Fróðskaparrit

						/ UPPISTOVUBEITINUM. SITK AND SETTKKMKNT

39

- a cattle passage - which connected the

settlement with the outfields through the

surrounding infield.

If we take into account our present

knowledge of settlement continuity, these

settlement areas or heimrust are exceeding-

ly important to archaeologists and histori-

ans alike, as they conceal settlement re-

mains from over a long period of time - re-

mains which are the basic source of our

knowledge of early Faroese history, unless

they of course have been disturbed by later

activity.

In Leirvík all three settlements or býling-

ar, are located on the oldest map of Leirvík

dating from 1793, where the extent of the

infield extant at the time is also indicated.

It is still possible to register the extent of

the heimrust of each of the three býlingar,

and - as mentioned in the beginning - we

have archaeological evidence that the

heimrust at Toftanes was allready settled

during the Viking-Age, although the Me-

dieval settlement as yet eludes us.

The heimrusts of the two other settle-

ments - við Garð and um A, have not been

subjected to archaeological excavations

and we do not therefore, know how far back

in time previous to 1584 AD they date.

The place-name við Garð indicates

though, that the settlement was established

alongside the then existing infield wall -

when though not known. Remains of the

old infield wall can still be seen east and

west of the settlement, fíg. 10.

Any attempt to view the settlement re-

mains at í Uppistovibeitinum in the context

of settlement development must take anoth-

er ruin into consideration. Some 70 m be-

yond the excavation, lies the so-called Bøn-

hústoft - ruin of one of the many churches

or chapels abolished under the Reformation

around 1540 AD. The church ruin has nev-

er been investigated and it's age is therefore

unknown. The ruin measuring some 9X5,5

m is encircled by a dyke built of stone and

turf with a total cross section of some 25 m

The site of the ruin, placed as it is within

the old infield, has always aroused aston-

ishment. Traditionally the site has been

connected with the settlement of við Garð,

which is the closest existing settlement. Al-

though við Garð and Bønhústoft lie close, I

am of the opinion that the stream of Brúsá

acts as a distinctive and natural division be-

tween the two. The question is, on the basis

of the aforementioned, whether it is not far

more likely to see the remains of í Uppi-

stovubeitinum and the church ruin as an en-

tity, allthough there are indications that oth-

er settlement remains lie hidden in the area.

The question of whether í Uppistovubeit-

inum could be the original settlement of við

Garð must also be considered. Tradition has

it, that the settlement of í Uppistovubeit-

inum had to move to við Garð as a result of

problems with water seepage and flooding

from the stream. This remains at the present

a theory, however the fact is that í Uppis-

tovubeitinum is entered in the land register

as a beiti - that is as an area where cattle be-

longing to the farm of Uppistova, of the set-

tlement of við Garð, grazed.

As mentioned above heimrusts were not

only settlement areas reserved for building,

but also included grazing areas. A logical

supposition would thus be that the settle-

ment of í Uppistovubeitinum lies on the site