Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2009, Page 21

Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2009, Page 21
SOCIAL AND SYMBOLIC LANDSCAPES IN LaTE IRON AGE ICELAND Figure 11. Sílastaðir Cemetery, N-Iceland (from Eldjárn 1956). mined by the topographical setting. Clusters, for instance, are not predomi- nantly found in locations such as at land- ing sites on the seashore, where “the route” was the ocean. Some of the most impressive linear grave fields are found on the coastline. What is the difference between the two? It may be that the many examples of Icelandic grave sites show in fact different stages of development of cemeteries, from the beginning of settle- ment, to the end of the pagan period. Large cemeteries do perhaps present suc- cessful settlement groups, while small ones either reflect an early abandonment, or perhaps are the burial grounds of the late-comers in the final phase of coloni- sation. Equally, different sizes may reflect dissimilarhouseholds, i.e. different social groups. But one must be careful not to make oversimplified statements about these differences. A small cemetery may be that of a family with powerful mem- bers, whose political and economic posi- tion allowed them to extend their occupa- tion in the surrounding area, establishing new farms and new cemeteries at the turn of each generation. Equally, a small household, of powerful neighbours, may not have had the option of expansion, and thus used a single cemetery for genera- tions. Therefore, the four average ceme- teries in Berufjörður could represent the former group whilst the large cemetery in Ytra-Garðshorn reflects the latter. Unfortunately, all the graves at the Beruíjörður cemeteries and Ytra- Garðshorn had been plundered prior to excavation. To continue an enquiry along these lines we need more complete records of representative burial grounds, big and small, with better preservation of skeletal material and grave-goods. Being able to trace the development of an Iron Age cemetery, from one grave to the next, is of course a fascinating pros- pect, but the dating of individual finds is poor, and does not offer sufficiently high resolution. C-14 dating of horse bones from graves are giving hope for more accurate dating of burials in Iceland (Ascough et al. 2007), and recent work on strontium isotopes extracted from human skeletons is giving indications as to the geographical origins of the people in these graves (Price and Gestsdóttir 2006). In Iceland there is yet another method available which could yield bet- ter dates and even establish the inner chronology of events within a cemetery, namely tephrachronology. In some areas of Iceland, tephra layers from the Iron Age are abundant, and may help to break down the period of c. 800-1100 into smaller units. The Hrífunes find is an excellent case in point: at this site in SE-Iceland, close to some of the most active volcanic areas of the island, a burial ground was found almost 2 m below the modern surface. The graves were dug into and covered by volcanic ash. Close stratigraphic observation revealed that the graves had been dug after the c. 870 tephra fell. One grave was covered by the c. AD 934 Eldgjá tephra, 19

x

Archaeologia Islandica

Direct Links

If you want to link to this newspaper/magazine, please use these links:

Link to this newspaper/magazine: Archaeologia Islandica
https://timarit.is/publication/1160

Link to this issue:

Link to this page:

Link to this article:

Please do not link directly to images or PDFs on Timarit.is as such URLs may change without warning. Please use the URLs provided above for linking to the website.