Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2004, Síða 124

Gavin Lucas
But how is the authority of such
images created? Tell two different people
to draw a section or an artefact, and you
will get two different images; of this
much, most fíeld archaeologists are no
doubt aware. But the real issue is whether
such differences can simply be reduced
to technical efficiency, experience or
skill. For if not, then we must face the
question that different ways of seeing the
archaeology will produce different
archaeological images. That in fact,
terms such as accuracy, objectivity or
clarity, when used to assess archaeologi-
cal imagery are not absolute or solid cri-
teria, but constructed. Moreover, in this
light, the deployment of convention -
especially to excess - only serves, ironi-
cally to mask the constructed nature of
these criteria, by offering a uniformity to
the visual archive which impacts back
upon our conception of the archaeologi-
cal record. The question at stake here, is
the extent to which archaeological
imagery constructs the archaeological
record and as a corollorary, constitutes
the nature of archaeological practice. It is
such a question that I want to explore
here through an examination of the visu-
al archive in Icelandic archaeology since
the late 19th century.
Archaeological Illustration and
Photography in Iceland
As in most European countries, archaeol-
ogy began in Iceland in the mid 19th cen-
tury, and by the tum of the century, had
become more or less professionalized -
though the number of archaeologists was
small, usually only one major figure in
any generation (Friðriksson 1994: 8).
Peculiar to Iceland was a strong connec-
tion between archaeology and a rich liter-
ary tradition, specifically the Sagas,
which influenced the whole nature of
archaeological investigation, even until
quite recently (ibid.). Less unique, was
the association between archaeology and
the development of nationalism. As in
most European countries, archaeology in
Iceland was closely entwined with
nationalistic sentiment and through its
focus on the Golden Age of the
Settlement period - i.e. the Viking settle-
ment remains, archaeology helped to cre-
ate a sense of national identity against the
recent history of Danish colonialism.
This broad social and political context
has undoubtedly determined the over-rid-
ing emphasis given to Viking archaeolo-
gy in the country, a situation which per-
sists to this day, especially in the eyes of
the wider international community,
though this is now slowly changing. One
might explore how the production of
popular imagery of this Viking past drew
on Icelandic archaeology, but that is not
my concern here. Rather, I want to
specifically focus on the relationship
between technical illustration and inter-
pretation.
Generally archaeologists produced
their own images, and given the few pro-
fessional archaeologists working in
Iceland - at least until the 1980s, the his-
tory and development of archaeological
illustration in the country is inextricably
linked to individuals and their styles.
Sigurður Vigfusson, Brynjúlfur Jónsson,
Þorsteinn Erlingsson, Daniel Bmun,
122