Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2005, Side 46

Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2005, Side 46
Yekaterina Krivogorskaya, Sophia Perdikaris &Thomas H. McGovern Figure 8. Reconstructed age distribution for landed cod based on atlas vertebrae ring counts. archaeological records of the two settle- ments of Akurvík and Gjögur are very distinct, yet both produce archaeofauna dominated by cod fish. How different were the products of the specialized sea- sonal físhing site of Akurvík and the "fishing farm" at Gjögur? Was Gjögur involved in preparation of físh for export or exchange, or was its intense físhing effort entirely directed towards provi- sioning its own household? Based on the combination of size reconstruction and element distribution, we can answer some of these questions with a fair degree of confidence. Akurvík seems to have always been strongly focused upon production for export, despite some on- site consumption of by-catch (note the cleithrum-premaxilla proportions and the disproportionate representation of head and jaws generally). Akurvík seems to have always produced both stockfish and klipfísk (or products very similar) but seems to have shifted emphasis from pre- dominately klipfísk production in its early phases to a greater emphasis on stockfish production in the later medieval period (evident in changes in both ele- ment distribution and size profíle). Gjögur also seems to have been consis- tently producing more físh than it was consuming, with a strong signal coming through its cod físh element distribution pattems. However, Gjögur seems to have been focused upon klipfisk production and would not have generated large amounts of stockfish in either period. If Gjögur and Akurvík can be seen as parts of an economic system (perhaps man- aged by the householders at Gjögur), then it seems that Gjögur's stockfish pro- duction was carried out at the separate físhing station and not near home, per- haps supplying a different type of export product. In the Middle Ages, Gjögur was clearly not carrying on simply a subsis- tence fishery (as at 18th century Finnbogastaðir) but was deeply involved 44
Side 1
Side 2
Side 3
Side 4
Side 5
Side 6
Side 7
Side 8
Side 9
Side 10
Side 11
Side 12
Side 13
Side 14
Side 15
Side 16
Side 17
Side 18
Side 19
Side 20
Side 21
Side 22
Side 23
Side 24
Side 25
Side 26
Side 27
Side 28
Side 29
Side 30
Side 31
Side 32
Side 33
Side 34
Side 35
Side 36
Side 37
Side 38
Side 39
Side 40
Side 41
Side 42
Side 43
Side 44
Side 45
Side 46
Side 47
Side 48
Side 49
Side 50
Side 51
Side 52
Side 53
Side 54
Side 55
Side 56
Side 57
Side 58
Side 59
Side 60
Side 61
Side 62
Side 63
Side 64
Side 65
Side 66
Side 67
Side 68
Side 69
Side 70
Side 71
Side 72
Side 73
Side 74
Side 75
Side 76
Side 77
Side 78
Side 79
Side 80
Side 81
Side 82
Side 83
Side 84
Side 85
Side 86
Side 87
Side 88
Side 89
Side 90
Side 91
Side 92
Side 93
Side 94
Side 95
Side 96
Side 97
Side 98
Side 99
Side 100
Side 101
Side 102
Side 103
Side 104
Side 105
Side 106
Side 107
Side 108
Side 109
Side 110
Side 111
Side 112
Side 113
Side 114
Side 115
Side 116
Side 117
Side 118
Side 119
Side 120
Side 121
Side 122
Side 123
Side 124
Side 125
Side 126

x

Archaeologia Islandica

Direkte link

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Archaeologia Islandica
https://timarit.is/publication/1160

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.