Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2010, Qupperneq 16

ORRI VÉSTEINSSON
Norwegian farm-mounds Norwegian
archaeologists have treated them primarily
as evidence for social and economic
change. In contrast Icelandic archaeolo-
gists have considered farm-mounds main-
ly as a product of construction techniques.
As a result very little discussion has taken
place within Icelandic archaeology on this
issue, despite the fact that farm-mounds
are much better researched and a more
central part of Icelandic archaeology than
in Norway (although see Buckland et al.
1994). The different perspective of the
Icelandic archaeologists - and the same
holds for their Faroese and Greenlandic
counterparts - is explained by farm-
mounds apparently having accumulated
from the very beginning of settlement in
these countries. Farm-mounds are as a
result not considered as a symptom of
change but a permanent fíxture of the
archaeological landscape. Icelandic
archaeologists have been much more con-
cemed with the related issue of the spatial
development of farmhouses, seeking to
interpret changes in layout as meaningíul
Hannesson 1943, Roussell 1943a, 1953,
Guðmundur Ólafsson 1982, Hörður
Ágústsson 1982, 1986, 1987, 1989, Price
1995, Orri Vésteinsson 2002).
Although it is inspired by the debate
on North Norwegian farm-mounds my
discussion of farm-mounds concentrates
on the Icelandic evidence - and
inevitably on the particular conditions
that may have contributed to their devel-
opment in that country. There is still
scope, and great need, for a systematic
comparison and debate between the dif-
ferent regions of the the North Atlantic,
in order to more fully understand this
intriguing phenomenon.
In the following I will be making ffe-
quent references to the excavation of the
Stóraborg farm-mound where I had the
good fortune to work for several seasons
in the late 1980s. Much of what I have to
say about farm-mounds began to form in
my mind back then and has benefited from
the expert tutelage of Mjöll Snæsdóttir, the
excavator of Stóraborg. This paper is writ-
ten in tribute to her.
But what is the problem about farm-
moimds that needs to be explained?
On the one hand there is a technical
issue: How do farm-mounds form? What
processes are involved and how do they
differ from depositional processes at farm
sites where mounds do not accumulate?
And following on from that: what is the
significance of that difference? Is the tem-
poral and spatial distribution of farm-
mounds in the North Atlantic an indication
of a particular technology? Economic
strategy? Ethnicity? Social structure?
Environmental constraints? Or all or some
combination of these factors? Both prob-
lems need to be solved, and the second set
of questions cannot be answered unless
firm understanding has been reached on
the technical issue. Before this is consid-
ered I would like to briefly introduce
Icelandic farm-mound studies as these
form the background to my argument.
Where relevant I also include references to
Greenlandic evidence.
Icelandic farm-mounds
Archaeologists have long known that in
Iceland farm houses have been built over
and over again on the same spot for cen-
turies, often forming deep stratigraphies