years been subjected, especially by Dr. Gustav
Storm of Christiania,[8-1] to most searching textual and historical
criticism, and the result has been that the simpler narrative of Hauk's
Book and AM. 557 is pronounced the more reliable account.[8-2] In respect
to literary quality, it has the characteristics of the Icelandic sagas
proper, as distinguished from the later sagas by well-known literary men
like Snorri. Where it grazes facts of Northern history it is equally
strong. Thus, there is serious question as to the first sighting of land
by Biarni Herjulfson, who is mentioned only in the Flat Island narrative,
and nowhere else in the rich genealogical literature of Iceland, although
his alleged father was an important man, of whom there are reliable
accounts. On the other hand, the record of the "Saga of Eric the Red,"
giving the priority of discovery to Leif Ericson, can be collaterally
confirmed.[8-3] The whole account of Biarni seems suspicious, and the
main facts, viewed with reference to Leif's discovery, run counter to
Northern chronology and history. There are, however, two incidental
touches in the Flat Island Book narrative, which are absent from the
other saga, namely, the observation concerning the length of the day in
Vinland, and the reference to finding "three skin-canoes, with three men
under each." The improbabilities of the Flat Island Book saga are easily
detected, if one uses as a guide the simpler narrative of the "Saga of
Eric the Red," the only doubtful part of which is the "uniped" episode, a
touch of mediaeval superstition so palpable as not to be deceptive.

Aside from such things as picking grapes in the spring, sipping sweet dew
from the grass, and the presence of an apparition, the Flat Island Book
account, when read by itself, with no attempt to make it harmonize with
the statements of the "Saga of Eric the Red" or other facts of
Scandinavian history, is a sufficiently straightforward narrative. The
difficulty begins when it is placed in juxtaposition to these facts and
statements. It should not be and need not be discarded, but in giving an
account of the Vinland voyages it must be used with circumspection. From
an historical standpoint it must occupy a subordinate place. If Rafn in
his _Antiquitates Americanae_ had given emphatic precedence to the saga as
found in Hauk's Book and AM. 557, had left to American scholars the
Dighton Rock and the Newport Tower, and had not been so confident