The general grandness of a runestone and the elaborateness of its carvings reflect on the people who commissioned the monument as well as on the commemorated individual. Particular elements of the carvings, however, provide information about the dead person specifically. The deceased are, for instance, praised for their aptitude on N 68 Dynna: mær hônnurst ‘handiest maiden’ and Sö 338 Turinge: landmanna bæztr ‘best of landholders’, or their devoutness on Vg 55 Källby: [k]ristinn mann, sar hafdi goda tro til Guds ‘Christian man, who had good belief in God’.974 Men were also sometimes honoured by referring to their heroic qualities, both through statements in the inscription and allusions in the decoration. How certain images on runestones could refer to heroism as part of the commemorative message is explored in this paper. First, however, it will be established what defines heroes on runestones and how visual references to heroic qualities may be identified.975
One can become a hero by performing a deed that requires and attests to extreme courage, surpassing that of others. Characters in myth or legend often do this with the help of a special skill or attribute. Sigur.r Fáfnisbani, for example, killed a monster with an ancestral sword. A heroic deed of a real person can be doing something dangerous, for instance fighting in a battle or partaking in a distant expedition. The Viking Age offered ample opportunity for such hazardous undertakings, which is reflected in how heroes are portrayed in the sources of the day.
In skaldic verse “successful and heroic” warriors are praised mainly by mentioning they did not flee from the battlefield and how they, by being victorious, provided food for the beasts of battle.976 In the Old Norse poetic tradition, especially in skaldic praise poems, these animals, the wolf, the raven and the eagle, are present on the battlefield to feed off the fallen warriors.977 Four memorial inscriptions on runestones express the heroic qualities of the commemorated person in terms of this warrior ideal as well by using the same motif of not-fleeing or by mentioning the feeding of a beast of battle, in these cases the eagle.978
Runestone inscriptions contain further, less poetic statements about a deceased person’s heroic past. Several monuments state clearly that the men fell in a battle. The verbs that indicate a violent death also seem to refer to warfare, certainly when a location is also given. The more neutral verbs that are used to express the fact that someone died seem to point to a less peaceful death too when the death occurred abroad or on a ship.979
Thus the heroic character of a man could be conveyed on a runestone by mentioning what he did or how he died, but also by what he was called in the memorial inscription. On Sö 164 Spånga, the commemorated man is given a “heroic cast” by the statement that he stod drængila i stafn skipi, ‘stood like a drængr in the stern of the ship’.980 Drengr was predominantly used for warriors, with the associations of a war-band. Another word that was also used in runic inscriptions for a ‘partner’ in the context of fighting and battles is félagi. Both words could also be used for partners on expeditions that concerned raiding or trading or both.981 Heimpegi, which occurs in a few runestone inscriptions, seems to have been applicable for the “closest and highest-ranking followers of a war-leader or king”.982
In short, mentioning (heroic) achievements of the deceased, which are often also the cause of death, was the most common way of expressing heroism in inscriptions on runestones that commemorated men. Sometimes denominations with martial connotations and a heroic tinge were employed and a few inscriptions refer to the Viking Age warrior ideal by using the poetic motifs of not-fleeing on the battle field and once feeding the beasts of battle.
Fig. 1: Sö 327 Göksten (Näsbyholm).
The references to heroic deeds and characteristics of the commemorated that are discussed above are all textual, but runestones can also contain allusions to heroism in the decoration. Scenes featuring the legendary hero Sigur.r are depicted on some monuments, others contain an image of a warrior figure or a single weapon, and a third group may refer to the late Viking Age heroic warrior ideal through images that might represent a beast of battle.983
Sigur.r Fáfnisbani is the only hero from myth or legend that is depicted on Viking Age runestones that can be identified with certainty.984 Various events from the stories about him are carved on half a dozen Swedish runestones.985 He is recognised as stabbing the runic serpent, who doubles as Fáfnir, with his sword on Sö 101 Ramsundsberget, Sö 327 Göksten (Näsbyholm) (fig. 1), U 1163 Drävle, Gs 9 Årsunda, probably on U 1175 Stora Ramsjö, Gs 19 Ockelbo, and possibly on Gs 2 Österfärnebo. He is seen again on Sö 101, sucking his thumb which he burned while roasting Fáfnir’s heart. Sigur.r is also depicted (again) on U 1163, Gs 9 and Gs 19, identified by the attribute of the ring Andvaranaut, which he carries to the Valkyrie Brynhildr/Sigrdrífa when she offers him a drink. The two large Sörmlandic monuments further contain images of the horse Grani with the treasure on his back; the birds who Sigur.r can understand after imbibing Fáfnir’s blood when he burns his thumb; Sigur.r’s foster father Regin with smith’s tools, who is decapitated on Sö 101 and who holds Fáfnir’s heart on Sö 327; Regin and Fáfnir’s brother Otr (or the otter hide); and a decapitated figure who could be either Regin or their father Hreidmarr on Sö 327.
A small group of runestones are decorated with images of armed men who cannot be identified as a particular hero from myth or legend. Four of them are depicted on horseback with a sword and some type of headgear, on Vg 119 Sparlösa, U 678 Skokloster, U 691 Söderby, and U 1161 Altuna (fig. 2). The horseman on DR 96 Ålum 3 does not carry an offensive weapon, but a shield and a triangular object on a stick. This could be a vane, which leads to an interpretation as standard-bearing warrior.986
Ög 181 Ledberg (fig. 3 and 4) shows four helmeted figures, clearly warriors too. The upper man on the front of the stone is armed with a sword, a spear and a shield, the lower one only with a shield and a sword, and the two depicted on the back do not carry any weapons. The upper of these two is being bitten in the foot by a wolf-like animal and the lower seems to collapse. (This wolf is discussed further below). U 678 is decorated with one horseman with a sword on the front and another with a spear on the back. Both wear helmets and can be identified as warriors.
The spear-carrying horseman on U 855 Böksta, on the other hand, is clearly part of a hunting scene. The rider is accompanied by two dogs and they chase an antlered animal that is attacked by a small hunting bird. (The larger bird on this monument is discussed below). A smaller figure on skis with a bow and arrow is also depicted on this stone. He either represents the hunting god Ullr or another hunter.
Two men are depicted with a long-shafted axe. They are standing instead of riding on horseback. The man on Sö 190 Ytterenhörna uses his axe as a weapon against the opposing quadruped. On DR 282 Hunnestad 1 the axe is carried over the man’s shoulder.987
Fig. 2: U 1161 Altuna (Photo Marjolein Stern).
Fig. 3 and 4: Ög 181 Ledberg, back and front (Photos Marjolein Stern).
Other interpretations of several of these armed men have been made in a mythological or religious context.988 The scene on Sö 190 Ytterenhörna has been interpreted as the god T)r or Ó.inn fighting Garmr or Fenrir at Ragnarök. The same scene is reconstructed on two stones of the Hunnestad monument, by considering DR 282 and DR 285 together. The armed rider with a cross on a staff on U 691 is seen as a Christian controller of evil forces, represented by the quadruped with serpentine features that iscarved below him. The scene on the back of Ög 181 Ledberg (fig. 4) is often regarded as Ó.inn being devoured by Fenrir at Ragnarök, or Vi.arr avenging him.
This article, however, considers the runestone material in the wider context of the Viking Age commemoration and praise tradition. The human figures on Sö 190 Ytterenhörna, DR 282 Hunnestad and Ög 181 Ledberg lack attributes or features that identify them as specific mythological characters, unlike for instance ?órr on U 1161 Altuna and the various images of Sigur.r. They can, however, be identified as warriors, by their weapons and headgear. Consequently, they are seen here as heroic figures. In the same light, it is suggested below that some of the animals that can be identified as wolves, ravens and eagles might represent beasts of battle rather than mythological characters. For Ög 181, this interpretation fits the gradual loss of weapons of the war-rior-figures on the front and the final collapse of the warrior after he is bitten by the wolf on the back of the stone. It also does not sit uneasily with the cross that is carved on the side of the monument, which a scene of Ragnarök would. The image of the ship on this runestone fits in with either interpretation, whether it is taken literally as visual information about the life or death of the commemorated man, or as a symbol in a context of Christianity, Old Norse mythology and/or Viking Age culture in general.
Vg 124 Ryda and U 999 Åkerby are decorated with a single weapon each. On Vg 124, the vertical inscription band is shaped like a sword. The sword in general has strong heroic connotations, also on runestones where it is otherwise depicted as the attribute of either the hero Sigur.r or of other warriors as listed above. The inscription band on U 999 follows the contours of the stone and ends in a spearhead in the centreof the surface. Spears occur in runestone decoration with a martial context on Ög 181 Ledberg (fig. 3 and 4) and U 678 Skokloster, but also in the hunting scene on U 855 Böksta.
In addition to these heroic images of Sigur.r, warriors and weapons, there are several wolves and birds in runestone decoration that may be seen as beasts of battle. These images form more symbolic references to warfare and the late Viking Age heroic warrior ideal. As discussed above, the courage of warriors could be praised by stating they provided food for the wolf, raven or eagle, who in themselves are symbols of battle. This also occurs in at least one inscription on a runestone, Sö 179: Tola let ræisa stæin pennsa at sun sinn Harald, brodur Ingvars. PæiR foru drængila fiarri at gulli ok austarla ærni gafu, dou sunnarla a Særklandi. ‘Tóla had this stone raised in memory of her son Haraldr, Ingvarr’s brother. They travelled valiantly far for gold, and in the east gave (food) to the eagle. (They) died in the south in Serkland.’
Animals in all shapes and sizes are a prominent element in runestone-decoration and they range from the realistic to the fantastic and from highly detailed to very sty-lized.989 The following short survey of the wolf-like (lupine) animals and the birds that look like a raven or eagle illustrates how possible beasts of battle can be identified among them, based on their features and context.
For the purpose of this study, only the images that are more or less realistic depictions of wolves are taken into account. This means that the more fantastic animals with lion-like features, such as long thin tails that point upwards and/or tendrils that form (sometimes antler-like) manes, are not considered to be lupine animals.990 The quadrupeds that have features similar to the serpents that carry the inscriptions and other serpent ornamentation are here also not considered to be wolf-like animals either.991
Realistic quadrupeds with wolf-like features are carved on several runestones. However, dogs and wolves both belong to the family of canidae and the distinction between them is not easily made. The only biological characteristics on the basis of which the two can be told apart with certainty are a longer snout in wolves and the shape of the tail. This is straight on wolves and always hangs down, while on dogs it can range from sickle shaped to curled and from hanging to pointing upwards.992 These differences, especially the shape of the skull, may be difficult to render clearly in stone carving. There are, however, some other characteristics and the visual context of the image can help to distinguish lupine quadrupeds from canines.
Ög 181 Ledberg (fig. 3 and 4) presents a unique opportunity to compare these two kinds of animals on one monument. There are three of them carved on it with different characteristics. The two quadrupeds on the front are depicted horizontally at the feet of the two warriors and are smaller than the one on the back. This larger canine is carved vertically and bites the foot of the warrior above it. It also has “beastly” features like manes and claws, which the smaller ones on the front seem to lack. Also, this beast on the back is further differentiated from the other two by its wide open mouth, long pointed ears and round eye.
The differences in appearance already encourage an interpretation of the two animals on the front as dogs, and the one on the back as a more beastly variety, i.e. a wolf. The positions of the animals also support this. The dogs on the front walk or stand at the feet of their masters, while the wolf on the back bites the warrior above it in the foot. In the context of the gradual loss of weapons and final collapse of the warrior-figures from front to back on this stone, the wolf can be seen as a visual reference to the motif of a beast of battle feeding off the fallen warrior. Although the association between Ó.inn and wolves is clear, his connection with Fenrir specifically seems only to have taken shape fully in the 13th century with Snorri’s writings.993 The kennings in which wolves function as beasts of battle that feed of the warriors, on the other hand, are dated to the 10th–12th centuries,994 which shows this concept was defined earlier and contemporary with these runestones.
The two opposing quadrupeds on DR 314 Lund and the one on the lost DR 286 Hunnestad 5 have the same features and posture as the Ledberg-wolf, so it is safe to say wolves are depicted on those monuments too.995 The wolves on DR 286 Hunnestad and DR 314 Lund look very similar to the one on Ög 181, but they are depicted together with mask-like faces. These motifs also occur separately, so these wolves may also represent beasts of battle as a heroic motif.
Further realistic-looking quadrupeds with wolf-like features like standing ears and a straight tail are carved on Sm 133 Sunneränga, Sö 313 Södertälje (gamla Turingevägen) and U 160 Risbyle. These features are less pronounced, however, and there is no visual context to confirm an interpretation of these images as a wolf. The quadruped on U Fv1978;226 Ösby has a very similar head to the wolves described above, but its tail curves upwards which means it cannot biologically be a wolf. Instead, it may represent a dog and Klaus Düwel has proposed an interpretation as a lion.996 These three images have more in common, however, with the depictions of wolves than with those of the smaller dogs or the larger images of lion-like beasts with fantastic features. They also share some characteristics with the dogs on Ög 181 Ledberg and with the small quadrupeds on Sö 101 Ramsundsberget and Sö 327 Göksten (Näsbyholm) (fig. 1) that represent the otter. These two, in turn, have similar eyes, teeth and pointed ears to those of the wolf on Ög 181, but they lack the manes. Maybe such small, relatively realistic looking quadrupeds were to a certain extent generic and multi-em-ployable and within this group of similar looking animals their individual context plays a more important role in their identification than details of their appearance.
A few images of birds on runestones may represent the other two beasts of battle, the raven and the eagle. Identifying the different kinds of birds carved on runestones is a challenging task and again context is an important factor. Some of the birds that are depicted with pronounced beaks and claws, are not part of a hunting scene, a Sigur.r-scene, sitting on a cross, or fighting another bird, serpent or quadruped with serpentine features.997 These images might be visual references to the birds of battle, the eagle and the raven. The most notable visual difference between the two is that the raven has a straight beak and the eagle a hooked one.
A raven is identified by its straight beak on U 920 Broholm, carved a little above the inscription band. This bird is presented as a motif and not as part of for instance a mythological or hunting scene. As such, it could represent one of the beasts of battle. Eagles can be recognized by their hooked beak. Because hunting birds, such as falcons and hawks have hooked beaks as well, the absence of a hunting context is important here too. This is the case for the bird on the side of U 692 Väppeby, which is seen from below with its head in profile. This bird could consequently represent the eagle as bird of battle. The same is true for the images at the top end of the inscription bands on Vg 150 Skattegärden and Vg 103 Håle Ödekyrkogård, which probably represent eagle heads.998
Two runestones are decorated with rather elaborate scenes of men on horseback hunting with a bird. The hunting bird sits on the rider’s arm on N 61 Alstad (fig. 5) and on U 855 Böksta it is attacking the antlered animal. Both scenes are combined with images of another, larger bird with a hooked beak and claws that is depicted somewhat separate from the hunting scenes. On U 855 this larger bird is carved above the inscription band and on N 61 it is placed above the other images. The latter is also depicted in a different perspective than the other images. It is seen from below like the bird on U 692 Väppeby. These larger predatory birds have a similar appearance and/or position to the raven and eagles described above as possible birds of battle. Another bird fulfils the role of the hunting bird in the hunting scene, therefore the larger birds on N 61 and U 855 can represent an eagle as a bird of battle, adding a heroic motif to the hunting decoration.999
Summarizing, the heroic images on runestones consist of depictions of Sigur.r,1000 of warriors,1001 the sword on Vg 124 Ryda, and possibly also the spear on U 999 Åkerby. The wolf on Ög 181 Ledberg can be interpreted as a beast of battle. In parallel to this wolf as beast of battle eating a fallen warrior and the “feeding the eagle as beast of battle” mentioned in the inscription on Sö 179, the eagles,1002 raven,1003 and other wolves1004 that can be identified on runestones may represent beasts of battle motifs, too. The following section discusses the context of the heroic imagery on the rune-stones and their commemorative function.
Fig. 5: N 61 Alstad, front (after Olsen 1941, p. 160).
As with all public displays of wealth and status, it is hard to know whether the size and location of a runestone reflects the commissioner’s actual social position, or how they wish themselves to be perceived. Regardless of this, the larger the monument is, the more prominent its mark is. There may have been a connection between the use of heroic imagery and the size of memorials in Uppland. The four monuments that are decorated with armed riders are distinctly taller than the three with images of unarmed horsemen.1005 The majority of runestones decorated with heroic imagery in general are larger than average, with some of exceptional size.
The prominence of images on runestones in relation to the other elements of the design – cross, ornamentation and inscriptions – reflects their importance on the monument. It is usually unknown how the carvings were originally emphasised by colour, which is a complicating factor in studying this. However, the size and position of the images, ornamentation and text also influence their prominence. For instance, an image that is placed above the other carvings is usually more eye-catching than a carving close to the ground, especially from a distance. Whether images are embedded in other ornamentation such as serpents or carved isolated on the surface also influences how noticeable they are.1006
Crosses decorate half of the Swedish and late-Viking Age Danish runestones.1007 Also half of the monuments with heroic imagery are decorated with a cross.1008 Heroic and warrior imagery was given more visual prominence than the crosses they are combined with, both when size and position are taken into account.1009 The Sigur.r carvings on U 1163 and Gs 9 also dominate over the cross. Those on U 1175 are smaller than the cross, but they are placed in a higher position. This is the other way round for those on Sö 327, where the cross is carved in the prominent top position, but the scenes of the Sigur.r stories together occupy a much larger part of the surface. Lupine beasts also tend to visually dominate over the cross. Birds and crosses are usually roughly of equal visual prominence, except for the one on U 920 Broholm, which is decorated with two large crosses.1010
The inscriptions on the runestones with heroic imagery seldom refer to heroism. Only Vg 119 Sparlösa possibly refers to battle.1011 The deaths that are mentioned on U 1161 Altuna (arson: badir fædrgar brunnu ‘both father and son(s) were burned (inside)’1012) and U 691 Söderby (murder: myrdan) are violent, but not necessarily heroic. The inscriptions give various other kinds of textual information.1013 Some consist of the memorial formula only, which informs us of the names of the commissioners of the monuments and the commemorated persons and their relationship.1014 On four of these runestones carvers have identified themselves at the end of the inscriptions1015 and the inscription on Vg 119 Sparlösa contains the phrase rad runarpar rægi[n]kundu <iu> par ‘interpret the runes of divine origin there’. Several inscriptions refer to the status and social role of the commemorated men through the use of the epithets pegn,1016 bóndi,1017 and landmænnr1018 and some of these men are called gódr ‘good, able’1019 and sniallr ‘able, valiant, good’.1020 In addition, prayers for the soul or spirit of the deceased are included in the inscriptions on four of the monuments with heroic imagery.1021 Sö 101 Ramsundsberget records the construction of a bridge, which adds to the grandness of the memorial and was considered a good Christian deed.1022 Hence the addition that the bridge was made for salu ‘for the soul of ’ the commemorated Holmgeirr. Vg 150 Skattegården, in contrast, contains an invocation to ?órr and Ög 181 Ledberg includes the spell @mk:iii:sss:ttt:iii:l[(l)]l, pistill/mistill/kistill, ‘thistle, mistletoe, casket’.1023
On most memorial stones with heroic images and crosses, the Christian message is only communicated visually and not also in the inscription,1024 but U 920 Broholm is carved with both. This monument contains two crosses as well as a prayer for the soul. Furthermore, on U 691 Söderby, which has a prayer in the inscription, a small cross on a staff is held by the horseman. In Uppland, where these memorials are found, only 12 % of the runestones are carved with a combination of visual and textual markings.1025 It seems it was especially important that the Christian message on U 920 was understood, since it is communicated through both media. On the monuments with either a verbal or visual Christian reference these are much less prominent, and regularly secondary to the heroic imagery. Apparently, it was sometimes decided to give the visual reference to heroism prominence over the display of the Christian message. This seems to be the case especially when it concerns a warrior image.1026 Conversely, the crosses that are combined with images of Sigur.r on raised stones and the possible eagles as beasts of battle are prioritised over the images.1027 Although these heroic references clearly function against a Christian background, the Christian message of the monument is generally secondary to the display of heroism.
Commemorative skaldic poetry and burial customs are Viking Age commemoration practices that use similar expressions, imagery, and objects to what is represented on runestones.1028 These parallels can help to reconstruct the complex, multi-faceted way in which the heroic images on runestones communicated part of the memorial’s message.
In poetry, the motif of ‘not fleeing on the battlefield’ is applicable to the defeated warrior to indicate he died a heroic death.1029 ‘Feeding the beasts of battle’ is also mostly used to praise victorious warriors, but it can be used as well in a way that is “specific, describing the warrior’s action in a particular battle, or general, praising the warrior for his prowess in a campaign or in the whole of his career”.1030
The various visual references to heroism on runestones serve a similar range of functions. If the images are taken to communicate information about the deceased person’s identity, battle-imagery may have indicated the cause of death of the commemorated man, instead of this being mentioned in the inscription. Despite not being victorious, dying in battle was heroic. Alternatively, heroic images could refer to battles the man fought in during his life in which he was victorious, and not to the cause of death.
The latter possibility is supported by a similar textual construction in two rune-stone-inscriptions. On Sö 55 Bjudby it is said of Hefnir that he travelled to England, but died at home: Var til Ænglands ungr drængr farinn, vardpa hæima at harmi daudr. U 1016 Fjuckby was raised in memory of Ljót’s two sons, of whom Áki perished abroad and the other died at home. Depending on the reading, the addition Styrdi [k]nærri, kvam hann Grikk(hafnir) ‘steered a ship, came to Greece (or Greek harbours)’ could apply to the first or the second son.1031 Thus in certainly one and possibly two out of the three inscriptions that mention home as place of death this is compensated by statements about heroic events that are clearly not related to the death of the commemorated men, but to their activities during their life. Presumably, many of the stones on which the manner of death is not specified commemorate someone who died death at home of old age, disease or an accident.1032 Depictions of warriors, weapons and beasts of battle could function in the same way as the inscription-elem-ents on Sö 55 and U 1016, i.e. to “mention” the deceased’s heroic qualities in general or to indicate that he fought successful battles during his life before dying peacefully at home. As discussed above, only two of the inscriptions on stones with heroic imagery specify the manner of death, through arson on U 1161 Altuna and murder on U 691 Söderby, which fits in with the tendency that the same information is not expressed in both image and text.1033
The images of warriors may also have had a further, more specific function. A comparison of the armed figures on runestones with weapons that were deposited in burials has shown a tendency to combine swords (and spears) with horses (or riding equipment) on the one hand and have axes be the weapon of a non-equestrian warrior on the other, both in runestone decoration and in early Viking Age burial customs in various Scandinavian regions.1034 These burials, and so possibly also the corresponding images, represent different kinds of warriors with probably varying social standing. The additional visual and textual information on memorial stones may be regarded as an extension of what was previously contained in the grave. Consequently, the visual representations of warriors on these monuments may have communicated a combined message about the heroic character of the commemorated men and their social identity.
Analogies with skaldic praise poems provide further information about the role of heroic images on memorial stones. In skaldic praise poetry, the heroic warrior ideal is referred to as part of the glorification of the commemorated leader. The specific motifs of not-fleeing and beast of battle through which this was done, seem to have been chosen in order to inspire young warriors and prepare them for the horrors of the battle field.1035 Since the depictions are less detailed and bloody than the verbal poetic references to the battlefield, the effect on young warriors-to-be would not have been quite the same, but the images might have resonated especially with this subgroup of the runestone’s audience.
The audience of runestones is difficult to reconstruct,1036 but it seems the monuments were aimed at an audience wider than the specific target group of (young) warriors that would hear skaldic praise poems. The stones with heroic imagery were all carved in honour of deceased men, but not exclusively so. Gs 9 Årsunda commemorates three or four men and one woman. Furthermore, a woman called Sigrí.r commissioned the bridge and caring at Ramsundsberget (Sö 101), ?yrvé raised Vg 150 Skattegården, and Gunna co-commissioned Ög 181 Ledberg. This female involvement shows women had a role in the commemorative practice of runestones and it implicated they were also included audience. The use of various means of communication, textual, visual and material, further suggests an inclusive rather than an exclusive approach to audiences. Specific aspects of the inscription, such as the occasional coded runes, however, could be aimed at a specific in-group. Similarly, the choice of particular heroic imagery could have been aimed at a specific subgroup of the runestone’s general audience.
Like the images of beasts of battle, the depictions of Sigur.r also have counterparts in skaldic verse. The runestone images from the stories about Sigur.r refer to three themes. The otter represents the treasure that lies at the root of the dramatic events, since it was to be covered in gold in compensation of Otr’s killing by Loki. This treasure is also present as the pack on Grani’s back and as the ring Andvaranaut, the last part of the compensation gold, which is carried by the figures on the raised stones and worn on the wrist by Sigur.r and the headless figure on Sö 327 Göksten (Näsbyholm). Sigur.r gains wisdom from the birds after the blood of Fáfnir enables him to understand them and from the Valkyrie when they exchange the toast and the ring. Thus the runestones show Sigur.r performing his heroic deed of killing Fáfnir, the treasure in various forms, and two kinds of scenes in which the hero acquires certain knowledge and wisdom. In some late 10thand 11th-century poems by Icelandic skalds that were composed in praise and commemoration of Norwegian rulers, reference is made to largely the same scenes and the same themes of heroism, wealth and wis-dom.1037 A reference to Sigur.r in verbal and visual expressions of late Viking Age commemoration and glorification was not only a reference to heroism, but also to the acquiring of wisdom and wealth.
Among other things, this survey has shown that there is hardly any overlap between expressions of heroism in the decoration and in the inscriptions on runestones, despite the number of textual references to heroic deeds or characteristics of the deceased on runestones in general. This is not unique for these memorials. There is for instance also only one runestone that combines a depiction of a ship with mentioning one in the inscription, while many more stones contain either visual or a textual references to ships.1038 Furthermore, among the memorials with heroic imagery only two contain a verbal as well as a visual Christian reference. It seems the decoration and the inscriptions on these runestones seldom communicate the same explicit message. On a more general level the inscription and the decoration do contribute to the same implicit message of the runestone about the wealth and status of the people involved. This is done through the degree of their elaborateness and exclusiveness.
Roughly half of the runestones with heroic images contain Christian references in the inscription or the decoration. When the latter, the crosses are only rarely more prominent than the heroic message. Although these heroic references clearly function against a Christian background, the Christian message of the monument is generally secondary to the display of heroism.
The various heroic images each seem to have slightly different functions. The depictions of Sigur.r refer not only to heroism, but also to wealth and wisdom. The details of the heroic warrior-images possibly also indicate social (or even military) standing. Carvings of the beasts of battle refer to the heroic warrior ideal, and may have resonated specifically with young warriors. The verbal and visual elements of the monument are seen, read and interpreted through different processes. They tap into different sets of references and complement each other in the visual communication that was employed on Viking Age runestones.
Andrén, Anders (2000): Re-reading Embodied Texts: an Interpretation of Rune-stones. In: Current Swedish Archaeology, 8, p. 7–33.
An English Dictionary of Runic Inscriptions in the Younger Futhark, University of Nottingham. http://runic-dictionary.nottingham.ac.uk/ (26. 09. 2014).
Beck, Heinrich (1970): Die Tiere der Jagd und Walstatt in den eddischen Liedern. In: Schwab, Ute (ed.). Das Tier in der Dichtung. Heidelberg, p. 55–73.
Bianchi, Marco (2010): Runor som resurs. Vikingatida skriftkultur i Uppland och Södermanland (Runrön 20). Uppsala.
Blindheim, Martin (1977): A Norwegian eleventh-century picture stone: the journey of the Magi to Bethlehem. In: Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 130, p. 145–156.
Crumlin-Pedersen, Ole/Thye, Birgitte Munch (Hrsg.). The Ship as Symbol in Prehistoric and Medieval Scandinavia (Publications from the National Museum. Studies in Archaeology & History 1). Copenhagen.
Brate, Erik (1911–1918): Östergötlands runinskrifter (Sveriges runinskrifter 2). (Stockholm. Brate, Erik/Wessén, Elias (1924–1936): Södermanlands runinskrifter (Sveriges runinskrifter 3). Stockholm.
Bugge, Sophus/Olsen, Magnus (1941–1960): Norges Innskrifter med de yngre Runer. Oslo.
Düwel, Klaus (1975): Runische Zeugnisse zu “Bauer”. In: Wenskus, Reinhard/Jankuhn, Herbert/ Grinda, Klaus (eds.). Wort und Begriff “Bauer”: Zusammenfassender Bericht über die Kolloquien der Kommission für die Altertumskunde Mittel*** Nordeuropas (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse, Folge 3, Nr. 89). Göttingen,p. 180–206.
Düwel, Klaus (1986a): Zur Ikonographie und Ikonologie der Sigurddarstellungen. In: Roth, Helmut (ed.). Zum Problem der Deutung frühmittelalterlicher Bildinhalte: Akten des 1. Internationalen Kolloquiums in Marburg a. d. Lahn, 15. bis 19. Februar 1983 (Veröffentlichungen des Vorgechichtlichen Seminars der Philipps-Universität Marburg a. d. Lahn, Sonderband 4). Sigmaringen, p. 221–271.
Düwel, Klaus (1986b): Wege und Brücke in Skandinavien nach dem Zeugnis wikingerzeitlichen Runeninschriften. In: Hauck, Karl (ed.). Sprache und Recht. Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Ruth Schmidt-Wiegand zum 60. Geburtstag. 2 vols. Berlin/New York,p. 88–97.
Faulkes, Anthony (ed.) (2005): Snorri Sturluson. Edda. Prologue and Gylfaginning. Second edition. London.
Fuglesang, Signe Horn (2005): Runesteinenes ikonografi. In: Øeby Nielsen, Gundhild (ed.). Runesten, magt og mindesmærker. Tværfagligt symposium på Askov Højskole 3.–5. oktober 2002 (Hikuin 32). Højbjerg, p. 75–94.
Gräslund, Anne-Sofie (2002): Ideologi och mentalitet: om religionsskiftet i Skandinavien från enarkeologisk horisont (Opia 29). Uppsala.
Jacobsen, Lis Rubin/Moltke, Erik (1941/42): Danmarks runeindskrifter. 2 vols. Copenhagen.
Jansson, Sven Birger Fredrik (1968): A Newly Discovered Runic Stone from Västerljung, Söderman land. In: Orrick, Allan H. (ed.). Nordica et anglica. Studies in Honor of Stefán Einarsson (Janua linguarum, series maior 22). Den Haag/Paris, p. 115–120.
Jansson, Sven Birger Fredrik (1981): Gästriksland runinskrifter (Sveriges runinskrifter 15). Stockholm.
Jesch, Judith (2001): Ships and Men in the Late Viking Age. The Vocabulary of Runic Inscriptions andSkaldic Verse. Woodbridge.
Jesch, Judith (2002): Eagles, Ravens and Wolves: Beasts of Battle, Symbols of Victory and Death. In: Jesch, Judith (ed.). The Scandinavians from the Vendel Period to the Tenth Century, an Ethnographic Perspective. Papers presented at the fifth conference on “Studies in historical archaeoethnology” organized by the center for interdisciplinary research on social stress, which was held in San Marino from 11th to 15th September 1998 (Studies in historical archaeoethnology 5). Woodbridge/San Marino, p. 251–269.
Jesch, Judith (2005): Memorials in Speech and Writing. In: Øeby Nielsen, Gundhild (ed.). Runesten, magt og mindesmærker: Tværfagligt symposium på Askov Højskole 3.–5. Oktober 2002 (Hikuin 32). Højbjerg, p. 95–104.
Jesch, Judith (2010): The Warrior Ideal in the Late Viking Age. In: Sheehan, John/Ó Corráin, Donnchadh (eds.). The Viking Age. Ireland and the West. Papers from the proceedings of the 15th Viking Congress, Cork, 18–27 August 2005. Dublin, p. 165–173.
Jesch, Judith (2012): Runic Inscriptions and the Vocabulary of Land, Lordship, and Social Power in the Late Viking Age. In: Poulsen, Bjørn/Sindbæk, Søren Michael (eds.). Settlement and Lordship in Viking and Early Medieval Scandinavia (The medieval countryside 9). Turnhout, p. 31–44.
Jungner, Hugo/Svärdström, Elisabeth (1940–1971): Västergötlands runinskrifter (Sveriges run inskrifter 5). Stockholm.
Kinander, Ragnar (1935–1961): Smålands runinskrifter (Sveriges runinskrifter 4). Stockholm.
Lager, Linn (2002): Den synliga tron: Runstenskors som spegling av kristnandet i Sverige (Opia 31).Uppsala.
Liepe, Lena (1989): Sigurdssagan i bild. In: Fornvännen, 84, p. 1–11.
Margeson, Sue (1980): The Volsung Legend in Medieval Art. In: Andersen, Flemming G. et al. (eds.).Medieval Iconography and Narrative. A symposium. Procedings of the Fourth International Symposium organized by the Centre for the Study of Vernacular Literature in the Middle Ages, Held at Odense University on 19–20 November, 1979. Odense, p. 183–211.
Miklósi, Ádám (2007): Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. Oxford.
Oehrl, Sigmund (2006): Zur Deutung anthropomorpher und theriomorpher Bilddarstellungen auf den spätwikingerzeitlichen Runensteinen Schwedens (Wiener Studien zur Skandinavistik 16). Vienna.
Oehrl, Sigmund (2010): Vierbeinerdarstellungen auf schwedischen Runensteinen: Studien zur nordgermanischen Tier*** Fesselungsikonografie (Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 72). Berlin/New York.
Pluskowski, Aleksander (2006): Wolves and the Wilderness in the Middle Ages. Woodbridge. Roesdahl, Else (1991): Nordisk førkristen religion. Om kilder og metoder. In: Steinsland, Gro (eds.). Nordisk Hedendom. Et symposium. Odense, p. 293–301.
Samnordisk runtextdatabas, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University. www.nordiska.uu.se/forskn/samnord.htm (26. 09. 2014).
Sawyer, Birgit (2000): The Viking-Age Rune-Stones. Custom and Commemoration in Early Medieval Scandinavia. Oxford.
Stern, Marjolein (2009): Sigur.r Fáfnisbani as a Commemorative Motif. In: Ney, Agneta/Williams, Henrik/Charpentier Ljungqvist, Fredrik (eds.). Preprint papers of The 14th International Saga Conference. Uppsala 9th–15th August 2009, 2. Gävle, p. 898–906. www.saga.nordiska.uu.se/ preprint/ (26. 09. 2014).
Stern, Marjolein (2013): Runestone Images and Visual Communication in Viking Age Scandinavia. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Nottingham. http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/4291/(26. 09. 2014).
Thedéen, Susanne (2009): A desirable, deceitful or disastrous death. Memories of men and masculinities in late Viking age runic inscriptions. In: Regner, Elisabet/von Heijne, Cecilia/KitzlerÅhfeldt, Laila/Kjellström, Anna (eds.). From Ephesos to Dalecarlia, Reflections on Body, Space and Time in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Stockholm studies in archaeology 48). Stockholm, p. 57–82.
U Fv + number = inscription published in Fornvännen: tidskrift för Svensk antikvarisk forskning. 1906–. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien (in collaboration with Svenska fornminnesföreningen, 1942ff.). Stockholm.
Wessén, Elias/Jansson, Sven Birger Fredrik (1940–43, 1943–46, 1949–51, 1953–58): Upplands runinskrifter 1–4 (Sveriges runinskrifter 6–9). Stockholm.
Williams, Henrik (1994): Vad sager runstenarna om Sveriges kristnande? In: Nilsson, Bertil (eds.). Kristnandet i Sverige: gamla källor och nya perspektiv (Projektet Sveriges kristnande, publikationer 5). Uppsala, p. 45–83.
Wulf, Fred (1997): Der Name des zweiten Sohnes in der Fjuckby-Inschrift. In: Blandade Runstudier, 2, p. 185–199.
