Iceland review - 2012, Side 74

Iceland review - 2012, Side 74
72 ICELAND REVIEW sites in Europe or the United States. “It is really an archaeologist’s dream because it is a completely relict landscape,” Orri says of the possibility for comprehensive investiga- tion of the archaeological record left at the Greenlandic sites. Orri and his team also hope that the remains will help them move closer to understanding what happened to the colony—something which archaeologists have debated at length over the years. Popular theories generally implicate environmental interactions, and the economy and social structure of the settle- ment. “People are interested in trying to under- stand how badly or well things were going for them in the 13th and 14th centuries before everything went wrong. And there are growing indications that things were fine still in the 14th century, that they were building large churches and therefore there was obvi- ously money to spare for structure investment. We don’t find any signs in the archaeological record of any economic or social crisis but obviously you can interpret the data in differ- ent ways… and people do,” Orri says. By looking at the animal bones, Orri and his team hope to gain insight into the economy of the bishop’s seat, which was the largest estate in the settlement. This may enable them to put together the pieces from different sites and help archaeologists paint a clearer picture of the period. CoMMoN tHeoRIeS Climate has often been cited as a possible rea- son for the disappearance of the settlement at Garðar. Some blame increasingly cold weather and the difficulties in sailing in ice-filled waters, on which the settlers relied for external trade and communication with Norway and Iceland. “Clearly there was a change that had a significant impact at least from the 13th cen- tury onwards. Whether it had a fatal impact is another matter,” Orri says. “It possibly limited their options so when they ran into trouble, possibly for very different reasons, they had fewer possibilities to respond. But I don’t think you can say ‘it was cold and they all died,’ which a lot of people have been saying,” he continues. In his book, Collapse, Jared Diamond suggests that the Norse damaged their envi- ronment through deforestation, soil erosion and the cutting of turf, ultimately leading to the depletion of resources on which they depended. Diamond also writes that their failure to adapt to changing circumstances, such as climate changes, and their over- reliance on livestock that was ill-adapted to Greenland’s climate, rather than marine products for food, led to famine and the colony’s ultimate demise. However, Orri points out that the archae- ological evidence suggests that the Norse Greenlanders did in fact consume marine products on an increasing scale, though, unlike in Iceland, fish was not a large part of the diet. Instead, they sourced most of their calories from hunting, seals in particu- lar, rather than through farming, and were largely self-sufficient in terms of food. Another common theory involves the Thule Eskimos, the ancestors of the present Inuit, who arrived in the area in the 12th and 13th century. Some have speculated that their arrival may have led to the demise of the Norse colonies. “We don’t have any unequivocal evidence that it was violent, but we can postulate that it must have been at times,” Orri says. The two populations had different subsistence strategies and used different hunting grounds. “They wouldn’t have needed to clash over resources, but that doesn’t mean that they didn’t,” he adds. Social tension is also often cited as a pos- sible reason for the eventual extinction of the settlement. A large gap between the rich and the poor is thought to have created ten- sions. “When you are talking about maybe only 2-, 3- or 4,000 people, not many people have to leave for things to go wrong very quickly.” There is also another line of thought which suggests that the settlers simply left in search of a better life. “It could simply be a loss of confidence at some point… that sometime in the late 14th century people suddenly realized that things weren’t going as well as they used to. There were more opportunities elsewhere,” Orri says, explain- ing that it is thought that they may have migrated to Iceland or Norway. Over the years, the settlements had less and less contact with the outside world. “One thing that I think must have been significant is that the king, who had his own ship going to Greenland regularly, stopped doing so after the middle of the 14th cen- tury. When your king stops collecting your taxes then surely that’s a message that you’re no longer at the center of things,” Orri explains, adding that the Icelandic bishops who were appointed after 1378 AD never traveled to Greenland. INteRNAtIoNAl CollAboRAtIoN Since the 2008 banking collapse in Iceland, state funding of archaeology projects has been cut significantly. In the meantime, Icelandic archaeologists are increasingly collaborating on international projects, the Garðar excavation being a prime exam- ple. Experts from Iceland have joined the National Museum and Archives of Greenland, which is in charge of the proj- ect, and become long-term partners with the City University of New York. Orri and his colleagues from Iceland are responsible for managing the excavation and assisting with the analysis of the artifacts. Collaboration with other countries isn’t new, though. Iceland has worked with experts from the United States, the United Kingdom and the other Nordic countries for decades. The collaboration and fund- ing from abroad—in this case from the NSF (National Science Foundation) in the United States—has been of great signifi- cance to Icelandic archaeologists, Orri adds. “It has been an enormous boost to the field, and not that common in archaeology, as it generally tends to be more geopolitically charged,” he continues. As for the fund- ing cuts, it’s been a tough few years, Orri says. “Our main concern is not to lose the expertise we have built here. We have managed to attract quite a few fine young people who have specialized in different subfields of archaeology, and we are very keen on hanging onto that expertise… but if things don’t start to turn around soon, we will be looking at a rather bleak future.”  ARChAEOLOGY

x

Iceland review

Direkte link

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Iceland review
https://timarit.is/publication/1842

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.