Árbók Hins íslenzka fornleifafélags - 01.01.1990, Qupperneq 65

KOLEFNISALDURSGREININGAR OG ÍSLENSK FORNLEIFAFRÆÐI
69
Sturla Friðriksson 1960. Jurtaleifar frá Bergþórshvoli á söguöld. Árbók hins íslenzka forn-
leifafélags 1960, bls. 64-75.
Sveinbjörn Rafnsson 1990. Byggðarlcifar í Hrafnkelsdal og á Brúardölum. Rit Hins
íslenska fornleifafélags I. Rcykjavík.
Tauber, H. 1959. Danske Kulstof-14 dateringer af arkæologiske prover I. Árboger for
nordisk oldkyndighed og historie 1959.
Taubcr, H. 1960. Copenhagen Radiocarbon Dates IV. American Journal of Science, Radio-
carbon Supplement, Vol. 2, 1960, 12-25.
Taubcr, H. 1968. Copenhagen Radiocarbon Dates IX. Radiocarbon Vol. 10. No. 1.
Vilhjálmur Orn Vilhjálmsson 1986. Þjórsárdahtr - bygdens odelœggelse. Specialeopgave og
prisopgave i Middelalder-arkæologi. Kandidatsritgerð í miðaldafornleifafræði við
háskólann í Árósum, bls. 178, 231-235. Óútgefin.
Vilhjálmur Örn Vilhjálmsson 1988. Dateringsproblemer i islandsk arkæologi. hikuin 14,
bls. 313-326.
Vilhjálmur Örn Vilhjálmsson 1989. Stöng og Þjórsárdalur - bosættelsens ophor. hikuin
15, bls. 75-102.
Þorkell Grímsson og Þorleifur Einarsson 1970. Fornminjar í Reykjavík og aldursgreining-
ar. Árbók hins íslenzka fornleifafélags 1969, bls. 80-97.
SUMMARY
l4C Dating in Icelandic Archaeology.
So far 79 14C dates have been made on archaeological samples from Iceland. AU the samples
have been dated at laboratories outside Iceland. Some 24% of the dates can, when used un-
critically, be interpreted to be older than the conventional date for the settlement of Iceland
(the Landnám) in the late 9th century. 95% of these high 14C ages have been obtained at the
14C laboratory at Uppsala, and the same laboratory has also processed 61% of the total
amount of archaeological 14C dates from Iceland. It should be noted that all ofthe unexpected
14C dates are produced on charcoal or wood.
When the settlement of a country is traditionally set at a precise date or a short period in
time, it is questionable to only use seemingly high 14C dating values as proofs of an earlier
landnam. The size of the dated samples, which is usually not published, and the laboratory
process could have been insufficient. It is also possible that the age of trees before use and the
origin of charcoal samples have not been taken into consideration. It is therefore stressed that
archaeological 14C dates should be regarded as relative and measured results of a laboratory
process. Although the method produces absolute results ofsingle measurements, it does not
necessarily produce exact and unquestionable results all the time. The total absence of any
archaeological evidence older than the late 9th century in Iceland indicates that the few unex-
pectedly old or young 14C agcs illustrate the actual frequency ofthe inaccuracy ofthe 14C dat-
ing method in gencral.
The archaeological site at Herjólfsdalur on the island of Heimaey, south of Iceland, has
been dated by some of these unexpectedly high 14C values to the 7th and 8th centuries. A
closer look at the dates from Herjólfsdalur, however, shows no clear indication for this ass-
umption. Considering the great probability range which the 14C dates of samples from the