A Place for the Heathlands

In the open heathland, with its crippled, wind-blown trees, a burial mound occasionally rises from the ground, low and modest of appearance, unlike the majestic Bronze Age mounds that seem to stretch towards the sun. These are the barrows of the Single Grave Culture (2800–2300 BCE), scattered throughout Jutland and clustering in the central and western areas of the peninsula. Heather, crowberries, and mosses cover them today. The mounds hold the graves of the Single Grave Culture people and, likely, the remains of the animals that accompanied them in life. Therefore, the key to understanding the interspecies relationships can be found in these sandy resting places.

The people of the SGC were immigrants with an eastern, steppe-derived ancestry.^{1 ( 1 )}
Allentoft et al. 2024. Their standardized burial style speaks of a lifestyle completely different from the Neolithic farmers who inhabited Jutland at the time of the emergence of the SGC people. For generations, the SGC people had wandered and lived in open landscapes, closely accompanied by their animals. As they became established in Jutland, radical changes occurred in this heathland landscape. Pollen diagrams speak of deforestation and the intentional burning of large areas.^{2 ( 2 )}
Andreasen 2009. Among the incinerated brushwood, the ashes now nourished the soil, giving rise to a new environment for plants. With its heather and grasses, the heathland was ideal for grazing, especially by sheep, thrifty and undemanding animals that could easily adapt to the occasionally harsh environment of the heathland. Yet cattle have been associated with the pastoralists of the SGC throughout its archaeological research his­tory, for more than 120 years.

The barrows of the SGC were first recognized as belonging to a unique cultural complex during the archaeological investigations of the 1890s. The grave goods consisted of stone battle axes and amber beads, and each grave belonged to only one individual.^{3 ( 3 )}
Müller 1898. This practice was significant because, unlike many contemporaneous cultures that favoured collective burials or large communal graves, the SGC's focus on individual burials was thought to highlight a distinct emphasis on personal status and identity. Such findings suggest a social structure that valued the role of the individual within the community, differing from the more communal traditions observed in neighbouring societies of the same era.^{4 ( 4 )}
Glob 1945. During the 1890s, the barrows were heavily robbed by treasure hunters. In an attempt to put an end to these actions, the National Museum of Denmark in 1899 distributed a pamphlet about the SGC barrows, trying to raise the knowledge level about the past. In this pamphlet, the SGC people are described as cattle herders for the first time:

As the wording conveys, the description of the SGC people seeks to reignite the smouldering national spirit that had been badly shaken by war and the loss of massive land areas in the preceding decades. The second Schleswig war of 1864 resulted in Denmark losing control of the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein to Prussia. The loss was significant, both territorially and psychologically, as it marked the decline of Danish influence in the region and led to a period of national introspection and rebuilding of national identity. The pamphlet seeks to enhance pride in the Danish lineage, as well as a sense of being part of something larger during times of recession. Thus, a relation defying time and space was carefully established between the heath peasants of that current time and the SGC people.^{6 ( 6 )}
Thorsen 1980. The SGC material culture was portrayed as reflecting power and wealth, and to fit the pastoral lifestyle into this narrative, cattle were suggested as the primary animal of the SGC people.^{7 ( 7 )}
Müller 1898. In the hierarchy of grazing animals, cattle are deemed more valuable than sheep or goats. Cattle were central both to the agricultural economy and to rural life, providing not only meat and milk, but also serving as draft animals for ploughing and transport. Cattle were a key symbol of wealth and status, with their size and productivity making them essential for sustaining farm operations and ensuring long-term prosperity. Sheep and goats, while valuable for wool and milk, were less central to agricultural practices, and had a smaller economic impact.^{8 ( 8 )}
Glob 1945.

The same rhetorical approach is visible in the archaeologist P. V. Glob's iconic monograph on the SGC in 1945.^{9 ( 9 )}
Glob 1945. Once again at a time of upheaval, with Europe left in ruins after World War II, the narrative of the SGC people as cattle drovers was further consolidated to evoke a sense of continuity and cultural pride in the face of complex challenges.^{10 ( 10 )}
Glob 1945: 246. Glob's narrative, seasoned by the pathos of war, emphasized that these people were cattle-herding immigrants. This statement was aligned with previous interpretations^{11 ( 11 )}
Müller 1898; Brøndsted 1938. – even though it was only loosely based on osteological remains (animal bones) from multiple domesticated species extracted from a SGC settle­ment on Zealand (and therefore geographically distant from the SGC people of central Jutland).^{12 ( 12 )}
Becker 1952.

In between these two periods of the 1890s and 1940s, another animal of value to the SGC people was proposed – namely, sheep.^{13 ( 13 )}
Brøndsted 1938: 233. No arguments, however, were presented to substantiate the assumption of the value and use of sheep, but it might have been based on an argued natural connection between sheep and heathland. Sheep are often associated with heathland due to their ability to graze on the sparse, nutrient-poor vegetation typical of heath ecosystems. This is particularly relevant in areas where human settle­ment and livestock grazing have historically shaped the landscape, such as the Danish heathlands.^{14 ( 14 )}
Odgaard & Rostholm 1988. However, sheep have never again since the 1940s been suggested as the primary animal of the SGC; they were superseded by a cattle narrative that was associated with Denmark's "noble past."

In the nutrient-poor soils of central Jutland, which favour the heather, organic remains decompose faster than in other environments. Due to these conditions, no zoo-osteological material from the SGC has been found in the heathland. However, at two sites from the coastal area of east Jutland, animal bones from the SGC suggest a mixed economy.^{15 ( 15 )}
Andersen 1982; Rowley-Conwy 1985; Rasmussen 2016. Interpretations of the bone material have supported the common agreement that the people of the SGC were cattle herders, as this species is visible in the data.^{16 ( 16 )}
Andersen 1982; Rowley-Conwy 1985; Rasmussen 2016. Nevertheless, the two coastal sites are not representative of the SGC economy in central Jutland, as the coastal areas differ from the heathland in soil composition, in plants, and in topography.

In the heathland, grazing was essential for continual regeneration and maintenance. Regular burning of the areas ensured new, fresh shoots with the highest pos­sible nutritional value.^{17 ( 17 )}
Buttenschøn & Buttenschøn 1982; Frederiksen & Kjær 1986; Grant et al. 1987. Ecological studies show that sheep thrive in areas with heather and nutrient-rich grasses, while cattle prefer grasses over heather.^{18 ( 18 )}
Buttenschøn & Buttenschøn 1982; Frederiksen & Kjær 1986; Grant et al. 1987. Thus, it is likely that sheep showed a preference for grazing on the heathland compared to cattle.

The herd was central to the survival of the SGC people, and for that reason the animals may have been more than merely resources – they were companions. Livestock were not only economic assets, but also deeply intertwined with the culture's identity, hierarchy, and spirituality. These animals were integral not just to this people's survival, but to their broader worldview and social structure. However, the prevailing "cattle narrative" and the initial analyses of osteological remains from SGC sites reflects a paradigm that views animals primarily as objects of economic and hierarchical value. This perspective neglects a broader understanding of the animals' roles, functions, and relationships with humans and the landscape.

When human–animal relations within the SGC are considered beyond the constraints of the cattle narrative, a more nuanced picture emerges. Animals and humans coexisted in deeply entangled relationships, shaping and maintaining the landscape through their shared actions. There is no reason to assume that the seemingly modest sheep could not have played a far more significant role in the lives of our ancestors – the SGC heath pastoralists – who may have grazed their sheep on the very ground where we now reside.