Volume I Part 32 (1/2)

[248] The above is for the most part a translation from Hauk's Landnamabok.

[249] We know little of how the ancient Scandinavians were able to provide themselves on their long voyages with food that would keep; they used salt meat, and it is probable that when they were laid up for the winter they often died of scurvy, as indeed is indicated by the narratives. Meat and fish they could doubtless often obtain fresh by hunting and fis.h.i.+ng; for grain products they were in a worse position; these can never have been abundant in Iceland, and they certainly had no opportunity of carrying a large provision with them; but as a rule they can scarcely have got on altogether without hydro-carbons, which are considered necessary for the healthy nourishment of a European. Milk may have afforded a sufficient compensation, and in fact we see that they usually took cattle with them.

In the narrative of Ravna-Floki's voyage to Iceland it is expressly said that the cattle died during the winter (see above, p. 257), and it must have been for this reason that they thought they must go home again the next summer, which shows how important it was. Probably Eric also took cattle with him on his first voyage to Greenland, and thus he was obliged before all to find a more permanent place of abode on the sh.o.r.es of the fjords where there was grazing for the cattle; but it is likely that he lived princ.i.p.ally by sealing and fis.h.i.+ng. In that case he must have been a very capable fisherman.

[250] Edda Snorra Sturlusonar, i. pp. 686, 688, Hafniae, 1848.

[251] If the Gunnbjornskerries lay on the east coast, then Gunnbjorn Ulfsson was the first to reach it; but, as has been pointed out above (p.

261), they are more likely to have been near Cape Farewell, a.s.suming the voyage to be historical.

[252] This incident is obviously connected with Irish legends, with which that same saga shows other points of resemblance. We read in the Floamanna-saga [cf. ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” ii. p. 118]: ”They were then much exhausted by thirst; but water was nowhere in the neighbourhood. Then said Starkad: I have heard it said that when their lives were at stake men have mingled sea-water and urine. They then took the baler, ... made this mixture, and asked Thorgils for leave to drink it. He said it might indeed be excused, but would not either forbid it or permit it. But as they were about to drink, Thorgils ordered them to give him the baler, saying that he wished to say a spell over their drink [or: speak over the bowl]. He received it and said: Thou most foul beast, that delayest our voyage, thou shalt not be the cause that I or others drink our own evacuation! At that moment a bird, resembling a young auk, flew away from the boat, screaming.

Thorgils thereupon emptied the baler overboard. They then row on and see running water, and take of it what they want; and it was late in the day.

This bird flew northwards from the boat. Thorgils said: Late has this bird left us, and I would that it may take all the devilry with it; but we must rejoice that it did not accomplish its desire.”

In Brandan's first voyage, in the Irish tale, ”Betha Brenainn,” etc., or ”Imram Brenaind” (of about the twelfth century; cf. Zimmer, 1889, pp. 137, 319), the seafarers one day suffered such thirst that they were near to death. They then saw glorious jets of water falling from a cliff. His companions asked Brandan whether they might drink of the water. He advised them first to say a blessing over it; but when this was done, the jets stopped running, and they saw the devil, who was letting the water out of himself, and killing those who drank of it. The sea closed over the devil, in order that thenceforth he might do no more evil to any one. The similarities are striking: both are peris.h.i.+ng of thirst and about to drink urine, the Icelanders their own, the Irish the devil's. They ask their leaders--the Icelanders Thorgils, the Irish Brandan--whether they may drink it. In both cases the leaders require a prayer to be said over it.

Thereupon in both cases they see the devil: the Icelanders in the form of a bird that screams and finally leaves them to trouble them no more, and the Irish in the form of the devil himself, who is pa.s.sing water, and disappears into the sea to do no more evil. The Icelandic tale is to some extent disconnected and incomprehensible, but is explained by being compared with the Irish; one thus sees how there may originally have been a connection between the bird (the Evil One) and the drink, which is otherwise obscure. The Icelandic account may have arisen by a distortion and adaptation, due to oral transmission, of the Irish legend.

[253] Cf. ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” ii. p. 656.

[254] Cf. ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” ii. p. 662.

[255] _Ibid._ pp. 684 ff.

[256] According to the ”Islandske Annaler” [pp. 121, 181, 477] it was in 1200, therefore eleven years later, not fourteen; it is there related merely that Ingimund the priest was found uncorrupted in the uninhabited region, but the other six are not mentioned.

[257] I.e., wax tablets to write on.

[258] The Arab Qazwini (thirteenth century) tells a story, after Omar al 'Udhri (eleventh century), of a cave in the west where lie four dead men uncorrupted [cf. G. Jacob, 1892, p. 168].

[259] Cf. ”Islandske Annaler,” edited by G. Storm, 1888, pp. 50, 70, 142, 196, 337, 383.

[260] Cf. G. Storm's arguments to this effect, 1888a, pp. 263 ff.; 1887, pp. 71 f.

[261] It is true that in Bishop Gissur Einarsson's (bishop from 1541 to 1548) copy-book there is an addition to the ancient sailing directions for Greenland that ”experienced men have said that one must sail south-west to New Land (Nyaland) from the Krysuvik mountains” (on the Reykjanes peninsula) [see ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” iii. p. 215; and G. Storm, ”Hist.

Tidskr.,” 1888, p. 264]; but it is impossible to attach much weight to a statement of direction in a tradition 260 years old; it may easily have been altered or ”improved” by later misconceptions.

[262] ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” iii. pp. 222-224.

[263] As we have said, they can scarcely have known anything of the coast to the north of this, which runs in a more northerly direction.

[264] Cf. G. Storm, 1891, p. 71; ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” i. p. 361.

[265] The mathematician and cosmographer Jacob Ziegler (ob. 1549) in his work ”Scondia” (printed at Strasburg, 1536) placed the promontory of Hvitserk (”Hvetsarg promontorium”) in 67 N. lat. [cf. ”Gronl. hist.

Mind.,” iii. pp. 500, 503]. This may be the usual confusion with Blaserk.

It happens to be by no means ill suited to Ingolf's Fjeld, which lies in 66 25' N. lat.

[266] In the Walkendorff additions to Ivar Bardsson's description of Greenland it is called Hvitserk, which may be a confusion with Blaserk; the pa.s.sage continues: ”And it is credibly reported that it is not thirty sea-leagues to land, in whichever direction one would go, whether to Greenland or to Iceland” [see ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” iii. p. 491]. The distance here given is remarkably correct. In Bjorn Jonsson's ”Gronlands Annaler” (written before 1646) it is related that ”Sira Einar Snorrason,”

priest of Stadarstad, near Snaefellsnes (he became priest there in 1502), owned a large twelve-oared boat, which, with a cargo of dried cod, was carried away from ondverdarnes (the western point of Snaefellsnes) ”and drifted out to sea, so that they saw both the glaciers, as Gunnbjorn had done formerly, both Snaefells glacier and Blaserk in Greenland; they had thus come near to Eric's course ('Eiriksstefnu')” [”Gronl. hist. Mind.,”

i. p. 123]. Here, then, we have the same idea that both glaciers can be seen simultaneously, as is also found in Bjorn's work with reference to Gunnbjorn Ulfsson's voyage (see above, p. 263).

[267] Cf. ”Gronl. hist. Mind.,” iii. p. 843. Captain Graah brought the stone to Denmark in 1824.