Mounds of fire-cracked stones is a typical Bronze Age monument for the region around lake Mälaren. They are usually, because of their content, interpreted as piles of rubbish. But as they often have kerbs, are situated on cemeteries and sometimes contain human bones, the traditional interpretation is not fully satisfactory.The main focus of this essay is on the mounds of fire-cracked stones which contain human bones in the region north of lake Mälaren. With a detailed study of these, and a comparison with those without human bones, my aim is to get closer to an explanation why the human bones were deposited. The essay consist of a comp­ilation  of 98 excavated mounds and a database with various information gathered from excavation reports and archive documents.With different kinds of osteological aspects taken in consideration, the study shows that human bones have been found in about a third of the mounds.

This paper aims to investigate the connection between clearance cairns and burial cairns. From this point of view I try to answer the questions why they are built in the same area and why these two different types of cairns are so similary constructed. Further I consider different theories about mounds of fire-cracked stones..

In Scandinavia the general idea of the Bronze Age society is that it was organised as chiefdoms. The model for what they looked like is taken from the anthropological studies of the Polynesian chiefdoms. The aim of my study is to investigate a Scandinavian Bronze Age feature, known as cairns mainly containing fire-cracked stone. This is compared with how people in different Polynesian chiefdoms, looked at similar remain. This is done to get a background for new ways of interpretation of such remains.

In Scandinavia the general idea of the Bronze Age society is that it was organised as chiefdoms. The model for what they looked like is taken from the anthropological studies of the Polynesian chiefdoms. The aim of my study is to investigate a Scandinavian Bronze Age feature, known as cairns mainly containing fire-cracked stone. This is compared with how people in different Polynesian chiefdoms, looked at similar remain. This is done to get a background for new ways of interpretation of such remains.

Åsmund Kåresson is one of our greatest rune stone makers. His ornographic stile was copied by other rune writers. Åsmund also made many stones, around 60. Many scientists took för granted Åsmund was from Uppland, but not Magnus Källström. He saw liknesses in a rune stone from Medelpad, M5, and one from Uppland, U372, dedicated to Åsmund.This essey tries to complement Källströms statement.

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..

It is a well known archaeological concern that the remains of human bones left from the bronze age and early iron age Scandinavia are not nearly enough to represent the estimated population of the time. Furthermore the bones of each find rarely represent a whole individual. The majority of the bones must have been disposed of somewhere else, possibly scattered in running waters or in the fields, where they have evaporated or are securely hidden from archaeological excavations.This thesis deals with the grave concept and the problem in using a word that is so very clouded by its modern, western meaning. It also offers an alternative explanation to why the bones are handled the way they are and why they are found in such awkward contexts..