[53] Laing's Heimskringla, vol. I, p. 457. It is related that while they were planking the ship, "it happened that Thorberg had to go home to his farm upon some urgent business; and as he stayed there a long time, the ship was planked upon both sides when he came back. In the evening the king went out and Thorberg with him, to see how the ship looked, and all said that never was seen so large and fine a ship of war. Then the king went back to the town. Early the next morning the king came back again to the ship, and Thorberg with him. The carpenters were there before them, but all were standing idle with their hands across. The king asked, 'What is the matter?' They said the ship was ruined; for somebody had gone from stem to stern, and cut one deep notch after another down the one side of the planking. When the king came nearer he saw that it was so, and said with an oath, 'The man shall die who has thus ruined the ship out of malice, if he can be found, and I will give a great reward to him who finds him out.' 'I can tell you, king,' says Thorberg, 'who has done this piece of work.' 'I don't think that any one is so likely to find it out as thou art.' Thorberg says: 'I will tell you, king, who did it, I did it myself.' The king says, 'Thou must restore it all to the same condition as before, or thy life shall pay for it.' Then Thorberg went and chipped the planks until the deep notches were all smoothed and made even with the rest; and the king and all present declared that the ship was much handsomer on the side of the hull which Thorberg had chipped, and bade him shape the other side in the same way and gave him great thanks for the improvement."
[54] A few years ago two very ancient vessels which probably belonged to the seventh century were exhumed on the coast of Denmark, seven thousand feet from the sea, where they were scuttled and sunk. The changes in the coast finally left them imbedded in the sand. One vessel was seventy-two feet long, and nine feet wide amid ships. The other was forty-two feet long, and contained two eight-sided spars, twenty-four feet long. The bottoms were covered with mats of withes for the purpose of keeping them dry. Among the contents was a Damascened sword, with runes, showing that the letter existed among the Northmen in the seventh century.
[55] The people of Iceland were always noted for their superiority in this respect over their kinsmen in Denmark and Norway. There is one significant fact bearing on this point, which is this: that, while a few of the people of Iceland went at an early period to engage in piratical excursions with the vikings of Norway, not a single pirate ship ever sailed from Iceland. Such ways were condemned altogether at an early day, while various European nations continued to sanction piracy down to recent periods. Again it should be remembered that in Iceland duelling was also solemnly declared illegal as early as 1011, and in Norway the following year; while in England it did not cease to be a part of the judicial process until 1818. See Sir Edmund Head's Viga-Glum Saga, p. 120.
[56] Those who imagine that these manuscripts, while of pre-Columbian origin, have been tampered with and interpolated, show that they have not the faintest conception of the state of the question. The accounts of the voyages of the Northmen to America form the framework of Sagas which would actually be destroyed by the elimination of the narratives. There is only one question to be decided, and that is the date of these compositions.
[57] The fact that Mr. Bancroft has in times past expressed opinions in opposition to this view will hardly have weight with those persons familiar with the subject. When that writer composed the first chapter of his History of the United States, he might have been excused for setting down the Icelandic narratives as shadowy fables; but, with all the knowledge shed upon the subject at present, we have a right to look for something better. It is therefore unsatisfactory to find him perpetuating his early views in each successive edition of the work, which show the same knowledge of the subject betrayed at the beginning. He tells us that these voyages "rest on narratives mythological in form, and obscure in meaning," which certainly cannot be the case. Furthermore they are "not contemporary;" which is true, even with regard to Mr. Bancroft's own work. Again, "The chief document is an interpolation in the history of Sturleson." This cannot be true in the sense intended, for Mr. Bancroft conveys the idea that the principal narrative first appeared in Sturleson's history when published at a late day. It is indeed well known that one version, but not the principal version, was interpolated in Peringskiold's edition of Sturleson's Heimskringla, printed at Copenhagen. But Bancroft teaches that these relations are of a modern date, while it is well known that they were taken verbatim from Codex Flatöiensis, finished in the year 1395. He is much mistaken in supposing that the northern Antiquarians think any more highly of the narratives in question, because they once happened to be printed in connection with Sturleson's great work. He tells us that Sturleson "could hardly have neglected the discovery of a continent," if such an event had taken place. But this, it should be remembered, depends upon whether or not the discovery was considered of any particular importance. This does not appear to have been the case. The fact is nowhere dwelt upon for the purpose of exalting the actors. Besides, as Laing well observes, the discovery of land at the west had nothing to do with his subject, which was the history of the kings of Norway. The discovery of America gave rise to a little traffic, and nothing more. Moreover the kings of Norway took no part, were not the patrons of the navigators, and had no influence whatever in instituting a single voyage. Mr. Bancroft's last objection is that Vinland, the place discovered, "has been sought in all directions from Greenland and the St. Lawrence to Africa." This paragraph also conveys a false view of the subject, since the location of Vinland was as well known to the Northmen as the situation of Ireland, with which island they had uninterrupted communication. It is to be earnestly hoped that in the next edition, Mr. Bancroft may be persuaded to revise his unfounded opinions.
Washington Irving has expressed the same doubt in his Life of Columbus, written before the means of examining this question were placed within his reach, and in the appendix of his work he mixes the idle tales of St. Brandan's Isle with the authentic histories of the Northmen. A very limited inquiry would have led him to a different estimate.
[58] The word rune comes from ryn, a furrow. Odin has the credit of the invention, yet they are probably of Phenician origin. They were sometimes used for poetical purposes. Halmund, in the Grettir Saga (see Sabing Baring Gould's Iceland), says to his daughter: "Thou shalt now listen whilst I relate my deeds, and sing thereof a song, which thou shalt afterwards cut upon a staff." This indicates the training the memory must have undergone among the Northmen.
[59] For a list of many Icelandic works, see the Introduction of Laing's Heimskringla.
[60] See Sir Edmund Head's Viga Glum Saga, pp. viii and ix.
[61] Ibid. Of course there was more or less poetry, yet poetry is something that is early developed among the rudest nations, while good prose tells that a people have become highly advanced in mental culture.