102 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
Introduction
Every artifact is the result of a specifi c combination
of three components: content (or function in
the case of everyday objects), style, and medium (or
material). Most commonly it is the novelty of content
or the uniqueness of style that makes an artifact
exceptional, but in some cases, it is the choice of the
artistic medium that is most original and innovative.
Considering the wide-ranging cultural contacts of
Viking-age Norsemen and the geographical variety
of their settlement areas, and thus varying availability
of materials, we may expect to see some level
of diversity in their use of artistic media and some
adaptation of local resources and traditions.
The development of art in Viking-age England
provides an example of a particularly successful adaptation
of a new artistic medium and local art form
by an immigrant Norse community: The emergence
of Anglo-Scandinavian stone sculpture, one of the
most prolifi c art forms of Viking-period England, was
the immediate result of the acceptance of the artistic
medium of stone in a new environment. The Viking
settlers adopted this insular medium of monumental
public art and transferred Scandinavian stylistic elements
and iconographical patterns from wood, bone,
and textile to stone. The birth of Anglo-Scandinavian
stone sculpture was thus the outcome of the artistic
adaptability of the Scandinavian settlers in England.
The new medium also carried already established
connotations, both cultural and social—it was the artistic
expression of European Christianity, sponsored
by local ecclesiastical and secular powers. Thus, the
adoption of the new art form refl ected a degree of
cultural and social adaptation, and resulted in artistic
changes (introduction of new styles, iconographical
patterns, and a new monument type, the hogback) as
well as in changes in the function and patronage of
pre-Conquest stone sculpture.1
This fruitful adoption of a local artistic medium,
however, did not seem to be typical in the Scandinavian
world of the North Atlantic. Archaeological
evidence has revealed surprising homogeneity
and consistency in the preference for certain raw
materials as well as in the use of everyday objects
and articles and in building customs throughout
the Viking colonies of the North Atlantic, which
suggests that Viking-age Scandinavian culture was
largely homogenous in nature, in spite of the considerable
geographical distances (Stummann Hansen
2005:106–107). The culturally determined preferences
for certain artistic media, however, did not
necessarily coincide with what the natural resources
of newly settled territories had to offer.
Thousands of miles west of the Anglo-Scandinavian
settlements, in the Norse colonies of Greenland,
the limited availability of resources imposed limitations
not only on daily sustainability, but also on the
availability of artistic media. Thus, one would naturally
expect to see some degree of adaptation to the
local circumstances in the choice of artistic materials
among the Norse Greenlanders—similar to the creativity
of the Anglo-Scandinavian communities, but
motivated by very different circumstances (limited
resources, harsh living conditions, relative isolation
from Europe, and contacts with the Inuits). The present
article offers a survey of the Norse Greenlanders’
use of different materials for artistic production. An
examination of their choices of artistic media will
shed light on the cultural identity and cultural contacts
of the Norse Greenland colony and reveal some
of the reasons for the Norse colonists’ willingness to
adapt to the local circumstances in some cases, and
their unwillingness to do so in others.
Art of the Norsemen
Art and artisanship were closely related concepts
and practices in medieval Greenland. Most
Norse artifacts found in Greenland are small, locally
manufactured, often with a practical purpose, and
usually intended for personal use. Artistic activity
included the carving of amulets for protection and
The Use of Artistic Media in Norse Greenland
Lilla Kopár*
Abstract - The choice of material (or artistic medium) is an important part of the creation of an artifact. At the same time,
it is also an indicator of artistic traditions and cultural infl uences. This article offers an overview of the use of some of the
most widely used and, in cultural terms, most signifi cant materials (metal, bone, ivory, wood, and soapstone) as artistic
media in Norse Greenland, with special attention to availability (and its limitations), the choice of alternative media, and
the infl uence of the Church on the use of artistic media. The survey reveals, on the one hand, some level of resourcefulness
of the Norsemen in Greenland to adapt to local circumstances, and on the other, their strong adherence to European
Christian culture.
2009 Special Volume 2:102–113
Norse Greenland: Selected Papers from the Hvalsey Conference 2008
Journal of the North Atlantic
*The Catholic University of America, Department of English, 620 Michigan Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20064 USA;
kopar@cua.edu.
2009 L. Kopár 103
game pieces for entertainment, the creation of objects
of Christian devotion and worship, as well as
the decorating of tools and utensils, furniture, and
clothes. Art also served as a way of self-expression,
both cultural and religious. The roots lay in the
pre-Christian tradition, but the role of art as well as
artistic taste and practices were heavily infl uenced
by Christianity, which was generally accepted by the
Norse settlers shortly after the landnám.2
Judging by the evidence of Norse mythology, the
Norsemen were most resourceful when it came to
utilizing their environment for artistic production.
Mythological sources contain several references to
artistic creation and to the fashioning of objects as
well as beings out of various materials: from natural
materials (e.g., wood and driftwood, gold, iron,
clay, ice, earth), body parts and bodily fl uids (blood
and spit), to nearly impossible and magical ingredients
(including sinews of a bear, breath of a fi sh,
spittle of a bird, noise of a cat’s footsteps, beard of
a woman, roots of a mountain). The native tradition
assigned a certain value to each material, depending
on the availability of resources in Scandinavia and
continental Europe. Upon arrival to Greenland, the
Norse settlers faced a very different natural environment
which posed serious limitations on resources.
In addition, the new faith, Christianity, introduced a
new cultural perspective on and fashion for certain
artistic media.
Artistic Media in Greenland: Metal, Bone, Ivory,
Wood, and Stone
Even though the Norse settlers of Greenland had
a variety of natural resources and materials available
to them for everyday use and artistic production,
the selection differed from that in Scandinavia and
even in the geographically more similar Iceland.
What Greenland lacked most was iron and wood, in
particular timber. On the other hand, the Greenlanders
had immediate access to ivory, which the rest of
Europe lacked and desired. In the following, I will
offer an overview of the artistic (and to lesser degree
practical) usage in Greenland of select materials that
are common in a general Scandinavian context and
discuss their availability and cultural value in Norse
Greenland.
It is generally assumed that the greatest blow
in practical terms was the shortage of metal, in
particular iron and bronze, much needed for basic
tools, weapons, and rivets, following European
technological traditions. Indeed, archaeology has
so far provided limited evidence for metal artifacts.
However, that picture may be deceptive. The limited
number of metal fi nds from Greenland does not
necessarily indicate a shortage of metal in the Norse
colonies. Rather, it may be due to poor preservation
of the material, or the fact that metal artifacts were
collected and reused by the Inuits after the desertion
of the Norse settlements. There is evidence
of local smelting at several Norse sites (smithies,
soapstone moulds, pieces of slag), probably from
imported blooms of crude iron, but so far no hearth
pit has been found in Greenland that would indicate
that the actual smelting of iron from bog ore took
place in the Norwegian or Icelandic fashion (Seaver
1996:29–31).3 The lack of charcoal may also have
made large-scale local smelting impossible.4 In spite
of some level of local manufacturing (in the form of
secondary smelting), iron had to be imported, crude
or wrought, and was indeed one of the most desired
articles in overseas trade.
Metal was also required by the Christian church
for certain ecclesiastical objects. Church bells
made of bronze were imported for the foundation
of churches, and several bell fragments have been
found both at Norse sites of the Eastern Settlement
and at Inuit sites.5 The question of whether the
Norsemen deliberately destroyed their church bells
or were simply unable to fi x the broken ones (Seaver
1996:96–97), or whether the bells were broken into
pieces by the Inuits for reuse (Gulløv 2004:253),
remains unanswered. Remains of church bells are
missing from the Western Settlement; they may have
been removed by the Norsemen when deserting the
settlements (Gulløv 2004:253). Other ecclesiastical
objects of precious metal (chalices, patens, etc.)
could be easily imported at the time of the establishment
of new churches or with the arrival of foreign
churchmen. They were probably also the fi rst objects
to be removed when a site was abandoned or sacked,
due to their portable nature. The bishop’s golden
ring from Garðar (Igaliku) (Fig. 1), probably of
foreign make, was buried with the deceased churchman
(after its precious stone had been picked out)
and thus remains one of the two surviving golden
artifacts from Norse Greenland, the other being a
second ring from the same site.6
Silver objects are equally rare among the fi nds.
An ornamented round silver buckle was found at
ruin group Ø34 in Qorlortup Itinnera (Municipality
of Narsaq) (Gulløv 2004:262). The same site also
produced a decorated and an undecorated buckle of
walrus tooth (see below and in Fig. 2). At Nipaatsoq
(Western Settlement), a silver fi nger ring emerged
along with a rather unusual object in the context of
Norse Greenland, a small silver shield (18 x 24 mm)
decorated (most probably) with the coat of arms
of the Scottish Campbell clan7 (Fig. 3) (Østergård
2004:110). The function and origin of the object are
unknown, although similar small shields are known
as dress ornaments from Europe from the high medieval
period (e.g., from the Slagelse hoard, Denmark).
The Nipaatsoq shield was either imported,
104 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
or, according to Claus Andreasen (1982), the product
of local craftsmanship (Seaver 1996:120–121). The
latter hypothesis is supported by the apparently
unfi nished nature of the artifact (it has no holes or
hook to attach it to clothing or another object) and
by the presence of a small lump of silver at the same
site. Even if the shield is of local origin, it clearly
follows imported designs. Other metal objects from
Greenland (besides basic tools, several knives, and
weapons) include a simple pewter pendant cross
of English origin from Hvalsey (Qaqortukulooq)
(Seaver 1996:173), an iron key with bronze inlay
decoration from Sandnes (Kilaarsarfi k), two simple
buckles or brooches formed of brass rings, and two
copper costume pins from the churchyard at Herjólfsnes
(Ikigaat), as well as a brass buckle from
Nipaatsoq. They are all rather simple in design and
have only limited aesthetic value. The one exception
is a poorly preserved but carefully moulded
lead plaque (40 x 45 mm) from Frederiksdal (Narsarmijit)
near Herjólfsnes. It shows a Crucifi xion
scene with the mournful Mary and John as attendant
fi gures (Fig. 4). The plaque is believed to be a pilgrim’s
badge, with remains of two holes on the top
for attachment (Berglund 1988:35), and therefore it
is almost certain to be of foreign make.
Besides importation, an obvious solution to the
diffi culty of obtaining metal was to replace it by
other media, such as bone, ivory, antlers, and soapstone.
Archeological excavations have brought to
light a number of costume pins and hair pins (Narsaq,
Brattahlíð [Qassiarsuk], Sandnes [Kilaarsarfi k],
Umiiviarsuk) made of a wide variety of materials
(bone, antler, ivory, and wood), belt buckles of bone
and walrus tooth (e.g., at ruin group Ø34, Qorlortup
Itinnera; Fig. 2), whalebone padlocks, spades,
and shovel blades, arrowheads of reindeer antler,
Figure 1. Walrus ivory crosier head and golden ring found and even a whalebone axe (Sandnes [Kilaarsarfi k];
in the bishop’s grave at Garðar (Igaliku). Photograph ©
National Museum of Denmark.
Figure 2. Decorated belt buckle of walrus tooth from ruin
group Ø34, Municipality of Narsaq. Photograph © Qaqortoq
Museum, by Geert Brovard.
Figure 3. Small silver shield with coat of arms from Nipaatsoq
(18 x 24 mm). Photograph © Greenland National
Museum and Archive, by Erik Holm.
2009 L. Kopár 105
Fig. 5A). The latter is clearly a copy of contemporary
iron axes (Roesdahl and Wilson 1992:316, cat.
no. 341) (cf. Fig. 5B). This creative and pragmatic
shift of medium is, however, not unique to Greenland.
For example, buckles in bone and occasionally
in ivory8 have also been known in England and on
the Continent from early Roman to late medieval
times. Interestingly, the main developments in the
design of buckles seems to have always taken place
in metal, and metal prototypes have clearly infl uenced
the design of bone buckles throughout the
period (MacGregor 1985:103–105). Bone buckles
were a resourceful and practical response to the limited
availability of metal,9 and they tend to be copies
of metal types.
Various types of bones of both domesticated
and hunted animals (sheep, cattle, reindeer, whale,
etc.) were used, among others, for tools, household
utensils, combs, fi gurines, and game pieces, but the
most precious of all bones was ivory, primarily for
commercial reasons. Walrus ivory and narwhal tusks
were valuable trade materials that had to be acquired
by dangerous and time-consuming hunts in the far
North, in Disko Bay. In spite of all the diffi culties,
the Norse Greenlanders produced large quantities of
ivory to supply the European market and to cover tax
duties. (The special crusade tithes of 1327 were paid
by the Greenlanders in the form of 635 kg of walrus
ivory. [Gad 1971:125–126, McGovern 1980:258]).
Walrus ivory was exported in an uncarved state, usually
in pairs (sometimes still attached to the severed
front part of the skull), but there is evidence of local
production of walrus tooth, ivory, and whalebone
artifacts as well. Walrus remains in general are widespread
and were found at nearly all excavated sites,
but the distribution of the types of bones is uneven.
While exportable tusks are very rare in Greenland
fi nds, frequent ivory chippings and carved pieces
of skull (especially the maxilla, or jawbone, around
the tusk root) indicate their local preparation for
the overseas market. It also suggests that the Norse
Greenlanders appreciated the export value of the
material over its value as fi ne artistic medium (Roesdahl
2005:189). Other types of walrus bones are rare,
except for post-canines and penis bones (McGovern
1980:258, Roesdahl 2005:187). Walrus bones were
used locally for making small fi gurines of humans,
walruses, and polar bears for protective or decorative
purpose, game pieces for entertainment, and
tools, buttons, and belt buckles for more practical
reasons. Narwhal bones are in general rare in farm
middens, which suggests that only the exportable
tusks were brought back from the hunting fi elds
(Roesdahl and Wilson 1992:384, cat. no. 591). A total
of twenty to thirty walrus and four to fi ve narwhal
skulls were found buried in the churchyard and in
the eastern end of the chancel at the episcopal church
site at Garðar (Igaliku)10 (Arneborg 2006:51). The
teeth of the animals had been extracted, probably
for trade. The arrangement of the bones suggests that
they were buried there deliberately, which indicates
that walrus bones were assigned some religious signifi
cance and special powers, and the local Christian
church allowed for the integration of some aspects
of heathen hunt ritual or magic (Nørlund and Roussell
1929:138; Seaver 1996:31, 101). Figurines and
amulets carved of ivory and bone suggest the same
supernatural associations and the hope for protection
Figure 4. Moulded lead plaque (40 x 45 mm), possibly
a pilgrim’s badge, with Crucifi xion from Frederiksdal
(Narsarmijit).
Figure 5. A. Whalebone axe head from Sandnes (Kilaarsarfi
k). B. Iron axe head from Tunuarmiut, Tunulliarfi k.
106 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
or good luck. Bones in general were probably believed
to retain certain characteristics of the animals
to which they once belonged.
In Europe, ivory had long been considered a
precious artistic medium and luxury item. With the
collapse of the Roman Empire in the West, elephant
ivory from Africa and Asia became diffi cult to obtain
and was completely unavailable in some regions.
From the second half of the ninth century onwards,
it was substituted by walrus tusk, narwhal horn, and
whalebone available in the northern regions. From
the late tenth to the early thirteenth century, whalebone
and walrus ivory enjoyed an unprecedented
popularity (in particular in the British Isles and
northern Europe) as an artistic medium of precious
devotional and secular objects (Beckwith 1972:116,
Gaborit-Chopin 1992:204). This period coincides
with a time of expanding commercial and political
relations of England and the Continent with Scandinavia
and their trade contacts with Greenland.
Up to the early thirteenth century, Greenland and
northern Norway were the chief suppliers of ivory
to the European market, until elephant ivory from
Africa became available again through Spain and
Sicily (from the late twelfth century onwards) and
became the basic material for Gothic ivory carvings.
11 As a result of Viking trade, walrus ivory and
narwhal tusks reached even the Middle East, where
they were much valued by the Arab rulers (Roesdahl
2005:185). Narwahl tusks in particular, commonly
mistaken for unicorn horns, were believed to possess
considerable prophylactic powers (MacGregor
1985:41).
During this period, there was an increased interest
in ivory as an artistic medium also in the
Viking homelands of Scandinavia. The European
popularity of ivory added a signifi cant prestige (not
only commercial value) to this local raw material
in Greenland too. Following the European fashion,
ivory was used in Scandinavia to create refi ned
(often ecclesiastical) objects, usually in Continental
style and manner, but frequent fi nds of ivory pins
and game pieces testify to a wider use of the material.
Apart from a carefully executed chess fi gure
of a queen from the island of Qeqertaq (Municipality
of Sisimiut), carved in walrus tooth (Østergård
2004:96, Fig. 61), the only surviving Greenlandic
example of a high-quality object of walrus ivory
is the famous crosier head from Garðar (Igaliku)
(Fig. 1), found buried in the bishop’s grave. It had
long been associated with Bishop Jón Smyrill (Sverrisfóstri)
(d. 1209), but the most recent dating of the
grave to the late thirteenth century (1270–80s, based
on radiocarbon dating) undermines this assumption
and suggests that the interred bishop may have
been Ólaf, bishop of Greenland between 1246 and
1280 (Arneborg 2006:50). The crosier resembles
English models, although in a somewhat conservative
and simple manner.12 An interesting parallel is
offered by a carefully executed, gilt-bronze crosier
found in a tomb (believed to be of Bishop Richard
de Carew, 1256–80) in the cathedral of St. David’s
in Pembrokeshire (Beckwith 1972:98, ill. 175). The
English crosier is a composite object, ornamented
with Winchester foliage and with nielloed silver and
gilt bronze decorations. It predates the lifetime of
the bishop; according to Beckwith, the crook dates
from the middle of the twelfth century, the nielloed
silver bands are slightly earlier, while the lower part
and the knop are from the end of the twelfth century.
While the Garðar crosier is undoubtedly simpler
in design, it shows obvious parallels in the foliage
carving. It also lacks silver and bronze decorations,
but a very similar impression is given by carved patterns
as a creative substitute for the lacking metal
ornaments. The provenance of the Garðar crosier
is debated. It may have been an import that arrived
with the bishop, or as a later present to him, or it
may represent high quality local craftsmanship. The
idea that the crosier was a present of Bishop Páll of
Skálholt to Bishop Jón Smyrill and consequently
its association with the famous Icelandic female
carver, Margrét hin haga (Margret the dexterous)
(Gad 1971:115, Nørlund 1971 [1936]:44) seems
less probable in light of the late thirteenth-century
dating of the tomb. In addition to Iceland, the Norwegian
archiepiscopal town of Trondheim has also
been suggested as a possible place of provenance
for the crosier based on the west-Norwegian origin
of a number of contemporary high-quality ivory
carvings and the obvious contacts between Norway
and Greenland (Liebgott 1992:203; Roesdahl and
Wilson 1992:316, cat. no. 344). If the crosier is of local
origin, it certainly indicates Greenland’s artistic
contacts with the wider North Atlantic world since
the artist was undoubtedly copying or imitating an
imported model.13
The third most valuable (and certainly most
commonly used) material besides metal and bone
was wood. Although there was limited availability
of wood in Greenland, the Norsemen did not suffer
a shortage of wood in general. What was lacking
was quality timber for the construction of ships and
buildings. Because of this, the Norsemen occasionally
crossed the Davis Strait (up to the mid-fourteenth
century) in order to obtain timber from Markland.
For smaller objects, local trees and driftwood could
easily be obtained and used. In addition to its obvious
practical employment in ship and house construction
and for making numerous household objects, wood
was frequently used as artistic medium both in an
ecclesiastical context (for crosses, crucifi xes, possibly
church portals, etc.) and in a secular context
(for fi gurines, toys, clothing accessories, decorative
2009 L. Kopár 107
wooden coffi ns found at Herjólfsnes were very simple
in design, and the lack of coffi ns in many graves
suggests that only wealthier inhabitants received the
honor of being buried in a coffi n.18 Some coffi ns were
even reused for a second burial, honoring the second
deceased, but disturbing the peaceful rest of the fi rst.
Many of the deceased at Herjólfsnes were accompanied
by wooden crosses. Altogether there were
fi fty-eight wooden crosses found, varying greatly in
carvings for furniture, and even for an ornamented
bridge of a fiddle-like stringed instrument (cf.
Gulløv 2004:273)). While decorative wood carvings
from Scandinavia often display complex ornamental
patterns with fi ne details, the surviving Greenlandic
fi nds are generally simple in decoration and design.
One exception is a small ornamented plank from
the Farm-Beneath-the-Sand (Gården under Sandet
[GUS]), a site unusually rich in wooden fi nds. The
plank has a carefully executed, symmetrical decorative
carving on one side and the name “Björk” in
runes and a dragon head incised on the other (Gulløv
2004:262). The function of the object is unknown; it
may have been a thread holder (yarn reel), presented
possibly as a wedding gift.14 A further example of
elaborate household decoration is an arm of a chair
from Sandnes (Kilaarsarfi k), ornamented with four
carefully executed animal heads, three in low relief
and one three-dimensional (Roesdahl and Wilson
1992:376, cat. no. 565).15 Decorative wood carvings
may have also been used to ornament the doors, portals,
and interior of churches and secular dwellings,
although no carving of this category survives and it
thus remains a speculation. Similarly to Norwegian
stave churches, the west end-walls of churches,
which in many cases appear to have been made of
wood (Ingstad 1966:204), may have been a prime
location of such decorative carvings.
The two fi nest pieces of wood carving surviving
from Norse Greenland are truly Christian artifacts
and derive from Continental or English models.
Both carvings, dated to ca. 1300 by Roussell, depict
the Crucifi xion and were found in the Western Settlement.
16 The crucifi x from the churchyard in Sandnes
(V51) (Fig. 6) is a three-fi gure group with Christ, the
Virgin Mary, and St. John, surrounded by an ornamented
oval frame. According to Seaver, the crucifi x
was probably an import, rather than of local production,
as was a “handsome wooden pax” found buried
nearby (Seaver 1996:130). It may have belonged to a
local priest and was buried with him upon his death.
The other crucifi x (Fig. 7), found among the remains
of a cross bench in ruin group V53d in Austmannadal,
is a relief carving on a wooden slab, with a
pointed end at the bottom (similar to the Herjólfsnes
crosses, see below). It was made of driftwood and
may have been locally carved following imported
models (Roussell 1941:247–249, Seaver 1996:128).
The two crucifi xes represent a departure from the
indigenous tradition of decorative wood carving and
emphasize artistic contacts of the Western Settlement
with Europe.
Further interesting aspects of the use of wood
in a Christian context are revealed by the burials at
Herjólfsnes (Ikigaat) in the Eastern Settlement. The
Norsemen at Herjólfsnes followed the Christian
practice of burying their dead in wooden coffi ns
that were constructed of driftwood.17 The thirty-one
Figure 6. Wooden crucifi x with Christ, the Virgin Mary,
and St. John from Ruin Group V51, Sandnes (Kilaarsarfi
k). Photograph © National Museum of Denmark.
108 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
made this cross in praise and worship of God
the Almighty.”
3. In some cases, personal devotion extended into
the realm of religious magic, as the mystic Latin
formula on the transverse limb of cross no. 150
indicates: “ma(ria) au(e) agla tetragramma Iesus
so(ter) a(don)ai on lo de(us) pater k(ristu)s r(ex)
adoni(ia) fi lii iat” (Seaver 1996:100).
4. Finally, a small wooden stick (n.b., not a cross),
known today as “Guðveig’s rune staff,” which
was inscribed with runes and laid in one of the
coffins, reveals a commemorative function:
“This women, whose name was Guðveig, was
laid overboard in the Greenland Sea.” The stick
was carved in her memory, possibly by a Norwegian
(Stoklund 1995:533) and laid to rest in
consecrated soil to give the deceased a secondary
Christian burial.
The fi rst two functions suggest that the crosses
were not meant to be burial crosses, but were used
as devotional objects in the lifetime of the deceased
and were interred as personal objects. Indeed, as
Marie Stoklund has pointed out, they do differ
from contemporary funerary crosses from England
and France (1984:103–104), and similar inscribed
wooden crosses found in Bergen, Norway, had no
connection with a cemetery or church (1995:533).
The shape of the crosses with a long and narrow part
at the bottom terminating in a point indicates that
they may have been hand-held crosses during rituals
(so-called processional crosses), or they were stuck
in the turf walls of houses and used as objects of private
devotion (Stoklund 1984:108–109, 113; Seaver
1996:99–100). Two small crosses similar to the ones
of Herjólfsnes have been found in one of the living
rooms at the Farm-Beneath-the-Sand (GUS); their
location indicates that they may have similarly been
used for domestic worship (Gulløv 2004:254). At
least two of the Herjólfsnes crosses imitate insular
(Celtic) design (probably via Norway) in their shapes
with semicircular armpits (Stoklund 1995:537). In
their decoration, some of them resemble metal, metal-
covered, or gilded crosses (cf. cross on the left in
Fig. 8, where carved circles and bosses echo the look
of gem stones set in metal). This resemblance suggests
that some crosses may have imitated imported
artifacts, some of them possibly of metal, which
offers another possible example of a shift in artistic
medium (metal and gems to wood).
Similarly, the widely available soapstone (steatite)
was also used as a local substitute for metal,
wood, and earthenware. Due to the lack of clay in
Greenland,19 no pottery was produced in the Norse
colonies; thus, it must have been imported, probably
from Norway and the Continent (Nørlund 1971
[1936]:82–83, Roussell 1941:243–244). On the other
hand, soapstone, a soft but sturdy and fi re-proof
material, was readily available for making large
cooking pots, household vessels, and small bowls
size, workmanship, and design (Fig. 8). They were
dated by Poul Nørlund to ca. 1300, but the runic inscriptions
on eight of the crosses suggest, according
to Marie Stoklund (1995:533, 537–39), an extended
period of production and in some cases a much earlier
dating. That interpretation indicates that many of
the crosses had been in use for a longer period of time
judging by the later dates of the burials. The function
of these crosses is revealed in part by the inscriptions
carved on some of them (readings by Finnur Jónsson
quoted in Hovgaard 1925:610). The crosses seemed
to have served four basic functions:
1. Some had a protective function, e.g., “God the
Almighty guard Guðleif well” (inscribed in
runes) or “Jesus Christ help, Christus natus est
nobis” (a bilingual inscription in runes).
2. Some served the purposes of worship and personal
devotion in the form of art, e.g., “Þorleifr
Figure 7. Wooden crucifi x from Ruin Group V53d, Austmannadal.
Photograph © National Museum of Denmark.
2009 L. Kopár 109
(sometimes ornamented with fi ne decorative carvings),
as well as tools, loom weights, spindle whorls,
oil lamps, and other household objects. A similarly
versatile usage of soapstone is also known from
Norway, where steatite is available in large quantities
(in contrast to Iceland, for example, where it is
lacking).20 Due to its workability, soapstone was also
used in Greenland as an artistic medium to fashion
small fi gurines and probably also architectural carvings
to decorate stone churches (e.g., Garðar [Igaliku]).
Large-scale monumental stone sculpture was
not part of the art of the Greenlanders, but the Christian
tradition introduced the custom of stone grave
markers. Simple and quite small grave markers in
early medieval fashion were found, for example, at
Herjólfsnes (Ikigaat) (Fig. 9a), Garðar (Igaliku), and
Figure 8. Three of fi fty-eight wooden crosses found in the churchyard in Herjólfsnes (Ikigaat). Photograph © National
Museum of Denmark.
110 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
in a number of impressive stone churches with mortared
and possibly whitewashed walls22—highly
ambitious enterprises considering the small size
of the Greenlandic communities and their limited
resources. These new churches represented a departure
from local building traditions and showed the
infl uence of contemporary Continental practices,
and in particular, Norwegian examples (Roussell
1941:119). The impressive church buildings of imported
designs required matching decorations and
ecclesiastical objects. This need created a cultural
pressure for certain artifacts: both ecclesiastical and
devotional objects and decorative artifacts, such
as church vestments and
vessels, bells, and even
stained glass. The items
that were not available in
Greenland, either due to
the lack of materials or
technology, were brought
into the country by its foreign
bishops or traded for
exported ivory and other
highly sought-after arctic
items. In an ecclesiastical
context, art was a form of
worship and a statement of
faith; thus, it required adherence
to the traditions of
the Church manifested in
Continental European artistic
taste and design. Besides
its enrichment of the
aesthetics of the Norsemen
and the actual inventory of
high-standard artifacts, the
Church also imposed certain
limitations on artistic
development and cultural
exchange, which affected
the Norsemen’s relations
with their more immediate
neighbors, the Inuits (or
Skrælings).
The intensity of contact
between the two cultures
varied, but in most
territories it was relatively
limited.23 However, numerous
Norse artifacts
made it into the hands
of the Inuits of Greenland
and of the Canadian
Eastern Arctic by trade or
force, and were possibly
further distributed through
Inuit exchange networks.24
Brattahlíð (Qassiarsuk) (Fig. 9b). They are usually
undecorated except for simple incised crosses and
occasional inscriptions.21 The custom of stone grave
markers was an artistic import and a sign of adherence
to the tradition of the Christian church.
The Role of the Church
A similar adherence to imported traditions of the
Church was true in terms of architecture. After his
arrival in Greenland in ca. 1127, Bishop Arnald of
Garðar launched a program of church construction,
which was carried on by his successors. It resulted
Figure 9. A. Stone grave marker from Herjólfsnes (Ikigaat). Photograph © National Museum
of Denmark. B. Stone grave marker from Brattahlíð (Qassiarsuk). Photograph ©
National Museum of Denmark.
2009 L. Kopár 111
an established network of power and administration,
and thus with a social prestige that could be utilized
by those aspiring to local political and social power
through building on available resources. In Greenland,
however, joining Christian Europe did not
mean utilizing existing resources and adapting to
local circumstances, but rather accepting an external
administrative system, turning away from possible
adaptive strategies on ideological basis, and promoting
a Europe-oriented, frontier identity.
The above survey of the use of artistic media
indicates not only this adherence of the Norsemen to
European Christian culture, but also some level of
resourcefulness to adapt to local circumstances. The
European orientation of the Norse colony is evident
in their desire to obtain objects in the European
fashion and to create artifacts that resemble them in
style and in medium. Their ability to adapt, on the
other hand, is manifested in the occasional shift in
media in response to availability of materials and
the demands of trade. However, this did not result
in a unique Greenlandic artistic tradition, and similar
occasional shifts in media can also be observed
elsewhere in the Scandinavian world and continental
Europe.26 The art of Greenland is therefore a further
proof of the fairly homogenous nature of Scandinavian
emigrant culture and the wide-ranging cultural
impact of Christianity even in the most remote region
of the North Atlantic.
Acknowledgments
My understanding of the complexity of the art of the
Greenlanders, both Norse and Inuit, as well as the original
draft of this manuscript, was substantially improved
through inspiring conversations at the Hvalsey Conference
in Greenland (and in subsequent communications),
particularly with Svend Erik Albrethsen, Jette Arneborg,
Hans Christian Gulløv, Judith Jesch, Christian Keller, Else
Roesdahl, Patricia Sutherland, and Orri Vésteinsson. I am
grateful for their valuable comments on various aspects of
my research. My trip to the Hvalsey Conference was made
possible by the fi nancial support of the Department of
English and the Dean of Arts and Sciences of The Catholic
University of America, Washington, DC.
Literature Cited
Andreasen, C. 1982. Nipaitsoq og Vesterbygden. Grønland
30:177–88.
Arneborg, J. 1990. The Roman Church in Norse Greenland.
Acta Archaeologica 61:142–150.
Arneborg, J. 2006. Saga Trails. Brattahlíð, Garðar,
Hvalsey Fjord’s Church and Herjólfsnes: Four
Chieftain’s Farmsteads in the Norse Settlements of
Greenland. A Visitor’s Guidebook. Vintervår [Narsaq,
Greenland] for The National Museum of Denmark,
Copenhagen, Denmark. 94 pp.
Bailey, R.N. 1980. Viking Age Stone Sculpture in Northern
England. Collins Archaeology Series. Collins,
London, UK. 288 pp.
The cultural exchange seems to have been limited
primarily to isolated artifacts. So far there is little
evidence of major change in Inuit technology or
art under Norse infl uence, or vice versa, although
Patricia Sutherland believes that the Inuit-Norse
contact in the Arctic was “possibly suffi cient to have
infl uenced local technologies” (quoted in Pringle
2000). Inuit carvings representing Norsemen (see
Gulløv 1983) indicate an interest in and interaction
with the Norse Greenlanders, but reveal little
information about the intensity and nature of the
contacts. Competition for limited resources may
certainly have fueled hostile encounters. Instead of
being a useful resource of arctic survival skills and
local technology, the Skrælings were often seen as a
source of potential danger, both in economic terms
and in a spiritual sense as pagans. The establishment
of a bishopric in Garðar (Igaliku) further intensifi ed
these feelings and limited cultural exchange on ideological
basis. As a result, the Norsemen did not seem
to adopt any Inuit hunting tools, skin boats, or clothing
even though that would have improved their effi
ciency in the local arctic circumstances, especially
after the worsening of the weather conditions (after
1150, and in particular in the fourteenth century,
with its cooling and extreme meteorological fl uctuation
[McGovern 1980:266–270]). Instead, they
followed the Scandinavian tradition in boat building
and the European fashion of clothing, similarly to
their general artistic orientation.25 Oddly, it is in this
most practical context of effi ciency and survival that
a shift in the use of materials did not happen.
Conclusion
In conclusion, let us return to where we started,
to the Scandinavian settlers in England, and draw
a brief comparison with the Greenland colony. The
differences are numerous and obvious, but a common
desire for integration makes the comparison
worthwhile. The most important difference between
the Viking settlement of Greenland and England
is that southern and southwestern Greenland were
virtually uninhabited at the time of the initial settlement,
thus the landnám was a full-scale settlement,
while in England, the Vikings encountered an established
society. In spite of this important dissimilarity
as well as the difference in the geographical
distance of the two islands from mainland Europe,
both immigrant groups saw the path to survival
and prosperity through the acceptance of Christianity
within a generation or two after settlement and
actively sought to join the Christian cultural community
of Europe, in artistic as well as other terms.
In both cases, the decision of conversion was made
initially by the social elite who expected to benefi t
most from such a change. The local circumstances
differed greatly. In England, Christianity came with
112 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 2
Bailey, R.N. 1996. England’s Earliest Sculptors. Pontifi cal
Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto, ON, Canada.
155 pp.
Beckwith, J. 1972. Ivory Carvings in Early Medieval England.
Harvey Miller Publishers, London, UK. 168 pp.
Berglund, J. 1988. Herjólfsnes (Ikigaat)—oqaluffi k immap
killingani. Kirken ved havet. Nanortalik Municipality
/ BHM press, Esbjerg, Denmark. 72 pp.
Buchwald, V.F. 2001. Ancient iron and slags in Greenland.
Meddelelser om Grønland, Man and Society 26. Danish
Polar Center, Copenhagen, Denmark. 92 pp.
Buchwald, V.F., and G. Mosdal. 1985. Meteoritic iron, telluric
iron, and wrought iron in Greenland. Meddelelser
om Grønland, Man and Society 9. Commission for
Scientifi c Research in Greenland, Copenhagen, Denmark.
52 pp.
Cramp, R.J. (Ed.) 1984–2008. Corpus of Anglo-Saxon
Stone Sculpture. Oxford University Press for the British
Academy, Oxford, UK. 8 vols.
Gaborit-Chopin, D. 1992. Walrus ivory in western Europe.
Pp. 204–205. In E. Roesdahl and D.M. Wilson
(Eds.). From Viking to Crusader: The Scandinavians
and Europe 800–1200. Rizzoli, New York, NY, USA.
429 pp.
Gad, F. 1971 (1970). The History of Greenland. Volume
1. Earliest Times to 1700. C. Hurst, London, UK,
and McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, QC,
Canada. 350 pp.
Gulløv, H.C. 1983. The Eskimo’s view of the European:
The so-called Norse dolls and other questionable carvings.
Arctic Anthropology 20(2):121–129.
Gulløv, H.C. (Ed.) 2004. Grønlands forhistorie. Gyldendal,
Copenhagen, Denmark. 434 pp.
Hovgaard, W. 1925. The Norsemen in Greenland. Recent
discoveries at Herjólfsnes. Geographical Review
15(4):605–616.
Ingstad, H. 1966. Land under the Pole Star. A Voyage
to the Norse Settlements of Greenland and the Saga
of the People that Vanished. St. Martin’s Press, New
York, NY USA. 381 pp.
Kopár, Lilla. In press. Gods and Settlers: The Iconography
of Norse Mythology in Anglo-Scandinavian Sculpture.
Brepols, Turnhout, Belgium.
Liebgott, N.-K. 1992. Bone, antler, amber, and walrus
ivory. Pp. 202–203. In E. Roesdahl and D.M. Wilson
(Eds.). From Viking to Crusader: The Scandinavians
and Europe 800–1200. Rizzoli, New York, NY, USA.
429 pp.
MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Ivory, and Horn. The
Technology of Skeletal Materials Since the Roman Period.
Croom Helm Ltd., Beckenham, UK, and Sydney,
Australia. 245 pp.
Mathiassen, T. 1931. Inugsuk, a mediaeval Eskimo settlement
in Upernivik district, West Greenland. Meddelelser
om Grønland 77:145–340.
McGovern, T.H. 1980. Cows, harp seals, and church bells:
Adaptation and extinction in Norse Greenland. Human
Ecology 8:245–275.
Nørlund, P. 1971 (1936). Viking Settlers in Greenland and
Their Descendants During Five Hundred Years. Kraus:
New York, NY, USA. (Reprint. Originally published
Cambridge University Press, London, UK.) 160 pp.
Nørlund, P., and A. Roussell. 1929. Norse ruins at Gardar,
the episcopal seat of mediaeval Greenland. Meddelelser
om Grønland 76. Danish Poler Center, Copenhagen:
Denmark. 170 pp.
Østergård, E. 2004. Woven into the Earth. Textiles from
Norse Greenland. Aarhus University Press, Aarhus,
Denmark. 296 pp.
Pringle, H. 2000. Hints of frequent pre-Columbian contacts.
Science 288(5467):783–785.
Roesdahl, E. 2005. Walrus ivory—demand, supply, workshops,
and Greenland. Pp. 182–191, In A. Mortensen
and S.V. Arge (Eds.). Viking and Norse in the North
Atlantic. Select Papers from the Proceedings of the
Fourteenth Viking Congress, Tórshavn, 19–30 July
2001. The Faroese Academy of Sciences, Tórshavn,
Faroe Islands. 445 pp.
Roesdahl, E., and D.M. Wilson (Eds.). 1992. From Viking
to Crusader: The Scandinavians and Europe 800–1200.
Rizzoli, New York, NY, USA. 429 pp.
Roussell, A. 1941. Farms and Churches in the Mediaeval
Norse Settlements of Greenland. With an appendix by
M. Degerbøl. Meddelelser om Grønland 89(1). C.A.
Reitzels Forlag, Copenhagen, Denmark. 354 pp.
Seaver, K.A. 1996. The Frozen Echo. Greenland and the
Exploration of North America ca. AD 1000–1500. Stanford
University Press, Stanford, CA, USA. 407 pp.
Stoklund, M. 1984. Nordbokorsene fra Grønland. Nationalmuseets
Arbejdsmark 1984. National Museum of
Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark. Pp. 101–113.
Stoklund, M. 1995 (1993). Greenland runes: Isolation or
cultural contact? Pp. 528–543, In C.E. Batey, J. Jesch,
and C.D. Morris (Eds.). The Viking Age in Caithness,
Orkney, and the North Atlantic. Select Papers from the
Proceedings of the Eleventh Viking Congress, Thurso
and Kirkwall, 22 August–1 September 1989. Edinburgh
University Press, Edinburgh, UK. 554 pp.
Stummann Hansen, S. 2005. Archaeology of the Arctic:
Scandinavian settlement of the North Atlantic. Pp.
104–110, In M. Nuttall (Ed.). Encyclopedia of the
Arctic. Volume 1. Routledge, New York, NY, USA,
and London, UK. 2380 pp.
Endnotes
1On Viking-age stone sculpture in England see, among
others, Bailey 1980, 1996:77-94; introductory chapters to
the individual volumes (esp. vols. I, II, III, VI, and VIII)
of the Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture (gen. ed.
R.J. Cramp, 1984–2008); and Kopár, in press.
2For primary sources and on the development of the Roman
Church in Greenland see Arneborg 1990 (esp. pp.
143-145).
3There was a Norse hearth pit furnace found at L’Anse aux
Meadows, Newfoundland, which suggests that American
ore was worked into crude iron at that settlement site and
brought back to Greenland for further refi nement (Seaver
1996:31).
4There is evidence of an alternative method of metal
production practiced mainly by the Inuits: at Cape York,
Northwest Greenland, iron meteorite pieces (known
among the Inuits by the names of the Tent, the Woman,
and the Dog) were chipped away to produce metal
by cold-hammering. (Buchwald 2001; Buchwald and
Mosdal 1985; Christian Keller, University of Oslo, Oslo,
Norway, pers. comm.)
2009 L. Kopár 113
5The Inuits attributed special signifi cance to church bell
fragments due to their music-making ability (Hans Christian
Gulløv, National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen,
Denmark, pers. comm.).
6There were two other rings found at the cathedral cemetery,
both made of bronze, one with a setting for a
stone (Nørlund 1971 [1936]:43, Roesdahl and Wilson
1992:316).
7The same pattern (or coat of arms) was also engraved
on a goat’s knuckle and a couple of soapstone shards.
The midden also revealed rivets, iron nails, and some
rings that may have belonged to a coat of mail (Seaver
1996:120).
8A twelfth-century example in walrus ivory was found
together with the famous Lewis chessmen in the Outer
Hebrides.
9Bone buckles also had practical advantages over metal
ones in the cold climate, the latter ones being unpleasantly
cold to the touch and increasingly breakable in
the cold weather. (I owe this practical remark to Kirsten
Seaver, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, United
States, pers. comm.).
10The skulls found inside of the existing church ruins may
have originally been in the churchyard of the earlier
church on the site, and became enclosed in the later
church by its eastward expansion.
11In England ivory was immensely popular; in his catalogue
of early medieval ivories, Beckwith (1972) lists
over 160 artifacts, mainly of ecclesiastical use.
12Further connections with the British Isles (or the insular
church and culture via intermediaries) are the insular
(Celtic) cross shapes of some of the Herjólfsnes crosses,
the presence of “Anglo-Saxon” dotted u-runes, and perhaps
word forms such as isu, isus for “Jesus” and kros
(Stoklund 1995:538).
13An investigation into the geographical origin of the ivory
itself by trace element analysis may bring us closer to a
defi nite answer to the provenance question.
14Svend Erik Albrethsen, Virum, Denmark, pers. comm.
15A whalebone loom slay from Austmannadal is decorated
with two incised human fi gures in combat (Roussell
1941:276, fi g. 171, no. 341). To my knowledge, this
unique carving is the only surviving multi-fi gural (and
possibly narrative) scene from Greenland (apart from the
traditional three-fi gure Crucifi xion Images from Sandnes
[Fig. 6] and Frederiksdal [Fig. 4]). It probably depicts a
secular scene.
16A third Crucifi xion image survives on the lead plaque of
Frederiksdal (Narsarmijit) at the southern tip of Greenland
(Fig. 4). The plaque is most certainly an import.
17Jette Arneborg, National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen,
Denmark, pers. comm.
18Coffi n burials were by no means a norm or necessity
even for high-ranking ecclesiastics: the above-mentioned
bishop buried at Garðar (Igaliku) in the thirteenth
century was not laid in a coffi n.
19Jette Arneborg, pers. comm.
20Greenland was famous in the North Atlantic for its
soapstone; “as a matter of fact, even in the seventeenth
century, there was an idea prevalent in Norway that the
soapstone used in Trondhjem Cathedral had come from
Greenland” (Nørlund 1971 [1936]:82-83).
21According to Marie Stoklund, Greenlandic runic inscriptions
on stones have probably all had connections with
graves, except maybe for the þurfi nna stone from Herjólfsnes
(Ikigaat) and the Napassut fragment (Stoklund
1995:532).
22See the example of the Hvalsey Fjord church site, the
Inuit name of which (Qaqortukulooq) means “white.”
23According to Patricia Sutherland (cited in Pringle
2000:783), in the Arctic, unlike in Newfoundland, the
Norse had frequent and prolonged contacts with the
Dorset Inuits, more than just trading, as is shown in the
presence of Norse or Norse-infl uenced artifacts (incl.
yarn and pieces of wood showing the infl uence of European
carpentry techniques and Norse-style design) at
Dorset Inuit sites (e.g., Nunguvik and three other sites
on Baffi n Island).
24For example, the Inugsuk Inuit culture of the west coast
(Upernivik district) was defi ned on the basis of the presence
of Norse artifacts such as iron and bronze objects,
wooden spoon cases, draughtsmen (often made into tops)
(Mathiassen 1931, McGovern 1980:264).
25Our knowledge of the clothing habits of the Norsemen is
largely limited to the evidence of burials, which may not
faithfully represent everyday clothing.
26Marie Stoklund arrived at a similar conclusion regarding
runic inscriptions: “Innovations [in Greenland runic inscriptions]
bear witness to close contact and widespread
cultural relations and make it problematic to speak of
isolation and to characterize certain features as ‘Greenland’
peculiarities (except perhaps the so-called ‘Greenland’
–r)” (Stoklund 1995:640).