Power, Magic and Bells

1 However, the earliest sporadic bell finds can be dated to the 5th–8th centuries AD.

2 Contemporary bells from other North- and East-European countries have been studied for example by Malm – Fehner 1967; Neubert 1969; Sedova 1981, 31 – 34. 156 Ris. 5. 6. 9. 10. 62; Gräslund 1984; Malinowski 1994; Stassiková-Stukovská 1994; and Povetkin 2009.

3 Rainio 2005; Rainio 2008; Rainio 2010.4 Miller 1982; Hodder 1987; Jones 1998; Flannery – Marcus

1998; Whitley 1998, 5 – 6; cf. Leach 1976, 10 – 16 fig. 1 – 2.5 Schafer 1977; Truax 1984; Hodder 1987, 6 – 7.6 Lewis-Williams 1998, 158 – 163 fig. 1 – 3.

Power, Magic and BellsA Contextual Analysis of Finnish Late Iron Age Archaeological Findings

Riitta Rainio

Zusammenfassung

Hunderte von ausgegrabenen Schellen, Glocken und glockenförmigen Anhänger bezeugen, dass metallene Klänge ein charakterisches Merkmal der späten finnischen Eisenzeit (800 – 1300 n. Chr.) wa-ren. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird die Bedeutung dieser Klänge untersucht und erklärt, warum sie so beliebt in dieser Zeit waren. Die in den Gräbern und Wohnplätzen gefundenen Gegenstände re-präsentieren strukturierte Befunde, die mit ethno-graphischen Analogien verglichen werden können. Über hundert Ausgrabungsbefunde legen nahe, dass die Schellen, Glocken und glockenförmigen Anhänger an Trachten und Zaumzeug befestigt waren oder in Beuteln oder Kästchen aufbewahrt wurden. Vorrangig befanden sich diese Klanggerä-te in reich ausgestatteten Gräbern sozial höherge-stellter Persönlichkeiten. Des weiteren wurden sie häufig zusammen mit Kreuzen, Miniatur-Schneid-werkzeugen und zoomorphen Anhängern gefun-den, die in der späteren finnisch-karelischen Kultur als prophylaktische Amulette Verwendung fanden. In der Eisenzeit sowie in der späteren finnisch-karelischen Kultur scheint der Klang der Schellen, Glocken und glockenförmigen Anhänger die so-zialen, kosmologischen und territorialen Grenzen markiert zu haben.

1 Introduction

Nearly every year archaeological excavations in Finland bring forth fragmentary artefacts that look like bells. Pellet bells have globular or pyramidal bodies and pellets inside, whereas bells have conical bodies and clappers inside. Small conical bell pen-dants appear in clusters and produce sound by jin-gling against each other. In several cases the sound is still audible. These sound-producing devices number at least 486 in Finnish finds. They have been found in all centres of habitation dating from

the 9th–13th centuries AD, i. e., from the Late Iron Age.1 This points to the conclusion that the arte-facts were in regular and established use, embellish-ing or manipulating the soundscape of that time.

During the past years, I have studied these previ-ously unexplored bells at the National Museum of Finland and at several provincial museums.2 I have catalogued and documented all the finds and inves-tigated them by means of cluster analysis, sound analysis, elemental analysis, ethnological analogy and contextual archaeological methods.3 In this pa-per, I limit myself to the question of meaning. I will present four contextual analyses which I made to find out: a) how the bells were used b) what socio-cultural functions they had and c) what their sound meant to the people of the Iron Age.

I rest my analyses on the principles of contex-tual and cognitive archaeology. According to these the archaeological record is the product of the hu-man mind and gives an opportunity to study also ancient patterns of thought. These patterns can be approached by searching through the archae-ological find contexts: sets, schemes and structures of which the excavated artefacts are parts.4 In the process of interpreting these abstract structures, the methods of soundscape studies and ethnologi-cal analogy will be useful.5 The results of the latter method should be reasonable and well-grounded if the analogy is made between cultures where the lat-er one is a descendant of the earlier.6 The Finnish-

Riitta Rainio374

7 In addition, they appear in similar positions in hoards and at dwelling sites.

8 The largest number of bells – 9 – 15 specimens – can be found in the grave 1 at Teuva Lautamäki, grave C39 at Köyliö Vanhakartano, grave 44 at Messukylä Vilusenhar-ju, grave 21 at Masku Humikkala and grave 26 at Mikkeli Tuukkala.

9 Pellet bells and bell pendants of different forms can be found in the grave 118 at Eura Luistari, grave 44 at Mes-sukylä Vilusenharju, find concentration NM 2481: 38. 71 at Mikkeli Tuukkala and the hoard of Kernaala. Pellet bells or bell pendants of different sizes can be found in the grave C39 at Köyliö Vanhakartano, grave 56 at Eura Luis-tari, grave 31 at Messukylä Vilusenharju, grave 113 at Sund Långängsbacken and grave 1 at Pertunmaa Kuusela.

10 Cf. Schafer 1977, 214. 271; Järviluoma 2003, 351 – 352.11 Cf. Aura – Horelli – Korpela 1997, 140 – 142.12 NM 8602; NM 8613; NM 8723; NM 8810; NM 9462;

NM 9724; NM 9831; Cleve 1978. The cemetery is situated in the region of Satakunta.

13 NM 18000; NM 20189; NM 20552; NM 20563; NM 22346; NM 23183; NM 23606; NM 23607; NM 24388; NM 24740; NM 25480; NM 26695; NM 27177; Lehtosalo-Hilander 1982a; Lehtosalo-Hilander 2000. The cemetery is situated in the region of Satakunta.

14 NM 15175; NM 17208; NM 18556; NM 18820; Nallinmaa-Luoto 1978. The cemetery is situated in the region of Pir-kanmaa.

15 NM 12033; NM 12549; NM 12690; NM 12841; NM 13298; Leppäaho 1953; Hirviluoto 1992. The cemetery is situated in the region of Finland Proper.

16 Lehtosalo-Hilander 1982b, 37 – 44.17 Lehtosalo-Hilander’s (1982b, 43), Halinen’s (1988, 3 – 6.

16 – 23 liite 7. 17. 18) and Koivisto’s (1996, 56 kaavio 12 li-ite 3. 7) earlier analyses of these cemeteries were of great help to me.

18 Cf. Cleve 1978, 19 – 63; Lehtosalo-Hilander 1982a, 49 – 291; Halinen 1988, 21 – 23 liite 17 – 18; Korkeakoski-Väisänen 1988, 63 – 73; Koivisto 1996, 62. 65 – 67.

19 In 13 % of the cases the gender remains undefined.

Karelian folk culture and the culture of the Iron Age seem to fulfil this condition.

2 Jingling Attires

My first task was to study the attachment or fas-tening of the bells. For the purpose, I traced all the information on their find contexts in the archive of the Department of Archaeology of the National Board of Antiquities. Although a large proportion of the bells had been found in indistinct contexts, I got together a total of 78 inhumation graves, 18 barrows, six hoards and 26 informative find concentrations from inhumation and cremation cemeteries and dwelling sites (Appendix).

On the basis of these find contexts – mainly in-humation graves – it seems evident that the bells were fastened to dresses. Pellet bells and bell pen-dants hung from headdresses, neck- or bead-bands (Fig. 1), chains and chain sets, and pendants con-nected to chains. They had been sewn onto coatlike garments, where they served as buttons (Fig. 2), or were carried in pouches, belts and boxes. Certain pellet bells made of sheet metal (Fig. 3) and large bells were hung from bridles or other parts of horse harnesses. Since nearly all artefacts are well-worn,7 it seems evident that they were not only grave gifts, but also utility articles in this world.

When people or horses wearing such dresses or harnesses were on the move, the bells started to ring, to jingle. The sound was not necessarily loud, but it could be made louder by bundling up as many as fifteen artefacts.8 The sound could also be made more variable by bundling up artefacts of dif-ferent forms and sizes: artefacts producing differ-ent pitches, timbre and partials.9 As a result, each of the dresses had a slightly different sound.

It is important to notice that the bells also pro-duced jingling acoustic spaces.10 Since the artefacts seem to have been in long-term use, these acoustic spaces could become integral parts of the dresses, their users or contexts of use. As such, the spaces could make a reference to a certain cultural mean-ing: marking the personal territories of the users, supporting or constructing their identities, and making their appearance more impressive: audible and discernible.11

3 Jingling Members of Community

To have an idea of the wider socio-cultural con-text of the bells, I began to compare the graves with bells with other graves in the same cemeteries. For example, I chose the inhumation cemeteries of Köyliö Vanhakartano,12 Eura Luistari,13 Mes-

sukylä Vilusenharju14 and Halikko Rikala,15 cata-logued all their finds, put them into a matrix and counted up the number of artefacts, imported and silver artefacts and artefact categories per grave. I also counted up the number of Lehtosalo-Hilan-der’s units,16 which represent the estimated price or value of grave furnishing.17

By these methods it is easy to find variation in the graves and their find combinations, and differ-ences among the buried individuals. If bracelets, round brooches, chain sets, beads and sickles are seen constructing a feminine combination, and swords, spears, belts, firesteels, weights and scythes a masculine combination,18 the bells seem to have belonged to both genders. In 45 % of the cases they belong to women’s headdresses, bead-bands, chain sets and horse harnesses, in 30 % to men’s coats, belts, pouches, boxes and horse harnesses, and in 12 % to small children.19 Interestingly enough, the acoustic images seem to have varied: while women usually wore delicately vibrating cast bells, men and horses wore bells that had been made of sheet metal and generated a more clattering or rattling sound.

Power, Magic and Bells 375

20 Cf. Schafer 1977, 49 – 52. 76 – 78. 273; Järviluoma 2003, 351 – 352.

21 For example, in grave 1 at Teuva Lautamäki, graves CB and CL at Köyliö Vanhakartano, graves 11, 26 and 40 at Mikkeli Tuukkala, graves 5, 6 and 15 at Mikkeli Visulahti, graves 3 and 5 at Räisälä Hovinsaari, graves 1 and 5 at Kau-kola Kekomäki, graves 49 and 69 at Saltvik Kvarnbacken and hoards of Janakkala Kernaala, Kuhmoinen Papinsaari, Hollola Juokko and Hämeenkoski Kylmäkoski; Kivikoski 1962, 256 – 260; cf. also Apals et al. 1974, att. 145, 6. 11 T. 56, 1; Râbinin 1981, T. 4, 6; 11, 8; 13, 1. 4; Kockurkina 1985, Ris. 51, 1 – 3; 52, 1. 3; 59, 7 – 15.

22 For example, in grave C15 at Köyliö Vanhakartano, grave 38 at Halikko Rikala, grave 12 at Yläne Anivehmaan-mäki, grave 9 at Mikkeli Visulahti, grave 13 at Räisälä Hov-insaari and grave 1 at Kaukola Kekomäki.

23 E.g., Krohn 1915, 68 – 79. 87 – 89. 93. 106 – 107. 142 – 144; Sirelius 1989 [1921], 551 – 568; Rantasalo 1945, 117 – 121; Rantasalo 1947, 27 – 28. 50 – 57; Siikala 1992, 95 – 97. 173 – 177. 192 – 205. 211. 231. 239 – 250. 283. 292 – 296; Stark-Arola 2002a, 68 – 69. 72 – 76. 81 – 90. 93.

24 E.g., Sirelius 1989 [1921], 552. 556; Rantasalo 1945, 35 – 36. 84 – 91. 94 – 103. 116 – 121. 127 – 128; Rantasalo 1947, 21 – 63; Vilkuna 1950, 29 – 30. 86 – 91. 125 – 146. 157 – 158; Rantasa-lo 1955, 36 – 39. 52 – 53. 57 – 60. 76 – 78; Siikala 1992, 242. 246 – 250; Stark-Arola 2002b, 181 – 219.

25 Cf. Schafer 1977, 93. 95 – 96. 98.26 Cf. also Kivikoski 1965, 26 – 27.27 Cf. Mills 2004; Scarre – Lawson 2006.

When comparing the number of artefacts, im-ported and silver artefacts, artefact categories and units per grave, it is easy to see that the grave goods, in general, accumulate in the same graves (Fig. 4 – 5). Even the bells and gender-related ar-tefacts mentioned above usually appear in these richly furnished graves, the best furnished graves in the cemetery. The bells belong to the dresses full of beads, coins, brooches, chains and pendants, and find combinations that can be linked with farmers, cattle-breeders, warriors, merchants and chiefs. The rest of the graves, at the same time, are almost empty.

Thus, it seems that the bells were – together with weapons, farm tools and jingling amounts of metal ornaments – associated with wealth and prosperity. Their sound could be taken as an in-dicator of high social status, or as a means of con-structing social hierarchies, manipulating meanings to increase power.20 These kinds of ideological messages were probably broadcast through rituals: burial rituals, calendar rituals and other common practices. In these rituals, the people wearing bells occupied larger personal and acoustic spaces than those who did not have any bells. The latter, conse-quently, ended up as passive listeners.

4 Signs of Magic

During the analyses, I also noticed that the bells repeatedly occur with certain other artefacts, in the same clusters or bunches with them. In chain sets the bells occur with crosses, miniature axes, ham-mers, knives, keys, spoons and combs, bird-, horse- and snake-shaped pendants, bear’s tooth pendants and cowry shells, which in ancient Finnish were called kyynpäät, i. e., snake skulls.21 In pouches and boxes the bells occur with hair, animal bones, teeth, claws, burls and nuts, and pieces of cloth, iron, bronze and sulphur.22 These elements do not occur simultaneously in all chain sets, pouches and boxes, but constitute a set of alternative types that can be used. Membership in this kind of paradig-matic set suggests that the elements were somehow associated with each other.

A similar set or structure can be found in later Finnish-Karelian folk culture (Tab. 1). In rituals and ritual poetry cow bells, sheep bells, horse bells, crosses, icons, axes, knives, swords, keys, spoons, combs and brushes, and body parts of humans, birds, horses, bears and snakes were regarded as amulets, magical tools. The bells, weapons and edge tools contained forces of fire, iron and smithy: the body parts of animals forces of forest, water and earth. The body parts of humans contained forces of death, and crosses and icons forces of graveyard and Christianity.23 These kind of forces were taken

into use in burial rituals, calendar rituals, wed-dings, childbirths and departures from the home yard: whenever somebody crossed critical cultural boundaries and needed protection. The amulets made up a magical circle or barrier against evil spirits, bears, wolves, the dead and other threaten-ing forces.24 The bells and bunches of metal arte-facts added an aural dimension – a kind of jingling soundwall25 – to this barrier.

Although this description relates to the 17th, 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries, I think it gives rather reasonable grounds for interpreting the Iron Age bells as amulets, magical tools.26 In this re-spect, it would seem natural that the majority of the bells has been found in graves and cemeteries, among the parts of the ritual burial garb.

5 Communal Boundaries

The last task was to put the bell sounds in their right acoustic context, in the Iron Age soundscape or sonic environment. Although the sounds and noises of the past have faded away, it is possible to try to ‘listen to’ the archaeological material.27 For example, excavated artefacts reveal that peo-ple heard the jingle of bells, chain sets and horse harnesses, jangle of keys, kettles and cauldrons, clatter of pots and loom weights, rustle of cloths, and hissing of arrows, sickles and scythes (Tab. 2). They heard how whetstones rasped, grindstones crunched, fishhooks burbled, funeral pyres sput-tered and blacksmiths hammered metallic grave

Riitta Rainio376

28 Cf. e. g. Kivikoski 1973; Pihlman 1999, 67 – 69; artefacts from the site of Sääksmäki Jutikkala after Hirviluoto 1997, 10 – 20; Haggrén – Mikkola 2000, 16; Haggrén – Hakanpää 2001, 6 – 11; Haggrén – Lehtonen – Wuorisalo 2003, 30 – 36. The blacksmiths hammered grave goods to twist them into unusable forms.

29 Cf. e. g. NM 24745; Schulz 1992, 86 – 92.30 Hirviluoto 1997; Haggrén – Mikkola 2000; Haggrén –

Hakanpää 2001; Haggrén – Lehtonen – Wuorisalo 2003; Nissinaho 2003, 92 – 93. 100 – 102. 113 – 114 k. 9. 13 t. 2. 3. The investigations include several excavations, site investi-gations, pollen analyses, land use modelling and a survey of historical maps.

31 Herding and possibly burn-beating.32 Cf. Schafer 1977, 9 – 10. 151 – 152. 272; Truax 1984, 61.33 Cf. Schafer 1977, 10. 151 – 152. 211. 275.34 Anttonen 1996, 116 – 117; Pihlman 1999, 64 – 69; Wickholm

– Raninen 2006, 158.35 E.g. Salminen 1916, 10. 52. 82 – 83. 130; Vilkuna 1950,

29 – 30. 86 – 91. 125 – 131. 136 – 138. 142 – 146. 157 – 158; Ran-tasalo 1955, 36 – 39. 52 – 53. 57 – 60. 76 – 78; Kemppinen 1967, 40; Rainio 2005.

goods.28 Furthermore, faunal remains reveal that people heard the moos of cows, bleats of sheep, neighs of horses, grunts of pigs, cackle of hens and bow-wows of dogs (Tab. 3). They heard how bears and wolves growled, squirrels climbed and grouses flew away.29 Most probably, people also heard nat-ural sounds produced by wind, rain, trees, brooks, insects and songbirds, and of course their own hu-man voices and cries.

Since the most probable location for each of these sounds can be deduced, it is possible to put these sounds in their ‘right’ places: different activ-ity areas of the Iron Age settlement. For example, the settlement of Sääksmäki Jutikkala, which has been studied extensively by archaeologists,30 con-sists of two dwelling sites, three cremation cem-eteries, possible fields and routes, a forest pasture and forest proper, i. e., the wilderness (Fig. 6). The sounds produced by people and farm animals can be put in the centre: the constructed and culti-vated area (Fig. 7). In the dwellings and farmyard these sounds were continuous, heard non-stop at all times of the year. In the fields and cemeteries they were periodical, heard sometimes in spring and summer and in rituals. The natural sounds pro-duced by trees, brooks, insects, songbirds and wild animals can be put in the outer areas. In the forest pasture these sounds were mixed with the sounds of grazing cattle and working31 people, but in the periphery, the wilderness, they reigned alone. However, occasional sounds of people and farm animals can be allocated to the routes: bridle paths and tracks in the forest. From the centre to the periphery, the sounds of people and farm animals gradually changed into the sounds of nature. The behavior of a listener also probably varied. In the centre, the continuous familiar keynote sounds32 of people and farm animals were not always heard consciously, whereas unfamiliar sounds suddenly coming from the forest served as warning signals. In the periphery, the wilderness populated by wild animals, listening was always active and attentive.33

The bells, which according to my analyses were signs of power and magic, can be positioned in the cemeteries: unproductive mounds or hillocks on the edge of fields. According to several scholars,34 rituals – burial rituals, calendar rituals and other common practices – took place there. It is possi-ble to imagine that the jingle of bells, chains and pendants of the ritual garb, the sputter of fire and the hammering of grave goods accompanied these rituals. The sounds from home farm and forest also mixed with each other. In addition, the bells fastened to bridles or other parts of horse harness-es can be located on the routes: bridle paths and tracks in the forest. In both cases, the bell sounds seem to have accompanied critical situations when people left their safe home farm for unsafer places:

the cemetery, the underworld, the boundary be-tween fields and forests, and the long way through uninhabited areas and forests. In these places the soundworld was also different from everyday life.

In later Finnish-Karelian folk culture, the bell sounds accompanied burial rituals, weddings, graz-ing cattle and calendar rituals connected with the first time cattle were let out in the forest pasture.35 In both cases – in the Iron Age as well as later – the pattern seems to be the same: the bell sounds be-longed to the social, cosmological, territorial and acoustic boundaries of the community. They made these boundaries audible, discernible and psycho-logically real.

6 Conclusions

Hundreds of excavated bells, pellet bells and bell pendants prove that metallic jingle was among the characteristic sounds of the Finnish Late Iron Age (AD 800 – 1300). The aim of this paper was to ex-amine the meaning of this sound, to find out why it was so popular at that time. On the basis of over one hundred inhumation graves, barrows, hoards and stray finds, it seems evident that the bells, pel-let bells and bell pendants were originally fastened to dresses and horse harnesses or carried in pouch-es and boxes. The resulting acoustic spaces could have been employed in constructing social hierar-chies, since the instruments usually appear in rich-ly furnished graves. Furthermore, the instruments repeatedly occur together with crosses, miniature weapons, edge tools and zoomorphic pendants that in later Finnish-Karelian culture were regarded as magical, prophylactic amulets. In the Iron Age, as well as in later folk culture, the bell sounds seem to have expressed social, cosmological and territorial boundaries.


Museum Collections

Archaeological collections, The National Museum of Finland (NM), Helsinki. Archaeological collections, Turku Provincial Mu-seum (TPM), Turku.

Archaeological collections, University of Turku, Department of Archaeology (UTA), Turku.Archaeological collections, Åland museum (ÅM), Mariehamn.

Archive Material

Main catalogues and Research reports (NM, TPM, UTA, ÅM), The Archive of the Department of Archaeology, the National Board of Antiquities, Helsinki.Haggrén, g. – Hakanpää, p. 2001 Valkeakoski (ent. Sääksmäki) Jutikkala

Kokkomäki. Kaivauskertomus kaivaukset 2001, The Archive of the Department of Ar-

chaeology, the National Board of Antiqui-ties, Helsinki.

LeppäaHo, J. 1953 Halikko Rikala. Ristiretkiajan kalmiston

kaivaus 1950, 1951, 1953, The Archive of the Department of Archaeology, the National Board of Antiquities, Helsinki.

Bibliography

anttonen, V.1996 Ihmisen ja maan rajat. Pyhä kulttuurisena

kategoriana, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 646 (Helsinki).

apaLs, J. – atgazis, M. – Daiga, J. – DenisoVa, r. – grauDonis, J. – Loze, i. – MugureVics, e. – stubaVs, a. – snore, e. – zagorskis, F. – zarina, a. 1974 Latvijas PSR arheologija (Riga).aura, s. – HoreLLi, L. – korpeLa, k. 1997 Ympäristöpsykologian perusteet (Porvoo –

Helsinki – Juva).cLeVe, n.1978 Skelettgravfälten på Kjuloholm i Kjulo,

Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistyksen Aika-kauskirja 44 (2) (Helsinki).

FLannery, k. V. – Marcus, J. 1998 Cognitive Archaeology, in: D. S. Whitley

(ed.), Reader in Archaeological Theory. Post-Processual and Cognitive Approaches (London), 35−48.

gräsLunD, a.-s. 1984 Schellen, in: G. Arwidsson (ed.), Birka II,

1. Systematische Analysen der Gräberfunde (Stockholm), 119 – 124.

Haggrén, g. – LeHtonen, H. – WuorisaLo, J.2003 Sääksmäen Jutikkala. Neljännen kai-

vauskesän tuloksia, Suomen keskiajan arke-ologian seura 1, 29 – 37.

Haggrén, g. – MikkoLa, t. 2000 Asutusjatkuvuutta ja monipuolista esineel-

listä kulttuuria. Sääksmäen Jutikkalan kar-tanon arkeologiset tutkimukset vuosina 1999 ja 2000, Suomen keskiajan arkeologian seura 3, 14 – 20.

HaLinen, p.1988 Köyliön Vanhankartanon c-kalmistoa ja

Euran Luistarin kalmistoa käyttäneiden yhteisöjen sosiaalinen ja taloudellinen rak-enne (Helsinki).

HirViLuoto, a.-L.1992 Halikon historia 1 (Halikko).1997 Sääksmäen Jutikkalan Muuntajamäki,

Suomen Museo 104, 7 – 22.HoDDer, i.1987 The Contextual Analysis of Symbolic Mean-

ings, in: I. Hodder (ed.), The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings (Cambridge), 1 – 10.

JärViLuoMa, H. 2003 Äänimaisematutkimus, in: T. Eerola –

J. Louhivuori – P. Moisala (eds.), Johdatus musiikintutkimukseen, Acta Musicologica Fennica 24 (Turku), 347 – 355.

Jones, c.1998 Interpreting the Perceptions of Past People,

Archaeological Review from Cambridge 15 (1), 7 – 22.

keMppinen, i. 1967 Haudantakainen elämä karjalaisen mui-

naisuskon ja vertailevan uskontotieteen va-lossa, Karjalan tutkimusseuran julkaisuja 1 (Helsinki).

kiVikoski, e. 1962 Kaurisimpukoita Suomen rautakauden löy-

döissä, Virittäjä 3 – 4, 256 – 260.1965 Magisches Fundgut aus finnischer Eisenzeit,

Suomen Museo 72, 22 – 35.1973 Die Eisenzeit Finnlands (Helsinki).kockurkina, s. i.1985 Kurgany letopisnoj Vesi X-nacala XIII veka

(Petrozavodsk).

Riitta Rainio378

koiVisto, s.1996 Tampereen Vilusenharjun ruumishaudat

rautakautisen yhteisön heijastajana (Helsin-ki).

korkeakoski-Väisänen, k.1988 Piirteitä Köyliönsaaren merovinkiaikai-

sista naisten haudoista, in: K. Korkeako-ski-Väisänen – U. Lähdesmäki – A. Ni-ssinaho – S. Pihlman – T. Tuovinen (eds.), Baskerilinja. Unto Salo 60 vuotta (Turku), 63 – 76.

kroHn, k.1915 Suomalaisten runojen uskonto, Suomensu-

vun uskonnot 1 (Helsinki).LeacH, e.1976 Culture and Communication. The Logic

by which Symbols are Connected (Cam-bridge).

LeHtosaLo-HiLanDer, p.-L.1982a Luistari 1. The Graves, Suomen Muinais-

muistoyhdistyksen Aikakauskirja 82 (1) (Helsinki).

1982b Luistari 3. A Burial-Ground Reflecting the Finnish Viking Age Society, Suomen Mui-naismuistoyhdistyksen Aikakauskirja 82 (3) (Helsinki).

2000 Luistari 4. A History of Weapons and Or-naments, Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistyks-en Aikakauskirja 107 (Helsinki).

LeWis-WiLLiaMs, J. D.1998 Wrestling with Analogy. A Methodo-

logical Dilemma in Upper Palaeolithic Art Research, in: D. S. Whitley (ed.), Reader in Archaeological Theory. Post-Processual and Cognitive Approaches (London), 157 – 175.

MaLinoWski, t.1994 Quelques idiophones en metal (grelots et

clochettes) du haut moyen age polonais, in: M. Otte (ed.), “Sons Originels”. Préhis-toire de la musique. Actes du colloque de musicologie, Liège, 11 – 13 décembre 1992, Etudes et Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Liège 61 (Liège), 183 – 199.

MaLM, V. a. – FeHner, M. V.1967 Priveski-bubenciki, Trudy gosudarstven-

nogo istoriceskogo muzeâ 43, 133 – 148.MiLLer, D.1982 Artifacts as Products of Human Categoriza-

tion Processes, in: I. Hodder (ed.), Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (Cambridge), 17 – 26.

MiLLs, s.2004 Auditory archaeology at Çatalhöyük. Pre-

liminary research, Çatalhöyük 2004 archive report, <http://www.catalhoyuk.com/ar-chive_reports/2004/ar04_40.html> (Janu-ary 1, 2011).

naLLinMaa-Luoto, t.1978 Tampere Vilusenharju. Nuoremman rau-

takauden kalmisto Pirkanmaalla, Karhun-hammas 3 (Turku).

neubert, g. 1969 Skandinaviske jernklokker til husdyr set i

Europaeisk sammenhaeng (Brede).nissinaHo, a.2003 Metsän, pellon ja veden viljaa. Sääksmäen

alueen elinkeinostrategiat ja asutus rau-takaudella, in: T. Heikkurinen-Montell – H. Taskinen (eds.), Sääksmäen Rapo-lan rautakautinen maisema ja elinkeinot Valkeakoskella, Rapola-tutkimuksia 3 (Hel-sinki), 77 – 123.

piHLMan, s.1999 Kuolema arkeologisena ilmiönä. Yleistyksiä

esihistoriasta, Aboa 59 – 60, 62 – 77.poVetkin, V. i. 2009 Bubenciki-zvoncy v drevnem Novgo rode,

Rossijskaâ Arheologiâ 2, 79 – 92.râbinin, e. a.1981 Zoomorfnye ukrašeniâ drevnej Rusi X–

XIV, Arheologiâ SSSR E 1 – 60 (Leningrad).rainio, r.2005 “Mikält kellot kuuluut, sikält pahat pajet-

koot!” Akustinen kommunikaatio suomalai-sissa kansanomaisissa riiteissä, in: O. Ampu-ja – K. Kilpiö (eds.), Kuultava menneisyys. Suomalaista äänimaiseman historiaa, Histo-ria Mirabilis 3 (Turku), 280 – 303.

2008 Classifying Iron Age Bells, Pellet Bells and Bell Pendants, in: A. A. Both − R. Eich-mann − E. Hickmann − L.-Ch. Koch (eds.), Studien zur Musikarchäologie VI, Orient-Archäologie 22 (Rahden/Westf.), 509−535.

2010 Suomen rautakautiset kulkuset, kellot ja kelloriipukset. Äänimaiseman arkeologiaa, Suomen musiikkikirjastoyhdistyksen ju-lkaisusarja 138 (Helsinki).

rantasaLo, a. V. 1945 Der Weidegang im Volksaberglauben der

Finnen 1, FF Communications 134 (Hel-sinki).

1947 Der Weidegang im Volksaberglauben der Finnen 2, FF Communications 135 (Hel-sinki).

1955 Arkea ja juhlaa vuodenaikojen vaihdellessa (Helsinki).

saLMinen, V.1916 Inkerin kansan häärunoelma muinaisine

kosimis- ja häämenoineen, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 155 (Helsinki).

scarre, c. – LaWson, g. (eDs.)2006 Archaeoacoustics (Cambridge).scHaFer, r. M.1977 The Tuning of the World (Toronto).


scHuLz, H.-p. 1992 Janakkalan Virala. Kivi- ja myöhäisrau-

takautinen/varhaiskeskiaikainen asuinpaik-ka, in: M. Huurre – P. Halinen – M. Lavento – J. Moisanen (eds.), Kentältä poimittua. Kirjoitelmia arkeologian alalta, Museovi-raston esihistorian toimiston julkaisuja 2, 86 – 92.

seDoVa, M. V.1981 Ûvelirnye izdeliâ drevnego Novgoroda X−

XV vv (Moskaw).siikaLa, a.-L. 1992 Suomalainen šamanismi: mielikuvien histo-

riaa, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran To-imituksia 565 (Helsinki).

sireLius, u. t.1989 [1921] Suomen kansanomaista kulttuuria.

Esineellisen kansatieteen tuloksia 2 (Hel-sinki).

stark-aroLa, L.2002a The Dynamistic Body in Traditional Finn-

ish-Karelian Thought, in: A.-L. Siikala (ed.), Myth and Mentality. Studies in Folklore and Popular Thought, Studia Fennica Folkloris-tica 8, 67 – 103.

2002b Pyhä raja ja pyhä keskus, Kalevalaseuran vuosikirja 79 – 80, 181 – 219.

stassikoVá-stukoVská, D. 1994 Metal Rattles of the Western Slavs, in C. Ho-

mo-Lechner (ed.), La Pluridisciplinarité en archéologie musicale 1 – 2, Recherche Mu-sique et Danse 11 (Paris), 443 – 446.

truax, b.1984 Acoustic Communication (Norwood, New

Jersey).WHitLey, D. s.1998 New Approaches to Old Problems, in: D. S.

Whitley (ed.), Reader in Archaeological Theory. Post-Processual and Cognitive Ap-proaches (London), 1 – 28.

WickHoLM, a. – raninen, s. 2006 The Broken People. Deconstruction of

Personhood in Iron Age Finland, Estonian Journal of Archaeology 10 (2), 150 – 166.

ViLkuna, k.1950 Wuotuinen ajantieto. Vanhoista merk-

kipäivistä sekä kansanomaisesta talous- ja sääkalenterista enteineen (Helsinki).

Riitta Rainio380

Appendix

The informative find contexts of the pellet bells, bells and bell pendants.


Riitta Rainio382

Elements Magical Tools

Pellet bell, bell pendant Cow bell, sheep bell, horse bellCruciform pendant Cross, icon, hymn bookBird-, horse-, snake-, bear-shaped pendant Body part of bird, horse, snake, bear, wolfAxe-, hammer-, knife-shaped pendant Axe, knife, sword, edge toolKey-, spoon-, comb-shaped pendant Key, spoon, comb, brush, sieveNut, burl Nut, burl, seedHair, piece of cloth Hair, nail, piece of clothPiece of iron, bronze, sulphur Piece of iron, bronze, tin, sulphur

Tab. 1 The elements in chain sets, pouches and boxes in comparison with magical tools in later folk culture.

Necklace, bracelet, ring, beadPellet bell, cruciform pendant, animal-shaped pendantKey, combRing needle, cloak-pin, needle, brooch, spiralSword, spearhead, shield boss, scramasaxBelt buckle, knife, sheath, strap-divider, bridle mount, rivetPotsherd, grindstones, loom weightWhetstone, awl, drill, fishhook, arrow, scythe, firesteelIron slag, clay mouldRemains of funeral pyres, burned bones, melted glass, melted bronzePosthole, clay daub, peg, stone foundation of a buildingGrain of rye, corn of wheat, kernel of barley

Tab. 2 Artefacts found at the site of Sääksmäki Jutikkala (AD 500 – 1100).

Species Number Species Number

Pig 250 – 350 Bear 1Cow 250 – 350 Seal 19Sheep/goat 250 – 350 Grouse 5Horse 107 Black grouse 8Cat 1 Willow grouse 2Dog/wolf 1 Wood grouse 1Hen 7 Perch 19Hare 29 Bream 12Beaver 12 Pike 12Elk 4 IdeSquirrel 2 Roach

Tab. 3 Animal bones (NM 24745) found at the dwelling site of Janakkala Virala (AD 800 – 1300).


Fig

. 1 T

he

pelle

t be

ll (N

M

9848

: 7)

an

d fo

ur

bead

s fr

om

grav

e 1/

1934

at

Päl

käne

Ris

tiän

mäk

i (D

raw

ing

by R

. R

aini

o).

Scal

e 2

: 1.

Fig

. 2 E

ight

pel

let b

ells

on

the

ches

t of t

he d

ecea

sed

in g

rave

21

at H

a-lik

ko R

ikal

a (a

fter

Lep

päah

o 19

53, m

ap 4

5). S

cale

1 : 8

.

Fig

. 3 T

he p

elle

t be

ll (N

M 2

2631

: 356

) an

d m

ount

bel

ongi

ng t

o ho

rse

gear

from

the

dwel

ling

site

at K

aari

na K

irkk

omäk

i (D

raw

ing

by R

. Rai

nio)

. Sca

le 1

: 2.

Riitta Rainio384

Fig. 4 Lehtosalo-Hilander’s units of property per grave in the cemetery of Köyliö Vanhakartano (AD 975 – 1150). The black columns denote the graves with bells.

Fig. 5 Lehtosalo-Hilander’s units of property per grave in the cemetery of Messukylä Vilusenharju (AD 1050 – 1150). The black columns denote the graves with bells.


Fig. 6 The settlement of Sääksmäki Jutikkala (AD 500 – 1100) (Drawing by R. Rainio). Scale 1 : 110.

Fig. 7 The soundscape of Sääksmäki Jutikkala (AD 500 – 1100) (Drawing by R. Rainio). Scale 1 : 110.

Documents

Power, Magic and Bells