There will also, in certain cases, be found contradictions. The statements of the different narratives do not always coincide. The disagreements are, however, neither very numerous nor remarkable. The discrepancies are exactly what we should expect to find in a series of narratives, written at different times and by different hands. The men who recorded the various expeditions to New England in the eleventh century agree, on the whole, quite as well as the writers of our own day, who, with vastly greater advantages, undertake to narrate the events of the second colonization in the seventeenth century.[65] Therefore these marvelous statements and occasional contradictions in nowise detract from the historic value of the documents themselves, which, even in their very truthfulness to the times, give every evidence of authenticity and great worth. To this general appearance of truthfulness we may, however, add the force of those undesigned coincidences between writers widely separated and destitute of all means of knowing what had been already said. The same argument may be used with the Sagas which has been so powerfully employed by Paley and others in vindicating the historical character of the New Testament. In these narratives, as in those of Paul and John, it may be used with overwhelming effect. Yet we do not fear to dispense with all auxiliary aids. We are willing _to rest the whole question of the value of these narratives upon their age_; for if the Sagas date back to a period long prior to the voyage of Columbus, then the Northmen are entitled to the credit of having been the first Europeans to land upon these shores. But the date of these narratives has now been settled beyond reasonable question. The doubts of the ablest critical minds, both in Europe and America, have been effectually laid to rest, and the only reply now given to the Northern Antiquarian is some feeble paragraph pointed with a sneer. We need not, therefore, appear before the public to cry, Place for the Northmen. They can win their _own_ place, as of old. They are as strong to-day in ideas, as anciently in arms. THE ABSENCE OF MONUMENTS AND REMAINS. That the Northmen left no monuments or architectural remains in New England is true, notwithstanding Professor Rafn supposed that he found in the celebrated Dighton rock[66] and the stone mill at Newport, indubitable evidences of the Icelandic occupation. Any serious efforts to identify the Dighton inscription and the Newport Mill with the age of the Northmen can only serve to injure a good cause. If Professor Rafn could have seen these memorials himself, he would doubtless have been among the first to question the truth of the theory which he set forth.