1906] The cruciform brooches of Norway. 33 



coil 1 ) and the axis, consequently consits of one piece ; very rarely 

 and only in the case of unusually large specimens the foot has been 

 made separately and fixed to the bow with small livets. In Norway 

 and Sweden is observed an inclination to make the bow relatively 

 shorter than it is in Denmark, which is not however a constant and 

 characteristic difference between the two districts. The separate 

 characters of the forms developed in Western Norway will be better 

 treated in connexion with the detailed description of the Western 

 forms which is given in the following. 



a. As the first form from the Eastern parts of the Peninsula 

 I present the brooches whose foot in its total length is formecl as an 

 animal-head, which consequently gets a comparatively long and 

 narrow shape, according to the original shape of the foot. The 

 combination of the moulded head, which always has an edge along 

 its middle line, and the flat end of the bow, is brought about in 

 different ways, either by leaving a triangular flat space projeciing 

 downwards from the end of the bow (fig. 26 above. figs. 39 and 

 40) 2 ) or by two small incisions forming a straight line across the 

 neck of the head and thus giving a more unorganical termination 

 towards the bow (fig. 38 and figs. 41 and 42). s ) The brooch fig. 

 42 may be regarded as an intermediate form of these two varieties. 

 showing that they are closely allied to each other ; I have preferred, 

 therefore, to place them together as forming one series in the classi- 

 fication. The former of them was much used in the early Scandinavian 

 brooches, often in especially large and well executed specimens with 

 the knobs fixed upon the ends of a separate axis and provided with 



*) In some few instances it has been suggested that the spring-coil aud 

 the pin have not been made of one piece of string, but separately, the pin of 

 bronze, the coil of iron. I have not observed such an arrangement in any case 

 respecting the cruciform brooches, and it is of course impossible as long as the 

 spring-coil has not lost its practical destiuation of producing the tension of the 

 pin and has been reduced to a mere typological rudiment, preserved from an 

 earlier stage of development. It is not likely that it should be so, where the 

 spring-coil is not visible when the brooch is used. 



2 ) Fig. 39: Giskegjerde, Borgund pgd. Søndmør. B. 719. Rygh: fig. 249.. 

 — Fig. 40: Gryten, Romsdalen. B. 444. Lorange: N. Olds. i B. M. p. 110. 



3 ) Fig. 41: Stenstad, Telemarken. Copenhagen Museum. From Stephens: 

 The' Old-Northern Runic Monuments vol. II, page 840. — Fig. 42 : Eine, Vang 

 pgd. Hedemarken. C. 15688. Lorange's collection. 



