 we're going to be staying in Scotland. So Rachel is going to be talking about something that I think has come up over and over in this session, which is paradigm, obviously, that's why we're all here. But the idea of oppositionism in Viking Age archaeology, because it must be an if or an or. Yes, Rachel will attempt to resolve that divide, a small task. Yes, very small. First of all, I would like to thank the organizers for accepting my paper in this session. As this session is about challenging the ingrained perceptions of the Vikings in our modern day thinking, my paper will discuss the different themes that have come in and out of fashion, more specifically the intentional brutalization of the Vikings, both in the past and present, as well as the pacification of the Vikings during certain time periods. I will use the example of Northern Scotland to illustrate the debates about interaction between Vikings and preexisting local groups. As we have all seen from the various TV shows, such as The Last Kingdom and the Vikings, Vikings are typically portrayed as a brutal group driven by their desire for power and fortune. Or conversely, you have the rather peaceful Vikings in How to Train Your Dragon, where the whole show is based on the Vikings living in harmony with their once enemy and trying to protect a species from extinction and enslavement. Generally written accounts during the Viking Age portray them as brutal. For instance, the report of the clergyman Alcuin after the attack on Lindisfarne, where he states the heathens poured out the blood of saints around the altar and trampled on the bodies of saints in the temple of God, like done in the streets. His evocative description of the happenings at Lindisfarne finishes with a statement never before has such an atrocity been seen. Accounts like these of the Vikings were not uncommon as they tended to attack churches, which also meant that they were attacking the largest portion of literate people in Europe and thus provoked written accounts disparaging their actions. Museums for their part have also contributed to the mixed understandings of the Vikings, although thankfully none have shown horned helmets in their exhibits, like the one here. I have seen them sold in quite a few of the gift shops. Given the evocative name, the Vikings, there have been countless exhibitions organized with a variety of interpretations being presented at them. Some exhibits, like the one at the British Museum in 2014, attempted to draw in visitors with lines like into a world of warriors, seafarers, and conquerors, discover the many fascinating aspects of a history that is both strangely alien, yet remarkably familiar. Other exhibits have been used to emphasize the domestic side of the Scandinavians during the Viking Age, like the one at Melbourne in 2018, which focused on domestic life, religion, economy, and technology. Overall, the exhibition demonstrates how most Vikings were farmers and merchants, not the barbaric warriors they are reputed to be. The difference in the messages of these two exhibits further illustrates the way in which the Vikings are portrayed to the public, even though both the London and Melbourne exhibits were organized by the National Museum of Denmark. This leads me to a general discussion of who we are actually talking about. Well, often the general public thinks Vikings as a cultural group. We know that being a Viking was actually more of a profession. Going a Viking meant raiding would likely take place with gold, silver, and slaves being the main sources of loot. But there was also more entailed. Trade was a large part of this profession, so it is unlikely that they randomly attacked anyone they saw, as that would generally lead to very bad trade relations detrimental to a group that counted on this for certain supplies. The Melbourne exhibit touched a bit on this topic of settlement, looking more to the domestic rather than the martial sphere of Scandinavian life, which leads to the question, when they weren't a Viking, what were they doing? Generally, once a Viking ceased being a Viking, they were farmers, both in Scandinavia homeland and in the new lands they decided to settle. The formation of settlements during the Viking Age by Scandinavians has left us with insight into the interactions between Scandinavian settlers and inhabitants of the areas they were settling. So here's a map of all of the settlements recorded in Scotland, or at least finds of Viking artifacts in Scotland. My discussion will be on the evidence for interactions and coexistence of the Scandinavian settlers and the Pictish inhabitants of northern Scotland. In Julian Richards, a very short introduction to the Vikings, he discusses the different theories that have been suggested as to the Scandinavian and Pictish relations in the Scottish Highlands, with the primary ones being genocide or assimilation. This leads to the question that many have asked, was Scotland colonized peacefully or were the previous inhabitants overwhelmed by force and perhaps even slaughtered to make room for the new settlers? Scholars like Hunter and Richie have insisted that the presence of Pictish artifacts and Scandinavian-style settlements are indicative of coexistence of the two groups within the same site. These understandings of a more peaceful nature have caused others vehemently to disagree with them. Many of the disagreements have been based on the lack of preservation of Pictish place names. However, we have little of any knowledge of the Pictish language, so determining the survival of place names is rather difficult. It is thought that Pictish was an insular Celtic language, but with no real indication of whether it was a Celtic language like Welsh and Cornish or a Celtic language like Irish or Scottish Gaelic. In either case, Celtic names do survive in Scotland amidst the Norse ones, so I don't think place names are indicative of extinction. Additionally, there is some literary evidence from the Annals of Ulster in 794 that cite the devastation of all the islands of Britain by the heave, which has also been used to give evidence to the extinction theory. However, there were also a series of wars between the Picts and the Dalryada Kingdom, as well as Northumbria, led by the King of the Picts, Oingus, from the 730s into the 760s, also recorded in the Annals of Ulster, which might have contributed to a decrease in population prior to the Scandinavian settlement. The archaeological evidence that I will hear after discuss is not meant to say that the Scandinavians settled Northern Scotland peacefully, but rather that there is evidence for coexistence of the Picts and the new settlers. The first site I will briefly introduce is that of Bornish and the Hebrides, which is thought to have mixed cultural messages on display. While some have argued that the evidence at Bornish points to a complete wipeout of the local population with the coming of the Scandinavians, I would agree with the excavators who see the subterranean stone-blind houses as distinctive from normal Norse practice, thus likely indicating influence by a remaining Pictish population. Additionally, the ceramics at the site appear to be closer to the ceramic traditions of the region rather than a completely new industry to the area. While this evidence does not necessarily imply a harmonious existence of Picts and Scandinavians living in the same small area, it does indicate coexistence and at the very least some communication between the two groups and the sharing of ideas. In Orkney, there is further evidence of coexistence between the new Scandinavian settlers and the Pictish inhabitants of the islands. At Birsey, during the second half of the ninth century, Pictish buildings were overlaid by rectangular structures ascribed to Scandinavians. At this time, a number of substantial Scandinavian-style halls were built with wall benches and box beds. Additionally, with evidence of ironworking and silversmithing taking place on the island, the community was likely not self-sufficient. There is evidence for joints of beef and mutton being brought from farms in the bay, such as that at Bakoy, where successive generations of cellular buildings in distinctive Pictish figure of eight form were replaced by rectangular halls, although the Pictish artifacts continuing in use, indicating a likely continuity in the population. The settlement at Pool is a multi-period site in nature with signs of occupation dating from the Neolithic to the late North Period. At Pool, there is a clearly identifiable period of overlap between the two cultural groups. The arrival of the Scandinavians in the eighth or ninth century is marked at Pool by seeming continuity in settlement between the pre-Norse and the early Viking farming settlement. This is primarily indicated by the continued use of Pictish-style buildings by the inhabitants who had access to Norse materials, in particular evidence coming from soaps down being present. At the site of West Ness on Rouse, excavations of the cemetery revealed both Pictish and Viking graves of varying types, both with and without grave goods. Radiocarbon dates indicate use from the seventh to the ninth centuries AD and skeletal analysis indicates that the remains comprise the whole community. Picks were buried with mineral to no grave goods, generally extended both placed in shallow rectangular graves, so this is considered the Pictish graves up here. While the Scandinavian graves almost all contained grave goods and were in rectangular oval and boat graves, as you can see here, thus indicating a continuous use of the cemetery from the Pictish periods into the time of Scandinavian settlement. In sum, rather than ascribing to one-sided conceptions of the period in Northern Scotland as either characterized by war and population replacement or peaceful assimilation, we should examine the evidence on a contextual basis. In general terms, the archaeological evidence that I have briefly presented here points towards a coexistence between Pictish and Scandinavian settlers. This does not necessarily imply harmonious interactions as coexistence can take many forms including marked power asymmetries and even situations such as slavery. Thank you.