Den nordiska bronsålderns slutskede – kronologi, definition och forskningsproblem

Since the establishment of the Three Age System, the Bronze Age–Iron Age transition has often been difficult to pinpoint, and the final Bronze Age hard to delimit. Oscar Montelius, the founder of the six sub-periods for the Nordic Bronze Age, doubted the usefulness of the sixth and final period in his later works. Like many others since, he discussed the successive transition from bronze to iron as a challenge. This somewhat diffuse period has often “slipped through the cracks”; excluded from Late Bronze Age “proper”, but not yet embraced by Early Iron Age scholars. This paper calls attention to the varying and sometimes contradictory definitions and characterizations of the final Bronze Age Period VI. Was it a period of profound change, continuity, decline or flourishing contacts and wealth? Does it correspond to 800–650 BCE, 700–500 BCE, 700–600 BCE or perhaps 550–400 BCE? Through examples from past and current research, we identify challenges and possibilities in how this period is approached. The paper ends with six propositions for studies of Period VI: to study continental parallels in relation to new international research, to further integrate “metal-focused” academic research with results from contract archaeology, to investigate regionality, to better understand the timing and impact of the Subboreal–Subatlantic climatic transition, to increase collaborations between Bronze Age and Iron Age specialists, and to experiment with various period definitions.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Fornvännen
Published
2024-10-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.62077/95u132.jp09tu
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Historical and Archaeological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
20.71
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Den nordiska bronsålderns slutskede – kronologi, definition och forskningsproblem

Karin Ojala, Anna Sörman
2 citations
Fornvännen
Historical and Archaeological Studies
20.71
article

Den nordiska bronsålderns slutskede – kronologi, definition och forskningsproblem

Karin Ojala, Anna Sörman
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Since the establishment of the Three Age System, the Bronze Age–Iron Age transition has often been difficult to pinpoint, and the final Bronze Age hard to delimit. Oscar Montelius, the founder of the six sub-periods for the Nordic Bronze Age, doubted the usefulness of the sixth and final period in his later works. Like many others since, he discussed the successive transition from bronze to iron as a challenge. This somewhat diffuse period has often “slipped through the cracks”; excluded from Late Bronze Age “proper”, but not yet embraced by Early Iron Age scholars. This paper calls attention to the varying and sometimes contradictory definitions and characterizations of the final Bronze Age Period VI. Was it a period of profound change, continuity, decline or flourishing contacts and wealth? Does it correspond to 800–650 BCE, 700–500 BCE, 700–600 BCE or perhaps 550–400 BCE? Through examples from past and current research, we identify challenges and possibilities in how this period is approached. The paper ends with six propositions for studies of Period VI: to study continental parallels in relation to new international research, to further integrate “metal-focused” academic research with results from contract archaeology, to investigate regionality, to better understand the timing and impact of the Subboreal–Subatlantic climatic transition, to increase collaborations between Bronze Age and Iron Age specialists, and to experiment with various period definitions.

FornvännenVol. 2024(3)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Historical and Archaeological Studies
20.71
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.