Gripla - 20.12.2009, Blaðsíða 151
151
also because there was simply not enough food to sustain prolonged visits
of the numerous and “luxury-hungry” royal court. That was why kings
aimed to establish their own local centres (e.g. royal farms or royal strong
holds) that furnished them with living conditions but, first of all, with a
reliable source of staple food. Otherwise, they had to rely on the more or
less voluntary hospitality of local aristocracy, which unavoidably involved
some undesirable interdependence.
I believe that the Icelandic economy itself would not have been able to
permanently support such expenditure because of the lack of good arable
lands and climatic restrictions on cereal production, in addition to the lack
of forests full of wild animals. The original settlers arrived with various
culturally embedded ideas about the environment and tried to implement
them in different geographic circumstances. In many cases, the direct
application of strategies common in various parts of the Continent
appeared to be catastrophic for both the people and for their natural envi
ronments because the delicate ecological balance was seriously disturbed by
the newcomers and their animals. The pollen-confirmed removal of birch
(Orri Vésteinsson 2000, 167) which was cut or simply burned (Buckland
2000, 147), overpasture by cattle and the results of the presence of pigs and
goats (McGovern 2000, 331; also 2003) led to the quick loss of much of
the original plant cover (Sigurður Þórarinsson 1974, 49f).
In addition to the negative effects of the overexploitation of the land’s
resources, which added to the natural shortcomings, the end of the heroic
time of the viking expeditions brought an end also to the inflow of luxury
imports, e.g. arms and jewellery. Not having substantial quantities of
attractive export products, the Icelanders still had to import commodities
for daily use (e.g. most metals and steatite pots). Archaeologists studying
the early settlement and economy of Iceland may admire how sophisticated
the combined exploitation of land and water resources was (cf. numerous
analyses by Thomas McGovern), but they also observe how much poorer
the level of material culture in medieval Iceland was when compared with
the contemporary situation on the Continent. But despite this, the
Icelanders managed to finance the building and upkeep of numerous
churches, even if these were extremely small and simple.
Economic realities may also explain the weakness of the Icelandic
Church, which was much less centralized than elsewhere in Christian
DeConStRuCtInG tHe “noRDIC CIvILIZAtIon”