Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana. Supplementum - 01.08.1967, Qupperneq 146

146
Ámundi Jónsson (1738-1805) was a well-known builder and carver who is known to have lived in Copen-
hagen from 1767 to 1770. Up to 1799 he is supposed to have built thirteen churches in addition to other
houses. He worked in southern Iceland. We know of a certain amount of church furniture from his hand,
including several altar-pieces and one baptismal font (e. g. figs. 276-280). He must be reckoned Iceland’s
foremost acanthus carver. His carving is not markedly baroque, and there are rococo features in some of
his works.
The northerner Hallgrímur Jónsson (1717-1785) was known both as a painter of altar-pieces and as a
wood-carver. His ornamentation is partly pierced and appliqué and partly in an unusually high relief.
A combination of Regency ribbon-work and vine stems with large flowers (figs. 288-297) is typical. His
plant forms seem to be based on the forms of European ornament designers (Daniel Marot).
A group of carvings, some of which have been attributed to Hallgrímur Jónsson, must stem from another
wood-carver, who may also have lived in the north, but whose name we do not know. It is pierced and
appliqué polychromatic carving on a very small scale and in a most individual style (figs. 204, 206, 207 and
281-286). The figures give us glimpses of the life of prosperous Icelanders, and plant ornamentation is
always an important accompaniment to these scenes.
The diversity of the carved plantornamentation oftheeighteenthcenturymayseemconfusing. Onecannot,
as with the seventeenth century, divide the works into one large group labelled folk art and one small one
marked modern professional work. They now seem to come from successors of either group or combinations
of both, sprinkled with varying amounts of fresh impulses from abroad, in addition to the «last word» from
Copenhagen. To some extent social divisions must have determined who carved in an old-fashioned and
who in a modern style. But the more modern works must in varying degrees have been imitated by the
amateurs.
If we examine the origins of the dated (and of some of the undated) artefacts, we get the impression that
carving was now just as eagerly carried on in the south and west as in the north. Nor does the north stand
out with regard to quality — apart from the productive wood-carvers mentioned.
Despite a good deal of very ordinary work, eighteenth-century wood-carving was very rich, considering
the external circumstances.
3. Slow decay.
During the nineteeth century folk art largely died out in Iiurope, and even in Iceland it hardly existed
after 1900. The rich tradition of carved plant ornamentation, which must to a large extent be regarded as folk
art, now reaches the end of the road. There was no sudden stop to the ornamental decoration of objects,
but our dated material is very sparse after 1880. From 1800 on, it altogether comprises 151 objects bearing
plant ornamentation. Regarded as artefacts they are less interesting than earlier material. Inventiveness
and variation diminish, and really good works are fewer and farther between. A certain mass-production
also seems to make itself felt.
Tradition stood remarkably firm with regard to the choice of motifs for the various types of objects,
but the motifs are often treated in a new way. To a large extent the forms are bigger and rougher, and the
«flat» relief is almost entirely dominant. With the virtual disappearance of rounded relief, the fluting of
stems and leaves also comes to an end, and one characteristic form of plant ornamentation is no longer in
the picture.
Most of the woodwork gives the impression of being folk art. While formerly the upper class and the