And, setting aside for the moment the exact form of words used, we may fairly say that the essential meaning of these various passages is as follows:—Olaf Tryggvason also brought about the conversion of Greenland. For this purpose he found an excellent agent in Leif, the son of the founder of that colony, a man who attained distinction in many ways, for he not only introduced the faith into those benighted regions but he also earned the title of ‘Lucky’ by the discovery of Wineland, and a brave and sensational rescue of a crew of shipwrecked men. It will be observed that Leif’s career is only relevant in this context in so far as it comes in contact with that of Olaf Tryggvason, with whom the writer is principally concerned, and all that it was necessary for him to know, and possibly all that he did know, was the fact that Leif was Olaf’s missionary and that he had various other claims to distinction. The when or the how of these various adventures of Leif were altogether beside the point, and did not need to be closely investigated. In this way, without any blame attaching to the original chronicler, even if he was responsible for the present order of the words, a false idea of the circumstances of Leif’s discovery may easily have been started in Iceland. Between the two ‘thættir’ or episodes which make up our story as incorporated in the Flatey Book Saga of Olaf Tryggvason, the passage already quoted from other texts appears, slightly edited into conformity with the Wineland story of the book by the omission of any reference to that country (see Appendix of Supplementary Passages, p. 75). The editing is incomplete, for the rescue of the crew remains, to be repeated under different circumstances later on; but inasmuch as the whole passage is obviously derived from the same source as the others which have been mentioned, no point can legitimately be made of this other than that the scribes of the Flatey Book did not carry the interference with their sources very far, which on the whole only goes to indicate that the Wineland story as they copied it suffered no alteration in the process, a fact in favour of this version rather than otherwise. It also shows that the thættir were drawn from an independent source. We may sum up the argument on this branch of the case as follows: 1. Leif was a person who came within the range of Icelandic interest not because of his exploits in themselves, which rather concerned Greenland, but because they had a bearing on the history of an Icelandic hero, Karlsefni, and of a Norse king, Olaf Tryggvason. 2. For this purpose the precise circumstances and date of his Wineland voyage were quite irrelevant. 3. The accounts therefore which appear of this voyage, both in Hauk’s account of Wineland and in the sagas of Olaf Tryggvason, are, as we should expect, extremely short and superficial.