Exploring Circum-Baltic Cultures and Beyond

180 Pages·2019·4.442 MB·English

by  Joonas Ahola, Kendra Willson (eds.)

The Retrospective Methods Network

Newsletter

Interdisciplinary and
Comparative Methodologies

№ 14

Exploring Circum-Baltic Cultures
and Beyond

Guest Editors:
Joonas Ahola and Kendra Willson

Published by
Folklore Studies / Department of Cultures
University of Helsinki, Helsinki
1
RMN Newsletter is a medium of contact and communication for members of the Retrospective
Methods Network (RMN). The RMN is an open network which can include anyone who wishes to
share in its focus. It is united by an interest in the problems, approaches, strategies and limitations
related to considering some aspect of culture in one period through evidence from another, later
period. Such comparisons range from investigating historical relationships to the utility of analogical
parallels, and from comparisons across centuries to developing working models for the more
immediate traditions behind limited sources. RMN Newsletter sets out to provide a venue and
emergent discourse space in which individual scholars can discuss and engage in vital cross-
disciplinary dialogue, present reports and announcements of their own current activities, and where
information about events, projects and institutions is made available.

RMN Newsletter is edited by Frog, Helen F. Leslie-Jacobsen, Joseph S. Hopkins, Robert Guyker
and Simon Nygaard, published by:
Folklore Studies / Department of Cultures
University of Helsinki
PO Box 59 (Unioninkatu 38 C 217)
00014 University of Helsinki
Finland

The open-access electronic edition of this publication is available on-line at:
https://www.helsinki.fi/en/networks/retrospective-methods-network

Interdisciplinary and Comparative Methodologies: Exploring Circum-Baltic Cultures and Beyond is
a special issue organized and edited by Frog, Joonas Ahola and Kendra Willson.

© 2019 RMN Newsletter; authors retain rights to reproduce their own works and to grant permission
for the reproductions of those works.

ISSN 2324-0636 (print)

ISSN 1799-4497 (electronic)

All articles in the main section of this journal have been subject to peer review.

2
Contents

Editor’s Column ................................................................................................................................... 6

INTERDISCIPLINARY AND COMPARATIVE METHODOLOGIES
EXPLORING CIRCUM-BALTIC CULTURES AND BEYOND
Interdisciplinary and Comparative Methodologies: An Introduction .................................................. 7
Frog, Joonas Ahola and Kendra Willson
Abstract: The core of this special issue engages with the constructedness of ideas and understandings rooted in the
discourses of scholarship. This introductory article explores perspectives on discourses and practices of
interdisciplinarity. The discussion of topics related to these issues develops in dialogue with individual contributions
to the collection in ways that make their interconnections and complementarity apparent.
Theory and Methodology for Assembly Site Identification and Analysis ......................................... 17
Alexandra Sanmark
Abstract: This article presents a new interdisciplinary methodology successfully developed for the identification and
detailed analysis of Viking-Age outdoor assembly sites. This methodology draws on archaeological evidence,
topographic information and a wide range of written sources, from laws to eddic poetry. It is hoped this approach
will inspire a new way of thinking, leading to the identification of outdoor assembly-sites in areas of the world where
they are not yet known.
Thegns in the Social Order of Anglo-Saxon England and Viking-Age Scandinavia: Outlines
of a Methodological Reassessment .................................................................................................... 25
Denis Sukhino-Khomenko
Abstract: The article addresses the possibilities for a methodological reassessment of the phenomenon of the thegns
in England and Scandinavia in the late Viking Age (ca. 900–1066). The historiographical overview reveals that the
thegns have never been examined for their own sake, and that the recent developments in source studies open new
methodological prospects in anthropological research. The case study of the thegns hopes to outline some of them.
Castrén’s Lectures on Finnish Mythology: Methodological Reflections .......................................... 51
Joonas Ahola and Karina Lukin
Abstract: M.A. Castrén’s Föreläsningar i finsk mytologi [‘Lectures on Finnish mythology’] represents an important
phase in the study of mythology and religion. It is the first comparative study on Finnish and related mythologies that
draws on contemporary international scholarship. The Lectures are here reviewed critically both as an emblem in the
history of the discipline and as a case study on challenges in combining methodologies from different disciplines and
approaches.
Great Goddess Theory in Ancient Germanic Studies ........................................................................ 70
Joseph S. Hopkins
Abstract: The present article discusses a historical tendency among scholars to focus on male-gendered deities in the
Germanic corpus, a boom period of goddess studies in the 1990s under the influence of Marija Gimbutas, and the
place of Great Goddess theory in the field of ancient Germanic studies today. Great Goddess theory is proposed to
remain an influence in ancient Germanic studies, particularly in the field’s tendency to identify goddesses as
extensions of a single entity.
Runo Revisited: Borrowing and Semantic Development .................................................................. 77
Kendra Willson
Abstract: The Finnish and Karelian word runo [‘poem’] has been viewed as reflecting a loan from Proto-Germanic
*rūnō, the ancestor of Old Norse rún [‘rune’]. However, given its limited distribution in Finnic and the meanings
attested in Germanic and Finnic languages, the word was more likely borrowed at a later stage, from Early Norse
3
near the start of the Viking Age, probably in the meaning of ‘incantation, verbal charm’ and in connection with
incantational magic.
On the Analogical Comparison of Performance Environments: Lament Poetry’s Soundscape
as a Case Study .................................................................................................................................. 91
Eila Stepanova and Frog
Abstract: This paper confronts the research tendency to treat a performance tradition as a semiotic phenomenon in
isolation from its performance environment. Karelian funeral lament offers an example of a tradition with a customary
soundscape that contextualizes and reinforces the performance arena, while performance participates in the
soundscapes of additional ritual activities. The case’s analogical value is illustrated through comparison with Old
Norse examples.

COMMENTS, PERSPECTIVES AND REPORTS
Scandinavian–Finnic Language Contact and Problems of Periodisation ....................................... 112
Johan Schalin
Abstract: This paper explores the periodisation of pre-documentary Scandinavian language and its synchronisation
with that of Finnic, the era in focus being the first millennium CE. Stratification of loanwords is discussed both as a
means to refine periodisation and as an aim in itself. The problems as concerns the latter half of the first millennium
are highlighted. The account is built on dissertation research defended in September 2018.
Archaeological and Lexical Relevant Indicators of South Sámi Prehistory .................................... 123
Minerva Piha
Abstract: This paper complements my model for combining archaeological and lexical material with relevant
indicators, a discipline-neutral tool that provides information on cultural processes enabling comparison of research
results of different disciplines. It shows how the model is applied to South Sámi material, and how relevant indicators
should be used in the data. I suggest that a degree of probability be added to the concept, distinguishing strong and
weak relevant indicators.
In the Hollow of Tursas? – An Overview of an Archaeological Work-in-Progress
in Southwest Finland ........................................................................................................................ 131
Sami Raninen
Abstract: Since 2012, an archaeological excavation has continued on a Late Iron Age (AD 800–1050) settlement site
and a medieval and early modern village plot of Tursiannotko in Pirkkala (near Tampere). The very well-preserved
materials found at the site give a lot of information regarding the modes of subsistence, building techniques, material
culture, ritual practices and trade contacts of a relatively wealthy farmer and hunter community.
Jómsvíkinga saga – Recent Research: Focus on Genre ................................................................... 136
Sirpa Aalto
Abstract: This report offers an overview of recent research being conducted on Jómsvíkinga saga.
Russian Laments of the Vologda Region in Modern Records: Distinctiveness and Relations
to Other Traditions ........................................................................................................................... 140
Elena Jugai
Abstract: This article introduces Russian laments of the Vologda region in relation to other lament traditions of the
Baltic Sea region. The tradition of this region and lament collection there are briefly introduced as well as the Russian
Lament database developed and used in connection with the current research. The language and poetics of the laments
are outlined followed by a rhythmical analysis and comments on parallelism, alliteration and practices.
New Research on Skolt Saami Laments .......................................................................................... 151
Marko Jouste
Abstract: This report briefly presents on evidence of a lament tradition among the Skolt Saami. The lament tradition
was recognized when documented by earlier scholars but has never entered discussion of lament traditions and has
remained generally unrecognized in discussions of lament traditions in the Baltic Sea region.
4
CONFERENCES AND EVENTS
Conference Report – Austmarr VI: Religion, Language, Practice, with a Workshop
on Late Iron Age Mortuary Behaviours ........................................................................................... 154
Kendra Willson
Conference Report – Austmarr VII: Crossing Disciplinary Borders in Viking-Age Studies:
Problems, Challenges and Solutions ................................................................................................ 156
Joseph Ryder
Conference Announcement – Austmarr IX: Genius loci in the Prehistory of the Baltic Sea
Region .............................................................................................................................................. 160
Vykintas Vaitkevičius
Conference Report – Folklore and Old Norse Mythology ............................................................... 161
Jesse Barber
Conference Report – Network of Early Career Researchers in Old Norse: Trends and
Challenges in Early Career Scholarship Workshop ......................................................................... 166
Luke John Murphy
Conference Announcement – Methodology in Mythology: Where Does the Study of Old
Norse Religion Stand, and Where Can We Go from Here? – The 2019 Aarhus Old Norse
Mythology Conference .................................................................................................................... 168
Eldar Heide

RECENT PUBLICATIONS
Contacts and Networks in the Baltic Sea Region: Austmarr as a Northern Mare nostrum, ca.
500–1500 AD ................................................................................................................................... 169
Maths Bertell, Frog and Kendra Willson (eds.)
Atlantic Outlooks on Being at Home: Gaelic Place-Lore and the Construction of a Sense
of Place in Medieval Iceland ............................................................................................................ 170
Matthias Egeler
Viking Law and Order: Places and Rituals of Assembly in the Medieval North ............................ 173
Alexandra Sanmark

PHD DISSERTATION PROJECTS
Communicative Registers, Enregisterment and Indexicality in Viena Karelian
Kalevala-Metric Poetry (working title) ............................................................................................ 176
Tuukka Karlsson

MASTER’S THESES
Óðinn: A Queer týr? A Study of Óðinn’s Function as a Queer Deity in Iron Age Scandinavia ..... 178
Amy Jefford Franks
CALLS FOR PAPERS
The Formula in Oral Poetry and Prose: New Approaches, Models and Interpretations .................. 179

5
Editor’s Column

The Retrospective Methods Network is going with this meeting’s workshop were oriented
strong and, as has become the norm, its towards discussion rather than publication.
daughter networks are especially visible. A The idea behind the collection was instead
collection of selected articles from the Old built on working not simply with the concept
Norse Folklorists’ meeting in 2015 (Tartu) has of ‘interdisciplinarity’, but with a broader
appeared as the beautiful volume Supernatural phenomenon of which interdisciplinarity is a
Encounters in Old Norse Literature and part, a phenomenon which has no label of its
Tradition, edited by Daniel Sävborg and Karen own and thus becomes simultaneously obscured
Bek-Pedersen (Brepols, 2018). The Austmarr in the shadow of interdisciplinarity. This aspect
Network held Austmarr VIII: The Viking-Age of the thematic issue’s focus is linked to
Baltic Sea Region and the Islamic World in comparativism, in the broad sense of bringing
Stockholm (31st May – 1st June 2018) and things together and looking for patterns of
Austmarr IX: Genius loci in the Prehistory of sameness and difference or how one thing may
the Baltic Sea Region is planned to be held in help shed light on another, a methodological
Klaipėda (29th–31st May 2019). The volume tool that intersects with interdisciplinarity and
Contacts and Networks in the Circum-Baltic the broader phenomenon with which it is
Region: Austmarr as a Northern Mare connected. The contributions gathered here
nostrum, ca. 500–1500 AD, edited by Maths include introductions to, and discussions of,
Bertell, Frog and Kendra Willson (Amsterdam methodologies that truly unite distinct
University Press, 2019) will soon be available. disciplines or that triangulate analyses of
The present special issue, Interdisciplinary different types of data emblematic of different
and Comparative Methodologies: Exploring fields. They also include perspectives on how
Circum-Baltic Cultures and Beyond, has been disciplinary discourses structure our thinking
developed as a collaboration between the and consider ways of overcoming the
Austmarr Network and the Academy of limitations that this creates. The Austmarr
Finland project Mythology, Verbal Art and Network looks at the Baltic Sea as an arena of
Authority in Social Impact (2016–2021) of contacts and networks and this emphasis has
Folklore Studies, University of Helsinki. shaped the content of the collection. Rather
Methodology has been a primary interest of than focusing only on Circum-Baltic cultures’
this journal since its inception, particularly in connections to one another, these are viewed as
connection with cultures of the past. The idea connecting outwards, for example to cultures
for this special issue is rooted in discussions of the British Isles or the Vologda region of
connected to the multidisciplinary workshop of Russia. The result is a core group of six papers
Austmarr VI: Religion, Language, Practice, accompanied by a variety of complementary
organized in Helsinki at the end of 2016 (see articles and reports that we hope you will both
the report by Willson in this issue), but it was enjoy and benefit from.
not planned as conference proceedings per se.
Austmarr Network meetings offer a venue for Frog
presenting work in progress rather than more University of Helsinki
or less ready papers, and the lectures connected
6
I
NTERDISCIPLINARY AND
C M
OMPARATIVE ETHODOLOGIES
E C -B C B
XPLORING IRCUM ALTIC ULTURES AND EYOND
Interdisciplinary and Comparative Methodologies: An Introduction
Frog, University of Helsinki, Joonas Ahola, University of Helsinki,
and Kendra Willson, Polish Institute of Advanced Studies / University of Turku
Abstract: The core of this special issue engages with the constructedness of ideas and understandings rooted in the
discourses of scholarship. This introductory article explores perspectives on discourses and practices of
interdisciplinarity. The discussion of topics related to these issues develops in dialogue with individual contributions to
the collection in ways that make their interconnections and complementarity apparent.
When scholars of one background look at whole fields of evidence invisible or subject to
research from another, it is not uncommon to erasure, as though they did not exist (Lotman
observe issues, sources or questions of which 1990: 58; Irvine & Gal 2000: 38–39). Put another
that other research appears unaware. Whether way, our socialization in particular discourses
the particular background is discussed in terms builds the ‘box’ in which we ‘think’. The
of disciplines, fields of study, subjects, schools challenges of advancing beyond those limits
or national scholarships, the discussions in are at the basis of the present collection. The
which we are first trained and later engage, as six articles that form the core of this special
well as the mass of published and unpublished issue engage with the constructedness of ideas
scholarship that is built into a discourse heritage, and understandings rooted in these backgrounds,
all shape our backgrounds, our interests, and discuss, develop and apply multidisciplinary
ideologies and whole field of vision. On the and comparative methodologies. This core is
one hand, this pragmatic reality structures our complemented by presentations of current
thinking and perspectives in ways that are findings and methodologies in overviews,
difficult to see beyond, and, on the other hand, it reports and discussions of additional research
creates disjunctions in discussion and knowledge relevant to understanding cultures and their
of different disciplines, national scholarships histories of relations in the Circum-Baltic arena.
or other groups of scholars. Interdisciplinary
and Comparative Methodologies: Exploring The Challenge of Diversified Knowledge
Circum-Baltic Cultures and Beyond brings The interest in humanities in general is focused
precisely these issues into focus. on the complexities of human societies and
The challenges posed by the diversity of cultures as a whole. This scope of interest is
frames of reference, paradigms and ideologies extremely wide and arguably even inexhaustible,
emergent across different discourses are not whereas the capabilities of any individual
simply issues of communication and shared scholar or even a group of scholars remain
understanding. Researchers’ frameworks extremely limited by comparison, and thus the
structure the factors and types of evidence scope of the humanities has naturally split into
under consideration, as well as the questions divisions of interest. The scholarship as a
considered interesting or relevant to ask and whole is shaped by the history of discourses in
trajectories along which to explore. The different disciplines and on different subjects
ideology of the resulting perspective may leave or phenomena, which is a basic issue linked to
7
specialized knowledge and associated discussion where that object’s image evolves as it is
networks. Any network of people who engage, discussed and debated. In this case, the
across protracted periods, in ongoing discussion potential for significant variation between
oriented to one another gradually evolves frames scholarship in different languages is salient
of reference for shared knowledge, vocabulary because the discussions of Old English and Old
and even evaluations of ideas, practices and so Norse are not integrated; the configuration of
forth (cf. Lemke 2002; Agha 2007). disciplines concerned with thegn and þegn also
Although scientific research aims at objective differs; and the difference in language has
understanding of reality, the knowledge affected ease of access to related work being
produced is always a construct that emerges in done in parallel.
dialectic with the ever-accumulating history of
scientific discourse, as “items have been A Perspective on Diversification
added, singly and in combination, to [its] ever The evolution of specialist discussions today is
growing stockpile” (Kuhn 1970: 1–2). It is rooted in the history of development of higher
popular to talk about ‘knowledge’ as an centers of learning and study. Especially the
objective thing, collective, unified and medieval Universitas magistrorum et
integrated, to which individuals both contribute scholarium [‘Corporate Body of Teachers and
and have uniform access. However, the Students’], which began emerging in the 11th
pragmatics of research and communication lead and 12th centuries under the Church, became a
knowledge to develop in channels within which nesting-ground of development during the
discussions become focused and specialized, Enlightenment and evolved rapidly in the wake
often discussed as ‘disciplines’, ‘fields’ or ‘areas of Romanticism. Already during the Middle
of research’. Specialization allows discussion to Ages, study was organized into different
advance to higher levels by building on a higher subjects; there was specialization and discussion
base competence and shared frame of reference, and debate on particular topics; but knowledge
but it also makes the particular channel of developed across subjects quite fluidly. Of
discussion more difficult for outsiders to course, as Harvey J. Graff (2015: 245n.37)
engage with if they lack the relevant learning. reminds us: “Only in theory was knowledge
These shared frames of reference may vary never undivided; to think otherwise was always
considerably between national or language- an act of faith.” Nevertheless, the threshold of
centered scholarships: the same nominal knowledge to engage in different academic
discipline may be understood and practiced discussions was, from today’s perspective,
very differently in Germany, the United States, comparatively low: a university education was
the Russian Federation, China, India and so on. organized so as to enable a student to develop
The term discipline ecology describes how competence across subjects. Contributions to
disciplines, their relative statuses and distri- discussion were also built on different ideas of
butions of labour are organized relative to one source criticism and methodological rigour,
another. National discipline ecologies may and did not necessarily differentiate between
vary considerably, which increases the empirically grounded theory and intuitive,
divergence between discussions of a particular untested hypotheses that might now seem like
topic or phenomenon. In the present volume, unbridled speculation (which is not to suggest
Denis Sukhino-Khomenko describes differences that speculation is no longer found in the
between Anglophone and Scandinavian humanities today).
scholarship on the Old English thegn and Old This situation was transformed in the course
Norse þegn [‘thane’]. Through his critical of the 19th century. Comparativism rapidly came
deconstruction of views in earlier scholarship to dominate research, leading to remarkably
and reanalysis of primary evidence, Sukhino- rapid advances in a variety of subjects (see
Khomenko’s study clearly illustrates how an further Griffiths 2017). At the same time, the
object of study and its relations to particular print publication economy facilitated increas-
sources are constructed through analysis, from ingly rapid and widespread circulation of
which it can enter into a disciplinary, national scholars’ works. Individual specialization was
or language-centered academic discourse, nothing new, but the accumulation of advances
8
and the quantity of widely circulating scholar- instrument in discourse and debate, often
ship formed a trajectory toward specialization without clear ideas about what it is or why it is
as a social phenomenon. Specialization took important (e.g. Graff 2015). The discourse on
shape as part of researcher identity and the interdisciplinarity remains at a remove from
level of base knowledge presumed for particular research ‘on the ground’ and the different sorts
discussion networks rose. These processes of potential that interdisciplinary work has. At
were complemented by the organization of the same time, a dichotomy arises in institutional
universities and educational programs into settings. Interdisciplinarity is valorized and
departments during the 19th and early 20th even demanded among individual researchers,
centuries. Rather than being an autonomous, but what becomes a draw to institutions is
organic process, the formation of institutional departments and disciplines as structures of
structures and disciplines involved agents, teaching and research that are more visible than
networks and institutional politics, ranging the endeavours of any one researcher.
from Max Müller in comparative philology at Reciprocally, researchers who become more
Oxford (Fynes 2007) to Kaarle Krohn’s interdisciplinary may face the challenge that
championing of folklore studies’ distinct hiring for faculty positions still seems to remain
identity (Frog 2013). Institutional status was centered on customary disciplinary categories.
important for the historical sustainability of The circulating ideas about interdisciplinarity
research fields across generations (cf. Dorson thus not only appear disconnected from research
1961). Institutional departments and positions being done, but even at odds with what happens
emerged in relation to one another (e.g. Siikala at the level of institutions advocating it.
2006), evolving national disciplinary ecologies, Interdisciplinarity does not necessarily entail
which could also be actively structured by the unification of knowledge. As Peter Weingart
individuals who held prominent positions (2000: 26) has written, “interdisciplinarity [...]
within those ecologies (e.g. Klein 2006). The is proclaimed, demanded, hailed, and written
late 19th and early 20th centuries were thus a into funding programs, but at the same time
formative time that established the foundations specialization in science goes on unhampered,
of disciplines and fields of study that enhance reflected in the continuous complaint about it.”
(and perhaps even govern) how the organization On a descriptive level, interdisciplinarity refers
of academic discourse operates, is discussed to a synthesis or combination of disciplines. In
and evolves today. practice, such synthesis and combination
occurs at the level of individual works and
A Problem of Interdisciplinarity projects or the work of individual researchers
The combination of specialization and institu- more generally. For example, the main
tional structuring produced concerns that disciplines represented in this volume are
knowledge would become compartmentalized historical linguistics and philology, folklore
and fragmented rather than being unified. and archaeology – all concerned with tracing
Present-day discussions on the need for and reconstructing the human past. Overlap
interdisciplinarity in research can be viewed as among these is substantial, and there has been
an inevitable counter-effect to the prolonged an increasing awareness that these disciplines
segmentation and specialization in research work better in dialogue. For certain investi-
that has distanced scholarly discourses gations, it may be that no one discipline can
throughout the humanities and especially yield dependable results on its own. In this
distianced the humanities from fields such as volume, Alexandra Sanmark demonstrates that
the natural sciences. The issue, however, is the identification of Norse assembly sites cannot
extremely complex and becomes idealized be done solely on the basis of archaeological
through discussion. Interdisciplinarity’s implicit data. She presents a methodology for combining
frame of reference is ‘disciplinarity’, a archaeological data with multifaceted and
stigmatized yet undefined ghost. A crux of multidisciplinary topographic data as well as
interdisciplinarity is that it has become treated eclectic textual evidence. Triangulating these
in discussion as an ideal and necessary solution not only allows the identification of such sites,
to all scientific inquiry, itself becoming an but also produces perspectives on assembly
9
sites as a type of place with predictable features views produced through multidisciplinary
and organized in certain ways. Interdisciplinary perspectives were being developed already
methodologies may produce innovations and from the first half of the 19th century, even if
new perspectives, but they develop around disciplinary infrastructures for approaching
particular questions or concerns. The approaches phonological and semantic change had not yet
can feed back into discussions identified with been developed. These contributions connect
different disciplines and sometimes open new with a widespread research interest in social
directions of investigation or reconcile dimensions of language connected to the
perspectives on a common problem approached remote past, which has been feeding back into
through different types of data. Nevertheless, historical linguistic research but also could, in
they do not produce a synthesis of the respective principle, advance socially to a critical mass of
disciplines per se. scholarship integrating etymology, language
The discourse on interdisciplinarity often history, archaeology, social linguistics and
seems to target a full integration of disciplines, linguistic anthropology.
dissolving boundaries between them in order When this sort of synthesis occurs at a
to achieve a unified if not holistic knowledge. social level, however, it tends not to result in a
This type of development requires inter- unification of disciplines but rather in
disciplinarity at a social level of networks of disciplinary diversification (Weingart 2000:
scholars; it is possible to observe examples of 36). Instead of being a means of unifying
this in the present collection. Several of the knowledge, interdisciplinarity is often used to
contributions to this volume take on the achieve new, innovative ways of investigating
challenge of relating language or words and and discussing whatever is brought into
their etymologies to different disciplinary research focus. If the use of interdisciplinarity
frameworks. Whereas Sukhino-Khomenko advances to a social phenomenon in a broader
brings into focus a social institution researched academic community, it becomes a call for its
in close connection with particular words, own specialized approaches (Weingart 2000:
Kendra Willson illustrates that etymologies 39–41). This may produce a new, hybrid field
must take into account fuller cultural contexts that receives institutional recognition, like
than has customarily been done, including biochemistry or linguistic anthropology, or the
changing genres and technologies of innovative field may remain under an
traditional performance. Riddles surrounding a established disciplinary or departmental label,
loan word can be addressed by considering its viewed as diversification in local or national
connections with social and historical scholarship or as a new ‘school’. In either case,
processes, to which etymology contributes a there is still specialization; it is simply
complementary perspective, as in her case changed. Such a field may intuitively sound
study on the relationship between Finno- like multiple, integrated specializations. In
Karelian runo [‘traditional poem; performer of practice, the process of integrating disciplines
traditional poetry’] and the family of Germanic carves out relevant areas of the fields being
words related to Old Norse rún [‘charm; unit integrated, so that it does not result in a
of mythic knowledge; message carved in comprehensive synthesis of two fields as
runes; runic letter; confidante’]. Similarly, wholes but rather links them by building
Minerva Piha sets out a methodology to bring something new from parts of each. Of course,
etymologies of South Sámi vocabulary into this is quite natural, as new knowledge tends to
full dialogue with archaeology. Johan Schalin evoke new questions that require new methods
seeks to develop a balanced model of language and approaches to answer. Even synthesis of
history that reconciles linguistic and previous knowledge may be more than an end
archaeological evidence rather than simply unto itself and may uncover ground for
treating language as iconic of culture and trending new paths. Some of the trends
projecting historical language phases onto observable in the current volume could
archaeological cultures (cf. Saarikivi & potentially come to be viewed as opening an
Lavento 2012). Joonas Ahola and Karina emerging field as a social trajectory of
Lukin draw attention to how similarly holistic interdisciplinarity becomes the new
10