Lewis Chessmen: What do we really know?

I attended a public lecture on Tuesday held by the Medieval and Renaissance Studies program here at Brock. The subject was about the Lewis Chessmen, gaming pieces found on the coast of the Isle of Lewis in Scotland.

The archaeologist who was giving the lecture gave us some background on the chessmen themselves and then he raised a very important point that I have never truly considered before. What do we really know about the past? Of course, in archaeology there are some things that we claim to know for certain, but are there other explainations that can be considered?

For example, he talked about where they were found: Could they have been found elsewhere? Moreover, can we assume that all the chessmen were from the same time period just because they were all found together? He then went on to examine the pieces and show why some could have been much earlier than the others.

Because they were all found together, could they have been made by the same artist? He then showed us that the gaming pieces could be seperated into groups by examining the facial features of each of the chessmen.

Moreover, the site in which the gaming pieces were found has not been excavated. Why not? The area is covered by sand-dunes and is probably not ideal for excavation.

Another assumption about the chessmen is that they were left by a passing merchant, but considering where they were found, could this be true? Below is a picture of the west coast of the Isle of Lewis in Scotland. The lecturer said that it is more probable that they washed up on the shore, which I am inclined to believe as well.

The pieces themselves were found in the mid-18th century, therefore the exact provenance is questionable. Where they really found in Lewis? Or could they have been found in other sites that seem probable? Is it ethical to display the Lewis Chessmen in a museum due to the fact that their provenance is questionable?

While the chessmen were an interesting topic in their own right, I found it much more interesting that the lecturer was questioning what was believed to be true about the chessmen.

When I take a class on archaeology, I assume that all the facts and figures about a certain artifact is true. But what makes us so sure? We should always be questioning what we think we know about the past and not take what is written in our textbooks for granted. Where there is one theory, there are many others and each should be considered when studying artifacts.

After the lecture, I went on to read a bit more about the Lewis Chessmen and I came across a recurring theme that has come up frequently in our class. Where should the Lewis Chessmen call home? Should they be housed in the National Museum of Scotland, where only 11 of the 93 are on display? The other 82 are at the British Museum, which we know has come under much scrutiny and controversy regarding the artifacts that they "own." The Chessmen were found in Scotland, so should that be their permanent home? Or do they belong in Norway, their original home and where they were first crafted?