Saga - 1984, Qupperneq 90

88
SIGFÚS HAUKUR ANDRÉSSON
struggle for independence from Denmark, where it was repeatedly cited as an
example of the short-sightednes and ill-judgement thought to characterize the ap-
proach of the Danish govemment in Icelandic affairs. It was Jón Sigurðsson, the most
important figure in the struggle for independence, who revived the story in two
articles written in 1840, one in Danish and one in Icelandic. Only in the first of these
does he give a source which is supposed to substantiate this story. Sigurðsson’s
source was not however one'of the previously mentioned writers but rather a Dan-
ish contemporary of theirs, Carl Pontoppidan, one of the directors of the Royal
Trade Monopoly, who was involved in many Icelandic affairs. In addition to sonie
vague comments by Pontoppidan, Sigurðsson’s source is really only a letter dated
21 January 1785, from the Governing Board of the Trade Monopoly to the Exche-
quer, saying that it would be possible to transport from Iceland some 500 people the
following summer or autumn on ships belonging to the Monopoly, as due to un-
usually little export from Iceland, many ofthem would be halfempty. There was,
then, clearly no plan for a total evacuation of the Icelandic population, although this
was Jón Sigurðsson’s claim in the heat of the independence struggle.
When the first Icelandic history books were written at the beginning of this cen-
tury, the relocation story was included as historical fact. No one seems to have
questioned the story until Þorkell Jóhannesson, in his essay „Við Skaftárelda’
(Andvari 1945), demonstrated convincingly that there had never been any question
of relocating anyone other than the needy and vagrants, the idea being both to save
these people froin starvation, and also to ease the financial burden on local authori-
ties, who would otherwise have been required to support them. In this connection
the figure given was about 500 people, but Hans Levetzow, later governor of Ice-
land, wanted to increase this figure to 800. Landsnefndin, the commission established
2. February 1785 to discuss possible solutions to the problems in Iceland, decided
against the relocation of any Icelanders, and the matter was closed.
Although one consequence of Þorkell Jóhannesson’s essay was the removal of the
relocation story frorn textbooks, it seems deeply rooted in the consciousness of Ice-
landers, many of whom still believe it. Some claim the story must be true, as it is
mentioned by such important contemporary figures as Hannes Finnsson and
Magnús Stephensen.
On the other hand, it is important to note that while Þorkell Jóhannesson used as
evidence sources found in the documents of the Exchequer and the previously
mentioned Landsnefnd, there are however in the Exchequer other documents bear-
ing on the case which ÞorkellJóhannesson did nót use, ie. reports and notes by Skúh
Magnússon, the King’s treasurer in Iceland who was in Copenhagen the winter of
1784-85 and Jón Eiríksson, a high official in the Exchequer dealing particularly with
Icelandic matters. In these they deal with the question ofthe relocation of beggats
and needy and make no mention of any proposal for the relocation of the entire Ice-
landic population, which they certainly would have done had any such proposal
been made, as they were opposed to the evacuation of any Icelanders.
It further weakens the credibility of this story that in view of the level ofshipp>nS
technology at that time, moving the entire population of Iceland on the Jutland
heaths would have been an extremely difficult, dangerous and expensive undertak-
ing, one which could only have been accomplished over a period ofmany years. In