Saga - 2020, Qupperneq 97

home burials. Church representatives were generally opposed to this new
practice. This was especially the case with Bishop Jón Helgason during the first
half of the twentieth century and Bishop Sigurbjörn Einarsson during the second
half of the century. They argued that establishing a home burial plot meant
turning your back on time-honoured church practices. They also feared that home
burial plots would fall into disrepair if the family vacated or sold the land and
that the great number of home burial plots affected parishioners’ loyalty to parish
churchyards. As such, home burials undermined the integrity of traditional burial
practices. Aside from a brief period in 1920, when conservative policies attributed
to Jón Helgason were in vogue, the Icelandic government generally granted appli-
cations for home burial plots. you could say that there was a battle being fought
over burial rites during the period when demand for home burial plots was at its
highest and the church took a vehement stance against the practice. Eventually,
the Althing repealed the legal provision for home burials due to pressure from the
national church. Thus it seems that the church won the battle. However, this was
not a total victory as burials have been conducted in existing home burial plots
up to recent times.
The enthusiasm for home burial plots is linked to the powerful push for
progress among Icelandic farmers, which can be seen both in technological
advances in farming as well as the social- and cultural awakening of the Icelandic
farmer. This coincided with a certain disinterest in the national church, its rites
and ceremonies, and served to undermine the tradition of church burials.
Lykilhugtök: Útfararsiðir; Heimagrafreitir; Vakningahreyfing bænda; Kirkjusaga
Keywords: Funeral traditions; Private graveyards; Farmer’s revival; Church history
(Icelandic)
átökin um útförina 95