The Norse discoverers of America : $b the Wineland sagas translated & discussedGathorne-Hardy, G. M. (Geoffrey Malcolm)
History
The Norse discoverers of America : $b the Wineland sagas translated & discussed
Gathorne-Hardy, G. M. (Geoffrey Malcolm)
America -- Discovery and exploration -- Norse
From this passage, as given by Hauk, it has been understood by Storm
and some other authorities that after rounding Keelness the explorers
came upon mountains which they imagined, rightly or wrongly, to belong
to the same range as others which they had met with at Hóp.
Now the first point which occurs to one in this connexion is that
the passage in question had, at an earlier date than that of any
extant manuscript of the text, already become so corrupt as to be
unintelligible. We can hardly regard the later half of the sentence
as a gloss by Hauk: it is not characteristic of his work to make so
considerable an addition to the matter copied. Still less can we
suppose that the compilers of Eric’s Saga, who never retained any
prejudice in favour of making sense of a passage, introduced the
words ‘to explore’. It looks, in fact, as if at a very early date two
inconsistent attempts had been made to interpret a phrase the meaning
of which was already dubious. It is therefore a very dangerous passage
on which to found any important conclusion.
Secondly, as has been already suggested, the passage about Thorvald
bears all the marks of an interpolation. It comes between two
sentences referring to the return to Straumsfjord which look as if the
saga-writer were taking up the thread of his principal theme after a
digression. It follows immediately after what is obviously information
from a fresh source—the passage beginning ‘Some men say’. It introduces
Thorvald suddenly for the first time, if we accept the purer version of
Eric’s Saga (cf. p. 126). It is embellished with a speech plagiarized
from elsewhere, a form of treatment without parallel in the saga.
Towards the end of the suggested interpolation the words ‘they went
back’ are twice repeated in Eric’s Saga. In these circumstances it
seems fairly safe to regard this passage as having formed no part of
the original story.
But if this be so, the sentence now under consideration, which mentions
Hóp and Straumsfjord, cannot belong to the interpolated matter, but
must be part of the original saga, and in this case it cannot refer
to the topography of Thorvald’s voyage, but to the relation between
Straumsfjord and Hóp.
In the third place, it seems unlikely that unscientific explorers would
recognize two ends of a range of mountains as belonging to one another
if separated by a long sea-voyage; the phrase ‘þat staediz mjök svá á’
(were therefore close opposite one another) seems to refer to a closer
connexion, such as that of two sides of the same hill, which would be
much more readily recognized.
The conclusions to be drawn are therefore:
1. The passage is too corrupt to allow of any important argument being
based on it.
2. It is at least doubtful whether it refers to Thorvald’s voyage at
all.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account