 2005; Kaul et al. 2005; Skoglund 

2005), but we also find studies which are more influenced 

by the international theoretical discourse. Several of the 

latter studies have tried to link the use of the landscape to 

the mythology and cosmology of different societies, both 

within the northern traditions (Helskog 1999, 2004; Bolin 

2000; Bradley 2000; Lahelma 2000, 2005; Lindgren 2001, 

2002; Fandén 2002; Goldhahn 2002b; Herva and Ikäheimo 

2002: Nash 2002, 2004; Sognnes 2002b; Viste 2004), 

and those found in the south (Widholm 1998; Sognnes 

2000a, 2002a; Bradley et al. 2002; Thedéen 2003, 2004; 

Wahlgren 2002; Eriksen 2003; Syvertsen 2003; Bengtsson 

2004a; Kristiansen 2005a). Gjerde (2002) has analysed the 

different landscape perceptions between these traditions 

from a diachronic perspective. 

One crucial variable to consider in any landscape 

analysis is how the landscape has changed since the rock 

art was made (Sognnes 2001a; Gjerde 2002; Helskog 

2004; Engelmark and Larsson 2005). In the northern parts 

of Europe, the shore displacement after the last glacial is 

very evident and important to consider (see Helskog 1999, 

2004; Ramstad 2000; Sognnes 2001a, 2003a; Bradley and 

Phillips 2004; Coles 2004a, 2005a; Ling 2004, 2005, 2006; 

Seitsonen 2004), but this fact has often been neglected. 

For instance, the “agrarian rock art” from Bohuslän (e.g. 

Almgren 1927; see Nordbladh 1980; Bertilsson 1987; 

Fredell 2003a; Bengtsson 2004a; Vogt 2006), nowadays

20 

seems to have been “maritime” (Ling 2004, 2005, 2006; 

Coles 2005a; also Nordenborg Myhre 2004). 

Among the most challenging landscape analyses we find 

questions about how the quality of different landscapes 

attracted the placing of images (Helskog 1999, 2004; 

Bradley 2000; Økland 2000; Wrigglesworth 2000, 2002, 

2005; Mandt 2001; Olsrud 2001; Bradley et al. 2002; Viste 

2004; Bradley and Nordenborg Myhre 2005; Slinning 

2005), such as its acoustic qualities (Goldhahn 2002b); 

influences from post-colonial theory such as Homi K. 

Bahbah’s thoughts about “the third space” (Nordenborg 

Myhre 2003, 2004; Ling 2004, 2005); different genderoriented 

analyses and interpretations (Mandt 1998, 2001, 

2002; Olsrud 2001); and Chris Tilley’s never-ending 

phenomenological endeavour (Tilley 1999, 2004). 

Some researchers are openly critical of traditional 

landscape analysis, mostly because they are so obsessed 

with “masculine peaks” and other macro perspectives of 

the landscape (e.g. Bertilsson 2000b; Bradley 2000; Mandt 

2001, 2002; Olsrud 2001; Viste 2004), such as different 

studies of prehistoric “territories” (e.g. Sognnes 2001a; 

Ramqvist 2002a, 2003), and the division between “sacred 

and secular” phenomena (e.g. Bradley 2000; Goldhahn 

2000; Sognnes 2000; Vogt 2000; Syvertsen 2003). George 

Blundell (2004: 79–80) has described these kinds of 


Fig. 2.2. The mythology of the re-incarnated sun as shown in the iconography on different razors from Denmark (after Kaul 

2000). 

interpretation as “empathetic traps”, which seem to belong 

to a modernistic world-view founded in the romantic era 

of the 19th century (also Walderhaug Sætersdal 2004: 

195–197). 

In traditional societies these kinds of landscape features 

are sometimes very important, but just as often cracks or 

similar features in a panel’s micro-landscape are equally 

important and incorporated in different compositions. 

Nature and culture, as well as sacred and profane, seem 

to be an innovation of the modern era (Ingold 2000). 

How these kinds of insights should be addressed and 

incorporated in the study of the rock art traditions of 

northernmost Europe is still waiting to be explored (but 

see Wahlgren 1998; Helskog 1999, 2004; Wrigglesworth 

2000: 108, 128–129; Bradley 2002; Bradley et al. 2002; 

Goldhahn 2002b, 2005b; Nash 2002, 2004; Nilsen 2005 

for some attempts). 

Religions and rituals 

During the last few years a consensus has been reached 

that the BA religion in Southern Scandinavia was centred 

on the annual and daily birth and re-birth of the sun. This 

interpretation has been considerably strengthened by the 

discovery of the fascinating Nebra disc (Meller 2004), and

the important iconographic studies of ships on bronze razors 

by Flemming Kaul (1998, 2000, 2002, 2003b, 2004a). 

The iconic ships on the razors are related to several other 

mythological beings, and Kaul has used this iconology to 

reconstruct BA cosmology (Fig. 2.2): 

“1: Sunrise. The fish pulls the rising sun up from 

the night-ship to the morning ship. 2: For a while, 

the fish was allowed to sail on with the ship. 3: The 

fish is to be devoured by a bird of prey. Stylized 

sun-horses (S-figures) are ready to fetch the sun. 

4: Two sun-horses are about to pull the sun from 

the ship. 5: At noon the sun-horse has collected the 

sun from the ship. 6: In the afternoon the sun-horse 

lands with the sun on the sun-ship. 7: Some time 

after the sun-horse has landed, the sun is taken 

over by the snake from the afternoon-ship. 8: The 

snake is concealing the sun in its spiral curls. It 


Fig. 2.3. The ship chronology presented by Kaul showing the most important traits during the Bronze Age. This chronology was 

later modified by Kaul (et al. 2005) working with the ship depictions from Bornholm, and Ling (2006) working in Bohuslän. 

will soon lead the sun down under the horizon. 9: 

Two night-ships sailing towards left. The sun is not 

visible, extinguished and dark on its voyage through 

the underworld. 10: A night ship followed by a fish 

swimming to the left. The fish is ready to fulfil its 

task at sunrise. The wheel has come full circle.” 

(Kaul 2004c: 131) 

Kaul (2004a) has also discussed how this cosmology 

was related to the eschatology of the human soul (cf. 

Kaliff 1997; Goldhahn 1999a; Melheim 2001, 2004; 

Kaliff and Oestigaard 2004; Kristiansen and Larsson 

2005). Another equally important outcome of this study 

is that a reliable ship chronology has been established for 

southern Scandinavia (Fig. 2.3), a chronology that was 

later confirmed and redefined by Ling using the shoredisplacement 

phenomenon in Bohuslän (Ling 2006).

22 

Alternative interpretations of the BA world-view are absent, 

but there is still some discussion about the interpretation 

of the human beings depicted on the razors; are they 

humans conducting different ceremonies (Kaul 1998), or 

gods related to the Indo-European pantheon (Odner 2000; 

Larsson 2000; Fari 2003; Fredell 2003a; Kristiansen and 

Larsson 2005; Nistad 2005), or should we try to find other 

ways to understand these figures? 

According to Kaul’s (2004a) synthesis, religious 

concepts were rather constant during the entire BA (1600 

to 500 cal. BC). During this timespan somewhat intense 

and important changes took place within the societies in 

southern Scandinavia, such as the shift from inhumation 

to cremation (Kaliff 1997; Goldhahn 1999a; Melheim 

2001, 2004). Other important changes occurred within 

the economic and agricultural spheres (Welinder 1998; 

Ethelberg et al. 2000; Myhre and Øye 2002), offerings and 

deposits of bronze items (Larsson 1986; Johansen 1993; 

Jensen 1997), changes in the use of rock art (Wahlgren 

2002); house building traditions (Borna-Ahlkvist 2002), 

etc. We also witness the expression of regional identities 

and cultural traits (cf. Skoglund 2005). 

These contrasts and the contradictions between different 

spheres in the “same” societies are rather hard to grasp, at 

least for me, but I think there is a great potential for our 

understanding of the rock art phenomenon if we try to 

relate them to each other. 

By excavating different rock art sites, and relating the 

findings to the newly established rock art chronology, it 

has become clear that several of the sites belonging to the 

southern traditions were used over a vast timespan. Some 

were in use for over a thousand years (Lødøen 2000; 

Bengtsson 2004a; Munkenberg 2004; Bengtsson et al. 

2005). Wahlgren (2002, 2004) has reached the same results 

by analysing the rate and depth of the pecked images, 

their combinations and their placement in the landscape. 

This means that the same panels were used by several 

generations (30 to 50) of human beings for recurring 

ceremonies and rituals. 

Nowadays, there seems to be a general consensus 

that rock art was related to the ritual spheres of society. 

Sometimes this interpretation is taken for granted and not 

demonstrated by any archaeological analysis. In this context 

Marit Wold (2005: 526, 527) has presented an important 

critique, arguing that a vaguely defined notion such as 

“ritual” tends to lose much of its interpretative potential. 

She urges us to try and define what kind of rituals we have in 

mind; crisis rituals (such as war, sickness, natural disasters, 

death), transitional and life course rituals (birth, initiation, 

gender, weddings, death), or calendar rituals (annual rituals 

associated with agriculture, herding, different games and 

plants, the movement of the sun and moon), etc. 

Personally I welcome this critique and some recent 

analyses which try to detect different kinds of rituals in their 

interpretations of rock art. Here we shall just mention those 

which dealt with images of foot prints. Many of the latter 


are rather small, often only 15 to 26 cm in length. If they 

depicted “real” feet these rock images would correspond to 

sizes 23–38 in Sweden, which are usually found on children 

or young teenagers. This is a rather widespread pattern that 

has been documented in several parts of Scandinavia, such 

as Östergötland (Wahlgren 2002: 223–229) and Kronoberg 

(Skoglund 2005: 217–222) in Sweden, and Trøndelag in 

Norway (Nilsen 2005: 95–99; cf. Bradley 1999; Coles 

1999; Thedéen 2004; Tilley 2004). 

This hypothesis can hardly be proved, but if we accept 

it as a starting point it could be interpreted as traces of 

different initiation ceremonies when young people started 

their journey to adolescence. Maybe the foot prints were 

pecked as a confirmation of their newly reached status and 

as insignia of their insight into the esoteric knowledge that 

was associated with these places and media (see Goldhahn 

2004)? 

Shamanism and altered states of consciousness 

We find fewer analyses of the northern traditions associated 

with the Mesolithic and Neolithic hunter-gatherers that use 

the concept of religion (but see Helskog 1999; Lindgren 

2001). Instead these studies are more often influenced by 

different “shamanistic” interpretations (Price 2001). Most 

of these studies take as their starting point the ethnology 

and history of religion of the Sámi people (Helskog 1999, 

2004; Autio 2000; Fandén 2002; Lindgren 2001, 2002; 

Price 2001; Slinning 2005), or related groups in Siberia 

(Tilley 1991; Shumkin 2000; Price 2001; Lofterud 2002; 

Jordan 2003, 2004). In Finland, the Kalevala, compiled in 

the 19th century, has been a similar source of inspiration 

(Siikala 2002). Several researchers have also been inspired 

by anthropological studies from different parts of the world, 

as well as the “neuropsychological model” introduced by 

Lewis-Williams and Dowson in 1988 (e.g. Grønnesby 

1998; Lahelma 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005; Goldhahn 2002b; 

Viste 2004). 

These shamanistic interpretations have aroused some 

severe criticism during the last few years (e.g. Carpelan 

2000; Bahn 2001; Diethelm and Diethelm 2001), and in 

particular the Lewis-Williams/Dowson model has been put 

under fire (cf. Helvenston and Bahn 2003, 2004; Clottes 

2004; Lewis-Williams 2004; Pearce 2004; Wilson 2004; 

Blundell 2004). Even though Lewis-Williams (2002a) has 

lately developed some different opinions about his model, 

these disagreements and debates have, strangely enough, 

not left any documented traces within the rock art research 

communities in the north. 

One of the problems with these interpretations, according 

to my altered state of reality, is that the shamanistic 

interpretations often tend to end where they ought to start. 

Shamanism is not a religion per se, but an ecstatic technique 

to reach different alternative states of consciousness (e.g. 

Hultkrantz; cf. Price 2001; Ingold 2000; Lewis-Williams 

2002a). To strengthen these interpretations, it is not only

necessary to argue about what purpose and function the 

rock art had in these different contexts, we also need to 

grasp a wider understanding of the world views of these 

societies. 

A recent trend that has not yet left any tangible traces in 

print is a revitalisation of hunting magic as an interpretative 

tool. The evolutionary and functionalistic perspective that 

was formulated by researchers such as Reinach (1903) and 

Frazer (1911) certainly had its flaws (e.g. Tilley 1991), 

but maybe it is time to reconsider these issues with fresh 

and open minds (see Helberg 2001 for a discussion). Is it 

probable, or even conceivable, that several thousand years 

of hunter-gatherer societies would not use this medium to 

try to ensure and provide for their subsistence? My personal 

answer is no, and I think it may be sensible to revisit older 

interpretations put forward by prominent scholars such as 

Hallström (1938, 1960) and Gjessing (1932, 1936), as well 

as consult recent international studies that deal with this 

issue (e.g. Ingold 2000; Lewis-Williams 2002b; Jordan 

2003, 2004; Thackeray 2005; Keyser and Whitley 2006). 

Neo-Diffusionism 

One of the most debated trends within rock art research 

during the last couple of years can best be described as 

a revitalisation of diffusion to explain cultural evolution, 

manifested in the international bestseller The rise of Bronze 

Age Society. Travels, transmission and transformations by 

Kristian Kristiansen and Thomas B. Larsson (2005). This 

influential study has served as a guideline and inspiration 

for several studies (Nordbladh 2001; Winter 2001, 2005; 

Fari 2003; Sjöholm 2003; Nistad 2005). Sometimes this 

interest is combined with the new allure of the “Indo- 

European question” and the use of early written sources to 

explain different rock art images (e.g. Østmo 1997; Odner 

2000; Walderhaug Sætersdal and Prescott 2001; Fredell 

2003a; Kristiansen 2004, 2005a, 2005b). 

One of the inspirations behind these studies is Klavs 

Randsborg’s (1993) influential analyses of the Kivik cairn 

in Scania. Randsborg interprets this 75 m broad and 7 m 

high cairn in terms of a “Nordic pyramid”, and suggests 

that the buried chief should be understood as a counterpart 

of the most famous voyager of this time – Odysseus (also 

Larsson 2002; Kristiansen 2004, 2005a, 2005b). This 

interpretation has a long research history in Scandinavia 

(see Christensson 2005; Goldhahn 2005e) and is based 

on the similarities between the decorated slabs in Kivik 

and the stela from Grave circle B in Mycenae (Randsborg 

1993). Kristiansen (2004: 116) accords the deceased chief 

a rather important role in the invention of the whole BA 

in this part of the world: 

“Just like Ulysses, the Nordic chief that voyaged 

all the way to the Mediterranean, who saw and 

understood the new and strange, was already a 

legend by the time he returned home. This status 

was enhanced if he had with him never before seen 


curiosities such as chariots, knowledge of new 

casting techniques, of wagon and ship building, 

perhaps even the foreign craftspeople themselves, 

as well as the stories about far-off settlements and 

gods, in addition to which he could even draw or 

carve. One such man was the chief of Kivik”. 

Ex Oriente Lux! One of the problems with this imaginative 

interpretation is that the bones from the Kivik cist seem 

to belong to two different youngsters under the age of 

15, dated to the 14th century cal. BC (Goldhahn 2005d, 

2005e). Another problem is that it is not very clear why 

contact with the Mediterranean world should form and 

shape the South-Scandinavian BA. Contacts with other 

areas, such as the British Isles (cf. Fett and Fett 1977; 

Bradley 1997), Ireland (Andersson Ambrosiani 1997), 

and the rest of western, eastern and northern Europe are 

obviously neglected in this scenario. Another problem is 

epistemological in nature, since it is not very clear why 

similar forms and styles between artifacts from different 

parts of Europe should be understood as the results of 

direct contacts (Larsson 2002; Kristiansen and Larsson 

2005). Several researchers have been rather critical of 

such assumptions (e.g. Walderhaug 2000; Wahlgren 2002; 

Thedéen 2003, 2004; Ericsson 2005). The most severe 

criticisms are addressed by Sjögren (2005) who discusses 

the proclaimed Minoan influences on North-European rock 

art images and traditions. Being a classical archaeologist 

herself, Sjögren is rather sceptical of such interpretations, 

and she argues that they fail to explain 1) the differences 

between the use of images in these different contexts and 

media; 2) the rather different meanings that were attached 

to the same motifs within the Minoan culture; and 3) 

how the transmission and transformation of the Minoan 

world-view were made across Europe (cf. Kristiansen and 

Larsson 2005). 

I am quite sure that this discussion will continue… 

Conservation and management 

As Gro Mandt (1992) and Jarl Nordbladh (2004a: 149) 

have noted before, insights about the diminishing of 

rock art are an old phenomenon in Scandinavia, reaching 

back to the birth of the modern era. During the last few 

decades, several large projects have been launched to try 

to save the rock art for coming generations; both local and 

regional (Høgestøl et al. 1999; Hygen and Bengtsson 2000; 

Kallhovd and Magnusson 2000; Vogt 2000; Bergvall and 

George 2001; Høgestøl 2002; Torseth et al. 2001), national 

(Bertilsson, C. 2000; Löfvendal 2000; Nordsted 2000; 

Hygen 2000; Sognnes 2000b; Helliksen and Holm-Olsen 

2001; Milstreu 2004a; Swantesson 2005), and international 

initiatives (Bertilsson 2000a, 2000c, 2001, 2004a, 2004b; 

Bertilsson and Fredell 2003; Bertilsson and McDermott 

2004a, 20004b; Milstreu 2005) are distinguished. All these 

attempts to save the rock art must of course be considered

24 

to be of great importance, and some very important tasks 

have indeed been accomplished, but we still lack any 

insightful overview of the results and conclusions of 

these projects. Sometimes one has the impression that the 

researcher seems more eager to attain the financial benefits 

that come with these projects, than to provide the rest of 

the research community with the outcome of these wellmeaning 

efforts. 

As a consequence, several critical voices have been 

raised against the goals, means and results of these 

projects (Walderhaug 1998; Walderhaug and Walderhaug 

1998; Vänskä 2000; Walderhaug Sætersdal 2000). Sverre 

Bakkevig (2004) has actually argued that rock art has 

received more damage than benefit from our well-meaning 

efforts to save it. We might ask what good does it do 

to put concrete into cracks to try to stop the rock from 

exfoliating? And, maybe more importantly, what long-term 

consequences are we creating by doing this? Until we have 

reached some profound conclusions about what to do, and 

why – instead of making bad worse – Bakkevig humbly 

suggests that we ought to have as little impact on the rock 

art and its environment as we possibly can (for comments 

see Bjelland 2005; Goldhahn 2005c; Sognnes 2005; and 

Bakkevig 2005 for a reply). 

A similar critique has been put forward by Gustafsson 

and Karlsson (2004) of the tradition of painting the rock 

engravings in Scandinavia for public display, a tradition 

that certainly works against better knowledge. Gustafsson 

and Karlsson even doubt that the painted engravings in 

the World Heritage Area of Tanum qualify to be called 

“authentic”. Whatever that is… 

Other recent debates concerning these issues have dealt 

with the lack of central archives for rock art documentations 

in the Scandinavian countries and the lack of management 

of different rock art site (Coles 2004c, 2005b; Bertilsson 

2005; cf. Hygen 2003). 

Documentation 

Archaeology in general and rock art research in particular 

make their own sources of information through their 

interaction and interpretation of the phenomena they 

study. This makes documentation a crucial and important 

task of our discipline. Throughout the history of rock 

art research we can see how different technologies have 

changed our understanding and altered our perception of 

the phenomena we study. Different technologies – such 

as rubbings, painting the pictures (sic), photography, 

video scanning, tracing, excavation, etc. – also give rather 

different perspectives on the phenomenon we call rock art. 

Not surprisingly we find that different researchers also 

interpret different traces in different ways (Nordbladh 

1981; Mandt 1991: 81; Sognnes 2001b; Olofsson 2004). 

This makes the praxis of documentation and the history 

of documentation an important and often overlooked part 

of rock art research. 


This situation makes rock art research a dynamic and 

interesting field of archaeology, not least because new 

documentation of a panel often results in new images being 

detected. New discoveries constantly add new information, 

which ought to make researchers in other disciplines, such 

as historians of religion, etc., sick with jealousy. It therefore 

may not come as a shock that much of the most profound 

research that has been carried out over the last years has been 

done within the field of rock art documentation, and several 

large and small documentation projects have been started, 

some of which are still ongoing, while others have ended. 

Within this field, some researchers have made major 

and even exceptional contributions to rock art research 

over the years. One of these heroes is John Coles who 

has provided us with several interesting papers concerning 

different images, such as ritual processions (Coles 2003a), 

documentation and analysis of larger important panels 

such as Bro Utmark in Tanum in Bohuslän (Coles 2004a), 

Järrestad (Coles 1999) and Fränarp (Coles 2002) in Scania, 

and Häljestad in Västmanland (Coles 2001c), all within the 

contemporary borders of Sweden. He has also managed 

to publish large amounts of the most important sites in 

Uppland (Coles 2000) and Bohuslän and Østfold (Coles 

2005a) – a truly impressive effort. 

A similar agenda has guided Kalle Sognnes to publish 

and interpret the rock art of Stjørdal in Trøndelag in Mid- 

Norway (Marstrander and Sognnes 1999; Sognnes 2001a); 

Pekka Kivikäs to document all known rock paintings in 

Finland (Kivikäs 2000) and Sweden (Kivikäs 2005), and 

Sven-Gunnar Broström (2004) to publish the engravings 

of Södermanland and Kronoberg in Sweden (in Skoglund 

2006). 

In Bohuslän, the rock art museum at Vitlycke has also 

made a lasting contribution to these outstanding efforts 

by publishing Torsten Högberg’s documentation from the 

World Heritage Area in Tanum (Bengtsson and Olsson 

2000; see also Milstreu and Prøhl 1996, 1999) and the 

rock engravings in Askum and Tossene parish (Bengtsson 

1997, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2004a, 2004b). The latter areas 

consist of more than 1000 rock art sites that previously 

were unknown to the broader field of researchers, which 

make this the largest documentation project since the early 

20th century. 

Some contributions to this field have also been made by 

the far better financed national and international rock art 

projects, such as Interreg, RockCare and Rane (Bertilsson 

and Fredell 2003; Bertilsson and McDermott 2004b), but 

their interest and expenses have been directed more towards 

saving the rock art and educating local authorities, than to 

producing lasting documents. Their contribution so far, 

which does not come close to the private initiatives by 

Coles, Kivikäs and Broström, is that the rock engravings 

from Onsøy in Østfold in Norway (Vogt 2000, 2006) and 

the engravings from Bornholm (Milstreu 2004b; Kaul et al. 

2005) have been documented, but the latter is not published 

yet.

Fig. 2.4. The famous rock art panel from Bedolina in 

Valcamonica documented by video-scanning techniques (after 

Goldhahn 2006). 

Another important contribution to this field has been 

made in Värmland in Midwest Sweden, where Heimann 

has documented the Neolithic rock paintings for his PhD 

(Heimann 2005). 

Adding to these vast new sources of information are some 

interesting new rock art panels found in the northernmost 

part of Sweden (Mulk and Bayliss-Smith 2001, 2006; 

Kivikäs 2003; Lindgren 2004; Viklund 2004; Broström 

2005), Dalsland (Andersson 2003, 2005), Bohuslän 

(Andersson and Toreld 2003), Östergötland (Broström et 

al 2005) in Sweden, Jong in Akershus (Simonsen and Vogt 

2005), and on Lofoten (Bertelsen and Nielssen 2002) in 

Norway. 

A positive trend is that a lot of new techniques have 

been introduced into the work of documentation which 

may alter our understanding of this phenomenon, such 

as digital photos to record rock paintings (Kivikäs 2000, 

2003, 2005; Ramqvist 2002b; Slinning 2002) and video 

scanning for the documentation of engravings (Johansson 

and Magnusson 2004, also Simson et al. 2004; Trinks et al. 

2005) (Fig. 2.4). Also the techniques of tracing and rubbing 

have been improved by adding the depth of the engravings 

in the final document (Fig. 2.5, also Coles 2001b, 2003b, 

2005a). 

More importantly, different problems and possibilities 

with different methods have been discussed (e.g. Bertilsson 

and Magnusson 2000; Coles 2000, 2005a; Nordbladh 2000, 

2004a, 2004b; Bertilsson and Fredell 2003; Bengtsson 

2004a; Helskog 2004; Helskog and Høgtun 2004; Goldhahn 

2005b). 

Despite all these progressive improvements I think 


Fig. 2.5. A section of the famous “Skomakaren” panel at 

Backa in Brastad, Bohuslän, in Sweden, documented so that 

a tentative depth of the engravings is shown. Documentation: 

Vitlycke Museum, Tanumshede. 

it is worth pointing out that they will not solve any 

epistemological issues concerning the meaning and 

significance of different rock art traditions (cf. Bertilsson 

and Magnusson 2000; Helliksen and Holm-Olsen 2001; 

Bertilsson and Fredell 2003: 7). Even if the video scanning 

technique has improved our ability to document different 

engravings (Fig. 2.4), it is not reasonable to describe it as an 

“objective and precise method” (Johansson and Magnusson 

2004: 133). What has been made by Mother Nature and 

altered by people in the past, or the present, what is found 

and lost, is still an analysis that must be learnt the hard 

way, and by using arguments and interpretations made by 

human beings. New methods cannot, and will not, leave 

us with any firm and safe answers, but maybe with new 

questions and possibilities? Time will tell.

26 

One reason for this scepticism is that the most optimistic 

view of this issue rests on a rather naïve modernistic 

perception that is inherent from the 19th century AD, 

which states that we ought to separate what is made by man 

– culture – from what is made by nature (e.g. Bertilsson and 

Magnusson 2000). This evolutionary predicament tends to 

view the panel as a rather passive element in the making of 

“art” with a capital A. There are rather few circumstances 

that may indicate that this is accurate. Already during 

the Palaeolithic we can see how the “natural” textures 

of the panels constitute active parts of different images 

and compositions (e.g. Lewis-Williams 2002a). The art 

and the canvas are not separate units, they relate to and 

constitute each other. This is also rather well documented 

through different historical and anthropological sources 

(e.g. Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1990; Lewis-Williams 


Fig. 2.6. Bergbukten VIIA in Alta (after Helskog and Høgtun 2004). 

2002b; Chippindale and Nash 2004; Walderhaug Sætersdal 

2004: 192). 

Turning to the “silent” rock art traditions of northernmost 

Europe, there are several well investigated areas and rock art 

sites which suggest that a similar interplay between the “art” 

and the “canvas” occurred here; both within the different 

hunter-gatherer traditions in the north (e.g. Helskog 1999) 

and also within the BA maritime oriented rock art traditions 

in the south (e.g. Wahlgren 1998, 2002; Coles 1999, 2000, 

2005a: 9–13; Wrigglesworth 2000; Bradley et al. 2002; 

Tilley 2004; Goldhahn 2005b; Nielsen 2005). 

In this context, Knut Helskog’s influential work on the 

rock art of Alta must be mentioned. Helskog (2004) argues 

that it is our current understanding of a phenomenon that 

must guide us to how and why it should be documented. 

In his own study of the rock art at Bergbukten I and VIIA,

he argues that the panels should be understood as a microlandscape 

where different mythological (and/or maybe 

historical?) events were depicted. The specific panels were 

then chosen for a specific purpose, to re-tell and re-create 

different mythological stories and events (Helskog 2004; 

Helskog and Høgtun 2004). By adopting a traditional 

documentation which presents the altered surface as black 

areas against a white and supposed objective background 

(art/canvas?), the intricate and deliberate dialogue between 

the texture of the panel and the altered surfaces will be 

forever lost (Fig. 2.6). The outcome of this process is that 

the presented interpretation loses part of its credibility, not 

least since the texture of the panel is excluded: different 

cracks (read creeks, streams, rivers, fjords and ravines), 

hollows (dales, gorges and valleys), ponds of water 

(swamps, lagoons, lakes and seas), smoother surfaces 

(meadows, paddocks, pastures, and plains) and different 

knolls and other raised areas on the panels (hills, summits 

and mountains), etc. (cf. Figs 2.6 and 2.7). 

Similarly, this author has argued that we ought to give 

up the fruitless utopia of finding any “secure and objective” 

ways to present the past in general, and any rock art 


Fig. 2.7. Bergbukten VIIA in Alta (after Helskog and Høgtun 2004). 

documentation in particular. Instead we ought to try to 

present “subjective interpretive documents” that allow our 

colleagues to see how and why we reached our conclusions 

and interpretations (Goldhahn 2005b). Documentation 

cannot be separated from interpretation; it is a dialectic 

and hermeneutic process, and it is time to make this more 

explicit in our praxis. 

The history of rock art research 

From the discussion above it is clear that the history of rock 

art research is a vital and active part of our understanding 

of the phenomenon we wish to explore (e.g. Baudou 2004), 

but there are very few studies indeed that try to explore this 

truism in a more explicit way (Goldhahn 2005e). Earlier 

interpretations are of course integrated in different research 

histories, and sometimes they can be thoroughly conducted 

and guide the reader to a more systematic understanding of 

the rock art areas and traditions that are discussed (Mandt 

1991; Wahlgren 2000, 2002; Sognnes 2001a; Bengtsson 

2004a; Kaul 2004a; Lindgren 2004; Nordenborg Myhre 

2004). But it is a silent fact that we still lack any more

28 

explicit studies that try to make the history of rock art 

research a subject on its own (but see Eikrem 2005 for a 

related analysis). 

Until then, we must turn our attention to articles and 

studies that touch on these matters. Jensen has provided us 

with an excellent study of the pre-modern antiquarian field 

of contemporary Sweden (Jensen 2002), and Christensson 

has dealt with the rock art research of the 19th century 

(Christensson 2001, 2005). The premature functionalism of 

the early 20th century has been discussed by Vogt (2001), 

Kaul (2004a: 31–44), Ling (2004, 2005) and this author 

(Goldhahn 2005f: 67–82). 

Other studies of more regional interest have been 

discussed by Wahlgren (2000), who presents an analysis 

of the history of rock art interpretation in Sweden; Nielsen 

(2005), who discusses the research history of the rock 

engravings at Bornholm; Lindgren (2004), who presents 

a regional survey of rock art research in the northernmost 

part of Sweden; Olofsson (2004) who discusses different 

generations’ interpretations of the Neolithic hunter-gatherer 

rock art at Glösa; and, Linge (2004, 2005), who has 

presented a thorough analysis of the fascinating rock art 

from Mjeltehaugen in Giske, western Norway, an Early BA 

barrow with 8 cists that was covered by two large slate slabs 

decorated with abstract ornamentation and 8 ships. Here 

we should also mention the very interesting autobiography 

of Anders Hagen (2002), professor at Bergen university; 

the biography of prominent rock art researchers such 

as Gustaf Hallström (Baudou 1997) and Nils Niklasson 

(Gillberg 2001), and articles about researchers such as 

Torsten Högberg (Bengtsson 2001), Fred Gundnitz (Kaleas 

2001), Axel Emanuel Holmberg (Christensson 2001), Sven 

Nilsson (Christensson 2005), Erling Johansen (Mikkelsen 

2000), and Anders Hagen (Østmo 2005b). Milstreu (2001) 

has also provided us with a research history of the rock art 

museum in Underslös in Bohuslän. 

These historical accounts are necessary in a field such 

as rock art research; they create structures, a feeling of 

belonging, confidence and, not least, a sense of legitimacy. 

Despite this, an explicit overview of the last 400 years 

of rock art research in this area of the world is much 

needed. 

Concluding remarks 

Rock art studies have become a very popular field on this 

side of the new millennium. The reasons for this are seldom 

discussed. The open access to the sites in the northernmost 

part of Europe; the fact that they are not destroyed like 

other prehistoric remains by our interpretative practices; 

the cultural and natural threats to this vanishing art form; 

the relatively cheap cost of visiting and conducting 

research on rock art; new exciting finds that constantly 

pop up; the enigma of the images themselves; the fun of 

doing fieldwork; and the long profound research history 

of this field in the Nordic countries, might be some of the 


explanations behind this enormous interest. Whatever the 

causes and effects, the vast interest shown by academia 

at the start of the new millennium will certainly help to 

increase interest in the enigmatic phenomenon we call 

rock art in the future. 

References 

Almgren, O. 1927. Hällristningar och kultbruk. Bidrag till 

belysning av de nordiska bronsåldersristningarnas innebörd. 

KVHAA Handlingar 35. Stockholm. 

Andersson Ambrosiani, P. 1997. Avbildningar av guldhalskragar 

i Kiviksgraven, pp. 463–470 in (Åkerlund, A., Bergh, 

S., Nordbladh, J. and Taffinder, J. red) Till Gunborg. 

Arkeologiska samtal. Stockholm Archaeological Reports Nr 

33. Stockholm. 

Andersson, B. 2002. Hällmålningen på Storberget och dess 

omgivande fornlämningar, pp. 9–16 in (Klang, L., Lindgren, 

B. and Ramqvist, P. H. red) Hällbilder and hällbildernas 

rum. Studier i Regional Arkeologi 2, Mitthögskolan. 

Örnsköldsvik. 

Andersson, T. 2001. En vårprocession från bronsåldern på en 

hällristning i Högsbyn. Hembygden 2001: 11–21. 

Andersson, T. 2003. En plöjningsscen på en hällristning i 

Högsbyn. Hembygden 11–16. 

Andersson, T. 2005. Hällristningar från Högsbyn. Del 2, Stranden, 

fornlämning nr 13 och 14 i Tisselskogs s:n, Dalsland. Ask and 

Embla hb, Hällristningsrapport 6. Allingås. 

Andersson, T. and Toreld, A. 2003. Mannen från Legene. 

Adoranten 2003: 94–95. 

Arwill-Nordbladh, E. 2001. Genusforskning inom arkeologin. 

Högskoleverket. Stockholm. 

Autio, E. 2000. Reindeer, reindeer antler, zig zag motive and 

other images in the Saami shaman drums an in the rock art, 

pp. 174–201 in (Kare, A., ed.) Myanndash. Rock art in the 

ancient Arctic. Arctic Centre Foundation. Rovaniemi. 

Bahn, P. G. 2001. Save the last trance for me: an assessment of 

the misuse of shamanism in rock art studies, pp. 51–93 in 

(Francfort, H. P. and Hamayon, R. N. eds) The concept of 

shamanism: uses and abuses. Akadémiai Kiadó. Budapest. 

Bakkevig, S. 2004. Rock art presevation: improved and ecologybased 

methods can give weathered sites prolonged life. 

Norwegian Archaeological Review 37 (1): 65–81. 

Bakkevik, S. 2005. Reply to comments on Sverre Bakkevig: 

rock art preservation. Norwegian Archaeological Review 38 

(1): 60–67. 

Ballard, C., Bradley, R., Myhre, L. N. and Wilson, M. 2004. 

The ship as a symbol in the prehistory of Scandinavia and 

Southeast Asia. World Archaeology 35 (3): 382–403. 

Baudou, E. 1997. Gustaf Hallström – arkeolog i världskrigens 

epok. Natur och Kultur. Stockholm. 

Baudou, E. 2004. Den nordiska arkeologin – historia och 

tolkningar. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets 

Akademien. Stockholm. 

Bender, B. 2006. Place and landscape, pp. 303–314 in (Tilley, 

C., Keane, W., Küchler, S., Rowlands, M. and Spyer, P. eds) 

Handbook of material culture. Sage Publications London. 

Bengtsson, L. (ed.) 1997. Hällristningar från Askums socken. 

Arkeologisk Rapport 3 från Vitlyckemuseet. Tanumshede. 

Bengtsson, L. (ed.) 1998. Hällristningar från Askums socken, del 

2. Arkeologisk Rapport 4 från Vitlyckemuseet. Tanumshede.

Bengtsson, L. 2000. Ett dokumentationsprojekt i Askums socken, 

Bohuslän, pp. 66–80 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H. red) 

Ristad och målad. Museiverket. Vammala. 

Bengtsson, L. 2001. Torsten Högberg – textilingenjören som blev 

hällristningsforskare. Häradsbladet 2: 10–11. 

Bengtsson, L. (ed.) 2003. Hällristningar från Askums socken, del 

3. Arkeologisk Rapport 6 från Vitlyckemuseet. Tanumshede. 

Bengtsson, L. 2004a. Bilder vid vatten. Kring hällristningar i 

Askum sn, Bohuslän. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 

51. Göteborg. 

Bengtsson, L. 2004b. Renande eld – en studie av eldskadade 

hällristningar i Askum socken, Bohuslän, pp. 378–390 in 

(Melheim, L., Hedeager, L. and Oma, K., eds) Mellom himmel 

og jord. Oslo Archaeological Series Vol 2. Oslo. 

Bengtsson, L. 2004c. Cup marks for the common people, images 

of the elite, pp. 167–178 in (Milstreu, G. and Prøhl, H. eds) 

Prehistoric pictures as archaeological source. Gotarc Serie 

C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 50. Göteborg. 

Bengtsson, L. and Olsson, C. (eds) 2000. Världsarvsområdets 

centrala del och Grebbestad. Arkeologisk Rapport 5. Vitlycke 

Museum. Tanumshede. 

Bengtsson, L., Gustafsson, A. and Strid, L. (eds) 2005. 

Tanumsprojektet. Arkeologiska undersökningar 1998–2004. 

Gotarc Serie D. Arkeologiska Rapporter 57. Göteborg. 

Bengtsson, N. 2001. Att leva på hoppet. Om voltigörer, kvinnliga 

kultutövare – och den röda tråden. Adoranten 2001: 84–95. 

Bergvall, M. and George, O. 2001. Forntidsvärld och gränslöst 

kulturarv. Tidsspår. Hembygdsbok för Ångermanland och 

Medelpad 2001/2002. Härnösand. 

Berntsson, A. 2005. Två män i en båt – om människans relation 

till havet under bronsåldern. University of Lund Institute of 

Archaeology, Report Series 93. Lund. 

Bertelsen, R. and Nielssen, A. R. 2002. Det første slipte bergbilde 

i Lofoten, pp. 17–22 in (Klang, L., Lindgren, B. and Ramqvist, 

P. H. red) Hällbilder and hällbildernas rum. Studier i Regional 

Arkeologi 2, Mitthögskolan. Örnsköldsvik. 

Bertilsson, C. 2000. Hällrist. En presentation av Riksantikvarieämbetets 

digitala hällristningsdokumentationsprogram, 

pp. 55–65 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H. red) Ristad och 

målad. Museiverket. Vammala. 

Bertilsson, U. 1987. The rock carvings of Northern Bohuslän. 

Spatial structures and social symbols. Stockholm Studies in 

Archaeology 7. Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. 2000a. Nordisk bergkonst – ett gemensamt uppdrag. 

En lägesrapport, pp. 6–8 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H. red) 


Bertilsson, U. 2000b. Rock art at the end of the world – 

deciphering the images of the rock art of Northern Sweden, 

pp. 39–45 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., eds) Ristad och 


Bertilsson, U. 2000c. RockCare – protection of European rock 

carvings. National Heritage Board. Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. 2001. RockCare the first three years – problems, 

progress and prospects. Adoranten 2001: 35–44. 

Bertilsson, U. 2004a. Rock art – our priceless heritage endangered, 

pp. 89–93 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L. eds) The 

future of rock art – a world review. National Heritage Board 

of Sweden, Report 2004:7. Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. 2004b. Recent trends in rock art management 

and research of the Nordic countries – a personal overview, 

pp. 100–113 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L. eds) The 

Valcamonica symposiums 2001 and 2002. National Heritage 


Board of Sweden, Report 2004:6. Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. 2005. Comments on “Conflict of opinions: rock 

carvings in Sweden 2003” by John Coles. Journal of Nordic 

Archaeological Science 15: 99–102. 

Bertilsson, U. and Fredell, Å. 2003. RockCare – Tanum laboratory 

of cultural heritage. Report from the documentation seminars 

in Tanum 8–21 July and Valcamonica 29 July–14 August, 

2000. National Heritage Board of Sweden, Report 2003:6. 

Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. and Magnusson, J. 2000. Dokumentation och 

vård, pp. 73–106 in (Kallhovd, K. and Magnusson, J. red) 

Hällristningar i gränsbygd. Bohuslän/Dalslanbd och Østfold 

– ett INTERREG IIA projekt – Slutrapport. Västra Götalands 

Länsstyrelses Rapportserie: Rapport 2000:56. Göteborg. 

Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L. (eds) 2004a. The future of rock 

art – a World review. National Heritage Board of Sweden, 

Report 2004:7. Stockholm. 

Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L. (eds) 2004b. The Valcamonica 

symposiums 2001 and 2002. National Heritage Board of 

Sweden, Report 2004:6. Stockholm. 

Bjelland, T. 2005. Aggressive lichens? Norwegian Archaeological 

Review 38 (1): 49–53. 

Blundell, G. 2004. Nqabayo’s Nomansland. San rock art and the 

somatic past. Studies in Global Archaeology 2. Uppsala. 

Bolin, H. 2000. Animal magic: the mythological significance of 

elks, boats and humans in North Swedish rock art. Journal 

of Material Culture 1: 153–176. 

Borna-Ahlkvist, H. 2002. Hällristarnas hem. Gårdsbebyggelse och 

struktur i Pryssgården under bronsålder. Riksantikvarieämbetet 

Arkeologiska Undersökningar, Skrifter 42. Lund. 

Bradley, R. 1997. Rock art and the prehistory of Atlantic Europe 

– signing the land. Routledge. London. 

Bradley, R. 1999. Dead soles, pp. 661–666 in (Gustafsson, A. and 

Karlsson, H. red) Glyfer och arkeologiska rum – en vänbok 

till Jarl Nordbladh. Gotarc Serie A vol 3. Göteborg. 

Bradley, R. 2000. The archaeology of natural places. Routledge. 

London. 

Bradley, R. 2002. Working without informants: field studies of 

rock art in Later Prehistoric Europe. Centre of Archaeological 

Research, The Australian National Museum. Canberra. 

Bradley, R. 2005. Ritual and domestic life in prehistoric Europe. 

Routledge. London. 

Bradley, R. and Nordenborg Myhre, L. 2005. Monument to 

landscape: landscape to monument, pp. 101–112 in (Santos, 

M. E. and Meléndez, A. T., eds) The contexts of visual 

imagery. Reflexiones sobre Arte Rupestre, paisaje, forma y 

contenido. Traballos de Arqueoloxia e Patrimonio 33. Santiago 

de Compostela. 

Bradley, R. and Phillips, T. 2004. The high-water mark: the siting 

of megalithic tombs on the Swedish island of Tjörn. Oxford 

Journal of Archaeology 23 (2): 123–133. 

Bradley, R., Chippindale, Ch. and Helskog, K. 2001. Post-Paleolithic 

Europe, pp. 482–529 in (Whitley, D. S., ed) Handbook of rock 

art research. Altamira Press. Walnut Creek. 

Bradley, R., Jones, A., Nordenborg Myhre, L. and Sackett, H. 

2002. Sailing through stone: carved ships and rock face at 

Revheim, Southwest Norway. Norwegian Archaeological 

Review 35 (2): 109–118. 

Broström, S-G. 2004. Hällristningar i Södermanlands län. 

Länsstyrelsen i Södermanlands Län, Rapport. Nyköping. 

Broström, S-G. 2005. Hällmålningen vid Letssjön i Hälsingland, 

pp. 81–85 in (Engelmark, R., Larsson, Th. B. and Rathje,

30 

L. red) En lång historia… Festskrift till Evert Baudou på 

80–årsdagen. Archaeology and Environment 19. Umeå. 

Broström, S-G., Goldhahn, J. and Ihrestam, K. 2005. En 

nyupptäckt hällbildslokal vid Sjöstorp gård, Ödeshög socken i 

Östergötland. Gotarc Serie D. Arkeologisk Rapport 61/Botark- 

Rapport 2005:17. Göteborg/Botkyrka. 

Carpelan, C. 2000. Sivullisen mietteitä kalliokuvien äärellä. 

Muinaistutkija 2000 (4): 2–17. 

Chippindale, Ch. and Nash, G. (eds) 2004. The figured landscapes 

of rock-art. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 

Chippindale, Ch. 2001. Theory and meaning of prehistoric 

European rock art: “informed methods”, “formal methods” 

and questions of uniformitarianism, pp. 68–98 in (Helskog, 

K., ed.) Theoretical perspectives in rock art research. Novus 

Forlag. Oslo. 

Christensson, J. 2001. Fornsagor i sten. Lärdomens bilder, pp. 

23–36 in (Mansén, E. and Nordin, S., eds) Festskrift till 

Gunnar Broberg. Atlantis. Stockholm. 

Christensson, J. 2005. Om Sven Nilsson som arkeolog, pp. 63–97 

in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Från Worm till Welinder. Gotarc Serie 

C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 60. Göteborg. 

Clottes, J. 2004. Hallucinations in caves. Cambridge Archaeological 

Journal 14 (1): 81–82. 

Coles, J. 1999. The dancer on the rock: record and analysis at 

Järrestad, Sweden. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 

65: 167–187. 

Coles, J. 2000. Patterns in a rocky land. Rock carvings in South- 

West Uppland, Sweden. AUN 27. Uppsala. 

Coles, J. 2001a. North European bronzes, rock art and wetlands: 

looking for context and relations. A preliminary study, 

pp. 148–157 in (Purdy, B. A., ed.) Enduring records. The 

environmental and cultural heritage of wetlands. Oxbow 

Books. Oxford. 

Coles, J. 2001b. Rock carvings, rubbings and lichen. Antiquity 

75: 255–256. 

Coles, J. 2001c. Bronze Age rock carvings at Häljesta, 

Västmanland, Sweden: domination by isolation. Germania 

79: 237–271. 

Coles, J. 2002. Chariots of the Gods? Landscape and imagery 

at Frännarp, Sweden. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 

68: 215–246. 

Coles, J. 2003a. And on they went… processions in Scandinavian 

Bronze Age rock carvings. Acta Archaeologica 74: 211– 

250. 

Coles, J. 2003b. A measure of conviction: recording emphasis in 

Scandinavian rock carvings. Antiquity 77: 567–571. 

Coles, J. 2004a. Bridge to the other world. Rock carvings at Bro 

Utmark, Bohuslän, Sweden. Proceedings of the Prehistoric 

Society 70: 173–206. 

Coles, J. 2004b. Illumination and reflections: looking at 

Scandinavian rock carvings, pp. 193–200 in (Heyd, T. and 

Clegg, J., eds) Aesthetics and rock art. Ashgate. Hampshire. 

Coles, J. 2004c. A conflict of opinions. Rock carvings in Sweden 

2003. Journal of Nordic Archaeological Science 14: 3–10. 

Coles, J. 2005a. Shadows of a Northern past. Rock carvings of 

Bohuslän and Østfold. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 

Coles, J. 2005b. Reply to Bertilsson. Journal of Nordic 

Archaeological Science 15: 103. 

Diethelm, I. and Diethelm, H. 2001. All shamans or what? A 

view on the problem of rock art interpretation. Adoranten 

2001: 120–126. 

Edgren, T. 2000. Gäddtarmen vid Hangö. Ett bildgalleri från 


historisk tid, pp. 9–19 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H. red) 


Eikrem, K. 2005. Bronsealder som sosial konstruksjon. 

Faghistorisk analyse av norsk bronsealderforsking på 1900– 

talet. Unpublished master thesis from Oslo University. Oslo. 

Engelmark, R. and Larsson, Th. B. 2005. Rock art and environment: 

towards increased contextual understanding, pp. 113–122 in 

(Santos, M. E. and Meléndez, A. T., eds) Reflexiones sobre Arte 

Rupestre, paisaje, forma y contenido. Traballos de Arqueoloxia 

e Patrimonio 33. Santiago de Compostela. 

Engelstad, E. 2001. Desire and body maps: all the women 

are pregnant, all the men are virile, but…, pp. 263–289 

in (Helskog, K., ed.) Theoretical perspectives in rock art 

research. Novus Forlag. Oslo. 

Ericsson, A. 2005. Fallos och resande, pp. 191–216 in (Goldhahn, 

J., ed.) Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska 

Skrifter 59. Göteborg. 

Eriksen, E. 2003. Kosmografi i bronsealder – en analyse av det 

sørvestlige Sandefjord. Unpublished master thesis from Oslo 

University. Oslo. 

Ethelberg, P., Jørgensen, E., Meier, D. and Robinson, D. 2000. 

Det Sønderjysle landbrugs historie. Sten-og bronzealder. 

Haderslev Museum. Haderslev. 

Fandén, A. 2002. Schamanens berghällar. Daus Tryck och Media. 

Östersund. 

Fari, C. 2003. Hieros-Gamos. En sammenligning mellom symbolets 

uttryck i den nordiske bronsealderens helleristningstraditsjon 

og myteverden i den østlige middelhavsområdet. Unpublished 

master thesis from Oslo University. Oslo. 

Fett, E. N. and Fett, P. 1977. Relations West Norway – West 

Europe documented in petroglyphs. Norwegian Archaeolgoical 

Review 12 (2): 65–92. 

Forsberg, L. 2000. The social context of the rock art in middle 

Scandinavia during the Neolithic. Myanndash. Rock art in 

the ancient Arctic (Kare, A., ed.), pp. 50–87. Arctic Centre 

Foundation. Rovaniemi. 

Forsberg, L. and Walderhaug Sætersdal, E. M. 2004. Carved 

in stone? In search of a Finnish rock carving tradition, pp. 

201–216 in (Oestigaard, T., Anfinset, N. and Sætersdal, T., 

eds) Combining the past and the present. BAR International 

Series 1210. Oxford. 

Frazer, J. G. 1911. The golden bough. MacMillan. London. 

Fredell, Å. 2003a. Bildbroar. Gotarc Serie B. Gothenburg 

Archaeological Thesis 25. Göteborg. 

Fredell, Å. 2003b. Bronze Age imagery. Through water and fire. 

Current Swedish Archaeology 11: 45–63. 

Fredell, Å. 2004a. To let the picture talk, pp. 137–147 in (Milstreu, 

G. and Prøhl, H., eds) Prehistoric pictures as archaeological 

source. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 50. Göteborg. 

Fredell, Å. 2004b. Figurative gestures: an introduction on how 

to study the use of gestures in figurative material, pp. 33–38 

in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L., eds) The Valcamonica 



Fredell, Å. 2004c. Bronze Age imagery – through water and 

fire, pp. 422–447 in (Melheim, L., Hedeager, L. and Oma, 

K. red) Mellom himmel og jord. Oslo Archaeological Serie 

Nr. 2. Oslo. 

Fuglestvedt, I. 1999. Adorants, voltigeurs and other mortals, pp. 

5–24 in (Goldhahn, J., ed) Rock art as social representation. 

BAR International Series 794. Oxford. 

Gillberg, Å. 2001. En plats i historien. Nils Niklassons liv och

arbete. Gotarc Serie B. Gothenburg Archaeological Theses 


Gjerde, J. M. 2002. Lokalisering av helleristninger i landskapet, 

pp. 185–199 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder av bronsålder. Acta 

Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8° 37. Lund. 

Gjessing, G. 1932. Arktiske helleristninger i Nord-Norge. 

Instituttet for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning Serie B: 

Skrifter XXI. Oslo. 

Gjessing, G. 1936. Nordenfjelske ristninger og malinger 

av den arktiske gruppe. Instituttet for Sammenlignende 

Kulturforskning Serie B: Skrifter XXX. Oslo. 

Glob, P. V. 1969. Helleristninger i Danmark. Jysk Arkæologisk 

Selskabs Skrifter VII. Aarhus. 

Goldhahn, J. 1999a. Sagaholm – hällristningar och gravritual. 

Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Umensis 11. Umeå. 

Goldhahn, J. 1999b. Introduction, pp. 5–24 in (Goldhahn, J., ed) 

Rock art as social representation. BAR International Series 

794. Oxford. 

Goldhahn, J. 2000. Hällristningar, kosmologi och begravningsritual 

– exemplet Sagaholm. Primitive tider 2000: 22–53. 

Goldhahn, J. (ed.) 2002a. Bilder av bronsålder. Acta Archaeologica 

Lundensia Series in 8° 37. Lund. 

Goldhahn, J. 2002b. Roaring rocks. An audio-visual approach on 

hunter-gatherer engravings in Northern Sweden and Scandinavia. 


Goldhahn, J. 2004. Mångtydighetens tydlighet – till frågan om 

hällbilders mening och innebörd, pp. 121–135 in (Milstreu, 



Goldhahn, J. (ed.) 2005a. Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. 

Arkeologiska Skrifter 59. Göteborg. 

Goldhahn, J. 2005b. Slagsta revisited – en essä om behovet av 

subjektivt tolkande dokument, pp. 581–598 in (Goldhahn, 

J. red) Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska 


Goldhahn, J. 2005c. “We paint and we proud of it!”. Norwegian 

Archaeological Review 38 (1): 55–60. 

Goldhahn, J. 2005d. Bredarör i Kivik. Nya analyser och dateringar 

av människoben. Fornvännen 100: 97–100. 

Goldhahn, J. 2005e. Från monolit till megalit. En essä om 

Bredarör i Kivik och dess verkningshistoria, pp. 129–154 

in (Engelmark, R., Larsson, Th. B. and Rathje, L. red) En 

lång historia… Festskrift till Evert Baudou på 80–årsdagen. 

Archaeology and Environment 19. Umeå. 

Goldhahn, J. 2005f. Från Sagaholm till Bredarör – hällbildsstudier 

2000–2004. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 60. 

Göteborg. 

Goldhahn, J. 2006. Hällbildsstudier i norra Europa – trender och 

tradition under et nya millenniet. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska 


Groseth, L. 2001. Å finne sted. Økonomiske og rituelle landskap i 

Telemark i sen-neolitikum og bronsealder. Varia 53. Oslo. 

Grundberg, L. 2000. Älvkvarnskult och offerkällor, pp. 88–106 

in (Edsgård, L., ed.) Människors platser – tretton arkeologiska 

studier från UV. Riksantikvarieämbetet Arkeologiska 

Undersökningar, Skrifter 31. Stockholm. 

Grønnesby, G. 1998. Skandinaviske helleristninger og rituell 

bruk av transe. Arkeologiske Skrifter fra Historisk Museum, 

Universitetet i Bergen 9: 59–82. 

Gustafsson, A. and Karlsson, H. 2004. Solid as a rock. An 

ethnographical study of the management of rock-carvings. 



Hagen, A. 2002. Et arkeologisk liv. Primitive tider. Oslo. 

Hallström, G. 1938. Monumental art of Northern Europe from 

the Stone Age. I. The Norwegian localities. Bokförlaget 

Aktiebolaget Thule. Stockholm. 

Hallström, G. 1960. Monumental art of Northern Sweden from 

the Stone Age. Nämforsen and other localities. Almqvist and 

Wiksell. Stockholm. 

Hansson, A. 2005. Hällmålningen på Flatruet – en arkeologisk 

undersökning. Jämten 2006: 88–92. 

Heimann, C. 2005. Förflutna rum. Landskapets neolitisering 

i sydvästra Värmland. Gotarc Serie B. Gothenburg 

Archaeological Theses 40. Göteborg. 

Helberg, B. H. 2001. Killer whales in rock art – hunting magic 

or totem figures? Way North 2001: 59–61. 

Helliksen, W. and Holm-Olsen, I. M. (eds) 2001. The Norwegian 

rock art project – documentation standard. The Norwegian 

Institute for Cultural Heritage Research. NIKU Publikasjoner 

113. Oslo. 

Helskog, K. 1999. The shore connection. Cognitive landscape and 

communication with rock carvings in Northenmost Europe. 


Helskog, K. 2000. Changing rock carvings – changing societies? 

Adoranten 2000: 5–16. 

Helskog, K. (ed.) 2001. Theoretical perspectives in rock art 


Helskog, K. 2004. Landscapes in rock-art: rock-carving and ritual 

in the old European North, pp. 265–288 in (Chippindale, 

C. and Nash, G., eds) The figured landscape of rock art. 

Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 

Helskog, K. and Høgtun, E. 2004. Recording landscapes in rock 

carvings and the art of drawing, pp. 23–31 in (Milstreu, G. and 

Prøhl, H., eds) Prehistoric pictures as archaeological source: 

Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 50. Göteborg. 

Helvenston, P. A. and Bahn, P. G. 2003. Testing the “three stage 

of trance” model. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 13: 

213–241. 

Helveston, P. A. and Bahn, P. G. 2004. Waking the trance-fixed. 

Reply from Helvenston and Bahn. Cambridge Archaeological 

Journal 14 (1): 90–100. 

Herva, V-P. and Ikäheimo, J. 2002. Defusing dualism: mind, 

materiality and prehistoric art. Norwegian Archaeological 

Review 35 (2): 95–108. 

Huggert, A. 2002. I ormens tecken. Ormfigurer i den nordeuropeiska 

taigan, pp. 23–33 in (Klang, L., Lindgren, B. and Ramqvist, P. 

H., eds) Hällbilder and hällbildernas rum. Studier i Regional 

Arkeologi 2, Mitthögskolan. Örnsköldsvik. 

Hygen, A-S. (ed.) 2000. Fire år med Bergkunstprosjektet 1996– 

1999. Riksantikvarens Rapporter 2000: 29. Oslo. 

Hygen, A-S. 2003. Co-operation for education – filling the demand 

for educational tools. Rock Art Research 29 (1): 23–52. 

Hygen A-S. and Bengtsson. L. 2000. Rock carvings in the 

Borderlands: Bohuslän and Østfold. Warne Förlag. 

Sävedalen. 

Høgestøl, M. 2002. Bergkunstprojektet i Rogaland. Fra Haug 

ok Heidni (1): 3–4. 

Høgestøl, M., Bakke, B., Bakkevig, S., Bjelland, T., Borgarp, C., 

Kjeldsen, G. and Walderhaug, O. 1999. Helleristningsfeltene på 

Austre Åmøy, Stavanger kommune, Rogaland. Dokumentasjon, 

sikring og tilretteleggning av feltene I til VI-5. AmS-Rapport 

9. Stavanger. 

Ingold, T. 2000. The perception of the environment. Routledge. 

London.

32 

Innselset, S. M. 2005. Skålgropene i Valdres og Indre Sogn 

– ikke berre “stølsristningar”?, pp. 69–89 in (Bergsvik, K. A. 

and Engevik jr, A., eds) Fra funn til samfunn. Universitetet i 

Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Nordisk 1. Bergen. 

Jensen, J. 1997. Fra Bronze- til Jernalder. Nordiske Fortidsminder 

Serie B: bd 15. København. 

Jensen, O. W. 2002. Forntid i historien. Gotarc Serie B. 

Gothenburg Archaeological Thesis 19. Göteborg. 

Johansen, Ø. K. 1993. Norske depotfunn fra bronsealdern. 

Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter, Ny Rekke Nr 8. Oslo. 

Johansson, S-O. and Magnusson, J. 2004. Developing new 

techniques for 3D documentation of rock art, pp. 125–133 

in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L., eds) The Valcamonica 



Jordan, P. 2003. Material culture and sacred landscape: the 

anthropology of the Siberian Khanty. AltaMira Press. Walnut 

Creek. 

Jordan, P. 2004. Examining the role of agency in hunter cultural 

transmission, pp. in (Gardner, A., ed.) Agency uncovered: 

archaeological perspectives on social agency, power and 

being human. University of College in London Press. 

London. 

Kaleas, L. 2001. Fred Gudnitz – en dansk kulturbärare i Bohuslän. 

Adoranten 2001: 73–76. 

Kaleas, L. 2004. Reflections on the interpretation of rock art, 

pp. 39–48 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L., eds) The 

Valcamonica symposiums 2001 and 2002. National Heritage 

Board of Sweden, Report 2004:6. Stockholm. 

Kaliff, A. 1997. Grav och kultplats. AUN 24. Uppsala. 

Kaliff, A. 2005. The grave as a concept and phenomenon, pp. 

99–124 in (Artelius, T. and Svanberg, F., eds) Dealing with the 

dead. Riksantikvarieämbetet Arkeologiska Undersökningar, 

Skrifter 65. Stockholm. 

Kaliff, A. and Oestigaard, T. 2004. Cultivating corpses. A 

comparative approach to disembodied mortuary remains. 


Kallhovd, K. and Magnusson, J. (eds) 2000. Rock carvings in the 

borderlands: Bohuslän/Dalsland and Østfold – an Interreg 

II A project: Final report. Länsstyrelsen i Västra Götaland/ 

Østfold Fylkeskommune. Göteborg/Sarpsborg. 

Kare, A. 2002. Clusters of sites – rock paintings in Finland. 

Adoranten 2002: 15–29. 

Karlsson, S. 2005. Kroppens gestaltning och symbolik på 

Sydskandinaviska hällristningar, pp. 461–472 in (Goldhahn, 



Kaul, F. 1998. Ships on bronzes. PNM Studies in Archaeology 

and History 3:1/2. Köpenhamn. 

Kaul, F. 2000. Solsymbolet. Skalk 2000 (6): 28–31. 

Kaul, F. 2002. The horse, the ship, the sun and the wheel in the 

Nordic Bronze Age. Sbronik Naradniho Musea v Praze 56: 

143–154. 

Kaul, F. 2003a. The Hjortspring boat and ship iconography of 

the Bronze and Early Pre-Roman Iron Age, pp. 187–208 in 

(Crumlin-Pedersen, O. and Trakadas, A., eds) Hjortspring – a 

Pre-Roman Iron Age warship in context. Ships and Boats of 

the North 5. Roskilde. 

Kaul, F. 2003b. Åndlig opbrud. Skalk 2003 (6): 20–27. 

Kaul, F. 2004a. Bronzealderens religion. Nordiske Fortisminder 

Serie B: Bd 22. Det Kongelige Nordiske Oldskriftselskab. 

København. 


Kaul, F. 2004b. Bronzealderens ikonografiske motiver og deres 

fremkomst i en fromativ fase, pp. 85–119 in (Milstreu, G. and 

Prøhl, H., eds) Prehistoric pictures as archaeological source. 


Kaul, F. 2004c. Social and religious perceptions of the ship in 

Bronze Age Northern Europe, pp. 122–137 in (Clarke, P., ed.) 

The Dover boat in context. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 

Kaul, F. 2005. Masser af skibe. Bronzealderens skibsbilleder på 

sten. Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark 2005: 73–93. 

Kaul, F., Stoltze, M., Nielsen, F. O. and Milstreu, G. (eds) 

2005. Helleristninger. Billeder fra Bornholms bronzealder. 

Bornholms Museum. Rønne. 

Keyser, J. D. and Whitley, D. S. 2006. Sympathetic magic in 

western north American Rock Art. American Antiquity 71 

(1): 3–26. 

Kivikäs, P. 2000. Kalliokuvat Kertovat. Atena. Jyväskylä. 

Kivikäs, P. 2003. Ruotsin Pyyntikulttuurin Kalliokuvat Suomalaisin 

Silmin. Kopijyvä Kustannus. Jyväskylä. 

Kivikäs, P. 2005. Kallio, maisema ja kalliomaalaus. Rocks, Landscape 

and rock paintings. Minerva Kustannus. Jyväskylä. 

Kjellén, E. and Hyenstrand, Å. 1977. Hällristningar och 

bronsåldersamhälle i sydvästra Uppland. Upplands 

Fornminnesförenings Tidskrift 49. Uppsala. 

Kristiansen, K. 2002. Langfærder och helleristninger. In Situ 

2001/2002: 67–80. 

Kristiansen, K. 2004. Seafaring voyages and rock art ships, pp. 

111–121 in (Clark, P., ed.) The Dover boat in context. Society 

and water transport in prehistoric Europe. Oxbow Books. 

Oxford. 

Kristiansen, K. 2005a. Cosmology and consumption in the Bronze 

Age, pp. 135–149 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan sten och järn. 


Kristiansen, K. 2005b. Institutions and material culture: towards 

an intercontextual archaeology, pp. 179–193 in (DeMarrais, 

E., Gosden, C. and Renfrew, C., eds) Rethinking materiality 

– the engagement of mind with the material world. McDonald 

Institute Monographs. Cambridge. 

Kristiansen, K. and Larsson, T. B. 2005. The rise of Bronze Age 

society. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 

Kvalø, F. 2004. Facing the sea in Bronze Age Norway: the ship, 

the sea and society. The Dover boat in context (Clark, P., ed.): 

111–121. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 

Lahelma, A. 2000. Landscape of the mind. A contextual approach 

to Finnish rock-art. Unpublished MA thesis at the University 

of Helsinki, Department of Archaeology. Helsinki. 

Lahelma, A. 2001. Kalliomaalaukset ja shamanismi. Tulkintaa 

neuropsykologian ja maalausten sijainnin valossa. 

Muinaistutkija 2001 (2): 2–21. 

Lahelma, A. 2003. Hallusinatoriset aiheet kalliomaalauksissa 

ja kampakeramiikassa. Viitteitä ekstaattisesta uskonnosta 

Soumessa kivikaudella. Shiti 5: 27–54. 

Lahelma, A. 2005. Between the worlds. Rock art, landscape and 

shamanism in subneolithic Finland. Norwegian Archaeological 

Review 38 (1): 29–47. 

Larsson, T, B. 1986. The Bronze Age metalwork of southern 

Sweden. Archaeology and Environment 6. Umeå.. 

Larsson, T. B. 2000. Flemming Kaul, “Ships in Bronzes. A study 

of Bronze Age iconography”. Norwegian Archaeological 

Review 33 (1): 61–64. 

Larsson, T. B. 2002. De döda, de “andra” och djuren, pp. 91–111 

in (Goldhahn, J. red) Bilder av bronsålder. Acta Archaeologica 

Lundensia Series in 8° 37. Lund.

Larsson, H. B. 2004. Streitwagen, Karren und Wagen im der 

bronzezeitlichen Feilskunst Skandinaviens, pp. 381–398 in 

(Burmeister, S., ed.) Rad und Wagen. Verlag Philipp von 

Zabern. Mainz. 

Lewis-Williams, J. D. 2001. Monolithism and polysemy: Scylla 

and Charybdis in rock art research, pp. 23–39 in (Helskog, 

K., ed) Theoretical perspectives in rock art research. Novus 

Forlag. Oslo. 

Lewis-Williams, J. D. 2002a. The mind in the cave. Thames and 

Hudson. London. 

Lewis-Williams, J. D. 2002b. A cosmos in stone. AltaMira Press. 

Walnut Creek. 

Lewis-Williams, J. D. 2004. Neuropsychology and Upper 

Palaeolithic art: observation on the progress of altered states 

of consciousness. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 14 (1): 

107–111. 

Lewis-Williams, J. D. and Dowson, T. A. 1990. Through the 

veil. San rock paintings and the rock face. South African 

Archaeological Bulletin 45: 5–16. 

Lindgren, B. 2001. Hällbilder, kosmogoni och verklighet. 

Tidsspår. Hembygdsbok för Ångermanland och Medelpad 

2001/2002: 43–81. 

Lindgren, B. 2002. Hällmålningar – ett uttryck för materiella och 

immateriella dimensioner, pp. 55–75 in (Klang, L., Lindgren, 

B. and Ramqvist, P. H., eds) Hällbilder and hällbildernas rum. 

Studier i Regional Arkeologi 2, Mitthögskolan. Örnsköldsvik. 

Lindgren, B. 2004. Hällbilder i norr. Forskningsläget i Jämtlands, 

Västerbottens och Västernorrlands län. Umark 36. Umeå. 

Ling, J. 2004. Beyond transgressive earths and forgotten seas. 

Towards a Maritime understanding of rock art in Bohuslän. 


Ling, J. 2005. The fluidity of rock art, pp. 437–460 in (Goldhahn, 



Ling, J. 2006. Elevated rock art. Maritime images and situations. 

Adoranten 2005: 5–32. 

Linge, T. E. 2004. Mjeltehaugen – fragment frå gravritual. 

Unpublished masters thesis from Bergen University. Bergen. 

Linge, T. E. 2005. Kammeranlegget i Mjeltehaugen – eit 

rekonstruksjonsforslag, pp. 537–570 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) 

Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 


Lofterud, C. 2002. Älgkon skapade världen. Tryck och Media. 

Östersund. 

Lundin, I. 1999. Maritima ristningar från Vinga till Koster. 

Bohusläns Museum Delrapport för projektet Blå Skagerack. 

Uddevalla. 

Lødøen, T. K. 2000. Bergbildene på Berge i Strandebarm. 

Hardanger 2000: 100–110. 

Lødøen, T. K. 2001a. Contextualizing rock art in order to 

investigate Stone Age ideology, pp. 211–223 in (Helskog, 

K., ed.) Theoretical perspectives in rock art research. Novus 

Forlag. Oslo. 

Lødøen, T. K. 2001b. Dating of rock art and interpretation of Stone 

Age ideology. Lietuvos Archeologija 19: 191–200. 

Lødøen, T. K. 2003. Late mesolithic rock art and expression of 

ideology, pp. 511–520 in (Larsson, L., Kindgren, H., Loeffler, 

D. and Åkerlund, A., eds) Mesolithic on the move. Oxbow 

Books. Oxford. 

Löfvendahl, R. 2000. Hällristningar i Sverige – vittringar och 

åtgärdar, pp. 81–88 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., eds) 



Malmer, M. P. 1981. A chorological study of North European rock 

art. KVHAA Antikvariska Serien 32. Stockholm. 

Mandt, G. 1972. Bergbilder i Hordaland. Årbok for Universitetet 

i Bergen. Humanistisk Serie 1970 2. Bergen. 

Mandt, G. 1986. Searching for female deities in the religious 

manifestations of the Scandinavian Bronze Age, pp. 111–126 

in (Steinsland, G., ed.) Words and objects. Norwegian 

University Press. Oslo. 

Mandt, G. 1987. Female Symbolism in Rock Art, pp. 35–52 in 

(Bertelsen, R., Lillehammer, A. and Næss, J-R., eds) Were they 

all men? An examination of sex roles in Prehistoric society. 

AmS-Varia 17. Stavanger. 

Mandt, G. 1991. Vestnorske ristninger i tid og rom. Kronologiske, 

korologiske og kontekstuelle studier. Bd 1–2. Unpublished 

PhD thesis from Bergen University. Bergen. 

Mandt, G. 1992. Introduction, pp. 11–14 in (Mandt, G., Michelsen, 

K. and Riisøen Hauge, K., eds) Conservation, preservation 

and presentation of rock art. Arkeologiska Skrifter fra 

Historisk Museum, Universitetet i Bergen, 6. Bergen. 

Mandt, G. 1995. Alternative analogies in rock art interpretation: 

the West Norwegian case, pp. 263–291 in (Helskog, K. and 

Olsen, B., eds) Perceiving rock art: social and political 

perspectives. Novus Forlag. Oslo. 

Mandt, G. 1998. Vingen revisited. A gendered perspective 

on “Hunters” rock art, pp. 201–224 in (Larsson, L. and 

Stjernquist, B., eds) The worldview of prehistoric man. 

KVHAA Konferenser 40. Stockholm. 

Mandt, G. 2000. Fragments of ancient beliefs: the snake as a 

multivocal symbol in Nordic mythology. ReVision 23 (1): 

17–22. 

Mandt, G. 2001. Women in disguise or male manipulation? 

Aspects of gender symbolism in rock art, pp. 290–311 



Mandt, G. 2002. Manipulasjon – metafor – kontekst: om 

kjønnsperspektivet i bergkunsten. Tidsperspektiv 1/2: 22–39. 

Mandt, G. 2005. Kårstad i Stryn – møtesplass for ulike 

kulttradisjoner i eldre jernalder?, pp. 51–67 in (Bergsvik, K. 

A. and Engevik jr, A., eds) Fra funn til samfunn. Universitetet 

i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter, Nordisk 1. Bergen. 

Mandt, G. and Lødøen, T. 2005. Bergkunst. Helleristninger i 

Noreg. Det Norske Samlaget. Oslo. 

Marstrander, S. and Sognnes, K. 1999. Trøndelags 

jordbruksristninger. Vitark 1. Acta Archaeologica Nidrosiensia. 

Trondheim. 

Melheim, A. L. 2001. Gjennom ild og vann. Graver og depoter 

som kilde til kosmologi i bronsealderen i Øst–Norge. 

Unpublished masters thesis from Oslo University. Oslo. 

Melheim, L. 2004. I mørket er alle katter grå. Om overgangen 

til branngravskikk i bronsealderen, pp. 392–421 in (Melheim, 

L., Hedeager, L. and Oma, K., eds) Mellom himmel og jord. 

Oslo Archaeological Series Vol 2. Oslo. 

Meller, H. (ed.) 2004. Der geschmiedete Himmel. Die weite Welt 

im Herzen Europas vor 3600 Jahren. Theiss. Stuttgart. 

Mikkelsen, E. 2000. Erling Johansen 1919–2000. Viking 63: 

7–9. 

Milstreu, G. 2001. Tanums Hällristningsmuseum 50 år 1979–2002 

– forandring og fremskridt. Adoranten 2001: 77–83. 

Milstreu, G. 2004a. Rock carvings of Denmark – the current 

situation, pp. 134–141 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L., 

eds) The Valcamonica symposiums 2001 and 2002. National 

Heritage Board of Sweden, Report 2004:6. Stockholm.

34 

Milstreu, G. 2004b. Museets Arbejdsmark. Adoranten 2004: 

113–117. 

Milstreu, G. 2005. Internationalt samarbejde. Dokumentation, 

bevaring og formidling, pp. 141–161 in (Kaul, F., Stoltze, M., 

Nielsen, F. O. and Milstreu, G., eds) Helleristninger. Billeder 

fra Bornholms bronzealder. Bornholms Museum/Wormanium. 

Rønne. 

Milstreu, G. and Prøhl, H. (eds) 1996. Dokumentation och 

registrering av hällristningar i Tanum. Documentation and 

Registration of Rock Art 1. Underslös. 

Milstreu, G. and Prøhl, H. (eds) 1999. Dokumentation och 

registrering av hällristningar i Tanum. Documentation and 

Registration of Rock Art 2. Underslös. 

Morphy, H. 1991. Ancestral connections. Chicago University 

Press. Chicago. 

Mulk, I-M. and Bayliss-Smith, T. 2001. Anthropomorphic images 

at the Padjelanta site, Northern Sweden. Current Swedish 

Archaeology 9: 133–162. 

Mulk, I-M. and Bayliss-Smith, T. 2006. Rock art and Sami sacred 

geography in Badjelánnda, Laponia, Sweden. Archaeology 

and Environment 22. Umeå. 

Munkenberg, B-A. 2004. Monumentet i Svarteborg, pp. 17–70 

in (Claesson, P. and Munkenberg, B-A., eds) Gravar och 

ritualer. Bohuslän Museum, Kulturhistorisk Dokumentation 

Nr 15. Uddevalla. 

Myhre, B. and Øye, I. 2002. Norges landbrukshistorie 1. 4000 

f.Kr-1350 e.Kr. Det Norske Samlaget. Oslo. 

Nash, G. (ed.) 2000. Signifying place and space. BAR International 

Series 902. Oxford. 

Nash, G. 2002. The landscape brought within: a re-evaluation 

of the rock-painting site at Tumlehed, Torslanda, Göteborg, 

West Sweden, pp. 176–194 in (Nash, G. and Chippindale, C., 

eds) European landscapes of rock-art. Routledge. London 

and New York. 

Nash, G. 2004. Establishing a new narrative. Additional figures 

to the painted rock-art panel at Tumlehed, Torslanda parish, 

Göteborg, South West Sweden. Adoranten 2004: 20–26. 

Nash, G. and Chippindale, C. (eds) 2002. European landscapes 

of rock-art. Routledge. London and New York. 

Nielsen, F. O. 2005. Helleristningsfund gennem 125 år, pp. 8–23 

in (Kaul, F., Stoltze, M., Nielsen, F. O. and Milstreu, G., 

eds) Helleristninger. Billeder fra Bornholms bronzealder. 

Bornholms Museum. Rønne. 

Nilsen, T. B. 2005. Vedrørende en bergkunstlokalitet i Stjørdalen. 

Masteroppgave i arkeologi framlagd vid NTNU i Trondheim, 

oktober 2005. Trondheim. 

Nilsson, L. E. 2005. Hjul på hällar. Warne Förlag. Sävedalen. 

Nistad, D. 2005. The Multivocality of the Bull Symbol. Discussed 

by the archaeological material from the Neolithic and the 

Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. Unpublished 

Masters Thesis from the Archaeological Department at Bergen 

University. Bergen. 

Nord Paulsson, J. 2002. Ritualiserandet av ett landskap, pp. 

113–128 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder av bronsålder. Acta 


Nordbladh, J. 1980. Glyfer och rum kring hällristningar i 

Kville. Akademisk avhandling, utgiven vid institutionen för 

arkeologi, Göteborgs universitet. Göteborg. 

Nordbladh, J. 1981. Knowledge and information in Swedish 

petroglyph documentation, pp. 61–79 in (Moberg, C-A., 

ed.) Similar finds? Similar interpretations?. Department of 

Archaeology. Göteborgs University. Göteborg. 


Nordbladh, J. 2000. Kort dokumentationshistoria för Bohusläns 

hällristningar, pp. 126–134 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., 

eds) Ristad och målad. Museiverket. Vammala. 

Nordbladh, J. 2001. Italienska träskulpturer som hällristningsfigurer. 

Adoranten 2001: 20–22. 

Nordbladh, J. 2004a. Towards a history of rock art research: the 

blank version, pp. 144–154 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, 

L., eds) The future of rock art – a world review. National 

Heritage Board of Sweden, Report 2004:7. Stockholm. 

Nordbladh, J. 2004b. Southern Scandinavian rock art in the 

landscape, pp. 142–148 in (Bertilsson, U. and McDermott, L., 

eds) The Valcamonica symposiums 2001 and 2002. National 

Heritage Board of Sweden, Report 2004:6. Stockholm. 

Nordenborg Myhre, L. 2003. Early Bronze Age in Southwest 

Norway seen in a third space perspective, pp. 186–197 in 

(Bergstøl, J., ed.) Scandinavian Archaeological practice – in 

theory. Oslo Archaeological Series Nr 1. Oslo. 

Nordenborg Myhre, L. 2004. Trialectic archaeology. Monuments 

and space in Southwest Norway 1700–500 BC. AmS-Skrifter 

18. Stavanger. 

Nordsted, T. 2000. Sikring av grottemalerier i Norge, pp. 100–125 

in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., eds) Ristad och målad. 

Museiverket. Vammala. 

Odner, K. 2000. Tradition and Transmission. Bantu, Indo- 

European and Circumpolar Great Traditions. Bergen Studies 

in Social Anthropology 54. Bergen. 

Olofsson, K-J. 2004. Glösa – transfiguring rock art. Adoranten 

2004: 55–77. 

Olsrud, I-M. 2001. Symbols in earth and stone. Landscape 

as a source to the understanding of rock art, pp. 251–259 



Pearce, D. 2004. “Testing” and altered states of consciousness in 

Upper Palaeolithic art research. Cambridge Archaeological 

Journal 14 (1): 82–85. 

Price, N. (ed.) 2001. The archaeology of shamanism. Routledge. 

London. 

Ramqvist, P. H. 2002a. Rock art and settlements. Issues of spatial 

order in the prehistoric rock art of Fennoskandia, pp. 144–157 

in (Nash, G. and Chippindale, C., eds) European landscapes 


Ramqvist, P. H. 2002b. Digitala och andra älgar. Bidrag till 

dokumentationen av hällmålningar, pp. 119–129 in (Klang, 

L., Lindgren, B. and Ramqvist, P. H., eds) Hällbilder 

and hällbildernas rum. Studier i Regional Arkeologi 2, 

Mitthögskolan. Örnsköldsvik. 

Ramqvist, P. H. 2003. Rock art in Central Norrland (Sweden): 

reflections in settlement territories, pp. 71–84 in (Sognnes, 

K., ed.) Rock art in landscapes – landscapes in rock art. 

Det Konglige Norske Videnskabers Selskab Skrifter 4. 

Trondheim. 

Ramstad, M. 2000. Veideristningene på Møre. Teori, kronologi 

og dateringsmetoder. Viking 2000: 51–86. 

Randsborg, K. 1993. Kivik. Archaeology and iconography. Acta 

Archaeology 64 (1). Munksgaard. 

Reinach, S. 1903. L’art et la magie: À propos des peintures et des 

gravures de l’Age du Renne. L’Anthropologie 14: 257–266. 

Seitsonen, O. 2004. Shore displacement chronology of rock 

paintings at Lake Saimaa, Eastern Finland. Before Farming 

2005 (1): 1–21. 

Shumkin, V. 2000. The rock art, labyrinths, seids and beliefs of 

Eastern Lapland’s ancient population, pp. 202–287 in (Kare,

A., ed.) Myanndash. Rock art in the ancient Arctic. Arctic 

Centre Foundation. Rovaniemi. 

Siikala, A. 2002. Mythic images and shamanism. A perspective on 

Kalevala poetry. Academia Scentiarum Fennica. Helsinki. 

Simonsen, M. F. and Vogt, D. 2005. Fotsåleristninger i 

gravkontekst: Jong – et nytt funn fra Øst-Norge, pp. 473–487 

in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. 


Simson, R., Clogg, P., Diaz-Andreu, M. and Larkman, B. 2004. 

Towards three-dimensional non-invasive recording of incised 

rock art. Antiquity 78: 692–698. 

Sjögren, L. 2005. Minoiskt i norr? Om kulturella influenser från 

Kreta till Skandinavien, pp. 151–166 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) 

Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 


Sjöholm, Å. 2003. Scandinavian rock carvings and Sardinian 

Bronzes. Were their expressions of form born in the eastern 

part of the Mediterranian? Adoranten 2003: 35–46. 

Skoglund, P. 2005. Vardagens landskap. Acta Archaeologica 

Lundensia Series in 8° 49. Lund. 

Skoglund, P. 2006. Hällristningar i Kronobergslän. Motiv, 

myter och dikumentation. University of Lund Institute of 

Archaeology, Report Series 97. Lund. 

Skogstrand, L. 2005. Krigerrollen som et maskulint ideal i yngre 

bronsealder, pp. 659–667 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan sten och 

järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 59. Göteborg. 

Slinning, T. 2002. Digital dokumentasjon og figurtolkning av 

bergmalninger, pp. 283–296 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder 

av bronsålder. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8° 

37. Lund. 

Slinning, T. 2005. Antropomorfe klippeformasjoner og fangstfolks 

kultsted, pp. 489–501 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan sten och 

järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 59. Göteborg. 

Sognnes, K. 2000a. Det hellige landskpet: religiøse og rituelle 

landskapselementer i et langtidsperspekv. Viking 2000: 

87–121. 

Sognnes, K. 2000b. Dokumentasjon av bergmalerier i Norge, pp. 

46–54 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., eds) Ristad och målad. 

Museiverket. Vammala. 

Sognnes, K. 2001a. Prehistoric imagery and landscapes: Rock 

Art in Stjørdal, Trøndelag, Norway. BAR International Series 

998. Oxford. 

Sognnes, K. 2001b. When rock art comes into being: on the 

recognition and acceptance of new discoveries. Rock Art 

Research 18 (2): 75–90. 

Sognnes, K. 2002a. Bilde, landskap og ritar i Midt-Norsk Stein-og 

Bronsalder, pp. 1–22 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder av bronsålder. 

Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8° 37. Lund. 

Sognnes, K. 2002b. Land of elks – sea of whales. Landscapes of 

the Stone Age rock-art in central Scandinavia, pp. 195–212 

in (Nash, G. and Chippindale, C., eds) European landscapes 


Sognnes, K. 2003a. On shoreline dating of rock art. Acta 

Archaeologica 74: 189–209. 

Sognnes, K. 2003b. Bronze Age rock-art and landscape in 

Trøndelag, Norway, pp. 85–106 in (Sognnes, K., ed.) Rock art 

in landscapes – landscapes in rock art. Det Konglige Norske 

Videnskabers Selskab Skrifter 4. Trondheim. 

Sognnes, K. 2003c. Rock art research in Northern Europe, pp. 

12–24 in (Bahn, P. G. and Fossati, A., eds) Rock art studies. 

News of the World 2. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 

Sognnes, K. 2005. Heritage management onging astray or 


following the yellow brick road – which is not there? 


Swantesson, J. O. H. 2005. Weathering and erosion of rock 

carvings in Sweden during the period 1994–2003: micro 

mapping with laser scanner for assessment of breakdown 

rates. Karlstad University Studies 2005:29. Karlstad. 

Syvertsen, K. I. J. 2002. Ristninger i graver – graver med ristninger, 

pp. 151–183 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder av bronsålder. Acta 


Syvertsen, K. I. J. 2003. Ristninger i gravar – graver med 

ristninger. Unpublished master thesis from Bergen University. 

Bergen. 

Syvertsen, K. I. J. 2005. Rogalands ristninger i graver som 

transformerende og stabiliserende faktorer i tilværelsen, pp. 

503–520 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc 

Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 59. Göteborg. 

Sørensen, M-L. S. 2000. Gender archaeology. Polity Press. 

Cambridge. 

Taskinen, H. 2000. Hällkonsten i Finland – forskningshistoria och 

dokumentation, pp. 20–32 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., 

eds) Ristad och målad. Museiverket. Vammala. 

Thackeray, J. F. 2005. Eland, hunters and concepts of “sympathetic 

control” expressed in Southern African rock art. Cambridge 

Archaeological Journal 15 (1): 27–34. 

Thedéen, S. 2003. Life course practices in Bronze Age landscapes 

of East Central Sweden. Current Swedish Archaeology 11: 

97–118. 

Thedéen, S. 2004. Gränser i livet, gränser i landskapet. Stockholm 

Studies in Archaeology 33. Stockholm. 

Tilley, Ch. 1991. Material culture and text. The art of ambiguity. 

Routledge. London. 

Tilley, Ch. 1994. A phenomenology of landscape. Berg. Oxford. 

Tilley, Ch. 1999. Metaphor and material culture. Blackwell. 

Oxford. 

Tilley, Ch. 2004. The materiality of stone. Berg. Oxford. 

Torseth, I. H., Lødøen, T. K., Torsvik, T. and Mandt, G. 2001. 

Sikring av bergkunst. Forvitringsfaktorerer og bevaringstiltak. 

Undersøkelser av helleristningsfeltene i Vingen, Bremanger 

kommune og Hjemmeluft, Alta kommune. Bergkunstrapporter 

fra Universitetet i Bergen 2. Bergen. 

Trinks, I., Díaz-Andreu, M., Hobbs, R. and Sharpe, K. E. 2005. 

Digital rock art recordning: visualising petroglyphs using 3D 

laser scanner data. Rock Art Research 22 (2): 131–139. 

Vänskä, H. 2000. Mossor och lavar. Ett hot mot hällmålningarna?, 

pp. 100–109 in (Edgren, T. and Taskinen, H., eds) Ristad och 


Viklund, B-O. 2004. The space of red ochre. The Stone Age 

gallery in the province of Ångermanland, Northern Sweden. 

Adoranten 2004: 41–54. 

Viste, S. 2004. Rock-art and shamanism, pp. 33–45 in (Milstreu, 



Vogt, D. 2000. Helleristninger i Onsøy, Fredrikstad kommune, 

Østfold. Varia 50. Oslo. 

Vogt, D. 2001. Continuity and Discontinuity in south Scandinavian 

Bronze Age rock art research, pp. 99–109 in (Helskog, K., 

ed.) Theoretical perspectives in rock art research. Novus 

Forlag. Oslo. 

Vogt, D. 2002. Urban graffiti. Visuelle politiske strategier i det 

offentlige rom – en analogi, pp. 315–324 in (Hofseth, E. 

Høigård, ed.) UKM – en mangfoldig forskningsinstitusjon. 

Universitetets Kulturhistoriske Museum. Oslo.

36 

Vogt, D. 2006. Helleristninger i Østfold og Bohuslän. En analyse 

av det økonomiske og politiske landskap. Doktoravhandlinger 

forsvart ved Det humanistiske fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo 

Nr 254. Oslo. 

Wahlgren, K. H. 1998. Encultured rocks. Encounter with ritual 

world of the Bronze Age. Current Swedish Archaeology 6: 

85–98. 

Wahlgren, K. H. 2000. The lonesome sailing ship: reflections on 

the rock carvings of Sweden and their interpreters. Current 

Swedish Archaeology 8: 67–96. 

Wahlgren, K. H. 2002. Bilder av betydelse. Stockholm Studies 

in Archaeology 23. Stockholm. 

Wahlgren, K. H. 2004. Switching images on and off. Rock carving 

practices and meaning in Bronze Age life-world, pp. 149–165 

in (Milstreu, G. and Prøhl, H., eds) Prehistoric pictures as 

archaeological source. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 


Walderhaug, E. M. 2000. Some reflection on the implications of 

form, context and function in rock art studies, pp. 59–69 in 

(Olausson, D. and Vandkilde, H., eds) Form, function and 

context: material culture studies in Scandinavian archaeology. 

Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8° 31. Lund. 

Walderhaug, E. and Walderhaug, O. 1998. Weathering of Norwegian 

rock art – a critical review. Norwegian Archaeological Review 

31 (2): 119–139. 

Walderhaug, O. 1998. Chemical weathering at rock art sites in 

western Norway: which mechanisms are active and how 

can they be retarded? Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 

789–800. 

Walderhaug Sætersdal, E. M. and Prescott, C. 2001. Om indoeuropeere, 

bergkunst og den arkeologiske diskurs. Primitive 

Tider 2001: 125–134. 

Walderhaug Sætersdal, E. M. 2000. Ethics, politics and practices in 

rock-art conservation. Public Archaeology 1 (3): 163–180. 

Walderhaug Sætersdal, T. 2004. Place, people and ancestors. 

Archaeology and society in Manica, Mozambique. Dr. art 

thesis. Faculty of Arts University of Bergen. Bergen. 

Welinder, S. 1998. Neoliticum-bronsålder 3900–500 f.Kr. 

Jordbrukets första femtusen år, 4000 f.Kr.-1000 e.Kr. (Myrdal, 

J., ed.): 11–236. Natur och Kultur/LTs Förlag. Stockholm. 

Whitley, D. S. 2000. The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of 

California. University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City. 

Widholm, D. 1998. Rösen, ristningar, riter. Acta Archaeologica 

Lundensia, Series in Prima 4° 23. Lund. 

Widholm, D. 2001. The meaning of art in Bronze Age burial 


rituals, in (Gediga, B., Mierzwinski, A. and Piotrowski, W., 

eds). Die Kunst der Bronzezeit und der Frühen Eisenzeit 

in Mitteleuropa. Polnische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 

Arbeiten der Archäologischen Kommission 14. Biskupin. 

Wilson, D. 2004. “People talk about heaven…”. Cambridge 

Archaeological Journal 14 (1): 86–90. 

Winter, L. 2001. Cultural encounters – Mediterranean symbols 

in the South Scandinavian rock carving tradition during the 

Bronze Age. Cultural interactions in Europe and Eastern 

Mediterranean during the Bronze Age (3000–500 BC) 

(Werbart, B., ed.): 9–27. BAR International Series 985. 

Oxford. 

Winter, L. 2005. Rock art, landscape and interaction: examples 

from Bronze Age Bohuslän, pp. 123–137 in (Santos, M. E. and 

Meléndez, A. T., eds) Reflexiones sobre Arte Rupestre, paisaje, 

forma y contenido. Traballos de Arqueoloxia e Patrimonio 33. 

Santiago de Compostela. 

Wold, M. 2005. Å skrive om bronsealderreligionen, pp. 521–535 

in (Goldhahn, J. red) Mellan sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. 


Wrigglesworth, M. 2000. Ristninger og graver som sted. En 

visuell landskapsanalyse. Unpublished masters thesis from 

Bergen University. Bergen. 

Wrigglesworth, M. 2002. Ristninger og graver i landskapet, pp. 

185–199 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Bilder av bronsålder. Acta 


Wrigglesworth, M. 2005. Vagnmotivet i en vestnorsk bronsealderkontekst, 

pp. 561–570 in (Goldhahn, J., ed.) Mellan 

sten och järn. Gotarc Serie C. Arkeologiska Skrifter 59. 

Göteborg. 

Yates, T. 1993. Frameworks for an archaeology of the body, pp. 

31–72 in (Tilley, C., ed.) Interpretative Archaeology. Berg. 

Oxford. 

Økland, I. 2000. Hulemalerier og rituell “performance”. 

Unpublished masters thesis from Tromsø University. 

Tromsø. 

Østmo, E. 1997. Horses, Indo-Europeans and the importance of 

ships. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 25: 285–326. 

Østmo, E. 2003. Da nordboene lærte seg å ro. Viking 2003: 

7–29. 

Østmo, E. 2005a. Over Skagerak i steinalderen. Noen refleksjoner 

om oppfinnelsen av havgående fartøyer i Norden. Viking 

2005: 55–82. 

Østmo, E. 2005b. Anders Hagen 1921–2005. Viking 2005: 

299–301.

rock art studies in northernmost europe, 2000 - Joakim Goldhahn

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?