Our Approach to Historical Evidence

The object comes first

We organise the subject around things people made, wore and used: combs, pins, beads, vessels and traces of colour. Our main focus is Scandinavian evidence, particularly the Viking Age and medieval period. Earlier and later comparisons are identified rather than treated as parts of one timeless tradition.

This is an introductory editorial resource, not an excavation archive, museum collection catalogue or peer-reviewed journal. It does not claim institutional affiliation, specialist accreditation or ownership of the archaeological finds discussed.

Four kinds of statement

Sources have settings

Collection records, excavation publications, specialist analyses and carefully contextualised texts are stronger starting points than repeated claims without references. Institutional links in our articles help readers begin their own research. A general museum homepage is not a substitute for a particular object record, and a general reference book cannot prove an individual cosmetic use.

We avoid presenting unsupported plant recipes, universal hairstyles or certainty about private beliefs. Words such as “may,” “suggests” and “not established” are used to mark limits, not to conceal them. New analysis can revise a material identification or an interpretation.

Images and corrections

Our soft-lit object illustrations are labelled reconstructions. They are visual explanations, not photographs of excavated objects, and their groupings should not be cited as historical assemblages. Captions distinguish illustrative arrangement from documented association.

If you find an error, please send the page URL, the exact sentence, a suggested correction and a catalogue entry or publication where possible. We assess the evidence rather than the popularity of a claim. No fixed response time or individual research service is promised.