 First of all, I would like to thank the organizers for accepting my paper and their session. Today, I will be giving a brief introduction to examples of religious ambiguity and the time of Christianization of Iceland. My evidence primarily comes from a discussion of burials and a few isolated finds with ambiguous interpretations that have been found in Iceland, roughly dated to the period of the conversion. But first, I'm going to give a brief historic introduction. The Christianization of Scandinavia was a long process with several conversions and subsequent reversions occurring. Iceland, however, was said to be an exception to this pattern of behavior with the Christianization of the country being dated to the meeting of the all thing in either 999 or 1080. The all thing was the popular assembly of Iceland held once a year in the summer and acted as a governing body for the island. So from the voting at the all thing in 1080 forward, Iceland is said to be a Christian nation. In addition to the continuous nature of Christianity in Iceland, the conversion was relatively peaceful, which differs greatly from the other regions of Scandinavia. Norway, for example, had several conversions and reversions and was finally, at least, nominally converted by Olaf Tregvossan, who used various means to convert Norway, including torture and execution of pagan holdouts. The differences between the methods of conversions are marked and set Iceland apart in this period. Arya the learned, generally considered a reliable source, although writing around the century later than the conversion, relates the events that transpired at the all thing. A feud had arisen between the Christians and the pagans with the probable civil war on the horizon. So as was the practice at the time, the argument was submitted for mediation. The decision of Iceland's religion was left to a law speaker, Thorgyr, who while pagan was thought to be sympathetic to the Christians. After careful consideration, his verdict was that all the people should become Christian and that those who here in the land were yet unbaptized should be baptized. But as concerns the exposure of infants and the old laws should stand, as should those pertaining to the eating of horse flesh. If they wished people might sacrifice to the old gods in private, but it would be lesser outlawry if the practice were verified by witnesses. But a few years later, this heaving custom was abolished, as were the others. This written account states the continuation of worship of the gods would result in a sentence of lesser outlawry, which was three years exile abroad and a potential to be killed by anyone without vengeance being allowed. Given the seriousness of this sentence for being found to continue the old practices, it is interesting that there is still some evidence for a transition period both in artifacts and burial evidence. Another factor that should be taken into account when discussing the conversion of Iceland is the island's relative isolation from the rest of the Christian world. The isolation allowed Icelandic religious belief to develop very differently than elsewhere, allowing for a blending of practices in order to ease the population into their new religion. Most of the early Christian records from Iceland indicate that churches were built by prominent individuals who would also be the priest for the church. This is not a drastic change from the previous system in which the same prominent individuals had pagan priestly roles. Only in 1297 was the church granted a portion of land, thus removing the secular control of church lands. This late development in Christian Iceland likely impacted the way in which Christianity formed and the strictness with which certain aspects were followed. Recent discussions by archaeologists on the burial evidence have brought into question the dichotomy that has long been understood to exist between the pagan and the Christian time in Iceland. In a study of burial practices of ambiguous religious affiliation, it has been found that there were three primary forms of burial practice taking place during the transitional period of the late 10th and 11th centuries. The three primary burial types were furnished extra home field burials, meaning burials outside the immediate vicinity of a home or farmstead. The unfurnished intra home field burials, meaning those close to the homestead and the Christian cemeteries which generally had a dense grouping of burials ranging from 10 to over 100 burials. Generally pagan burials are thought to be furnished and Christian burials unfurnished. However, there are several examples of unfurnished burials found in small groupings or on their own, oriented north to south rather than the Christian norm of east to west. While the diversity illustrated in the burials is shown against a backdrop of ideological shifts with the conversion to Christianity, it does not show a replacement of one practice by another, but rather seems to illustrate social divisions in Icelandic society during this time. It is possible that all three burial types attested in the second half of the 10th century AD are in fact Christian and in the sense that the deceased and those performing the burials profess to be Christian. As it was only in the 11th century AD with growing numbers of professional churchmen, that uniformity of burial custom was established. And here we have a graveyard dating to the 11th century that actually has some burials really outside of the norm of the east-west orientation, especially with that one being cut into with another grave. In addition to an ambiguity in burial practices, there are several ambiguous objects that fuse Christian and pagan imagery. The hybridization of imagery could indicate that the old gods and the new god were fused together in order to make the transition easier. Another possibility is that by making the objects religiously ambiguous, a person could be seen as either Christian or pagan, meaning that they would not be proven to break the law, but could still wear or hold an object representing their beliefs. Whatever the reason, the three objects that I will hear after discuss have raised many questions over the years as to their actual meaning. And the three that I'm going to be talking about just for comparison are these two and then this one right here. The Ereland statuette was found in the early 1800s near Ocariri in northern Iceland. It is dated to the early 11th century based on its classification as belonging to the ringerike style of art, which Wilson dates to between 990 and 1050. The statuette was described by Burdelsen as a four-legged chair with a peaked back, a three-peaked back, but no arms with a thin person sitting upright on this chair, naked except for a combed hat and holding a bearded mask up against its face and a cruciform object which rests on the person's knees. The primary source of debate with this figure is actually what he's holding, so this right here. Since its first publication in the 1820s, it has been described as Thor holding his hammer, Mjolnir. The first doubt about this interpretation was published in the early 1980s by Christian Eldjarn who connected the cruciform object with the Christian cross. But which one is it? The ringerike style has been described as a style of syncretism with several examples of Christian and pagan content being illustrated simultaneously, with scenes like that of Sigurd slaying the dragon Fafnir being one of the most popular. For instance, in looking at rune stones from other areas of Scandinavia, the ringerike style has frequently been used in the depiction of crosses with the most frequent illustrations being Tree of Life cross and the Tree of Life ring cross. The Tree of Life appears in both Norse mythology and Christianity and the association with the serpent is also found in both religions, perhaps showing religious syncretism as seen in the imagery. So for instance, in this picture you have the cross up at the top and then you have the snake going around with another cross in the middle. So perhaps the snake is the serpent from the Garden of Eden or Jormund Gondir. It's really undecided. The Foss pendant is another prominent example of an ambiguous object from Iceland. This pendant has been described both as a Thor's hammer and a cross by the National Museum of Iceland, although the souvenir is marketed solely as Thor's hammer. You can buy this pendant widely on the internet or in any of the gift shops in Iceland. The pendant roughly dates to between 950 and 1050, putting it around the time of the conversion. In the middle of the pendant, there is a cruciform cutout as you can see here and a wolf's head decorates the suspension loop. So this is where it would have attached to a cord to be worn around the neck. The placement of the loop means that the cross, if it was a cross, would have been inverted from the typical manner of hanging, while as a hammer it would not be out of the norm to hang it in this manner. Another object of interest is the lead pendant from Ralf Nestader. This artifact presents yet another example of an ambiguous pendant, although thought to date to the 13th or 14th century, so it's a bit later than the other ones, and has thus been labeled a cross by the National Museum of Iceland, although the suspension loop is actually down here, so in the same placement as the one from Foss. And rather than having a cutout in the middle, there is a cruciform shape raised up. The similarities between the two pendants are evident, but the example from Ralf Nestader also shares the rounded terminals of the object clasped in the hands of the Erarland statuette. Essentially, this pendant holds attributes of both of the previous objects, but with a much later date than one would expect an artifact such as this to appear, if Iceland were to have converted immediately after the vote of the all thing. We see here a classic example of material culture telling a different, much more complex story than the official written accounts. I propose that we see the discussed artifacts and practices as reflections of an ambiguous reality. They belong to a period of transition and were likely used as means of integrating the new religion with the old, much like the depictions of angels and Christianity as reflections of the Roman and Greek winged gods, such as Nike. The ambiguity would therefore be an integral part of the multi-vocality of material culture in shaping religious identities in Iceland during the 10th and 11th centuries. Rather than a short-term process dating to the historically transmitted date either of 999 or 1000 AD, we need to understand the Christianization of Iceland as a gradual process that included, at least in its initial stages, considerable ambiguity and links with the pagan past. Thank you.