Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2007, Side 42

Davide Zori
types (nails and clench bolts) under a sin-
gle term, an example of the first typologi-
cal problem. As a group, the boat burials
include two artifact types (nails and clench
bolts) that are each described by three dif-
ferent terms (‘hnoðnagli’, ‘rónaglf and
‘bátasaumur’), thus exemplifying the sec-
ond typological problem.
Typological inconsistencies in
the catalog seriously affect archaeological
research by obscuring both the morpho-
logical differences between the artifact
types and the functional consistency with-
in each of the types. This results in dif-
ficulty and potential inaccuracy in the sta-
tistical analysis of cultural materials. The
problem would be solved by the applica-
tion of a protocol using strictly consistent
terminology that recognizes the distinc-
tions between nails, rivets, and clench
bolts. Based on the preceding section, it is
recommended that different artifact types
from the same find context be cataloged
separately. Furthermore, the term ‘nagli’
should be reserved just for nails, ‘hnoðna-
glf for rivets, and ‘rónaglf solely for
clench bolts. Finally, ‘bátasaumur’ ought
to be eliminated as a typological category
because it conflates objects of different
functions—nails and clench bolts—there-
by violating one of the essential aspects
of a useful typology (Adams and Adams
1991) and adding to the overall state of
classificatory confusion.
A more uniform typology will
assist in the statistical analysis of nails,
rivets, and clench bolts and the compara-
tive study of their find contexts, ultimate-
ly contributing to a more nuanced under-
standing of daily life in early Iceland.
The National Museum of Iceland is in an
ideal position to serve as a pioneer among
museums in catalog consistency because
of the manageable size of the national
collection and quality of the electronic
database that has already been compiled.
IV. Widespread Typological
Inconsistencies
Typological inconsistencies in the categori-
zation of small functional ironwork are not
an isolated phenomenon, but a widespread
terminological problem that exists in many
languages and appears in other museum
collections, as well as numerous archaeo-
logical publications and site reports. This
section provides examples of typological
inconsistencies from museum collections,
site reports, and well-known publications in
English and Danish in orderto demonstrate
the relevance of the argument in the wider
geographic sphere of the North Atlantic.
The identical two terminological problems
found in the catalog at the National Muse-
um are also pervasive in the sources ana-
lyzed in this section. To reiterate, the first
terminological problem obscures differ-
ences in artifact morphology by lumping
more than one distinct artifact type under
a single term, whereas the second problem
compromises the integrity of typological
terms by applying more than one term to a
single artifact type.
Archaeological publications fre-
quently exhibit the first terminological
problem by using a single term such as
‘nail’ in English, ‘naglf in Icelandic, or
‘nagle’ in Danish to refer to all three types
of artifacts—nails, rivets and clench
bolts—without distinguishing between
them. In a Danish example from the pub-
lication Trelleborg, Poul Norlund (1948)
used the term ‘'jernnagler’7 to refer to a
group of artifacts that he illustrated with a
7 Danish, jern=iron, «ag/er=nails/rivets/clench bolts
40