CHAPTER XII

EXPEDITIONS OF THE NORWEGIANS TO THE WHITE SEA, VOYAGES IN THE POLAR SEA, WHALING AND SEALING

EXPEDITIONS TO THE WHITE SEA

[Sidenote: Expeditions to the White Sea]

Even if Ottar was perhaps not the first Norwegian to reach the White Sea, his voyage is in any case a remarkable exploring expedition, whereby both the North Cape and the White Sea became known, even in the literature of Europe, nearly seven hundred years before Richard Chancellor reached the Dvina in the ship "Edward Buonaventura" in 1553, from which time the discovery of this sea has usually been reckoned.

In Ottar's time, or soon after, the Norwegian king asserted his sovereignty over all the Lapps as far as the White Sea, and in the Historia Norwegiæ it is said that Hálogaland reached to Bjarmeland. The headland Vegistafr is mentioned in the Historia Norwegiæ, in the laws, and elsewhere, as the boundary of the kingdom of Norway towards the Bjarmas (Beormas). This may have been on the south side of the Kola peninsula by the river Varzuga, already mentioned, or by the river Umba (see the map, vol. i. p. 170).[105] After Ottar's time the Norwegians more frequently undertook expeditions, doubtless for the most part of a military character, to the White Sea and Bjarmeland. We hear about several of them in the sagas.

[Sidenote: Harold Gråfeld's expedition to the Dvina]

Eric Blood-Axe marched northward, about 920, into Finmark and as far as Bjarmeland, and there fought a great battle and gained the victory. His son, Harold Gråfeld, went northward to Bjarmeland one summer about 965 with his army, and there ravaged the country and had a great fight with the Bjarmas on "Vinu bakka" [i.e., the river bank of the Dvina (Vina)], in which King Harold was victorious and slew many men; and then laid the country waste far and wide, and took a vast amount of plunder. Of this Glumr Geirason speaks:

"Eastward the bold-spoken king intrepidly stained his sword red, north of the burning town; there I saw the Bjarmas run. For the master of the body-guard good spear-weather was given on this journey, on Vina's bank; the fame of a young noble travelled far."

[Sidenote: Trollebotten]

At that time, then, the Norwegians must have reached the Dvina and discovered the east side of the White Sea, which was still unknown to Ottar. They had thus proved it to be a gulf of the sea. The Bjarmas probably lived along the whole of its south side as far as the Dvina, and the name of "Bjarmeland" was now extended to the east side also, and thus became the designation of the country round the White Sea. As a people of strange race of whom they knew little, the Norwegians regarded the Lapps as skilled in magic; but it was natural that the still less known and more distant Bjarmas gradually acquired an even greater reputation for magic, and in these regions stories of trolls and giants were located. The Polar Sea was early called "Hafsbotn," later "Trollebotten," and the White Sea was given the name of "Gandvik," to which a similar meaning is attributed, since it is supposed to be connected with "gand" (the magic of the Lapps); but the name evidently originated in a popular-etymological corruption of a Karelian name, Kanðanlaksi, as already shown (vol. i. pp. 218, f., note).

[Sidenote: Thore Hund's expedition to Bjarmeland]

Snorre Sturlason (ob. 1241) included in the Saga of St. Olaf a legend from Nordland about an expedition to Bjarmeland, supposed to have been undertaken in 1026 by Thore Hund, in company with Karle and his brother Gunnstein from Hálogaland, men of the king's bodyguard. The tale may be an indication that at that time more peaceful relations had been established between the Nordlanders and the Bjarmas. They went in two vessels, Thore in a great longship with eighty men, and the brothers in a smaller longship with about five-and-twenty. When they came to Bjarmeland, they put in at the market-town;[106] the market began, and all those who had wares to exchange received full value. Thore got a great quantity of skins, squirrel, beaver and sable. Karle also had many wares with him, for which he bought large quantities of furs. But when the market was concluded there, they came down the river Vina; and then they declared the truce with the people of the country at an end. When they were out of the river, they held a council of war, and Thore proposed that they should plunder a sanctuary of the Bjarmas' god Jomale,[107] with grave mounds, which he knew to be in a wood in that part of the country.[108] They did so by night, found much silver and gold, and when the Bjarmas pursued them, they escaped through Thore's magical arts, which made them invisible. Both ships then sailed back over Gandvik. As the nights were still light they sailed day and night until one evening they lay to off some islands, took their sails down and anchored to wait for the tide to go down, since there was a strong tide-rip (whirlpool) in front of them ("rǫst mikil var fyrir þeir"). This was probably off "Sviatoi Nos" (the sacred promontory), where Russian authorities speak of a strong current and whirlpool. Here there was a dispute between the brothers and Thore, who demanded the booty as a recompense for their having escaped without loss of life owing to his magical arts. But when the tide turned, the brothers hoisted sail and went on, and Thore followed. When they came to land at "Geirsver" (Gjesvær, a fishing station on the north-west side of Magerö)--where we are told that there was "the first quay as one sails from the north" (i.e., east from Bjarmeland)--the quarrel began again, and Thore suddenly ran his spear through Karle, so that he died on the spot; Gunnstein escaped with difficulty in the smaller and lighter vessel; but was pursued by Thore, and finally had to land and take to flight with all his men at Lenvik, near Malangen fjord, leaving his ship and cargo.

[Sidenote: Expedition to Bjarmeland, 1217]

Even if this expedition is not historical, the description of the voyage and the mention of place-names along the route nevertheless show that these regions were well known to Snorre's informants; and journeys between Norway and Bjarmeland cannot have been uncommon in Snorre's time or before it. Many things show that the communication with Gandvik and Bjarmeland continued through the whole of the Middle Ages, and was sometimes of a peaceful, sometimes of a warlike character; but of the later voyages only three are, in fact, mentioned in Norwegian authorities: one of them was undertaken by the king's son Håkon Magnusson about 1090; of this expedition little is known. In Håkon Håkonsson's time we have an account[109] of another expedition to Bjarmeland in the year 1217, in which took part Ǫgmund of Spånheim from Hardanger, Svein Sigurdsson from Sogn, Andres of Sjomæling from Nordmör, all on one ship, and Helge Bograngsson and his men from Hálogaland, on another. Svein and Andres went home with their ship the same autumn; but Ǫgmund proceeded southward through Russia to the Suzdal kingdom in East Russia, on a tributary of the Volga. Helge Bograngsson and his Nordlanders stayed the winter in Bjarmeland; but he came in conflict with the Bjarmas and was killed. After this Ǫgmund did not venture to return that way, but went on through Russia to the sea (i.e., the Black Sea) and thence to the Holy Land. He came safely home to Norway after many years.

[Sidenote: Expedition to Bjarmeland, 1222]

When the rumour of what had happened to Helge and his men reached home, a punitive expedition was decided on. The king's officers in Nordland, Andres Skjaldarbrand and Ivar Utvik, placed themselves at the head of it; and they came to Bjarmeland with four ships in the year 1222, and accomplished their purpose; "they wrought great havoc in plunder and slaughter and obtained much booty in furs and burnt silver." But on the homeward voyage Ivar's ship was lost in the whirlpool at "Straumneskinn," and only Ivar and one other escaped. "Straumneskinn" is probably Sviatoi Nos (see p. 138).

[Sidenote: Warlike and peaceful relations with the White Sea in the twelfth century and later]

This is the last Norwegian expedition to Bjarmeland of which Norwegian accounts are known; but that the White Sea traffic continued, though it was never very active, may be concluded from other sources. The name of the Bjarmas themselves disappears after the middle of the thirteenth century, when it is related that a number of Bjarmas fled before the "Mongols" and received permission from King Håkon to live in Malangen fjord. After that time in the districts near the Dvina we only hear of Karelians and their masters the Russians of Novgorod.

That there was considerable navigation, probably combined with piratical incursions, between the north of Norway and the countries to the east, may also appear from a provision of the older Gulathings Law, where in cap. 315, in a codex of 1200-1250, we find:

"The inhabitants of Hálogaland are to fit out thirteen twenty-seated and one thirty-seated ship in the southern half, but six in the northern half; since they [i.e., the inhabitants of the northern half] have to keep guard on the east."

This keeping guard might, it is true, refer to Kvæns in Finmark, but it seems rather to point to ships coming from the east. In the negotiations of 1251, between the Grand Duke of Novgorod (Alexander Nevsky) and Håkon Håkonsson, there is express mention of disturbances from the east in Finmark, and after that time we hear more frequently of hostile incursions of Karelians and Russians in Finmark; they may have come by land, but occasionally also by sea.

A treaty of 1326 between Norway and Novgorod shows that Norwegian merchants traded with the people of Novgorod on the White Sea. The erection of the fortress of Vardöhus, as early as 1307, also shows the importance attached to these eastern communications, and the fortress certainly afforded them a fixed point of support. Thus about 1550 we see that "Vardöhus weight" (mark and pound) had penetrated into northern Russia and was generally used in the North Russian fish and oil trade. The Norwegians chiefly bought furs in Bjarmeland, but what they exported thither is not mentioned in the Norwegian notices; it may even at that time have been to some extent fish, which in later times was the most important article of export to North Russia from the north of Norway.

As G. Storm [1894, p. 100] has pointed out, the Russian chronicles tell of many hostile expeditions by sea between Norway and the White Sea in the fifteenth century. In 1412 the inhabitants of "Savolotchie" (the countries on the Dvina) made a campaign against the Norwegians. A complaint from Norway of 1420 shows that the attack was directed against northern Hálogaland, without informing us whether it was made by land or by sea. Some years later, in 1419, the Norwegians made a campaign of reprisal and came

"with an army of 500 men in trading-vessels and sloops and ravaged the Karelian district about the Varzuga [on the Kola peninsula on the north side of the White Sea] and many parishes in Savolotchie [on the Dvina], amongst others St. Nikolai [at the mouth of the Dvina], Kigö and Kiarö [in the Gulf of Onega], and others. They burned three churches and cut down Christians and monks, but the Savolotchians sank two Norwegian sloops, and the rest fled across the sea."[110] "In 1444 the Karelians went with an army against the Norwegians, and fought with them, and in 1445 the Norwegians came with an army to the Dvina, ravaged Nenoksa [in the gulf off the mouth of the Dvina] with fire and sword, killed some and carried off others as prisoners; but the inhabitants on the Dvina hastened after them, cut down their 'voivods' [leaders, chiefs] Ivar and Peter, and captured forty men who were sent to Novgorod."[110]

This will be sufficient to show that the White Sea voyage remained familiar in Norway. This communication increased about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and this had a decisive influence on the so-called rediscovery of the White Sea by the English.

[Sidenote: Early connection of the Bjarmas with southern civilisation]

In reading Otter's narrative and the earliest Norse accounts of voyages to Bjarmeland it must strike us that the Bjarmas we hear about seem to have possessed a surprisingly high degree of culture. As Professor Olaf Broch has also pointed out to me, this may be an indication that a comparatively active communication had existed long before that time along the Dvina and the Volga between the people of the White Sea and those on the Caspian and the Black Sea (by transport from the Volga to the Don). In those early times, before the Russians had yet established themselves in the territory of the upper Volga, this communication may have passed to the east of the Slavs through Finnish-speaking peoples the whole way from the lower Volga and the Finnish Bulgarians (cf. the Mordvin tribes of to-day).

It appears to me that various statements in Arabic literature may indicate such a connection.[111] The Arabs received information about northern regions through their commercial communications with the Mohammedan Finnish nation of the Bulgarians, whose capital Bulgar lay on the Volga[112] (near to the present town of Kazan), and was a meeting-place for traders coming up the river from the south and coming down the river from the north. Special interest attaches to the mention of the mysterious people "Wîsu," far in the north. This is evidently the same name as the Russian Ves[113] for the Finnish people who, according to Nestor[114] (beginning of the twelfth century), lived by Lake Byelo-ozero (the white lake) in 859 A.D. They are mentioned together with Tchuds, Slavs, Merians and Krivitches, and were doubtless the most northerly of them, possibly spreading northwards towards the White Sea. They are probably the same people that Adam of Bremen [iv., c. 14, 19] calls "Wizzi" (see vol. i. p. 383; vol. ii. p. 64), and possibly those Jordanes calls "Vasinabroncæ,"[115] who together with "Merens" (Merians ?) and "Mordens" (Mordvins ?) were subdued by Ermanrik, king of the Goths. But the Arabic Wîsu seems sometimes to have been a common name for all Finnish (and even Samoyed) tribes in North Russia and on the coast of the Polar Sea.

According to Jaqût,[116] Ahmad Ibn Fadhlân (about 922 A.D.)[117] stated in his work that

"the King of the Bulgarians had told him that behind his country, at a distance of three months' journey, there lived a people called Wîsu, among whom the nights [in summer] were not even one hour long." Once the king is said to have written to this people, and in their answer it was stated that the people "Yâǵûǵ and Mâǵûǵ [on the Ob ?] lived over three months' journey distant from them [i.e., the Wîsu] and that they were separated from them by the sea" (?). The Yâǵûǵ and Mâǵûǵ lived on the great fish that were cast ashore. The same is told by Dimashqî (ob. 1327) about the Yâǵûǵ and Mâǵûǵ, and by Qazwînî (thirteenth century) about the people "Yura" on the Pechora.

Jaqût (ob. 1229) in his geographical lexicon[118] has an article on

"'Wîsu' situated beyond Bulgar. Between it and Bulgar is three months' journey. The night is there so short that one is not aware of any darkness, and at another time of year, again, it is so long that one sees no daylight." In his article on "Itil" Jaqût says: "Upon it [the river Itil or Volga] traders travel as far as 'Vîsu'[119] and bring [thence] great quantities of furs, such as beaver, sable and squirrel."

Al-Qazwînî (ob. 1283) says:[120]

"The beaver is a land- and water-animal, which dwells in the great rivers in the land of 'Isu' [i.e., Wîsu, cf. al-Bîrûnî], and builds a home on the bank of a river." He further relates that "the inhabitants of 'Wîsu' never visit the land of the Bulgarians, since when they come thither the air changes and cold sets in--even if it be in the middle of summer--so that all their crops are ruined. The Bulgarians know this, and therefore do not permit them to come to their country." Qazwînî also gives the information that "Wîsu" is three months' journey beyond Bulgar, and continues: "The Bulgarians take their wares thither for trade. Each one lays his wares, which he furnishes with a mark, in a certain spot and leaves them there. Then he comes back and finds a commodity, of which he can make use in his own country, laid by the side of them. If he is satisfied with this, he takes what is offered in exchange, and leaves his wares behind; if he is not, he takes his own away again. In this way buyer and seller never see one another. This is also the proceeding, as we have related, in the southern lands, in the land of the blacks." The same story of dumb trading with a people in the north is met with again in Abu'lfeda (ob. 1321) and Ibn Batûta (cf. also Michel Beheim, later, p. 270).

Ibn Batûta (1302-1377) has no name for this people, any more than Abu'lfeda; but he calls their country "the Land of Darkness," and has an interesting description of the journey thither.[121]

He himself, he says, wished to go there from Bulgar, but gave it up, as little benefit was to be expected of it. "That land lies 40 days' journey from Bulgar, and the journey is only made in small cars[122] drawn by dogs. For this desert has a frozen surface, upon which neither men nor horses can get foothold, but dogs can, as they have claws. This journey is only undertaken by rich merchants, each taking with him about a hundred carriages [sledges ?], provided with sufficient food, drink and wood; for in that country there is found neither trees, nor stones nor soil. As a guide through this land they have a dog which has already made the journey several times, and it is so highly prized that they pay as much as a thousand dinars [gold pieces] for one. This dog is harnessed with three others by the neck to a car [sledge ?], so that it goes as the leader and the others follow it. When it stops, the others do the same.... When the travellers have accomplished forty days' journey through the desert, they stop in the Land of Darkness, leave their wares there, and withdraw to their quarters. Next morning they go back to the same spot ..." and then follows a description of the dumb barter, like that in Qazwînî. They receive sable, squirrel and ermine in exchange for their goods. "Those who go thither do not know with whom they trade, whether they be spirits or men; they see no one."[123]

Of special interest for our subject is the following statement in Abû Hâmid (1080-1169 or 1170) which may point to the peoples on the shores of the Polar Sea having obtained steel for their harpoons and sealing weapons from Persia:

"The traders travel from Bulgâr to one of the lands of the infidels which is called Îsû [Wîsu], from which the beaver comes. They take swords thither which they buy in Âdherbeiǵân [Persia], unpolished blades. They pour water often over these, so that when the blades are hung up by a cord and struck, they ring.... And that is as they ought to be. They buy beavers' skins with these blades. The inhabitants of Îsû go with these swords to a land near the darkness and lying on the Dark Sea [the northern Atlantic or the Polar Sea] and sell these swords for sables' skins. They [i.e., the inhabitants of that country] again take some of these blades and cast them into the Dark Sea. Then Allâh lets a fish as big as a mountain come up to them, etc. They cut up its flesh for days and months, and sometimes fill 100,000 houses with it," etc. [Cf. Jacob, 1891, p. 76; 1891a, p. 29; Mehren, 1857, pp. 169, f.]

It is not credible that the swords which rang in this way were harpoons, as Jacob thinks. We must rather suppose that they were rough ("unpolished") steel blades, which were used for making harpoons and lances (for walrus-hunting and whaling). The blades having water poured over them must doubtless mean the tempering of the steel, through which, when it was afterwards hung up by a cord, it came to give the true ring. Although Abû Hâmid is no trustworthy writer, it seems that there must be some reality at the base of this statement; and we here have information about some of the wares that the traders carried to Wîsu, and that were derived from their commercial intercourse with Arabs and Jews. The people to whom the inhabitants of Wîsu or Vesses took the steel blades must have been fishermen on the shore of the Polar Sea, who carried on seal- and walrus-hunting, and perhaps also whaling, and this is what is referred to by the fish that Allâh sends up. They may have been Samoyeds (on the Pechora), Karelians, Tver-Finns, and even Norwegians. It might be objected that sables cannot be supposed to have been obtained from the last-named; but this is doubtless not to be taken too literally. Ibn Ruste (circa 912 A.D.) thus says that the Rûs (Scandinavians, usually Swedes) had no other occupation but trading in sables, squirrel and other furs, which they sold to any one who would buy them.

It seems to result from what may be trustworthy in these statements that there was fairly active commercial intercourse from Bulgar with the Vesses and with the peoples on the White Sea, and perhaps in districts near the Polar Sea. A shortest night of one hour would take us to a little north of the mouth of the Dvina. In the land of the Vesses by Lake Byelo-ozero there was an easy way across from the Volga's tributary Syexna to Lake Kubenskoye, which has a connection with the Dvina; and there was also transit to the river Onega. There was thus easy communication along the great rivers; but besides this the traders seem also to have travelled overland with dogs; this was probably when going north to Yugria and the country of the Pechora, in the same way as traders in our time generally go there with reindeer. The trade in furs was then, as in antiquity, the powerful incentive; it was that too which chiefly attracted the Norwegians to Bjarmeland.

It is not likely that the Arabs themselves reached North Russia; one would suppose rather that travelling Jews assisted as middlemen in the trade with these regions. But the finding of Arab coins on the Pechora would point to Arab trade having penetrated through intermediaries to the shores of the Polar Sea.[124]

THE POLAR EXPEDITION OF THE FRISIAN NOBLES AND KING HAROLD'S VOYAGE TO THE WHIRLPOOL

[Sidenote: The Frisian nobles' Polar expedition]

Among mediæval voyages to the North there remain yet to be mentioned Harold Hardråde's expedition[125] and the voyage of the Frisian nobles, related by Adam of Bremen in the descriptions already given (vol. i. pp. 195, f.). That the latter voyage must be an invention, and cannot contain much of historical value, is obvious (cf. vol. i. p. 196). The whole description of the abyss or maelstrom is taken from Paulus Warnefridi (as will be seen by a comparison of the descriptions on pp. 157 and 195, vol. i.); the Cyclopes of marvellous stature, as well as the treasures of gold that they guard, are originally derived from classical literature, although Adam may have taken them from earlier mediæval authors, and Northern ideas about the giants in the north in Jotunheim may have helped to localise the story.[126] The great darkness, the stiffened sea, chaos and the gulf of the abyss at the uttermost end of the world or of the ocean are all classical conceptions, and the description itself of the dangers of the voyage, of the darkness that could scarcely be penetrated by the eyes, etc., is just what we find in classical literature, and in many points bears great resemblance to the poem of Albinovanus Pedo, for example (see vol. i. p. 82). It is possible, of course, that there may be thus much historical truth in the story, that some Frisian nobles made a voyage to the Orkneys or perhaps to Iceland, but even this is doubtful, and the rest is demonstrably invention. In spite of this Master Adam asserts that Archbishop Adalbert in person had told him all this, and that it happened in the days of his predecessor, Archbishop Alebrand, who had the story from the travellers' own lips; for they returned to Bremen and brought thank-offerings to Christ and to their saint "Willehad" for their safety. One might suppose that these nobles themselves had invented the story and told it to the archbishop;[127] but it does not seem likely that they were acquainted with Paulus Warnefridi's description of the maelstrom, and the Cyclopes with their treasures in the north seem also to be learned embroidery; they might have heard oral tales about them, but in any case we may doubtless suppose that the story has been much "improved" by Adam. There is a mediæval folk-song about the dangers of sailors at sea which may also be supposed to have contributed to the description.

[Sidenote: King Harold's voyage to the maelstrom]

Be that as it may, this story must weaken our confidence in Adam's credibility, or rather in his critical sense. If his narrative of a voyage which started from his own adopted town of Bremen not long before his time is so untrustworthy, what are we to think of his statement about the experienced Norwegian king Harold's expedition to explore the extent of the ocean? No doubt it may appear as though he had his information about this voyage from the Danish king Svein, who is mentioned as his authority for the statements immediately preceding, and so far this information might have a good source; but it has received precisely the same decoration as the other voyage, with the mist or darkness that shuts out the uttermost end of the world, and the vast gulf of the abyss which was narrowly escaped. This is certainly of older origin, and he has not even given himself the trouble to make a little alteration in the dangers of the two stories. Another thing that weakens our confidence in his statements is his saying that the Danish king had told him that all the sea beyond the island of Winland was filled with intolerable ice and immeasurable darkness. It may doubtless be supposed that classical conceptions had even at that time created superstitions of this kind in the North, and thus King Svein may have told him this; but it must be more probable that all these ancient book-learned ideas are due, not to the unlearned and travelled monarch, but to the well-read magister, who moreover himself quotes in the same connection Marcianus's words about the congealed sea beyond Thule.

It would be entirely in Adam's vein if some accidental resemblance or association had given him an opportunity of making use in this way of ideas he had from his learned reading, just as the name of Kvænland gave him the chance of bringing in the myths of the Amazons, Cynocephali, etc. (cf. vol. i. p. 383). It was pointed out earlier (vol. i. pp. 195, 197) that the statements about the sea "beyond this island" and about Harold's voyage are possibly a later addition by Adam himself, which has been inserted in the wrong place; "this island" might then mean Thyle (Iceland) and not Winland. Whether we regard the latter as a newly discovered country in America or as the Insulæ Fortunatæ, it is difficult to understand why precisely the sea on the other side of this island should be particularly associated with the ancient conceptions of the dark or misty, and the congealed or ice-filled sea; ice and darkness are nowhere connected in this way with Wineland in later authorities. It is true that in Arabian myth there are islands in the west near the Sea of Darkness (cf. chapter xiii.) and that the Promised Land in Irish myth is surrounded by darkness (== fog) like the Norwegian huldrelands and the Icelandic elflands; but if Adam got his ideas in this way, it would only show more conclusively how mythical his narrative is. If Adam confused the names of Vinland and Finland (i.e., Finmark) (cf. vol. i. pp. 198, 382; vol. ii. p. 31), it would also be natural for him to imagine that beyond it were ice and darkness.

[Sidenote: Whirlpool]

The view has been held that the whirlpool in which King Harold and the Frisian nobles were nearly drawn down was of Scandinavian or Germanic origin [cf. S. Lönborg, 1897, pp. 173, f.]. It seems undoubtedly to correspond to the Norse "Ginnungagap" [cf. G. Storm, 1890, pp. 340, ff.]; but it is a question how early this idea arose. I have already (vol. i. pp. 11, 12, 17) pointed out the probable connection between it and the Greek Tartaros (and Anostos) or Chaos, and have shown (vol. i. pp. 158, f.) that Paulus Warnefridi took his whirlpool from this source, and called it Chaos. But now it is evident, as we have seen, that Adam took his description of the whirlpool from Paulus, and thus we have the full connection. It may also be mentioned as curious that Lucian in his Vera Historia tells of just such an abyss:

"We sailed through a crystal-clear, transparent water until we were obliged to stop before a great cleft in the sea.... Our ship was near being drawn down into this abyss, if we had not taken in the sails in time. As we then put our heads out and looked down, we saw a depth of a thousand stadia, before which our minds and senses stood still...." Finally with great difficulty they rowed across a bridge of water that stretched over the abyss [Wieland, 1789, iv. p. 222].

With this may be compared that in the Irish legend (Imram Maelduin) Maelduin and his companions came to a sea like green glass, so clear that the sun and the green sand of the sea were visible through it. Thence they came to another sea which was like fog (clouds), and it seemed to them that it could hardly support them or their boat; they saw in the sea beneath them people adorned with jewels and a delightful land, etc.; but when they also saw down below a huge monster which devoured a whole ox, they were seized with fear and trembling, for they thought they would not be able to get across this sea without falling through to the bottom, because it was as thin as cloud; but they came over it with great danger [cf. Zimmer, 1889, p. 164].

Although, as already mentioned (vol. i. p. 362), Lucian does not seem to have been read in western Europe before the fourteenth century, I cannot get away from the impression that in some oral way or other (cf. vol. i. pp. 362, f.) there must be a connection between the Irish tale (written down long before Adam of Bremen's work) and the above-mentioned fable (as well as many others) which Lucian reproduces, whether the connection be with Lucian himself or with the authors he parodies. But then it will not be rash to conclude further that there may also be a connection between the cleft in the sea or profound abyss of Lucian or of Greek fable, from which mariners escaped with difficulty, and Adam's whirlpool, which King Harold avoided by turning back.

[Sidenote: Maelstrom among the Irish]

But it is also conceivable that the various currents in northern waters may have furnished food for these constantly recurring ideas about maelstroms and whirlpools. Such maelstroms appear also in Irish legends. In the "Imram Brenaind" [cf. Zimmer, 1889, p. 134] it is related that:

One day the voyagers saw on the ocean deep, dark currents [whirlpools] and their ships seemed to be drawn into them with the force of the storm. In this great danger all eyes were turned upon Brandan. He spoke to the sea, saying that it should be satisfied with drowning him alone, but spare his comrades. Thereupon the sea became calm, and the rushing of the whirlpool ceased immediately; from that time until now it has done no harm to others.

[Sidenote: Maelstrom in Norway; the Moskenström]

The Historia Norwegiæ places "Charybdis, Scylla, and unavoidable whirlpools" in the north in "Hafsbotn" (cf. later). This must have been a general idea in Norway; for about one hundred years later, in 1360, the Englishman, Nicholas of Lynn, who travelled in Norway in the middle of the fourteenth century, wrote his lost work, "Inventio Fortunata," on the northern countries and their whirlpools from 53° to the North Pole; but unfortunately we do not know its contents.[128] The conceptions of these whirlpools may doubtless be connected with reports of dangerous currents in the north. The Moskenström by the Lofoten Islands may in particular have given rise to much superstition at an early time. In winter with a westerly wind it runs at a rate of as much as six miles an hour, and with a rising tide it may be altogether impassable. It may set up a high topping sea, which breaks over the whole current so that it can be heard three or four miles off.[129] In later times there are terrifying descriptions of this dangerous current. Thus Olaus Magnus (1555) says that between Roest and Lofoten

"is so great an abyss, or rather Charybdis, that it suddenly swamps and swallows up in an instant those mariners who incautiously approach" (see the illustration, vol. i. p. 158).... "Pieces of wreckage are very seldom thrown up again, and if they come to light, the hard material shows such signs of wear and chafing through being dashed against the rocks, that it looks as if it were covered with rough wool." And the natural force here manifested exceeds all that is related of Charybdis in Sicily and other wonders.

The Englishman, Anthony Jenkinson, who made a voyage to the White Sea in 1557, writes of it:[130]

"Note that there is between the said Rost Islands & Lofoot, a whirle poole called Malestrand, which from halfe ebbe untill halfe flood, maketh such a terrible noise, that it shaketh the ringes in the doores of the inhabitants houses of the sayd Islands tenne miles off. Also if there commeth any Whale within the current of the same, they make a pitifull crie. Moreover, if great trees be caried into it by force of streams, and after with the ebbe be cast out againe, the ends and boughs of them have bene so beaten, that they are like the stalkes of hempe that is bruised."

Schönnerböl in 1591 gives a more detailed description of the current, in which the same things are reported

of the iron ring "in the house door ... it is shaken hither and thither by the rushing of the current"; of the whale, who when "he cannot go forward on account of the strong stream, gives a great cry, as it were a great ox, and then he is gone..."; and, finally, of great trees, spruce or fir, which disappear in this current, and when at last they come up again, "then all the boughs, all the roots and all the bark is torn off, and it is shaped as though it had been cut with a sharp axe." He says that "many people are of the opinion that there is a whirlpool in this current or immediately outside it"; and "when the stream is strongest, one can see the sun and the sky through the waves, since they go as high as other high mountains."[131]

Peder Claussön Friis gives a similarly exaggerated description of the current (circa 1613), sometimes using the same expressions as the authors quoted. The resemblance between these various descriptions is so great that it cannot easily be explained merely by their reporting the same oral tradition; what they have in common must rather be derived from an older written source (Nicholas of Lynn ?), which again has adopted ancient mythical conceptions. It is strange how few more recent ideas have been added even in Schönneböl, who was sheriff of Lofoten and Vesterålen for at least twenty years (from 1570), and must have had plenty of opportunity for gathering information on the spot; but it is the usual experience that everything that could be got from old books was preferred. That stories of the Moskenström may have been known in Adam of Bremen's time is highly probable, perhaps even Paulus Warnefridi had heard of it (cf. vol. i. p. 158).

[Sidenote: Possible truth in Harold's ocean voyage]

When we have shorn Adam's tale of all borrowed features, is there enough left to make it possible that the Norwegian king Harold undertook a voyage out into the ocean? It is not easy to form a definite opinion on this, but the probability must be that King Svein or the Danes told some such story, which was then adorned by Master Adam. As the voyage was supposed to have taken place recently, it must be Harold Hardråde who was intended, otherwise one might be led to think of Harold Gråfeld's celebrated voyage to Bjarmeland.[132] What the object may have been, and what direction the voyage took, we do not know. As Adam says it was to explore "the breadth of the northern ocean" ("latitudinem septentrionalis oceani"), one must suppose that in his opinion it set out from Norway northward or north-westward over the ocean towards its uttermost limit, since according to the maps and ideas of that time he imagined the ocean as surrounding the disc of the earth like a ribbon (see vol. i. p. 199), and he may then have sailed across this to find out its extent.[133] But it is quite possible, as P. A. Munch [1852, ii. pp. 269, ff.] suggested, that Master Adam may have heard something about a northward voyage undertaken by Harold, during which he had been exposed to some danger in the Saltström or the Moskenström;[134] or if it was a voyage to Bjarmeland (Harold Gråfeld's ?) that he heard of, then it might be the current at Sviatoi Nos or Straumneskinn, often spoken of in the sagas, that Adam has made into the whirlpool.

WHALING AND SEALING VOYAGES OF THE NORWEGIANS IN THE POLAR SEA

[Sidenote: The Norwegians as whalers.]

The skill of the Norwegians as fishermen, whalers and sealers had, of course, a great deal to do with the development of their seamanship and ability to travel and support themselves along unknown and uninhabited shores. The accurate knowledge of the many species of seals and whales shown in the "King's Mirror," to which no parallel is met with earlier in the literature of the world, proves how important the hunting of these animals must have been; for otherwise so much attention would not have been paid to them.[135] When in speaking of the greater whales a distinction is made between those that are shy and keep away from the hunters, and those that are tamer and easier to approach, and when the longest of all ("reyðr") is mentioned as being specially tame and easily caught, we can only regard this as showing that whaling was also carried on in the open sea; that is, not in a merely accidental fashion, as when the whales entered narrow fjords where they could be intercepted, or when they ran aground.

From Ottar's statement to King Alfred (cf. vol. i. p. 172)--that "in his own land [i.e., Norway] there is the best whaling. They are forty-eight cubits long, and the largest are fifty cubits long"--we may conclude that the Norwegians, and perhaps the Lapps also, hunted the great whales as early as the ninth century, and doubtless long before that time, while King Alfred does not seem to have known of any such whaling being practised in England.[136] We are not told in what way the whale was caught in those days, but from statements elsewhere it is probable that the Norwegians had several methods of taking whales, as is the case even to the present day in Norway: one way was with the harpoon and harpoon-line in open waters, that is, without cutting off the whale's escape with nets.

The Arab cosmographer, Qazwînî (of the thirteenth century), quoting the Spanish-Arabic writer Omar al-'Udhrî[137] (of the eleventh century), says that the Norsemen in Irlânda (Ireland).

"hunt young whales, and they are very great fish. They hunt their young and eat them.... Of the method of catching them al-'Udhrî relates that the hunters collect in their ships. They have a great iron hook [i.e., harpoon] with sharp teeth, and on the hook a strong ring, and in the ring a stout rope. When they come to a young one, they clap their hands and make a noise. The young one is amused by the clapping of hands and approaches the ship, delighting therein. Thereupon one of the seamen approaches and scratches its forehead, which the young one likes. Then he lays the hook to the middle of its head, takes a heavy iron hammer and gives three blows with all his force upon the hook. It does not heed the first blow, but with the second and third it makes a great commotion, and sometimes it catches some part of the ship with its tail, and knocks it to pieces, and it continues in violent agitation until it is overcome by exhaustion. Then the crew of the ship draw it to shore with their combined force. Sometimes the mother notices the movements of the young one, and pursues them. Then they have a great quantity of crushed onions in readiness, and throw it into the water. When the whale perceives the smell of the onions it finds it detestable, turns round and retreats. Then they cut the flesh of the young one in pieces and salt it.[138] And its flesh is white as snow, and its skin black as ink."[139]

This is, clearly enough, a layman's naive description of whaling with harpoon and harpoon-line in open waters, a method which had therefore already been introduced into Ireland by the Norwegians at that time. It may consequently be regarded as certain that the Norwegians were acquainted with harpooning. That this was very usual appears also from the "King's Mirror" and the ancient Norwegian laws, where whaling and whale-harpoons ("skutill") are often mentioned.

On the west coast of Norway, in the neighbourhood of Bergen, there is still practised to-day another method of catching whales which must be very ancient. When the great whales enter certain fjords which have a narrow inlet, their escape is cut off by nets, and they are shot with poisoned arrows from bows which entirely resemble the crossbows of the Middle Ages. The arrows used are old and rusty, and convey bacteria from one whale to another. When the whale has been hit by these arrows it is rapidly weakened from blood-poisoning, so that it may easily be harpooned and then killed by lances, after which it is cut up and divided among the inhabitants of the fjord, according to ancient, unwritten rules. In spite of the blood-poisoning, the whale's flesh and blubber are eaten, and are regarded as very valuable provisions. I have myself often taken part in this kind of whaling. Possibly Peder Claussön Friis [cf. Storm, 1881, p. 70] refers to a similar method of whaling when he says that

"in ancient times many expedients or methods were used for catching whales, which ... on account of men's unskilfulness have fallen out of use."

They had "a spear with sharp irons, so that it could not be pulled out again." This was hurled into the whale, which died in a short time, or became so weakened that it could be drawn to land;

"which whales were then cut up and divided among those who had shot, and him who owned the land, or him who had first found the whale driven in, according to the provisions of the law."

We must suppose that this iron was poisoned with bacteria from former whales, in a similar way to the arrows mentioned above, whereby the animal's wound was infected. However, Peder Claussön's description of the hunt is evidently taken in great measure from older literary sources, since similar descriptions are found as early as in Albertus Magnus (ob. 1280) [De animalibus, xxiv. 651], and in Vincent of Beauvais [Speculum universalis, i. 1272]. In all three authors the whale dives after being struck, and tosses about on the bottom or rubs itself against it, thereby driving the spear farther in; but in Peder Claussön it does so in order to "get rid of the shot," while in Albertus it is on account of salt water getting into the wound, and in Vincentius the salt water penetrates and kills the wounded whale. As the descriptions of Albertus and Vincentius evidently refer to ordinary harpoon-whaling, it may be doubtful whether Peder Claussön's statement really relates to a method of catching different from the usual one with harpoon and line, although one is disposed to believe that it does. He also mentions in the same place other whales that they could "pursue with boats and drive into bays and small fjords, and kill them there with hand-shot and bow-shot." This may be supposed to refer to a method similar to that mentioned above, with poisoned arrows; but, on the other hand, it may relate to a third method of taking small whales, which was certainly practised from very early times in Norway, and which consists in schools of small whales being driven into bays and inlets, where they are intercepted with nets and driven ashore.

The method of whaling with poisoned arrows or throwing-spears must, as has been said, be very ancient. Whether it was invented by the Norwegians themselves, or whether they did not rather learn it from the older hunter-people of Norway, the "Finns," is difficult to determine. Nor do we know how ancient whaling in general may be in the North; it may date from early times, though Ottar's mention of it is the earliest known in literature.

[Sidenote: Harpoon-fishing in the Mediterranean in antiquity]

It is evident that a high development of seamanship, skill in hunting, and resourcefulness were required before men could venture to encounter the great whales of the ocean in open fight with free sea-room, where the whale was not crippled by having run aground or into narrow fjords with no outlet. This whaling in the open sea demanded the invention of special appliances, of which the harpoon with its line was of special importance. It may be possible, though it is not certain, that the Norwegians were the first Europeans to practise this kind of whaling, and as, from numerous documents, we may conclude that whaling was actively carried on by the Normans in Normandy as early as the tenth and eleventh centuries, one is inclined to suppose that it was the Normans who first introduced the method of harpoon and line there,[140] and then passed it on to the Basques. But we ought not to lose sight of the fact that there are other possibilities, since the harpoon was probably known to and used on smaller marine animals by the neolithic people of Europe, and the taking of larger fish with harpoon and line was known in the Mediterranean in antiquity,[141] as appears, for instance, from Polybius's description of the catching of swordfish at Scyllæum (on the Straits of Messina), which is reproduced in Strabo, i. 24:

"A common look-out man goes at their head, while they collect in many two-oared boats to lie in wait for the fish; two in each boat. One of them rows, the other stands in the bow with a spear, while the look-out man gives warning of the appearance of the fish; for the animal swims with a third of its body above water. As soon as the boat has reached the fish, the spearman pierces it by hand, and immediately draws the spear out of its body again, with the exception of the point; for this is provided with barbs, and is purposely attached loosely to the shaft, and has a long line fastened to it. This is paid out after the wounded fish, until it is tired by floundering and attempts at flight; then it is drawn to land, or taken into the boat if it is not very large." No better description of harpoon-fishing is to be found in the Middle Ages. The dolphin was to the Greeks Poseidon's beast, and they did not take it; but from Oppian's account we see that the barbarian fishermen on the coast of Thrace had no such scruples, but caught dolphins with harpoons to which a long line was attached [cf. Noël, 1815, p. 42].

If the Iberian people of the western Mediterranean practised this kind of fishing, the Basques may also have been acquainted with it. But if they used the harpoon on swordfish and small whales, the further step to using it for the Biscay whale was not insuperable to these hardy seamen, and they may thus have themselves developed their methods of whaling without having learnt from the Normans, even if no evidence is forthcoming of their having been acquainted with whaling so early as the latter.[142] It may also be supposed that the Norsemen in the beginning, far back in grey antiquity, took their harpoon-fishing from the south, just as they obtained the form of their craft to some extent from the Mediterranean.

Thus, although we cannot regard it as certain that the Norwegians introduced the knowledge of whaling with the harpoon and line in Normandy, it is in any case probable that they were particularly active in practising and developing this method, and we may conclude that they must have been acquainted with whaling before they came there, since we see that the whalers of Normandy bore the Scandinavian name of "walmanni."[143] If they had learnt their whaling in the foreign land, it goes without saying that they would also have taken the name from thence, and it is extremely improbable that they should have acquired a Scandinavian designation for an occupation the knowledge of which they had not brought with them from their native land.

The Normans also took with them the knowledge of whaling as far as the Mediterranean. In Guillelmus Appulus's description (of about 1099-1111) of the Norman conquest of southern Italy it is related[144] that when Robert Guiscard comes to the town of Regina in Calabria he hears

"the rumour that there is a fish not for from the town in the waves of the Adriatic, a great one with an immense body, of an incredible aspect, which the people of Italy had not seen before. The winds of spring, on account of the fresh water, had driven it thither. It was captured by the ingenuity of the leader [i.e., Robert] by means of various arts. It swam into a net made of fine ropes, and when it was completely entangled in the nets with the heavy iron, it dived down to the depths of the sea, but at last it was hit by the seamen in various projecting places, and with much pains dragged ashore. There the people look at it as a strange monster. Then it is out in pieces by order of the leader. Thereof he obtains for himself and his men much food, and also for the people who dwelt on the coasts of Calabria. And the Apulian people also have a share of it."

It looks as though the author's view was that the whale was caught with nets and killed by the throwing of lances, which is not impossible; but it may also be supposed that the poetical description is somewhat misleading, and that the "nets with the heavy iron" were the harpoon with its line (?).

It may be regarded as doubtful whether the harpooning of great whales in open waters was ever so actively carried on and brought to such perfection during the Middle Ages in Norway, Iceland and Greenland as was evidently the case in Normandy and especially among the Basques, from whom later the English and the Dutch learned it. As in those days there was abundance of whales to be caught on the Norwegian coast (the nord-caper was then numerous there), this kind of whaling would not tempt the Norwegians to seek better hunting-grounds along other coasts in northern waters. On the other hand, it is evident that practice in whaling must have been of great importance to them, wherever they settled in these regions.

[Sidenote: Albertus Magnus on walrus-hunting]

Albertus Magnus (ob. 1280), who gives a detailed description of the harpoon and of whaling (cf. above, p. 158), has also the following description of walrus-hunting:

"Those whales which have bristles, and others, have very long tusks,[145] and by them they hang themselves up on stones and rocks when they sleep. Then the fisherman approaches, and tears away as much as he can of the skin from the blubber by the tail, and makes fast a strong rope to the skin he has loosened, and he binds the ropes fast to rings fixed in the rocks or to very strong posts or trees. Then he throws large stones at the fish and wakes it. When the fish is awake and wants to go back [into the sea], it pulls its skin off from the tail along the back and head, and leaves it behind there. And afterwards it is caught not far from the spot, when it has exhausted its strength, as it floats bloodless upon the sea, or lies half-dead on the shore."

He also tells us that walrus-rope[146] was commonly sold at the fair at Cologne, which shows that walrus-hunting must have acquired great importance at that time. It can only have been carried on by the Norwegians (and Icelanders ?), the Finns or Lapps, the peoples of the north coast of Russia, and the Greenlanders. It is unlikely that the ropes were brought all the way from Russia by land to Cologne; they must rather have come from Norway. The Norwegians obtained a certain quantity of walrus-rope ("svarðreip") through the trade with Greenland, and perhaps with North Russia, but they probably got most from their own hunting in northern waters. The quantity of walrus they could kill in Finmark would not be sufficient to satisfy the demand, and, as suggested earlier (vol. i. p. 177), they must certainly have sought fresh hunting-grounds, above all eastwards in the Polar Sea.

[Sidenote: Hunting expeditions of the Norwegians eastward and northward in the Polar Sea]

Norse-Icelandic literature does not tell us that the Norwegians in their voyages to Bjarmeland went any farther east than "Gandvik" (the White Sea) and the Dvina. But it is to be noted that the sagas as a rule only mention the expeditions of chiefs, with warlike exploits, fighting and slaughter of one kind or another; while peaceful trading voyages, which were certainly numerous, are not spoken of, nor walrus-hunting and hunting expeditions in general, since such occupations were not usually followed by chiefs. We cannot therefore expect to find anything in the sagas about countries or waters where there were no people, and where only hunting was carried on.

From Ottar, however, who was not a saga-writer, we learn that walrus-hunting was practised, and doubtless very perseveringly, in the ninth century (vol. i. p. 176), and that even at that time he went in pursuit of it as far as the White Sea. It is thus extremely improbable that such hardy hunters should have stopped there, and not continued to move eastward, where there was such valuable prey to be secured. We must suppose that at least they reached the west coast of Novaya Zemlya, where there were walrus and seal in abundance. That such was the case is just as probable as the reverse is improbable, and as it is improbable that expeditions of this kind should have found mention in the sagas. That the Norwegians knew Novaya Zemlya may perhaps be concluded from the mediæval Icelandic geography (cf. vol. i. p. 313; vol. ii. p. 1), according to which the land extended northward from Bjarmeland round the north of Hafsbotn (the Polar Sea) as far as Greenland, making the latter continuous with Europe (cf. the map, p. 2). The knowledge that the west coast of Novaya Zemlya extended northwards into the unknown may have given rise to such an idea. It was general in Scandinavia and Iceland in the latter part of the Middle Ages, whilst Adam of Bremen speaks of Greenland as an island, like Iceland and other islands in the northern ocean. The discovery of "Svalbard" (Spitzbergen ?) in 1194 may, as we shall see directly, have lent support to the belief in this connection by land.

[Sidenote: Saxo's Farther Bjarmeland]

Saxo Grammaticus in his Danish history, of the beginning of the thirteenth century, also has mythical tales of voyages to Bjarmeland. Amongst others the legendary king Gorm and Thorkel Adelfar on a mythical voyage to the north and east came first to Hálogaland, then to "Hither Bjarmeland," which had steep shores and much cattle, and then to a land with continual cold and heavy snow, without any warmth of summer, rich in impenetrable forests, which was without produce of the fields, full of beasts unknown elsewhere, and where many rivers rushed through rocky beds. This land was "Farther Bjarmeland."[147] If we except the forests this description suits Novaya Zemlya better than the Kola peninsula; but it is extremely doubtful whether any real knowledge of these regions lies at the root of Saxo's mythical tales, in which, for instance, the travellers come to the river of death and the land of the dead. The designation Farther Bjarmeland may nevertheless point to a land having been known beyond the often-mentioned Bjarmeland.

In the old legendary sagas there is frequent mention of "the Farther Bjarmeland," which lay to the north or north-east of the real Bjarmeland (Permia), and where there was a people of gigantic size and immense riches. This fabulous country may, it is true, be entirely mythical, perhaps originally derived from ancient Greek myths; but on the other hand it may be the knowledge of Novaya Zemlya that has influenced the formation of the myths about it. However this may be, we may be sure that the voyages of the Norwegian hunters in those days extended into the eastern Polar Sea far beyond the limits of Ottar's voyage, and much farther than the chance mentions in the sagas of more or less warlike expeditions of chiefs to the White Sea would indicate.

[Sidenote: Discovery of Svalbarð]

A notice that is extant relating to the year 1194 shows better than anything else that the Norwegians probably made extensive voyages in the Polar Sea, and the mention of it is purely fortuitous. In the "Islandske Annaler" (in six different MSS.) it is briefly stated of the year 1194: "Svalbarðs fundr" or "Svalbarði fundinn" (Svalbard was discovered); but that is all we are told; surely no great geographical discovery has ever been more briefly recorded in literature. Svalbarði means the cold edge or side, and must here mean the cold coast. In the introduction to the Landnámabók we read about this land:

"From Reykjanes on the south side of Iceland it is five [in Hauk's Landnáma three] dœgr's sea [i.e., sail] to Jolldulaup in Ireland to the south, but from Langanes on the north side of Iceland it is four dœgr's sea to Svalbard on the north in Hafsbotn,[148] but it is one dœgr's sail to the uninhabited parts of Greenland from Kolbeins-ey in the north."

As will be seen, Svalbard is spoken of, here and in the Annals, as a land that is known. It is also mentioned in Icelandic legendary sagas of the later Middle Ages.

The Historia Norwegiæ says of a country in the north:[149]

"But in the north on the other side of Norway towards the east there extend various peoples who are in the toils of heathendom (ah, how sad), namely the Kiriali and Kwæni, horned Finns[150] and both Bjarmas. But what people dwell beyond these we do not know for certain, though when some sailors were trying to sail back from Iceland to Norway, and were driven by contrary winds to the northern regions, they landed at last between the Greenlanders and the Bjarmas, where they asserted that they had found people of extraordinary size and the Land of Virgins ('virginum terram'), who are said to conceive when they taste water. But Greenland is separated from these by ice-clad skerries ('scopulis')."

And in a later passage we read:

"The fourth part [of Norway] is Halogia, whose inhabitants live in great measure with the Finns [Lapps], and trade with them; this land forms the boundary of Norway on the north as far as the place called Wegestaf, which divides it from Bjarmeland ('Biarmonia'); there is the very deep and northerly gulf which has in it Charybdis, Scylla, and unavoidable whirlpools; there are also ice-covered promontories which plunge into the sea immense masses of ice that have been increased by heaving floods and are frozen together by the winter cold; with these traders often collide against their will, when making for Greenland, and thus they suffer shipwreck and run into danger."

It may seem probable that this description of a country in the north referred to Svalbard; and the naive allusion to glacier-ice plunging from the land is most likely to be derived from voyagers to the Polar Sea; for it seems less probable that it should be merely information about Greenland transferred to the North. Storm, it is true, dated the Historia Norwegiæ between 1180 and 1190, that is, before the discovery of Svalbard according to the Annals; but later writers place it in the thirteenth century, even as late as 1260 (see vol. i. p. 255). The ideas of the people of great size and of the Land of Virgins are obviously taken from Adam of Bremen, and may be a literary ornament.

[Sidenote: Svalbard probably Spitzbergen]

There have been different opinions as to what country Svalbard was. Many have thought that it might be the northern east coast of Greenland; Jan Mayen has also been mentioned; while others, like S. Thorlacius, a hundred years ago (1808), supposed that it was "the Siberian coasts of the Arctic Ocean, lying to the east of Permia (Bjarmeland), that the ancient Norsemen included under the name of Svalbard, i.e., the cold coast." Gustav Storm [1890, p. 344] maintained that Svalbard in all probability must be Spitzbergen,[151] and many reasons point to the correctness of this supposition.

No certain conclusion can be drawn about Svalbard from the passage quoted from the Landnámabók. "On the north in Hafsbotn" must mean in some northerly direction; for it is only the chief points of the compass, north, south and west, that are mentioned, and no intermediate points; for one course alone, from Bergen to Hvarf in Greenland, the direction "due west" is given, which must be true west.[152] Langanes is said to lie on the north side of Iceland instead of on the north-east, from Reykjanes to Ireland the course was south, instead of south-east, etc. The points of the compass are evidently used in the same way as is still common in Norway; "in the north of the valley" may be used even if the valley bends almost to the west. The Landnáma's statement (Sturlubók) that it is four "dœgr's sea" from Snæfellsnes "west" to Greenland (i.e., Hvarf) then agrees entirely with the common mode of expression that I have found among the arctic sailors of our day in Denmark Strait, where they never talk of anything but sailing east or west along the edge of the ice, even though it is north-east and south-west; we sail westward from Færder to Christianssand, or we travel south from Christiania to Christianssand. Consequently "on the north in Hafsbotn" means the same as when we say north in Finmark (cf. Ottar's directions, vol. i p. 171), or even north in the White Sea, and speak of sailing north to Jan Mayen. As Langanes in particular, the north-east point of Iceland, is mentioned as the starting-point, we should be inclined to think that Svalbard was supposed to lie in a north-easterly direction; it is true that the course to Ireland is calculated from Reykjanes and not from the south-east point of Iceland; but this may be because the voyage was mostly made from the west country.

The distances given in these sailing directions in the Landnámabók are even less accurate than the points of the compass. From Stad in Norway to the east coast of Iceland is said to be seven "dœgr's" sail, while from Snæfellsnes to Hvarf is four "dœgr," from Reykjanes to Ireland three or five "dœgr," from Langanes to Svalbard four "dœgr," and from Kolbeins-ey to the uninhabited parts of Greenland one "dœgr." The actual distances are, however, approximately: from Norway to Iceland 548 nautical miles, from Snæfellsnes to Hvarf 692, from Reykjanes to Ireland 712, from Langanes to Spitzbergen 840 (from Langanes to Jan Mayen 288), and from Mevenklint to the east coast of Greenland 184 nautical miles. It is hopeless to look for any system in this; the distances from Iceland to Greenland and from Iceland to Ireland are given as being much less (4/7 and 3/7 or 5/7) than the distance from Norway to Iceland, whereas in reality they are considerably more. In the fourth part of the "Rymbegla" [1780, p. 482] a "dœgr's" sail is given as equal to two degrees of latitude, that is, 120 nautical miles (or twenty-four of the old Norwegian sea-leagues), but according to the measurements given there would be 80 nautical miles in a "dœgr's" sail between Norway and Iceland, 172 between Iceland and Greenland, and 236 (or 144) between Iceland and Ireland. These measurements of distance are therefore far too uncertain to be of any use in finding Svalbard. According to the scale in the "Rymbegla" it would be two and a half "dœgr" to Jan Mayen, and seven "dœgr" to Spitzbergen from Langanes.[153]

The old Norwegians imagined Hafsbotn [or Trollabotn][154] as the end ("botn") of the ocean to the north of Norway and north-east of Greenland, as far as one could sail to the north in the Polar Sea. But Svalbard lay according to the Landnámabók in the north of Hafsbotn; and if one tries to sail northward in summer-time, either from Langanes, the north-east point of Iceland, or from Norway, endeavouring to keep clear of the ice, it will be difficult to avoid making Spitzbergen. If one followed the edge of the ice northwards from Iceland in July, it would infallibly bring one there. Such a voyage would correspond to the sailing directions from Snæfellsnes when they steered west to the edge of the ice off Greenland, and then followed it south-westwards round Hvarf. On the other hand, it would be impossible to arrive at the northern east coast of Greenland without venturing far into the ice, and it is not likely that the ancient Norsemen would have done this unless they knew that there was land on the inside and consequently hunting-grounds (cf. vol. i. p. 286). No doubt one might make Jan Mayen; but it is difficult to suppose that this little island should have been given such a name, which is only suited to the coast of a larger country. The conclusion that Svalbard was not the northern east coast of Greenland seems also justified from the latter being mentioned immediately afterwards in Hauk's Landnámabók under the name of "the uninhabited parts of Greenland," one "dœgr's" sail north of Kolbeins-ey (see vol i. p. 286; vol. ii. p. 166).

As has already been said, the Norwegians (cf. Historia Norwegiæ and the "King's Mirror") and Icelanders (cf. the mediæval Icelandic geography) thought that "land extended from Bjarmeland to the uninhabited parts in the north, and as far as the beginning of Greenland," that is, round the whole of the north of Hafsbotn. From several legendary sagas of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries we can see that Svalbard was in fact reckoned among these uninhabited parts in the north, which were reached by sailing past Hálogaland and Finmark, and northward over Dumbshav (see map, p. 34).

Thus, in Samson Fagre's Saga [of about 1350] we read in the thirteenth chapter, "On the situation of the northern lands":

"Risaland lies east and north of the Baltic, and to the north-east of it lies the land that is called Jotunheimar, and there dwell trolls and evil spirits, but from thence until it meets the uninhabited parts of Greenland goes the land that is called Svalbard; there dwell various peoples." [Grönl. hist. Mind., iii. p. 524.]

The outcome of what has been advanced above will be briefly: there can be no doubt, from the sober statement in the Icelandic Annals and in the Landnáma, that the land of Svalbard really was discovered, even though the date need not be accurate; and it may further be regarded as probable that this land was Spitzbergen.

It may be supposed that it was discovered accidentally by a ship on the way between Iceland and Norway, as stated in the Historia Norwegiæ, being driven by storms to the north of Hafsbotn; but the mention of the country in the Landnámabók may indicate that the voyage was made more than once, and that knowledge of the country cannot in any case have been limited to an accidental discovery of this sort. It is more probable that the Norwegians and Icelanders carried on seal- and walrus-hunting northwards along the edge of the ice in the Polar Sea, and in that case it was unavoidable that they should arrive at Svalbard or Spitzbergen. And when it was once discovered they must often have resorted to it; for the valuable walrus was at that time very plentiful there.

[Sidenote: The Russians' arctic sealing a continuation of the Norwegians']

As we nowhere find mention of these sealing expeditions of the Norwegians in the Polar Sea, except in Ottar's narrative, it may be difficult to show certain evidence of their having taken place; but the Russians' seal-hunting in the Polar Sea, of which we hear as early as the sixteenth century, can in my opinion scarcely be explained in any other way than as a continuation in the main of the Norwegians' sealing. When the English, and later the Dutch, came to the Murman coast and the coasts eastwards as far as the Pechora, Vaigach and Novaya Zemlya, they found fleets of Russian smacks engaged in fishing and walrus-hunting; most of them were from the Murman coast, some from the White Sea, and a few from the Pechora. Stephen Burrough thus found in June 1556 no less than thirty smacks in the Kola fjord, which had come sailing down the river, on their way to fishing- and sealing-grounds to the east. These smacks sailed well with the wind free, could also be rowed with twenty oars, and had each a crew of twenty-four men.

Pistorius[155] refers to Andrei Mikhow as saying that the "Juctri" (Yugrians in the Pechora district) and "Coreli" (Karelian) on the coast of the Polar Sea hunted seals and whales, of whose skins they made ropes, purses, and ...? ("redas, bursas et coletas"), and used the blubber (for lighting ?) and sold it. They also hunted walrus (called by Mikhow by its Norwegian name "rosmar"),[156] the tusks of which they sold to the Russians. The latter kept a certain quantity for their own use, and sent the rest to Tartary and Turkey. The hunting was said to proceed in a curious fashion; the walruses, which were very numerous, clambering up on to the mountain-ridges and there perishing in great numbers.[157] The Yugrians and Karelians then collected the tusks on the shore. Is there here some confusion with stories of the collection of mammoth tusks?

What was said earlier (p. 145) from an Arabian source about steel blades being sold to the peoples on the coast of the Polar Sea in North Russia seems to point to sea-hunting having been well developed in these regions as early as the twelfth century; for otherwise steel for hunting appliances could not have been a common article of commerce.

That Norwegians and Russians often met in northern waters may apparently be concluded from the words already quoted from Erik Walkendorf, about 1520 (cf. p. 86), that fifteen of the Skrælings did not venture to approach a Christian or Ruten (i.e., Russian). As he places the land of the Skrælings north-north-west of Finmark, this seems to be a legend that is brought into connection with the Polar Sea. Of walrus-tusks he says that "these are costly and greatly prized among the Russians." Unless this is taken from older literary sources (?), one might suppose that it was information he himself had obtained in Finmark, and it might then point to the Norwegians having sold walrus-tusks to the Russians.

[Sidenote: Russians and Lapps learned walrus-hunting from the Norwegians]

The fact that, as mentioned above, a Russian author of the sixteenth century (Mikhow) uses the Norwegian name "rosmar" seems also to point to Russian connection with the Norwegians in the arctic fisheries. In addition to this, the Russian word "morsh" for walrus is evidently the same as the Lappish "moršša" (Finnish "mursu"), and may originally be the same word as "rosmar" ("rosmhvalr"). For it is striking that the same letters are present in "morsh" or "moršša" as in "rosm(hvalr)," or in "rosmar"; there is only a transference of consonants, which is often met with in borrowed words in different languages.

I asked Professor Konrad Nielsen what he thought about this, and whether he could imagine any Finnish-Ugrian origin of the word, or whether any similar word was known, for instance, in Samoyed. He considers that my assumption may "be quite well founded."[158] He has consulted Professor Setälä of Helsingfors about it, and the latter thinks that if the word was borrowed from Finnish into Russian, there is nothing to prevent its being connected with the Norse rosm(hvalr)--the latter would then, of course, be the primary form. Similar metatheses are found in other Norse loan-words in Finnish. Konrad Nielsen thinks that "the Lappish word is pretty certainly borrowed from Finnish, so that the idea of its Norse origin meets with no difficulty from that quarter." And as to the possible Russian origin of the word, he has spoken to the Slavic authority, Professor Mikkola, who informs him that in popular language the Russian word is only found in the most northern dialects, and there is no point of connection in other Slavic languages, so that he regards it as probable that it is not originally a Slavic word. No Finnish-Ugrian etymology for the word can, according to Konrad Nielsen, be put forward. "In Samoyed," he says, "the name for walrus is only known as far as Jura-Samoyed (the most western dialect of Samoyed) is concerned: 't'ewot'e,' 'tiut'ei.' I have compared this with the Lappish name for seal, 'dævok'--'davak'--'dævkka.' In this I see evidence that the Lapps (contrary to Wiklund's view) were acquainted with the Polar Sea and its animals before they came to Scandinavia." He also draws my attention to the fact that "the Finnish 'norsu' (in the older language also 'nursa'), 'elephant,' seems to be connected with 'mursu,' which is easily explained by the analogous use of walrus-tusks and elephant-tusks."

Professor Olaf Broch also considers my assumption probable, and has submitted the question of the etymology of the Russian "morsh" to Professor Berneker, who may doubtless be regarded as the first authority in questions of this kind. He replies that a "wild" etymologist might connect the word with a series of words in Slavic languages which express various movements; but the Russian word, being so definitely localised, must doubtless be derived from the North-Finnish linguistic region. Whether the Finnish "mursu," Lappish "moršša," "morša," can be referred to a metathesis of Old Norse rosmhvalr, Danish rosmer, etc., Professor Berneker is unable to determine. "But with loan-words all sorts of anomalies take place, and no rules can be laid down."

If we compare these various utterances of such eminent authorities, it appears to me that there are paramount reasons for regarding the Russian-Finnish name for walrus as of Norse origin. But in that case it also becomes probable that the Norwegians were the pioneers in walrus-hunting along the coasts of the Polar Sea, and that both the Finnish peoples and the Russians learned from them.

It will doubtless be difficult to find a natural explanation of the peoples on the northern coasts of Russia having from the first developed their arctic sea-hunting with large craft, unless we suppose that they learned it from the Norwegians, and that it is thus a continuation of the methods of the latter. It should also be remembered that the Kola peninsula as far as the White Sea itself was reckoned a tributary country of Norway (cf. p. 135), and that the name of the Murman coast means simply the Norwegians' coast. None of the peoples on the north coast of Russia can have been a seafaring people very far back, as is shown by their boats and appliances; and it is difficult to believe that they should have been able to develop independently a system of navigation on a coast presenting such unfavourable conditions; no doubt they could have done so with small boats, originally river-boats,[159] but not with larger craft; this they must most probably have learned from their nearest seafaring neighbours, the Norwegians, who were masters at sea.

It is remarkable that already as early as in Adam of Bremen white bears (polar bears) are mentioned as occurring in Norway (cf. vol. i. pp. 191, f.). That this might be due to the connection with Iceland and Greenland, even at that time, is perhaps possible, but not very probable, as these countries are mentioned separately by Adam. The white bears in Norway may rather point to a connection with the Polar Sea and to the Norwegians having practised sealing there.

[Sidenote: Mention of white bears in Norway]

It is perhaps due to the same connection of the Norwegians with the Polar Sea that we find on the Italian Dalorto's map of 1325 (see next chapter) and on several later maps the statement that there are white bears in northern Norway. Probably polar bears' skins were brought to the south from Norway as an article of commerce and the Norwegians may have obtained the skins partly by their own hunting in the Polar Sea, partly by the trade with Greenland, and partly, no doubt, by that with the peoples on the north coast of Russia. The Arab Ibn Sa'id (thirteenth century) mentions white bears in the northern islands, amongst them the island of white falcons (i.e., Iceland). "These bears' skins are soft, and they are brought to the Egyptian lands as gifts." In the "Geographia Universalis" of the thirteenth century (see next chapter) the white bears in Iceland are described. It was a common idea in southern Europe in the Middle Ages that Greenland, and sometimes also Iceland (cf. Fra Mauro's map), lay to the north of Norway, or they were made continuous with it, and even a part of it.

The Venetian Querini, who was wrecked on Röst Island and travelled south through Norway in 1432, says that he saw a perfectly white bear's skin at the foot of the Metropolitan's chair in St. Olaf's Church at Trondhjem.[160] As Greenland was under the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Trondhjem, this skin may have been a gift from pious Greenlanders, as perhaps were also the Eskimo hide-canoes mentioned by Claudius Clavus (cf. p. 85). In Norse literature polar bears are always connected with Icelanders or Greenlanders, who sometimes brought them alive as gifts to kings.

[Sidenote: Decline of the Norwegians' sea-hunting]

We may thus conclude from what has been advanced above that the hunting of whales, seals, and particularly walrus was of great importance to the Norwegians in ancient times, and for the sake of the last they certainly made extended expeditions in the Arctic Ocean. It may therefore be difficult to understand how it came about that this sea-hunting declined to such an extent in more recent times that we hear nothing about the Norwegians' hunting in the Polar Sea, while in the sixteenth century fleets from the northern coasts of Russia were engaged in fishing and walrus-hunting; and Peder Claussön Friis is able to say of whaling in Norway (about 1613):

"In old time many expedients or methods were used in these lands [i.e., Norway] for catching whales ... but on account of men's unskilfulness they have fallen out of use, so that they now have no means of hunting the whale unless he drifts ashore to them."

This seems to show that the Norwegians' whaling in open sea had really gone out of practice, for otherwise this author must have known of it; on the other hand, whale-hunting in the fjords, which were closed by nets, has continued to our time. Walrus-hunting (as well as sealing) appears to have been still carried on in Finmark in Peder Claussön Friis's time.

His description of the animal and its hunting is in part accompanied by stories similar to those in Olaus Magnus and Albertus Magnus (see p. 163), and he mentions the great strength of walrus-hide ropes, and their use "for clappers in hanging bells, item for shore-ropes and other ropes, and for the screws on the quay at Bergen, with which the dried fish is screwed into barrels, and for such other uses as no hawser or cable can so well serve for." This shows that these ropes must have been widely employed and that there must have been considerable hunting of walrus. According to an order of Christian IV., dated from Bergenhus Castle, July 6, 1622, fifteen walrus-hides were to be bought yearly for the King's service,[161] and from K. Leem's description it seems that walrus was still hunted in Finmark in his time (1767). He says too [1767, p. 302] that "even the Sea-Lapps of the Varanger-Fiord formerly practised whaling, using for that purpose appliances invented and made by themselves." To this is added in a note by Gunnerus: "The same thing may also be said in our time of the Lapps in Schjerv-island and of a few peasants in Nordland, especially in Ofoten."

But in none of these accounts is there any hint that the Norwegians carried on their hunting beyond the limits of the country, as Ottar did in the ninth century.

The decline of this productive hunting may have come about through the concurrence of many circumstances. Hostile relations with the Karelians and Russians on the east may have had some influence on it; as the latter in increasing numbers took up the same hunting in their smacks, the eastward waters may have become unsafe for the Norwegians, who, though superior in seamanship, were inferior in numbers. But a more important factor was the rapid growth of the fisheries on the home coasts in Finmark after the fourteenth century, which may have claimed all available hands, leaving none over for fishing in more distant waters. Besides which the influence of the Hanseatic League no doubt contributed; then, as later, they learned to prefer the valuable trade in dried fish to fitting out vessels for the more uncertain and dangerous hunting in the Polar Sea, which they knew nothing about. Finally came the royal edict of April 1562, which enforced Bergen's monopoly in the trade with Finmark, whereby the dead hand was laid upon this part of the country, as formerly upon Greenland. In those days a corresponding displacement of the arctic fisheries must have taken place from Norway to north Russia, as in the last century again a displacement took place in the contrary direction, when the Russian hunting in the Arctic Ocean and Spitzbergen ceased and the Norwegians again became the only hunters in these waters.

[Sidenote: Decline of Norwegian navigation]

It was a concatenation of unfortunate accidents that produced the gradual decline of the voyages of the Norwegians and of their unrestricted command of all northern waters from the White Sea, and probably also Novaya Zemlya and Spitzbergen, over all the northern islands, Shetland, the Orkneys (to some extent the Hebrides, Man and Ireland), the Faroes, Iceland, and as far as Greenland, and probably also for a time the north-east coast of America. Unfavourable political conditions had a great deal to do with this, not the least of them being the long union with Denmark, with the removal of the seat of government to Copenhagen, which was extremely unfavourable to the interests of Norwegian commerce. To this was added the growing power of the Hanseatic League in Norway, the effect of which was as demoralising to all activity in the country as it was paralysing to our navigation. But not the least destructive were the royal monopolies of trade with the so-called tributary countries of the kingdom; like all State monopolies, they laid their dead hand upon all private enterprise. In this way the Norwegian command of northern waters received its death-blow; while the mercantile fleets of other nations, especially the English, came to the fore, to a large extent by making use of Norwegian seamanship and enterprise; thus the English seaport of Bristol seems to have had many Norwegians among its citizens, who certainly found there better conditions to work under than at home.

The mass of knowledge the Norwegians had acquired about the northern regions, before their time entirely unknown, was to a great extent forgotten again; and at the close of the Middle Ages all that remained was the communication with Iceland and the knowledge of the neighbouring seas, besides the continuance of the connection between the White Sea and Norway; while the voyage to Greenland, to say nothing of America, was forgotten, at any rate by the mass of the people.

The development of humanity often proceeds with a strangely lavish waste of forces. How many needless plans and unsuccessful voyages, how much toil and how many human lives would not a knowledge of the Norwegians' extensive discoveries have been able to save in succeeding ages? How very different, too, might have been the development of many things, if by the chances of an unlucky destiny the decline of Norwegian navigation had not come just at a time when maritime enterprise received such a powerful impetus among more southern nations, especially the Portuguese, then the Spaniards, later the French, the English and the Dutch. By their great discoveries it was these nations who introduced a new era in the history of navigation, and also in that of polar voyages. But if Norwegian seamanship had still been at its height at that time, then certainly the Scandinavians of Greenland would once more have sought the already discovered countries on the west and south-west, and the Greenland settlements might then have formed an important base for new undertakings, whereby a new period of prosperity for Norwegian navigation and Norwegian enterprise might have been introduced. This was not to be; it was only reserved for the Norwegians to be the people who showed the way to the other nations out from the coasts and over the great oceans.