Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2007, Blaðsíða 85

A REASSESSMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CATHEDRAL AT GARÐAR, GREENLAND
1930, 50). What seems to be certain,
however, is that building no. 5 replaced
an older building at this place. In figure 4
it is quite evident that the foundations of
building no. 5 cut an older foundation.
There is also scant evidence of a build-
ing or buildings at the eastern side of the
enclosure, although this is only a small
fragment of foundation. The rest of it had
been destroyed by burials and, as Norlund
suggests, quite probably by the later erec-
tion of the south chapel of the cathedral
(Norlund 1930, 51).
Apart from building no. 2, Nor-
lund confessed to be insecure regard-
ing the use of the buildings surrounding
the enclosure. He did consider them to
be connected with the church and more
specifically with the church as cathedral
(Norlund 1930, 52). In this, one cannot
but agree with Norlund. Not only is the
complex completely unique in Norse
Greenland, but it bears a striking resem-
blance to the layout of buildings con-
nected with European monastic churches
or, indeed, cathedrals. There seems to be
no reason to believe otherwise than Nor-
lund did, but as I will try to demonstrate
later, it can be questioned whether the
enclosure was built simultaneously with
Garðar 1. Norlund’s further theory that
the first bishop or bishops had their resi-
dence in a building connected with the
enclosure (Norlund 1930, 85) cannot be
substantiated, based on the extant mate-
rial. Conversely, it cannot be completely
discounted either, but there is simply no
evidence that speaks for it.
Garðar 2 (fig. 5) represented a
major increase in size. The nave was wid-
ened, the chancel lengthened and chapels
were added to the north and south side
of the chancel. Garðar 2 was the larg-
est medieval stone church in Greenland,
measuring just over 27 metres in length.
At the western end, the nave was about 11
metres wide, expanding due to a strange
crookedness of the south wall to about 13
metres at the eastern end. The chancel was
about 8 metres wide, and about 16 metres
wide including the chapels. In neither
phase could the excavators find traces of
the western gable of the nave and Nor-
lund suggested that the west gable might
have been wooden (Norlund 1930, 32pp).
Indeed it has even been proposed that
the entire church was built of wood and
that walls of stones and turf were merely
added for protection against wind and
weather (Krogh 1976, 306). This does not
seem tenable, though, as Aage Roussell
already argued in 1941 with reference to
the church at Brattahlið (Roussell 1941,
104).
Since virtually only founda-
tion stones were left, it was impossible
for Norlund to say much about how the
church had looked above ground level.
He did, however, find indications of two
doorways. The main argument for both
doorways is the presence of large flag-
stones just outside the building - one at
the south side of the nave and one at the
corner between the nave and the south cha-
pel (fig. 5). Norlund believed these stones
to be parts of stone paths, leading from
the main residence to the cathedral (Nor-
lund 1930,104-05). As figure 3 indicates,
however, these paths are highly irregular,
particularly the one leading to the pre-
sumed entrance in the south chapel. Had
it not been for Norlund’s punctured line,
marking out the path in fig. 5, I highly
doubt much would be made of these stones
today. There is another reason for regard-
ing these presumed entrances as highly
speculative. As Norlund himself points
out repeatedly, we are dealing with the
83