Many different types of Scandinavian flint -- visual classification and energy

dispersive X-ray fluorescence

Högberg, Anders
http://kulturarvsdata.se/raa/fornvannen/html/2012_225
Fornvännen;2012(107):4, s. 225-240
Ingår i: samla.raa.se
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint
– Visual Classification and Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence
By Anders Högberg, Deborah Olausson and Richard Hughes

Högberg, A.; Olausson, D. & Hughes, R., 2012. Many Different Types of Scandi-
navian Flint – Visual Classification and Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence.
Fornvännen 107. Stockholm.

Proceeding from previously published studies of the provenance of southern Scan-

dinavian flint based on visual classification and chemical sourcing, this paper pres-
ents a comprehensive study of flint provenancing. Existing knowledge of the appear-
ance and geological origin of flint types is discussed and reappraised, and new
chemical analyses of flint from 25 localities are presented. The results show that
although there are certain problems in identifying the provenance of south Scandi-
navian flint using geochemical and visual criteria, in most cases these problems can
be overcome. The study ends with a discussion of how the results of the study can
be applied more broadly in future archaeological research.

Anders Högberg,
Archaeology, School of Cultural Studies, Linnaeus University, SE–391 82 Kalmar
anders.hogberg@lnu.se

Deborah Olausson
Dept of Archaeology and Ancient History, Lund University
deborah.olausson@ark.lu.se

Richard E. Hughes
Geochemical Research Laboratory, Portola Valley, California
rehughes@silcon.com

South Scandinavian flint as a raw material for
prehistoric tool manufacture has been investigat-
ed in several studies. The focus has been on flint
types and their quality, appearance, provenance
and availability. Studies based on present-day geo-
logical conditions and availability under prehis-
toric conditions have been carried out to investi-
gate where flint may have been found and how it
was transported both within and between regions,
such as those with abundant flint in the ground
as well as others lacking a natural supply (Knuts-
son 1988; Eriksen 2000; Apel 2001; Knarrström
2001; Mjærum 2004; Högberg and Olausson 2007;
Högberg 2009). Some of the better-known stu-
dies of the provenance of flint and interpreta-
tions of prehistoric transport concern the exten-
sive finds of flint objects, chiefly flint axes, from
Bjurselet in northern Sweden (Becker 1952; Knuts-
son 1988).
Classification of south Scandinavian flint into
different types has chiefly been based on visual
inspection (e.g. Becker 1988; 1993). In a study pub-
lished in 2007, two of the present authors defined
seventeen characteristic types of flint from south-
ern Sweden, Denmark and northern Germany
on the basis of variables such as colour, appear-
ance, properties and availability (Högberg & Olaus-
son 2007). Several studies, however, have demons-
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
226 Anders Högberg et al.
trated the limitations involved in visual classifi-
cation (discussion in Schindler 2010), and in an
earlier pilot study we have tested the possibility
of supplementing visual diagnosis with geoche-
mical sourcing of flint through the use of non-
destructive energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence
spectrometry (EDXRF; Hughes et al. 2010). We
were able to recognise distinctions among flint
from different geographical areas. However, the
results of the pilot study were preliminary, and
we emphasised that further samples must be ana-
lysed from these localities to ensure that the dis-
tinctions identified remained discrete. Also, we
needed to test additional samples from localities
not included in the pilot study, to determine the
degree to which the chemical signatures are use-
ful for identifying flints in this part of the world.
Here we build on these previously published
results and synthesise new results from an exten-
sive chemical analysis of a selection of Scandina-
vian flints (Hughes et al. 2012) together with an
updated review of the visual classification of
some flint types from southern Scandinavia. It is
the most comprehensive study to date of chemi-
cal characterisation of flint from south Scandi-
navia.
Availability and Visual Classification of Flint
Högberg & Olausson’s 2007 classification has been
commented on (Bjarke Ballin 2008; Eriksen 2008;
Andrefsky 2009; Schindler 2010) and we have
done further research on the availability of various
flint types in southern Scandinavia. This applies
chiefly to varieties of Falster Flint and Common
Kristianstad Flint, and a new flint source at Båstad
in northwestern Scania and southern Halland
(fig. 1).
Falster Flint is a characteristic type found at
Hasselø on the island of Falster, Denmark. Its
blue striped appearance in a blue, black or grey
matrix makes it is easy to recognise and the flint
type is well known among modern knappers for
its supreme quality. In 2007 (p. 96 ff) Högberg &
Olausson stated that Falster Flint could be found
mainly on the island of Falster, giving it a clear geo-
graphical provenance in contrast to many other
flint types. This has, however, proven not to be
the case. On the north coast of Jutland, Denmark,
flint nodules can be found which are impossible
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
to distinguish by eye from Falster Flint (Eriksen
2008). The same problem applies to certain flint
nodules from the beach at Hökholz near Schles-
wig in northern Germany. When we visited Hök-
holz in 2010 we found several flint nodules which
we could classify as Falster Flint, together with
an abundance of several other ice- or moraine-
transported flint types. This means our previous
descriptions of the provenance of Falster Flint
(Högberg & Olausson 2007, p. 96 ff) are in need
of revision.
The geographical distribution of the visually
characteristic Common Kristianstad Flint, with
its numerous lighter-coloured spots of various
sizes in a black or grey matrix, has not previously
been investigated in detail. This type of flint
occurs in geological formations and in the till in
north-eastern Scania, Sweden, but exactly where
it occurs and in what quantities has, until recent-
ly, been unclear. Old geological literature that
has come to our attention after 2007 makes it
clear that Common Kristianstad flint occurs in
situ in geological chalk formations in the area
around Kristianstad and that it can also be found
in ice-transported limestone nappes and in gla-
cial till as far south as central Scania, as far west
in northern Scania as Vittsjö, and as far east as
western Blekinge. Farther east in Blekinge or far-
ther to the north in Småland there are no report-
ed occurrences of Common Kristianstad Flint
(Moberg 1880; 1884; Blomberg 1900; Lunde-
gren 1934). This ought to have an impact on in-
terpretations of trade in raw material and arte-
facts made of Common Kristianstad Flint, par-
ticularly in Blekinge and north along the east
coast of Sweden up to the Kalmar region and
Öland, where many finds of production waste
and artefacts made from Common Kristianstad
Flint have been made (Lundegren 1934; Magnus-
son & Selling 2001).
Another less often discussed occurrence of
flint is worth mentioning. Palaeontologist J.C.
Moberg (1886) noted the occurrence of flint and
chalk in north-western Scania and southern Hal-
land. Large-scale surveys revealed a greyish-yellow
homogeneous flint and a dark-grey flint together
with till or limestone. Moberg (1886, p. 365) con-
cluded that a solid chalk system stretching from
the north side of the Hallandsåsen ridge at Bås-

Fig. 1. Map of south
Scandinavia with sites
mentioned in the text.
tad and extending to the Halland plain had been
destroyed or covered by till during the glacial pe-
riod. The occurrence of flint in this area should
be investigated more carefully in the future.
Chemical Sourcing
For more than 40 years instrumental techniques
have been applied to determine the chemical com-
position, or “fingerprint”, of geological flint sour-
ces with the goal of using chemical correspon-
dences between geological and archaeological ma-
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 227
terials to establish the probable geological source
of origin of prehistoric artefacts (e.g. Aspinall &
Feather 1972; de Bruin et al. 1972; Bush 1976;
Cowell 1981; Stockmans et al. 1981; Craddock et
al. 1983; Kinnunen et al. 1985; Bush & Sieveking
1986; Sieveking & Hart 1986; Sieveking & New-
comer 1987; Matiskainen et al. 1989; Luedtke
1992; McDonnell et al. 1997; Schild & Sulgos-
towska 1997; Costopoulos 2003; Baltrūnas et al.
2006; Högberg & Olausson 2007; Allard et al.
2008; Hughes et al. 2010; 2012; Olofsson &
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
228 Anders Högberg et al.
Rodushkin 2011). Much of this instrumentally
based provenance research has been devoted to
studies of flint from England and continental
Europe. Despite the long history of interest in
flint mines in Denmark and Sweden (e.g., Althin
1951; Becker 1959; Rudebeck 1998) and works
focusing on lithic technology in the region (e.g.,
Olausson 1983; Knutsson 1988; Eriksen 2000;
Apel 2001; Knarrström 2001; Högberg 2009),
only a few studies focusing on the chemical charac-
terisation of flint from these countries have been
published (Micheelsen 1966; Hughes et al. 2010;
2012; Olofsson & Rodushkin 2011).1
Methods
The laboratory analysis conditions and instru-
mentation used in our study has been described
elsewhere and those interested in additional ana-
lytical detail may consult Hughes et al. 2010, p.
21; 2012. The instrument used is a QuanX-EC™
(Thermo Electron Corporation) EDXRF spec-
trometer equipped with a silver (Ag) x-ray tube,
a 50 kV x-ray generator, digital pulse processor
with automated energy calibration, and a Peltier
cooled solid state detector with 145 eV resolution
(FWHM) at 5.9 keV. The x-ray tube was operated
at differing voltage and current settings to opti-
mise excitation of the elements selected for analy-
sis. Samples were cleaned with distilled water be-
fore analysis to remove any noticeable surface
contaminants. Special care was taken to avoid di-
recting the X-ray beam on to obvious patinated
surfaces or calcareous or fossil inclusions. The
only other requirement was that each sample
should be relatively flat, with a minimum surface
size for analysis of >2–3 mm thick and >15–20
mm in diameter.
Previous research showed that X-ray intensi-
ties above background for certain trace elements
were too low to yield reliable composition esti-
mates, so analyses presented in Hughes et al. 2012
focused on major and selected minor elements.
Ca, Ti, Mn and Fe), using the Kα emission line
Of the nine elements analysed (Al, Si, S, Cl, K,
for each, Si, Ca, and Fe typically generated the high-
est count rates (counts/second over background)
and total counts, so these elements were employ-
ed to characterise differences among flint sour-
ces.2 Because of the extremely high SiO2 content
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
of flint, the Geological Survey of Japan’s JCh-1
chert standard (Imai et al. 1996) was used for pre-
cision and accuracy comparison.
Source Criticism
First we must briefly recognise four factors affect-
ing the precision and accuracy of non-destructive
EDXRF analysis.
1. The homogeneity or heterogeneity of the ma-
terial being measured. Volcanic rocks (such as
obsidian) are typically quite homogeneous in
trace, minor and major element composition
and they usually exhibit a comparatively nar-
row range of elemental variability. By con-
trast sedimentary rocks (like flint and chert)
are quite heterogeneous in composition be-
cause formation processes over very long pe-
riods of geological time compress and com-
bine assorted organic and inorganic material.
This diverse parent material expresses itself
in sedimentary rocks as chemical heterogene-
ity (Luedtke 1992).
2. The physical surface to be analysed. The tar-
get surface should be flat and free from inclu-
sions. Highly irregular surfaces alter the criti-
cal geometrical path between the X-ray tube
excitation source and the detector. Highly
variable and usually inaccurate results can
result. Obsidian artefacts that are relatively
flat or lenticular in cross-section typically yield
precise data via EDXRF analysis (Hughes 1986,
p. 31 ff), and we have had the same result with
flint (Hughes et al. 2012).
3. EDXRF is a bulk-area, near-surface technique,
so X-rays excited and emitted from the entire
target (sample) surface are detected and com-
bined to derive a composition estimate for
each element. In the present case, the X-ray
beam was focused on each sample via a 6.8
mm collimator (aperture) within a 30 mm2
excitation area. However, Scandinavian flint
often contains inclusions, and if the X-ray
beam excites an area of such inclusions, the
spectrum shows a noticeable enhancement
(spike) in Ca and Fe composition atypical of
the inclusion-free matrix of the specimen
(Hughes et al. 2012). To avoid this problem
and its impact on correct chemical classifica-
tion of flint, every effort was as mentioned
 Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 229
Table 1. Results of the !"#$%& (%)*+ !,*) !*+ -% . )* -"* /, 01 2&
replicated EDXRF analy- 34#5&6 789:';< 789:';< 789:;< 7$$#< 789:';< 789:';< 7$$#< 7$$#< 7$$#<
!"#$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 0112 33044 20211 145 20216 20787 32 "( 118
sis of the patinated and 9'#'%&%&:");)1 <02= <042 <0221 <12 <021 <021 <44 <5
unpatinated surface of a !"#$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 01=7 33027 20211 116 20272 20753 63 "( 144
flint flake. Nd = no data, 9'#'%&%&:");)4 <02= <042 <0221 <12 <021 <021 <11 <5
nc = not computed, nr = !"#$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 01>= 33036 20211 141 20241 2075= 86 7 115
9'#'%&%&:");)7 <02= <042 <0221 <12 <021 <021 <44 <4 <5
not reported. Recom- !"#$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 01>6 3301= 20211 115 20213 20782 32 > 116
mended values for JCh-1 9'#'%&%&:");)= <02= <042 <0221 <12 <021 <021 <44 <4 <5
from Imai et al. (1996). ± !"#$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 011= 33016 20212 116 20217 20754 88 4 11>
9'#'%&%&:");)> <02= <042 <0221 <12 <021 <021 <44 <4 <6
= 2 sigma estimate (in
ppm and weight percent) ?'$" 0175 33071 20211 11306 20242 20756 6=06 ". 116
of X-ray counting uncer- @%$"($,()A'B&$%&:" 0244 20761 C 0221 7032 20225 2022> 5053 ". 4082
tainty and regression fit- D:'--&.&'"%):-)
150> 706 =01 707 7206 104 803 ". 407
E$,&$%&:")FGH
ting error (from Hughes
et al. 2012). I$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 1084 3508= 2027= 417 20157 20468 178 48 78>2
9'#'%&%&:");)1 <02= <042 <0221 <14 <021 <021 <76 <> <71
I$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 1053 3506= 20277 423 20158 20437 1== 46 7882
9'#'%&%&:");)4 <02= <042 <0221 <14 <021 <021 <46 <> <71
I$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 1084 3508= 20277 42> 20184 2043> 1=6 4> 7851
9'#'%&%&:");)7 <02= <042 <0221 <14 <021 <021 <46 <> <71
I$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 1087 35031 2027= 421 201>3 20463 125 44 785>
9'#'%&%&:");)= <02= <042 <0221 <14 <021 <021 <74 <> <71
I$%&"$%'()*+,-$.'/ 1081 3506> 20277 133 20165 20483 1=> 48 7858
9'#'%&%&:");)> <02= <042 <0221 <14 <021 <021 <46 <> <71

?'$" 1084 35064 20277 42>0= 20153 20463 17502 4>06 7857
@%$"($,()A'B&$%&:" 0244 208= 0221 >087 0211 20225 1804> 4073 8088
D:'--&.&'"%):-)
107 C1 105 406 504 404 1408 307 C1
E$,&$%&:")FGH

JDKL1
F>)9'#'%&%&:"*H
?'$" 20621 36071 022> "( 2041> 202=2 1870= 175064 45>8
@%$"($,()A'B&$%&:" 20248 20124 0221 20224 20224 13047 7032 =07>
D:'--&.&'"%):-)
70= C1 C1 C1 =02 1101 403 C1
E$,&$%&:")FGH

JDKL1 2087= 38061 ", 1= 20441 202=> 163 17= 4=32

F,'.:MM'"('(H

Fig. 2. Visualisation of the

results in tab. 1. Note that the
figure is a graphic representa-
tion and only shows the rela-
tionship within each analysed
element with and without pati-
nation. It does not show the
relationships between ele-
ments. For each element the
mean values from the unpati-
nated surface and the patinated
surface respectively have been
divided by the sum of the
means from the unpatinated
surface and patinated surface,
and the quota represented by
each bar in the chart. Mn was
not computed for the unpati-
nated surface, and so this ele-
ment is not included.

Fornvännen 107 (2012)

230 Anders Högberg et al.
made to direct the X-ray beam to portions of
a sample without any obvious inclusions.
4. Patination and other surface adherents can
have serious effects on derived composition
estimates. Although we have not yet carried
out exhaustive experiments on the effects of
patination of flint via EDXRF we have de-
monstrated that, in relation to an unpatinated
surface, a patinated surface shows SiO2 de-
pletion and elevated concentrations of Al2O3,
K2O and Fe – particularly Fe. Cl and Ti values
are also higher in the patinated samples, al-
though CaO values appear to be only slightly
affected (tab. 1; fig. 2; Hughes et al. 2012).
These results indicate that post-fracture
weathering and deposition environment do
introduce chemical changes in the affected
surfaces (e.g., Shepherd 1972, p. 114 ff; Luedt-
ke 1992; Högberg & Olausson 2007, p. 67 ff).
Silica is leached from the flint and replaced by
iron and other substances. With respect to
archaeological artefacts, polishing and grind-
ing done to artefacts by prehistoric artisans or
“painting” of artefacts with ochre (Van Gijn
2010, p. 177 ff) may have left near-surface
residue introduced by polishing media, which
could affect measurements. As future EDXRF
provenance studies are applied to archaeolo-
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
Fig. 3. The pilot study (Hughes
et al. 2010) analysed 50 sam-
ples from a few localities in
eastern Denmark and Scania,
demonstrating that it is possi-
ble to distinguish different
chemical types of Scandinavian
flint. As a first step in the
extended study presented here,
45 samples from the same local-
ities were re-analysed to see
whether the pilot results could
be repeated. The figure shows
that this was accomplished; the
three chemically distinct
groups / types defined in the
pilot study – Hanaskog, Östra
Torp, and Stevns Klint – are
replicated in this bivariate plot
(from Hughes et al. 2012).
gical artefacts, the effects of patination are
especially important to recognise.
Results of the Chemical Analyses
The 2010 pilot study involved seven locations
restricted to eastern Denmark and southern Swe-
den. One question that arose from the results of
that study was whether or not the chemical types
we labelled Hanaskog, Östra Torp and Stevns Klint
would remain discrete if more samples were ana-
lysed. To investigate this, we reanalysed the origi-
nal specimens we had used to discern the chemi-
cal distinctions among Scandinavian flint varie-
ties and compared them to new samples from the
same source sites.
The results from the additional sample analy-
sis are illustrated in fig. 3. The graph shows that
the same general CaO and Fe relationship identi-
fied among the flint types in the pilot study is
apparent in these data. This shows that the analy-
ses presented in the pilot study can be repeated,
using quantitative composition estimates, with
the same results.
With this as a starting point, we deemed it
worthwhile to proceed with chemical analyses of
south Scandinavian flint from other localities.
Therefore, we widened our geographical focus and
collected flint from an additional 18 localities in
 Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 231
!"#$%&'()* +,-."#%( /0+&+.12&3451*6 7"*5*$%8
"#$%& '()$ ')& *# + $) *,) -( ./ 01
2345!67 2345!67 2345!67 28897 2345!67 2345!67 28897 28897 28897

0,#:41; <,::1#= >%, %5%?@ @@5?? %5%$> % %5%$> %5>%A $% % ?%

0,#:41; <,::1#= >% %5%BB @@5?% %5%$@ &? %5%>A %5>A$ A% % ??
'C,/D(/,E(,/ F=;D,# $&!2&5A!997 %5%GG @@5?$ %5%$? G> %5%>@ %5>H$ &B % ?H
'1/I/(,/ J##(D:K=L $@ %5%?B @@5$% %5>@$ ?$ %5%$@ %5>B& HH % AB
'1/I/(,/ J##(D:K=L $@, %5>B& @@5H> %5%$% /D %5%H$ %5>?$ A> /D GG
'1/I/(,/ J##(D:K=L $@M %5>H& @@5AB %5%$G &% %5%$B %5>$H HB /D >%%
'1/I/(,/ J##(D:K=L &%, %5$%? @@5>B %5%>% >%$ %5%&H %5$%B &G /D H?
'1/I/(,/ J##(D:K=L &% 2&5A!997 %5$>& @@5H$ %5%>% >%@ %5%H? %5$%? H> % AB
FNO1/ P,:9Q/D $A!2&5A!997 %5%AH @G5B? %5%$B ?? % >5%B? HA % ?$
FNO1/ P,:9Q/D $AC!2&5A!997 %5>%B @G5&? %5%$% G> % >5&>% $> & HB
R;SITI,/ +#(/4KI#9 >?M!2U$7 %5&H% @@5%% %5%&% >&@ %5%H& %5$?B ?& ? >&A
R;SITI,/ +#(/4KI#9 >?M5& %5H%? @G5@> %5%&& >>A %5%HG %5$@A ?@ A >H&
R;SITI,/ +#(/4KI#9 >?,!2&5A!997 %5$&G @G5G& %5%$@ >$& %5%&> %5&@& H% A >>&
R;SITI,/ +#(/4KI#9 >?C %5&>A @@5%% %5%$% >$@ %5%$H %5&AB >%& & >$G
R;SITI,/ +#(/4KI#9 >?,, %5>%@ @@5HA %5$H& >%G %5%$$ %5$>> A% /D >&&
V '31D(:K!R1,CK <(:(/O1/ >$ %5%@> @G5A% %5%>? >%@ % >5>@% $H & >$B
V '31D(:K!R1,CK <(:(/O1/ >$, % @G5?? %5%$& G$ % >5>A% $H & >A&
W;,S!R,/D!X,/(,/ +=#MSOY;D H> %5$$> @@5%@ %5%&% >$& %5%&& %5A%$ B@ & >>?
R#,CZ!+;(:4(,/:4,D <,/,:ZIO >,!2&5A!997 %5BBG @B5GG %5%A& >%A %5>&& %5HA? >%G B >B&B
R#,CZ!+;(:4(,/:4,D <,/,:ZIO >M!2&5A!997 %5H>A @G5?> %5%?H @> %5%B? %5&H% >&@ ? >??>
R#,CZ!+;(:4(,/:4,D <,/,:ZIO >C!2&5A!997 %5$&> @G5&H %5%&? B% %5%?@ >5%>% ?@ >% >%@B
R;I3/!R;SITI,/ 0,Z:1 H 2&5A!997 %5>&% @@5H> %5%>$ @& %5%$B %5&%& ?B % A?
R;I3/!R;SITI,/ [IZ:#1E $?,!2&5A!997 % @@5A@ %5%$@ ?> %5%$A %5$AH $? $ ?$
R,## RI;/KI#9 A % @@5%$ %5%$> G? % %5B?B AG % HB
R,## RI;/KI#9 A,5& %5%?% @G5@% %5%$% @& %5%$% %5BH? $B & A$
+(//1ZQ##1 +(//1ZQ##1 >>5$!2&5A!997 %5H@A @G5&& %5%B% $?? %5%?A %5H%@ >H> % &?BG
W;,S!R,/D!.,441 '1E1# H@ %5>&A @H5>G %5%$$ >%? % A5&A% HH >& H??
W;,S!R,/D!.,441 '1E1# H@,!2&5A!997 %5>AH @&5G$ %5%>? @& % A5AB% G? >H HH>
W;,S!R,/D!.,441 .=/:41D $> %5>$? @B5?@ %5%$? >BG % >5?H% B> & >BG
W;,S!R,/D!.,441 .=/:41D $>, %5$>% @B5%? %5%$B &%A % >5@A% GH H >B>
F1D\R;I3/!R;SITI,/ )DMS >G % @@5AA %5%$G >$& %5%$> %5$?> % % ?%
F1D\R;I3/!R;SITI,/ )DMS >G, %5>>@ @@5&$ %5%%G ?% %5%>@ %5$G$ &B % ?$
F1D\R;I3/!R;SITI,/ RL1;O1\MS H& %5$?H @G5@B %5%AG @H %5%HA %5&%& BB % @B
F1D\R;I3/!R;SITI,/ <1##(OZ(#D1 A% %5>$% @G5B& %5%>@ $& %5%>A >5%?& HH & >%A
);DIE(C(,/ ]#,/D >H >5>B% G>5H% %5%$A >H%G % >A5@% H$G >AA B>>G

Table 2. Quantitative composition estimates for flint samples from south Scandinavia. Recommended values
for JCh-1 from Imai et al. (1996). nd = no data. The “Flint Type” column lists visual categories according to
Högberg & Olausson 2007.

Denmark, Sweden and northern Germany for
analysis (tab. 2). Figs 4–5 show the CaO/Fe rela-
tionship among these samples.
Several important new findings emerged.
Composition estimates for these Scandinavian
flints refine and quantify the chemical distinc-
tions previously identified. Samples from a total
of 25 localities (18 new ones and 7 samples from
previously analysed localities) add to the number
of archaeologically significant chemical signa-
tures – and thus varieties – in the region’s flint.
On the basis of CaO and Fe composition,
flint from Bjerge-by, Hasselø, Odby, Fakse, Voks-
lev, Rørdal and Ellidshøj can be subsumed with-
in the Stevns Klint chemical type (fig. 5). Flint
from Öland, Bornholm, Jasmund, Helligkilde,
Hising, Klintholm, Mønsted, Sevel, Kinnekulle,
Kølbygård and Hanaskog (the high Fe variant,
i.e. Black Kristianstad Flint) each have CaO and
Fe values distinct from each other and from the
Stevns Klint, Östra Torp and Hanaskog types, i.e.
the low Fe variant (Common Kristianstad Flint)
previously defined in the pilot study (fig. 4, 5).
Consistent with the variants defined visually
by Högberg & Olausson (2007), there appear to
be at least two chemical varieties of Hanaskog
flint; Common Kristianstad Flint falls within the
chemical variety termed Hanaskog in tab. 2 and
fig. 3, while Black Kristianstad Flint from the same
general location in Scania contains a significant-
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
232 Anders Högberg et al.
ly greater amount of Fe, plotted as “Hanaskog”
in the legend to fig. 4.
A dramatic difference in CaO/Fe composi-
tion sets Öland and Kinnekulle flint apart from
all others in this Scandinavian sample (tab. 2; fig.
4). These flint types come from other geological
formations and periods, and they are visually dis-
tinct from the rest of the analysed flint. Indeed
they also come from localities that are geograph-
ically distant from other sites (Högberg & Olaus-
son 2007, p. 132 ff).
CaO/Fe contrasts provide evidence for two
chemical types, Mønsted and Sevel, within the
visual type we labelled Grey Band Matte Danian
Flint (Högberg & Olausson 2007, p. 108 ff). This
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
Fig. 4. A plot of samples from Kinnekulle,
Hanaskog, Sevel and Öland. These four
types have distinct chemical compositions.
The limits for the chemical types from
figure 3 are shown. Note that the
Hanaskog chemical type defined in the
pilot study consists of Common Kris-
tianstad Flint and that the samples
labelled Hanaskog in this figure and plot-
ted to the right of the Hanaskog chemical
type are of the Black Kristianstad Flint
variety. Both flint types are found at the
Hanaskog site. They have different chemi-
cal compositions, in addition to looking
different and having different knapping
properties. The lower left-hand corner is
shown enlarged in fig. 5.
Fig. 5. Flint with a chemical composition
within or close to the Stevns Klint type. It
is evident that flint from several different
localities is subsumed within the same
chemical type. Further, that it is possible
to distinguish different flints on the basis
of their chemical composition. The data
points form several clusters, indicating
that the Stevns Klint chemical type as
defined in the 2010 pilot study needs to be
revised. Note that the symbols for Vokslev
and Rørdal are hidden behind the symbols
for Odby and Hasselø.
distinguishes them from other flints from north-
ern Jutland. Although the two localities produce
the same visual variety of flint and are geographi-
cally close to each other, they have different che-
mical compositions.
Flint from Danian and Senonian levels at
Stevns Klint (fig. 6) also contains more CaO than
other members of the chemical type of that name
defined previously (fig. 3), which may help to dif-
ferentiate it in archaeological contexts.
The samples from Bornholm (the so-called
Ball Flint), and from Hisingen (labelled West
Swedish Beach Flint) do not represent homoge-
neous flint from two primary sources but rather
stray nodules available on beaches along the coast

Fig. 6. Here three of the localities
with samples within the Stevns
Klint type are plotted at high reso-
lution. It is possible to distinguish
different localities. Flint from
Møns Klint and Södra Sallerup
cluster together, whereas flint
from Stevns Klint stands out. Note
that the flints from Stevns Klint in
the plot are of both Danian and
Senonian ages. Samples analysed
from Danian levels at Stevns Klint
contain significantly higher con-
centrations of Cl than do those
from Senonian contexts, making it
possible to distinguish between
them.
of Bornholm and on the west coast of Sweden.
The geological origin of these flint types is not
known. Relative CaO enrichment allows the Ball
Flint from Bornholm to be separated from the
Stevns Klint group (fig. 5). This graph also shows
that CaO/Fe values distinguish between Born-
holm and the Rügen Flint samples from Jasmund
in northern Germany. Chemical analysis of the
flint from Hisingen distinguishes it from other
types. However, Ball Flint and West Swedish
Beach Flint come from beach ridges where they
have been affected by water and wind for long
periods of time and so may be thoroughly pati-
nated, that is, affected all the way through the
nodule. Even though we analysed surfaces on
freshly knapped flakes whose surfaces did not
show any visible patination, we do not know for
certain whether the distinct pattern we obtained
reflected the chemical type of the flint or the im-
pact of weathering.
Fig. 5 also shows that the Reddish-brown Bryo-
zoan Flint sample from Helligkilde (Högberg &
Olausson 2007, p. 128 ff) has a distinct chemical
composition. However, we have only been able
to analyse one sample. A single specimen from Køl-
bygård of the Grey Band Danian type also has a
distinct CaO/Fe composition. To draw any but the
most tentative conclusion, we need to analyse
more samples of these flint types.
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 233
Other samples analysed have CaO and Fe
compositions within the range of the Stevns
Klint chemical type. The sample from Rørdal, the
specimens from Ellidshøj, from Odby and from
Bjerge-by conform to the Stevns Klint chemical
type, as corroborated by visual classification as
Scandinavian Senonian Flint (Högberg & Olaus-
son 2007, p. 89, 105, 129). The characteristics of
Falster Flint from Hasselø also correspond to
those of the Stevns Klint chemical type (fig.5).
Another visually distinct flint type is the
Brown Bryozoan Flint which can be found at
Fakse on Zealand and Vokslev in Jutland. The
honey-brown or grey matrix with numerous bryo-
zoans visible to the naked eye makes it easy to
recognise (Högberg & Olausson 2007, p. 120 ff).
However, the chemical analysis places it together
with the Scandinavian Senonian Flint (fig. 5),
demonstrating that flint with different visual cha-
racteristics can have a very similar CaO/Fe geo-
chemistry.
Flint from Klintholm, the so-called Bryozoan
Flint, Funen Variety, is partly chemically distinct
from the Stevns Klint group, but intergrades at
lower CaO and Fe compositions in specimens
where inclusions are less prevalent (fig. 5). The
Bryozoan Flint, Funen Variety from Klintholm is
distinct in appearance (Högberg & Olausson
2007, p. 116 ff) and has previously been identi-
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
234 Anders Högberg et al.
fied as one of the few south Scandinavian flints
which are distinctive as to visual appearance and
geological source (Thomsen 2000, p. 35). Our
study supports Thomsen’s results; flint from
Klintholm is chemically distinct, even though it
falls close to the Stevns Klint type in the plots.
Note that some of our data come from a very
small number of geological samples, just one per
locality in some cases. This means that even though
the results of our study show that it is possible to
identify flint chemically from some localities in
south Scandinavia, it is not yet possible to specify
the extent of intra-source chemical variability or
potential chemical overlap. Doing so will require
additional analysis of more source rocks, and the
addition of other well-measured chemical ele-
ments for corroboration or modification. Future
studies might also benefit from multivariate ana-
lyses including several or all analysed elements.
But at present our sample size per group (chemi-
cal type) is much too small and uneven to satisfy
the statistical preconditions for such analyses.
Note also that chemical groupings of flint do
not necessarily imply geographical proximity. The
terms “source” and “chemical type” are used here
to identify groups of specimens that share a dis-
tinct chemical signature independently of geo-
graphic location (cf. Hughes 1998, p. 104). In
fact, the results of our study provide several
examples of the non-concordance between che-
mistry and geography, e.g. the Brown Bryozoan
Flint from Fakse and Vokslev mentioned above.
Although many in situ flint exposures are known
in southern Scandinavia, glacial scouring and ice
transport have moved flint from its point of ori-
gin to widely dispersed and mixed contexts where
it was exploited by those areas' inhabitants (Niel-
sen 1997; Knarrström 2001; Högberg & Olaus-
son 2007; Eriksen 2010, p. 87 ff). In light of this
it is important to determine, as precisely as pos-
sible, the geographical dispersal of chemical flint
varieties so that informed inferences can be made
about the role(s) and significance of human acqui-
sition and conveyance of these materials at dif-
ferent times in the past.
Archaeological Implications
Our 2010 pilot study showed that flint which looks
the same, for example Scandinavian Senonian Flint,
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
ended up in the same chemical type group. In our
more recent expanded study we investigated the
extent to which the earlier results applied to flint
from a wider area, i.e. flint from all over southern
Scandinavia (Högberg & Olausson 2007; Hughes
et al. 2012). The ideal result we had hoped for was
that visually similar flint from geographically di-
stant areas would possess different chemical sig-
natures. If so, this could lay a clear foundation for
interpretations of how raw material or artefacts
were moved during prehistory. Regrettably, that
was not the result we obtained. One of the clear-
est findings of the expanded study is that classifi-
cation based on appearance, geography, geology
and geochemistry sometimes groups the samples
within the same type, but sometimes not. The con-
clusion to be drawn from the studies presented
here is that there is no exact correlation between
the flint’s visual appearance and properties, the
place it comes from, the geological formations it
comes from, or its chemical composition. This is
an important result, as it shows the difficulty of
sourcing flint from southern Scandinavia. It also
demonstrates that the grouping of flint into three
chemical types that we suggested in our 2010 pilot
study is not sufficient for future studies. The che-
mical types need revision and expansion and, if
chemical types are to be discussed, new ones will
need to be delineated.
It is relevant at this juncture to ask how our
new results regarding the geochemistry of south
Scandinavian flint relate to previous provenance
analyses of flint, and what their significance will
be for future archaeological studies of the trans-
port of flint and flint artefacts.
Based on typological and technological stud-
ies, Jan Apel (2001) has suggested that during the
Late Neolithic, Scandinavian bifacial knapped
flint daggers made of Scandinavian Senonian
Flint – the so-called Danish Daggers (Callahan
2006; Nunn 2006) – were produced mainly with-
in two areas. One was in northern Jutland. From
here he suggested that the daggers were trans-
ported to northern Germany and Norway and
then from Norway to eastern central Sweden.
The other area where daggers were produced was
in south-eastern Denmark and Scania. Here dag-
gers were made of similar Scandinavian Senon-
ian Flint and transported to northern Germany,

Fig. 7. The relative frequency of LN I dagger types in
different regions in Scandinavia. Type I daggers from
the production area in Jutland, Denmark, are marked
in white and type II and III daggers from the produc-
tion area in eastern Denmark and Scania appear in
black (from Apel 2001, p. 306, fig. 9:16).
southern Sweden and south-eastern Norway (figs
7–8; Apel 2001, p. 304 ff). In Sweden many such
daggers have been found in areas where no flint
can be found in the ground (fig. 9). Flints which
look alike but come from geological sources
located far from each other may differ in their
chemical composition. If this proves to be the
case, the results could be used to further investi-
gate Apel’s suggestions about the trade or distri-
bution routes for daggers. In fact, this is an im-
portant problem to address with future EDXRF
analysis.
Overall, our results are both encouraging and
sobering. Samples from different sites where Scan-
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 235
Fig. 8. Proposed exchange routes from the two main
production areas to different parts of Scandinavia
during LN I (from Apel 2001, p. 307, fig. 9:17).
dinavian Senonian Flint is available display the
same chemical characteristics. Fig. 5, for example,
shows that samples which are visually similar, have
the same properties when knapped, and have the
same chemical composition, can come from dif-
ferent geographical areas. But as fig. 6 shows, some
samples of Scandinavian Senonian Flint do not
plot in exactly the same composition range. For
example, flint from Stevns Klint is slightly differ-
ent in composition from the flint from Södra
Sallerup and Møn. It should also be added to the
discussion that Danish daggers were sometimes
made out of Danian flint, making future geoche-
mical studies on this artefact type even more pro-
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
236 Anders Högberg et al.
Fig. 9. Daggers and spearheads found in a gallery grave at Skogsbo in Västergötland (Forssander 1936). No flint
occurs naturally in the area. The dagger at the far left is c. 28 cm long. Photo by AH.
mising. These examples show that, while there is
no simple result that clearly separates flints from
different localities from each other, there is tre-
mendous potential to inform future investigations
of how raw material and artefacts were trans-
ported during prehistory.
There are other important results which may
be of value to future research on flint provenance.
Rügen Flint from Jasmund is very similar in visual
appearance to Scandinavian Senonian Flint. What
sets them apart is that the former has a so-called
“diving cortex”, i.e. the chalk cortex intrudes into
the flint from the surface, creating cavities and
tunnels in the flint. Larger nodules of Rügen Flint
also contain irregular lighter spots of different
sizes which are often surrounded by a thin band
of even lighter-coloured flint (Högberg & Olaus-
son 2007, p. 100 ff). But smaller black nodules of
Rügen Flint which lack the diving cortex can easi-
ly be mistaken for Scandinavian Senonian Flint.
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
The coasts of the south-west Baltic Sea with Sca-
nia, eastern Denmark and Germany shared basi-
cally the same material culture over long periods
of prehistory (Apel 2001; Högberg 2009). Thus it
would be important to examine any evidence for
transports of raw material. Sourcing of Rügen
Flint has hitherto rested solely on visual assess-
ment, which can be problematic when artefacts
lack cortex, so chemical sourcing may be useful in
future analyses of finds from this area.
Black Kristianstad Flint has a distinct chemi-
cal composition but it is seldom identified as the
raw material for prehistoric artefacts in Swedish
museum collections (Högberg & Olausson 2007,
p. 78 ff), despite the fact that the flint was avail-
able in a densely populated landscape (Edring
2005). A flake or a nodule of Black Kristianstad
Flint is easy to recognise if it is not patinated and
retains its cortex. Its deep black colour and homo-
geneity, together with the rather thick yellowish

grey cortex, are unique. But if Black Kristianstad
Flint has been knapped into an artefact, with no
cortex left on the surface, and this artefact has
become patinated after thousands of years buried
in an archaeological context, then the flint type is
much more difficult to recognise. It takes on an
appearance that resembles patinated Scandina-
vian Senonian Flint. Since the latter type is well
known to archaeologists, whereas few Swedish
archaeologists are familiar with Black Kristian-
stad Flint, a patinated artefact with no cortex
made out of this flint type can easily be mistaken
for Scandinavian Senonian Flint. Our chemical
analyses show clear differences between Black
Kristianstad Flint and all the other flint types.
This result could be used in the future to investi-
gate whether or not Stone Age tools found in the
area around Kristianstad and classified as Scandi-
navian Senonian Flint may actually have been
made from Black Kristianstad Flint. For example,
finds from the many excavated megalithic tombs
around Kristianstad could be interesting to con-
sider from this point of view (Bagge & Kaelas
1950; 1952). This, in combination with the new
knowledge presented above about the distribu-
tion and occurrence of Common Kristianstad
Flint in northern Scania and parts of Blekinge,
may lead to new results regarding how flint in
this area was used as a raw material in prehistoric
times.
Falster Flint was used a great deal during pre-
history. In our analyses this flint type proved to
have the same chemical composition as Scandi-
navian Senonian Flint, for example from Møn
and Ellidshøj. As pointed out above, Falster Flint
occurs at more places than Hasselø on Falster;
the type has been reported from northern Jut-
land (Eriksen 2008), and our renewed studies
show that the flint type is also found at Hökholz
in Schleswig. Falster Flint is visually distinctive,
with its blue stripes in a blue, black, or grey ma-
trix. The stripes are visible even if the flint is pati-
nated. Therefore artefacts manufactured from
Falster Flint are easy to recognise. However, not
all areas of the matrix of this type of flint are
striped, and when stripes are absent it is difficult
to tell dark varieties of Falster Flint apart from
Scandinavian Senonian Flint. This applies to pati-
nated flint as well as fresh surfaces. And the re-
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 237
sults of the chemical analyses do not help us in
making this judgement.
Ball Flint from Bornholm falls within a sepa-
rate chemical group (fig. 5). This is an interesting
result for future studies of contacts between
Bornholm and the east coast of southern Sweden
and the south Baltic coast. There is an ongoing
archaeological discussion (Skak-Nielsen 2004)
as to whether or not Bornholm, located only c. 40
km southeast of the Swedish coast, played an im-
portant role in contacts across the Baltic during
the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic. Future
provenance studies of flint could clarify this.
In the introduction to this paper we men-
tioned the finds from Bjurselet in northern Swe-
den as being among the better-known Scandina-
vian examples of transport of flint artefacts in
prehistoric times (Becker 1952; Knutsson 1988).
In his raw material studies of the finds, based on
visual characterisation, Becker (1952) argued
that the flint from which most of the axes in the
finds are made came from eastern Denmark.
Using our results, we hope to be able to pinpoint
exactly where the raw material for the Bjurselet
axes came from (Olausson et al. in press).
Thanks to Jan Apel for kindly letting us use figures from
his dissertation. Funding for this research was provid-
ed by The Birgit and Gad Rausing Foundation for Re-
search in the Humanities and by The Erik Philip-Sören-
sen Foundation for Research in Genetics and the Hu-
manities, Lund University. English translation by Alan
Crozier.
End notes
1. Olofsson & Rodushkin (2011) have published a pi-
lot study involving Scandinavian flint. The authors
emphasise that their results are preliminary, but
we wish to make a few comments. The study is bas-
ed on six archaeological artifacts and nineteen re-
ference samples. Seven of the reference specimens
are geological samples from Denmark. The rest are
patinated archaeological samples from sites in Rus-
sia (p. 1149, tab. 2). Our work shows the difficulties
inherent in using patinated flint as a reference samp-
le. This, together with the likelihood that archaeo-
logical artifacts may have been transported across
vast distances during prehistory (as e.g. the flint
artefacts from Vuollerim exemplify), renders such
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
238 Anders Högberg et al.
artifacts highly problematic as reference samples.
Furthermore, the geochemical variation between
flint types that we have identified from Denmark
makes it impossible to treat this large geographical
area as one. In table 2 (p. 1149) a geological refer-
ence sample is listed as Danian flint from Møns
Klint. But there are no Danian flint layers in the
chalk cliffs of Møn, only Senonian flint of different
ages (Högberg & Olausson 2007, p. 36 ff). It is also
stated that flint mines are present on Møns Klint
(p. 1164). As far as we know there are no prehisto-
ric flint mines from this area (Högberg & Olausson
2007, p. 51 ff).
2. The analyses for SiO2, CaO and Fe (and other
reported elements) were conducted in vacuum un-
der three different sets of operating conditions to
optimise excitation of major and minor elements
of interest. Background subtracted integrated net
count rate (counts/second) data were converted to
composition estimates (ppm and weight percent
composition) using a fundamental parameters algo-
rithm incorporating international rock standards
after overlapping Kα and Kβ line contribution from
adjacent elements was stripped and matrix correc-
tion algorithms applied. X-ray tube current was
scaled automatically to the physical size of each
specimen.
References
Allard, P.; Bostyn, F.; Gilignay, F. & Lech, J. (eds). 2008.
Flint mining in prehistoric Europe: Interpreting the
archaeological records. BAR Intl Series 1891. Oxford.
Althin, C.A., 1951. The Scanian flint mines. Meddelan-
den från Lunds Universitets Historiska Museum 1950–
51, IV. Lund.
Andrefsky, W. Jr., 2009. Book Review: Scandinavian
Flint. An archaeological perspective. Journal of An-
thropological Research 65:3. Albuquerque.
Apel, J., 2001. Daggers, knowledge and power: the social
aspects of flint-dagger technology in Scandinavia 2350–
1500 cal BC. Kust-till-kust böcker 3. Uppsala.
Aspinall, A. & Feather, S.W., 1972, Neutron activation
analyses of prehistoric flint mine products. Archaeo-
metry 14. Oxford.
Bagge, A. & Kaelas, L., 1950–52. Die Funde aus Dolmen
und Ganggräbern in Schonen, Schweden. I–II. KVHAA.
Stockholm.
Baltrūnas, V.; Karmaza, B.; Kulbickas, T. & Ostrauskas,
T., 2006. Siliceous rocks as a raw material of pre-
historic artefacts in Lithuania. Geologija 56. Vil-
nius.
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
Becker, C.J., 1952. Die nordschwedischen Flintdepots.
Acta Archaeologica XXIII. Copenhagen.
– 1959. Flint-mining in Neolithic Denmark. Anti-
quity 33. Cambridge.
– 1988. Skandinavisk flint i nordsvenske fund fra
mellem- og sen-neolitisk tid. XVII Nordiska Arkeo-
logmötet i Åbo 1985. ISKOS 7. Helsinki.
– 1993. Flintminer og flintdistribution ved Limfjor-
den: Kort- og råstofstudier omkring Limfjorden.
Lund, J. & Ringtved, J. (eds). Limfjordsprojektet vol.
6. Århus.
Bjarke Ballin, T., 2008. Book Review: Scandinavian
Flint. An archaeological perspective. Antiquity 2008.
York.
Blomberg, A., 1900. Geologisk beskrifning öfver Ble-
kinge län. Jemte redogörelse för stenindustrien inom
Blekinge län. Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning. Ser.
C.a. Afhandlingar och uppsatser i 4:0. N:o 1. Stock-
holm.
de Bruin, M.; Korthoven, P.J.M.; Bakels, C.C. & Groen,
F.C., 1972. The use of non-destructive activation
analysis and pattern recognition in the study of
flint artefacts. Archaeometry 14. Oxford.
Bush, P.R., 1976. The use of trace elements in the
archaeological classification of cherts. Staringia 3.
Pinneberg.
Bush, P.R., & Sieveking, G. de G., 1986. Geochemistry
and the provenance of flint axes. Sieveking, G. de
G. & Hart, M.B. (eds). The Scientific Study of Flint
and Chert. Cambridge.
Callahan, E., 2006. Neolithic Danish Daggers: An ex-
perimental peek. Apel, J. & Knutsson, K. (eds).
Skilled Production and Social Reproduction. Aspects on
Traditional Stone-Tool Technologies. SAU Studies 2.
Uppsala.
Costopoulos, A., 2003. Prehistoric flint provenance in
Finland: Reanalysis of southern data and initial
results from the north. Fennoscandia Archaeologica
XX. Helsinki.
Cowell, M.R., 1981. The archaeological and geochem-
ical implications of trace element distributions in
some English, Dutch, and Belgian flints. Staringia
6. Pinneberg.
Craddock, P.T.; Cowell, M.R.; Leese, M.N. & Hughes,
M.J., 1983. The trace element composition of pol-
ished flint axes as an indicator of source. Archaeo-
metry 25. Oxford.
Edring, A., 2005. Berget i backens skugga. Det sociala land-
skapet på Kristianstadsslätten under tidig- och mellan-
neolitikum. Report Series 94. Dept of Archaeology,
University of Lund.
Eriksen, B.V. (ed.), 2000. Flintstudier: en håndbog i sys-
tematiske analyser af flintinventarer. Aarhus Univer-
sity Press.
– 2008. Review of Anders Högberg & Deborah
Olausson: Scandinavian Flint – an Archaeological
Perspective. KUML 2008. Højbjerg.

– 2010. Flint working in the Danish Bronze Age:
The decline and fall of a master craft. Eriksen, B.V.
(ed.). Lithic Technology in Metal Using Societies. Jut-
land Archaeological Society Publications 67. Højberg.
Forssander, J.E., 1936. Der ostskandinavische Norden wäh-
rend der ältesten Metallzeit Europas. Lund.
Högberg, A., 2009. Lithics in the Scandinavian Late Bronze
Age: Sociotechnical Change and Persistence. BAR
Intl Series 1932. Oxford.
Högberg, A. & Olausson, D., 2007. Scandinavian Flint
– an Archaeological Perspective. Aarhus University
Press.
Hughes, R.E., 1986. Diachronic Variability in Obsidian
Procurement Patterns in North-eastern California and
South-central Oregon. University of California Pub-
lications in Anthropology 17. Berkeley–Los Ange-
les.
– 1998. On reliability, validity, and scale in obsidian
sourcing research. Ramenofsky, A.F. & Steffen, A.
(eds). Unit Issues in Archaeology: Measuring Time,
Space and Material. University of Utah Press. Salt
Lake City.
Hughes, R.E.; Högberg, A. & Olausson, D., 2010.
Sourcing flint from Sweden and Denmark: a pilot
study employing non-destructive energy disper-
sive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry. Journal of
Nordic Archaeological Science 17. Stockholm.
– 2012. The Chemical Composition of Some Archaeo-
logically Significant Flint from Denmark and Swe-
den. Archaeometry 54. Oxford.
Imai, N.; Terashima, S.; Itoh, S. & Ando, A., 1996.
1996 compilation of analytical data on nine GSJ
geochemical reference samples, “sedimentary rock
series”. Geostandards Newsletter 20. Paris.
Kinnunen, K.; Tynni, R.; Hokkanen K. & Taavitsai-
nen, J-P., 1985. Flint raw materials of prehistoric
Finland: rock types, surface textures and microfos-
sils. Geological Survey of Finland 334. Espoo.
Knarrström, B., 2001. Flint – a Scanian Hardware. Skåns-
ka spår – arkeologi längs Västkustbanan. Riksantik-
varieämbetet. Stockholm.
Knutsson, K., 1988. Making and using stone tools: The
analysis of the lithic assemblages from Middle Neolithic
sites with flint in Västerbotten, northern Sweden. Aun
11. Uppsala.
Luedtke, B.E., 1992. An archaeologist’s guide to chert and
flint. Archaeological Research Tools 7. Institute of
Archaeology, University of California, Los Ange-
les.
Lundegren, A., 1934. Kristianstadsområdets kritbild-
ningar. Geologiska Föreningens i Stockholm Förhan-
dlingar. Band 56, häfte 2, No 397. Stockholm.
Magnusson, G. & Selling, S. (eds). 2001. Möre – histo-
rien om ett småland. E22-projektet. Kalmar.
Matiskainen, H.; Vuorinen, A. & Burman, O., 1989.
The provenance of prehistoric flint in Finland. Ma-
Many Different Types of Scandinavian Flint 239
niatis, Y. (ed.). Archaeometry: Proceedings of the 25th
International Symposium. Amsterdam.
McDonnell, R.D.; Kars, H. & Jansen, B.H., 1997. Pet-
rography and geochemistry of flint from six Neo-
lithic sources in southern Limburg (The Nether-
lands) and northern Belgium. Ramos-Millan, A. &
Bastillo, M.A. (eds). Siliceous Rocks and Culture.
Granada.
Micheelsen H., 1966. The Structure of Dark Flint from
Stevns, Denmark. Meddelelser Fra Dansk Geologisk
Forening 16. Copenhagen.
Mjærum, A., 2004. Å gi øksene liv. Et biografisk perspektiv
på slipte flintøkser fra sørøstnorsk tidlig- og mellomneoli-
tikum. Hovedfagsoppgave i nordisk arkeologi. Uni-
versity of Oslo.
Moberg, J.C., 1880. Berättelse afgiven till Kongl. Veten-
skaps-Akademien om en med understöd af allmän-
na medel företagen resa till en del svenska kritloka-
ler. Öfversigt af Kongl. Vetenskaps-Akademiens Förhand-
lingar 1880, N:o 10. Stockholm.
– 1884. Cephalopoderna i Sveriges kritsystem. I. Sve-
riges kritsystem systematiskt framstäldt. Med två
kartor. Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning. Ser C. Af-
handlingar och uppsatser 63. Stockholm.
– 1886. Kritsystem i fast klyft i Halland. G.F.F. Bd. 8.
Stockholm.
Nielsen, L.E., 1997. Raw material provenance in the
Early Neolithic: A comparative study of thinbutt-
ed flint axes from two regions in Jutland, Den-
mark. Schild, R. & Sulgostowska, Z. (eds). Man
and Flint. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology,
Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw.
Nunn, G., 2006. Using the Jutland Type IC Neolithic
Danish Dagger as a model to replicate parallel, edge-
to-edge pressure flaking. Apel, J. & Knutsson, K.
(eds). Skilled Production and Social Reproduction:
Aspects on Traditional Stone-Tool Technologies. SAU
Studies 2. Uppsala.
Olausson, D.S., 1983. Flint and ground-stone axes in the
Scanian Neolithic: An evaluation of raw materials bas-
ed on experiment. Scripta Minora Regiae Societatis
Humaniorum Litterarum Lundensis 1982–1983
no. 2. Lund.
Olausson, D.; Hughes, R.E. & Högberg, A., in press. A
New Look at Bjurselet and the Neolithic Flint Axe
Caches from Västerbotten, Sweden, Using Non-
Destructive Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence
Analysis for Provenance Determination. Acta Ar-
chaeologica. Copenhagen.
Olofsson, A. & Rodushkin, I., 2011. Provenancing
Flint Artefacts with ICP-MS Using REE Signa-
tures and Pb Isotopes as Discriminants: Prelimi-
nary Results of a Case Study from Northern Swe-
den. Archaeometry 53. Oxford.
Rudebeck, E., 1998. Flint Extraction, Axe Offering,
and the Value of Cortex. Edmonds, M. & Richards,
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
240 Anders Högberg et al.
C. (eds). Understanding the Neolithic of North-western
Europe. Glasgow.
Schild, R. & Sulgostowska, Z. (eds), 1997. Man and
Flint. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Pol-
ish Academy of Sciences. Warsaw.
Schindler, B., 2010. Review of Anders Högberg and
Deborah Olausson, Scandinavian Flint: An
Archaeological Perspective. Lithic Technology 35:1.
San Antonio, Texas.
Shepherd, W., 1972. Flint: Its Origin, Properties and Uses.
London.
Sieveking, G. de G., & Hart, M.B. (eds), 1986. The Scien-
tific Study of Flint and Chert. Cambridge.
Summary
Proceeding from previously published studies of
the provenance of south Scandinavian flints bas-
ed on visual classification and chemical analysis,
in this contribution we present the results from re-
cent work on the sourcing of flint. Previous know-
ledge about the appearance and geological origin
of flint types has been discussed and reappraised,
and an extensive chemical analysis of flint from a
total of 25 localities has been synthesised. The re-
sults show that provenance analyses of flint from
southern Scandinavia are difficult. No clear and
simple interpretable patterns can be discerned. But
Fornvännen 107 (2012)
Sieveking, G. de G., & Newcomer, M.H. (eds), 1987.
The Human Uses of Flint and Chert. Cambridge.
Skak-Nielsen, N.V., 2004. The neolithisation of Scan-
dinavia: How did it happen? Adoranten 2004. Ta-
numshede.
Stockmans, C.; Bosmans, H. & Vermeersch, P., 1981.
Trace element analysis of Belgium flint mine pro-
ducts. Staringia 6. Pinneberg.
Thomsen, E., 2000. Flintens geologi og mineralogi.
Eriksen, B.V. (ed.). Flintstudier: En håndbog i system-
atiske analyser af flintinventarer. Aarhus.
Van Gijn, A., 2010. Flint in Focus. Lithic Biographies in the
Neolithic and Bronze Age. Leiden.
the study also shows that certain flint types have
distinct chemical compositions, and that several
of the south Scandinavian flints can in fact be
told apart. Overall, our recent findings offer hope
that, although not easy, it is at least possible to
determine the provenance of south Scandinavian
flint. In the last part of this paper we provide a
few examples of interesting archaeological prob-
lems where our results might be applied in future
research on the transport of raw material and the
distribution of flint artefacts during Prehistory.