Saga - 1990, Side 63

FÉLAGS- OG HAGÞRÓUN A ÍSLANDI
61
Summary
This article deals with the socio-economic development of Iceland during the
first half of the nineteenth century. During this time the population of the
country grew from 48.000 to 60.000. In previous works this population
growth has been explained in terms of improvements in farming, fishing and
trade on the one hand and more favourable climatic conditions than had pre-
vailed during the eighteenth century on the other hand. The problem with
previous explanations is that they largely rest on a comparison of the num-
ber of cattle, sheep and horses at the beginning of the century on the one
hand and the middle of it on the other hand. The same is largely true for
comparison of exports, the ownership of fishing vessels etc. In the present
paper we present and discuss much more detailed empirical evidence rela-
ting to the development of population and economic conditions during the
first part of the nineteenth century. This evidence is used to answer the
question: Were economic improvements and population growth made possi-
ble by improvements in external conditions (climate, lower frequency of
epidemics, natural catastrophes etc.) or were they rather the consequences
of internal economic improvements, such as extended vegetation, changes in
the structure of habitation, greater emphasis on fishing etc?
Our findings do not support the thesis that economic improvements and
population growth can be explained in terms of improved external condi-
hons. No changes occurred as regards epidemics, climate and natural cata-
stophes during the first part of the nineteenth century, although volcanic
eruptions were not of the magnitute witnessed by the Skaftáreldar-years
1783-84. However, there occurred a number of volcanic eruptions during
the first half of the nineteenth century, epidemics were present, sea-ice is
reported to have affected farming in the country all years but six during the
first four decades of the century. Moreover, death by starvation is reported
for six years (between 1803-1814), and 14 years of the period 1801-1851 saw
a reduction of population. Infant mortality remained extremely high during
this period; no improvements in this respect occurred until the second half of
the century.
Furthermore, the period 1801-1851 did not witness any structural changes
as regards the division of labour. The population was just as dependant
upon farming and fishing at the end of the period as at its beginning. The
development of urbanization, handicrafts and urban industries was ex-
tremely slow. The growing population derived its livelihood much in the
same way as previous generations had done. However, some improvements
'vithin farming, fishing and trade are noticable, and these seem to have suf-
ftced to allow for population growth.
The number of cattle and horses rose during the period, but this increase
vvas proportionally slower than popuiation growth. However, the number of
sheep in the country rose sharply, especially after 1820. During the entire