The Vikings: A Memorable Visit to America
Exploring the New World a thousand years ago, a Viking woman gave birth to what is likely the first European-American baby. The discovery of the house the family built upon their return to Iceland has scholars rethinking the Norse sagas
- By Eugene Linden
- Smithsonian magazine, December 2004, Subscribe
(Page 2 of 5)
In the summer of 2001, Steinberg and his colleagues scanned the low fields in Glaumbaer. The work proceeded uneventfully until late August, when the team was about to pack up and leave. (“You always find the most important things in the last week of a field season,” says Steinberg.) When two undergraduates probing spots that showed low conductivity in earlier scans pulled up their first plug of earth, they looked in the hole and saw a layer of turf—consistent with a turf house—below a yellow layer that marked the eruption of MountHekla in 1104.
Excited, Steinberg returned in 2002 to dig a series of trenches. By the end of that season, the team had uncovered parts of what appeared to be an extensive longhouse, 100 feet by 25 1/2 feet. By the end of 2004, the team had plotted the direction and length of one of the walls. The house was so large that it evidently belonged to someone with wealth and power. But who?
All the detail about Norse trips to Vinland (as the Norse called North America) comes from two accounts: The Saga of Erik the Red and The Saga of the Greenlanders. These epic Viking tales were probably first written down around 1200 or 1300 by scribes who either recorded the oral stories of elders or worked from some now-lost written source, says Thor Hjaltalin, an Icelandic scholar who oversees archaeological activities in northwest Iceland. The two sagas give similar accounts of Thorfinn’s trip to the New World, but they differ on some significant details about his return to Iceland. In Erik the Red’s saga, Thorfinn moves back to his family estate in Reynisnes, while in the Greenlanders’ saga, Thor-finn settles down in Glaumbaer, after his mother proves less than welcoming to his wife. In a key passage from the Greenlanders’ saga, Thor-finn sells some of his Vinland spoils in Norway, then comes to “north Iceland, in Skagafjord, where he had his ship drawn ashore for the winter. In the spring he purchased the land at Glaumbaer and established his farm there.” It goes on: “He and his wife, Gudrid, had a great number of descendants, and a fine clan they were. . . . After [Thorfinn’s] death, Gudrid took over the running of the household, together with her son Snorri who had been born in Vinland.”
Apart from the grand scale of the longhouse, which ties it to someone of Thorfinn’s stature, other evidence links it to the North American expedition, Steinberg claims. Its straight-walled design differs from the bowed-wall construction typical of Icelandic longhouses of the era, and it bears a strong resemblance to structures that have been uncovered in L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland. And finally, Steinberg says, it’s unlikely that any other chief could build one of the grandest longhouses of the Viking era and not be mentioned either in the sagas or other sources.
Before Steinberg’s find, conventional wisdom held that Erik the Red’s version was more credible and that the reference to Glaumbaer in the Greenlanders’ saga was merely a flourish, added years after most of the saga was written, to improve Gudrid’s image and perhaps that of a Glaumbaer chief. There are still many points of dispute about which Norse did what and where in North America, but if Steinberg’s find is indeed Thorfinn’s house, the long-discounted Greenlanders’ saga, which names Thorfinn as a primary source, becomes the more accurate version—at least on the matter of where Thorfinn and company ended up. So after he found the longhouse, Steinberg called Olafsson—who had identified Erik the Red’s farmstead as a jumping-off place for the New World—and blurted, “I think I’ve found the other end of your story.”
Vikings spread out from Scandinavia and settled in Iceland, which Steinberg describes as “one of the world’s last large inhabitable islands to be inhabited,” in 874. They were led by local chiefs who did not like taking orders from, or paying taxes to, Harald Finehair, a Norse king then consolidating power in Norway. As the celebrated Norwegian anthropologist Vilhemmer Stefansson wrote in 1930, the Viking expansion was perhaps “the only large scale migration in history where the nobility moved out and the peasantry stayed home.”
At first, Iceland offered a paradise to these ruggedly independent Vikings. The lowlands had forests of birch and other trees that had never felt the ax. In just 60 years the population jumped from zero to 70,000. By 930, the Norse had established one of the world’s first parliaments, the Althing, where chiefs met to settle disputes.
There was just one sore point to this idyllic life. Settled and organized though they might have been, the Vikings were also some of the toughest warriors who ever lived. A slighted Norse was not the type to turn the other cheek. The resulting bloody duels reverberated far beyond Iceland. As Stefansson put it in 1930, writing during Prohibition, “The eventual discovery of North America hangs upon a fashionable practice of the day, that of man-killing, which, like cocktail shaking in the later America, was against the law but was indulged by the best people.” He was referring to a few unreconstructed manslayers like Erik the Red, who overtaxed even the Norse tolerance for conflict and was exiled more than once by his fellow chiefs. Erik was first forced to relocate to Iceland’s west coast and was then banished from the island altogether.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (21)
I think that the Norse probably took a few inuit women from Greenland back to iceland and Norway. Thats how some "East Asian" genes are showing up in iceland.
Posted by Tim on January 11,2013 | 09:03 AM
I'm gonna agree with everyone here and say Demetrius is terribly misinformed and should take a look into a history book next time he decides to make a post. And however I understand that he would like to defend his culture (if you can call it that) in the same way I am currently doing (Vikings are the s#@t) Now not only did the vikings who were apparently "savages" Spread their Culture from as far as Iceland to The Middle East whereas the Spanish got to the South America and had their hearts set that it was india,and to top it all off these "highly civilized" spaniards butchered Countless Native Americans and ruined Several Civilizations which thanks to the spaniards we'll never get to know enough about to piece together how their society worked so yeah Demetrius Spanish are just sooooooo great. >:-(
Posted by ErikYeahlikeaviking on December 3,2012 | 07:59 PM
The abandonment of the settlements on Greenland in the 14th century has intrigued me for some years. That pioneers of this kind should disappear without fighting back somehow seems to be unnatural. Assuming that they were still pioneers leaves us with a few alternatives.
They could go back east to Iceland and Scandinavia, where the Plague had made room for that. Other destinations in Europe not to be forgotten. But why not imagine that these pioneers went further west? They knew the riches they craved were there so I feel convinced that some of them went. Others have suggested the same but have not been able to come up with enough evidence to support their claims.
Just how far did they penetrate into the continent? Modern DNA-testing may be able to help. My idea is not scientific, basically. I am a wooden shipwright and have for some time been wondering if the shape of the indian canoe, which in some areas resemble the norse ships,could help us decide approximately how far they got, assuming that the native boatbuilder would have thought it worthwhile to copy the foreign vessels. How far into the woods am I?
Posted by ole klemme on April 13,2012 | 04:39 AM
Does anyone ever stop to think why northeastern tribes such as the Iraquois Algonquin mohecan and probably most all of the tribes of that region look more european and not mongoloid as western tribes do?
They seem to have prominent straight noses of scandinavians.
HUM JUST THINKING.
Posted by Greg on February 9,2012 | 02:18 PM
Why does it seem that scandinavians are not given credit for being the first modern europeans. The fact they discovered america is one of the most important things to have ever been done by peoples of there time! What would modern history have been with out the viking's explorations trading and interbreeding with most of the world. Just wondering
Posted by on February 9,2012 | 02:01 PM
They didn't find "beach nuts" at LAM. They were butternuts ( also called white walnuts). And BTW they are Beech Trees, not Beach Trees!
Posted by Dick Jorgensen on January 3,2012 | 05:49 PM
"Tom McGovern, an archaeologist at HunterCollege in New York City, has spent more than 20 years reconstructing the demise of a Norse settlement on Greenland. In the middle of the 14th century, the colony suffered eight harsh winters in a row, culminating, in 1355, in what may have been the worst in a century. McGovern says the Norse ate their livestock and dogs before turning to whatever else they could find in their final winter there. The settlers might have survived if they had mimicked the Inuit, who hunted ringed seal in the winter and prospered during the Little Ice Age"
Looks like twenty years of modelling were wasted. Midden heaps from fifteenth century Greenland show the Norse diet was 80% fish in the final years in the final years of their settlement there.
The climate affected the Inuit just as much as the Norse. The Dorset Eskimo were forced into the northernmost reaches of Greenland and Ellesmere Island during the medieval warm period. The Thule migrated there as well and drove the Dorset to extinction with the dog, bow, and toggling harpoon. The Thule themselves were forced out of the northernmost latitudes and below the Arctic circle once the Little Ice Age hit, placing them in competition with the Norse. Perhaps the Norse were doomed from the start, we can't be certain. What is known is that the settlements in Greenland were obsolete once Europe obtained easy access to elephant ivory, endangering the market for walrus ivory, Greenland's only valuable export.
Posted by Ken on October 2,2011 | 06:59 PM
Great helped me on my project
Posted by pizza on January 13,2011 | 05:39 AM
Leaving later (and irrelevant) Europeans aside...
Linden seems to have cloaked the core of this article, the uncovering of a large Viking Age building in Iceland, with a fairly free ranging overview of the problem of matching the three Vinlander's Sagas to possible historic events.
There has long been (massive) debate about just how the tales of the Sagas might match any actual facts. Any modern reader of what are in truth long repeated *stories* needs to be aware that although there may be accurate elements, much is also intended as mere entertainment. On the other hand there is the proven archaeology uncovered in Canada, primarily at L'Anse aux Meadows, but also through the Arctic. That the house remains and small collection of artifacts at L'Anse aux Meadows Newfoundland are Norse in origin is certain.
One obvious flaw in Linden's thesis is that he seems to conclude the building complex at LAM needs to belong to only one of either of Leif or Thorfin. He appears to discard the more obvious interpretation - that the Saga tales actually describe entirely different locations.
That the Norse at LAM did in fact travel down at least to modern day New Brunswick is proven by artifacts. Both beach nuts and beach wood was found at LAM, trees which never grew further north than New Brunswick. People tend to always want to settle in desirable locations - so perhaps Thorfin's houses are sitting, unknown, under the buildings of some modern Canadian town.
Readers should remember that to Leif and the other Norse, *Vinland* was a vast territory, not merely a small exploration camp set on it's doorstep.
Frankly, given the extensive work we all undertook on the fine details on the exhibit 'Vikings - North Atlantic Saga' ( http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/start.html ), I do find this offering by Eugene Linden 'a bit shallow'.
Posted by Darrell Markewitz on October 5,2010 | 08:15 AM
i totally agree
Posted by rythm drummer on September 30,2010 | 10:59 AM
Red Feather has it.
Posted by Skáld on September 9,2010 | 11:32 PM
Haha, very good point, Red Feather!
Posted by Aratan "Fire Spirit" on March 26,2010 | 01:49 PM
well..i`m afraid america was already populated thousands of years before both Leiv Eriksson and colombus "discovered" it..so I belive someone dicovered it before any of them really. and they colonized it too :-)
Posted by Red Feather on February 10,2010 | 05:04 PM
Hatred of mankind is an obominous thing. We all need to be more tolerant of each other so that our own cultures do not disappear. Vikings, like native Americans were not savages; they were human beings just like you and I. In fact the Vikings are our ancestors, though their culture has been destroyed their blood still runs through our veins.
Posted by M Binkley on September 20,2009 | 10:55 AM
This is viking history that is proven: The vikings of norway who invented the viking boat ( today known as the most solid boat built and as fast as modern sailboats today). These vikings went over to Iceland from norway. From Iceland to greenland (some of them). As they were exploring they came to north america 400-500 years before columbus discovered central america. Thats right: columbus discovered central america and leif Eriksson discovered north america. This is not a theory - it's a fact that is accepted in Europa and north america. I read about spanish ppl in here and north america hehe, sorry but nomatter how many spanish speaking ppl that exists in north america , it doesn't change proven history. the fact of the first born white child born in north america was from Norway/Iceland , and that the first viking walked this land 500 years before columbus is part of our viking history in scandinavia. One spanish guy in here is talking about vikings as savages. That is right they were. But vikings were good craftsmen and tacticians during war and occupation. You can't just be a pure "monkey savage" to have as great success as the vikings had. I actually think spanish talking ppl should see the film by Mel gibson about spanish occupation of central and south americas. No, not savage at all ;)
Posted by kristianviking on January 17,2009 | 07:01 AM
To Will Sinclair: I have been studying and documenting sites in Colorado, US, since meeting Bill McGlone, Gloria Farley and companies in the field in 1988. There is incredible evidence, (i.e. glyphs marking equinox, cross-quarter days, etc., most with some form of significant Celtic Ogham) of incursions of Western Europeans into the Americas before the Vikings. Farley translated the Heavner Runestone in Oklahoma as Viking: http://www2.privatei.com/~bartjean/mainpage.htm I have located star charts and ship petroglyphs, filmed equinox shadow plays in caves, even Mithriams http://onter.net/story.html As Farley explains, the evidence is "In Plain Sight". Scott Monahan currently offers the best documentation: http://onter.net/story.html There is now DNA evidence of Europeans in theAmerica's N.E. dating beyond 13,000 years. I will be back in the field this fall continuing my own amatuer documentation with the goal of local presentations in Colorado. The sites are under threat of military training ground expansion and I will do my part to record what I can ... for posterity ... Truth? The evidence is on the rocks. I'm surprised there are no articles in the Smithsonian on the subject, and taken back by the resistance of the archaeological community to such theory. Archaeology should be a science, not a dogma. Douglas Young
Posted by Douglas Young on July 28,2008 | 11:02 AM
The Norsemen were quite late in the game of Europeans finding, using the resources found it North & Central America. Why not read the evidence in both of Professor Barry Fell's books, "America, B.C." and "Saga, America". Then increase your knowledge a bit more by reading of the findings of Gloria Farley in her book, "In Plain Sight". The musems where the findings of artifacts from the American B.C. period of history, unearthed, preserved & presented for inquisitive eyes are listed in all three books.By all means make an effort to read these outstanding non fiction books.
Posted by Will D. Sinclair on July 26,2008 | 11:46 AM
I love it when people with so little knowledge froth at the mouth. The only reason the Spanish ever amounted to ANYthing was because of the Moors and Jews, whom the kicked out in 1492. After that, Spain has only been a nation of bloody-handed seagoing plunderers and genocidal murderers who were not smart enough to keep from squandering all they stole on squabbling with the English (hey, Demitrius, can you say "Spanish Armada?" twice?). What they didn't spend on wars they gave to Rome. Not exactly a culture of geniuses. There has never been anything called "Spanish" culture. Anything that has ever been labeled "Spanish" that is cultural is because of the Moorish & Jewish influences. For all they stole, they have remained the most culturally and economically backward country in Europe! Anyone with enough intelligence to question the repressiveness of the Spanish system ended up in the clutches of Torquemada! And how about Columbus? He wasn't even a Spaniard, he was an Italian! So...the culmination of Spanish ...uh...culture...in the 20th century was the fascist regime of Franco? Compare what the Scandinavian nations are today to what Spain is today. Sure, a lot of people speak Spanish because they were seafarers, that is undeniable. But Viking culture has spread to and been in absorbed into virtually ALL of Europe (even Spain throught the visigoths as has been pointed out), through the Mediterranean, into italy, Russia (the "Russ" whom Russia was named after were Vikings) and so on. In the words of Bugs Bunny, "what a maroon."
Posted by Ellis D. Tripp on July 2,2008 | 03:33 PM
Demetrius, I'm sorry you feel attacked, but this article did not say anything derogatory about Spanish explorers or Spanish speakers. It shared some insights about the exploits of some Vikings who arrived in America (and eventually left--due, most likely to climate change) almost 500 years before an Italian explorer persuaded the monarchs of Spain (descendants of Visigoths--read Viking cousins) to back his expedition to the "Indies". Y te digo estas cosas no para decirte nada mala, sino para mostrarte que no hay porque sentirte enojado cuando estas leyendo de la historia ajena.
Posted by George Johnson on June 26,2008 | 07:02 PM
I really think Demetrius needs to take another look at Spanish History, That of both the Iberian Peninsula as well as the Americas, That possibly his own surname from Rodrigo,is of Viking or Sueve origin,that held sway in Spain. Also, everyone knows the Spanish "religion" imposed on native populations, was a brutality that caused the extinction of Taino and other tribes in the Caribe, after the enslavement, and diseases introduced by the Spanish in Central and South America,for the sole purpose to extract gold for it's cathedrals and fill the coffers of their regents. And if the current state of "Hispanic Culture" in the New World is any barometer of civilisation- I would rather live in Scandinavia any day !!!
Posted by E.J. Quinn on June 26,2008 | 11:11 AM
Were to start Mrs. Rodriguez? You are not 100% right or factual. The Vikings , they are Northern Europeans or Norse, as you call them is not a name of a people but a adjective- to go a Vikining meant to go exploring, colonizing, trading, etc... Although the Spaniards were great people worthy of great praise at times, they were alsosavages brutal in south America and other places and were blood thirsty for gold.Also mostly all European and Also asian countries fought the Muslims, all the way from the Greeks fighting the Persian Empire, the Crusaders Knights Hospitaller/Tuetonic Knights /Knights Templar etc...,to the European nations during WW1 ( Ottoman Empire ring a bell) also Spain has a large Muslim population. The Norse people of Northern Europe founded Iceland, Greenland had some of the most earliest legal systems, The Thing or Allthing,Were some of the worlds finest craftsmen, explorers, traders, seafarers, merchants, mercanaries for the Byzantine empire, poets and had a religion although not X-tian, also they created aform of writing called the Runes. I would have to write a whole dissertation to show how absurd your statement was. Yours was not the truth I suggest do some research before claiming something as fact when posting on a prestigous Scientific magazine. I am very happy to see this article and many others written in this fine magazine.I suggest a article on early Celtic Christianity also
Posted by Albie A Gogel on June 26,2008 | 06:37 AM
Im sorry to break up this fairy tale story but north america,central america,as well as south america and many more territory's are speaking spanish to this very day.And this is becuase the spanish are world renoune sea faring people,as well as conquerors,1000 of years fighting the muslims,and even before that remember who the romans were? take a western civ class the spanish were there best generals, as well as emperor ,Hadrian. I could go on but i will sum up that the norse were nothing more than savages, the vikings could never colonize a snow ball fight.History does not like to reconize that the spanish gave the indians in the new world horses and religion, but i know one thing that is certain what i comment is not fiction it is true,factual to 100% not opinion. SO those red heads up in new england sorry to say came off a boat and a journey that was made possible by the spanish 100 years before the bought there tickets.
Posted by Demetrius Rodriguez on March 2,2008 | 06:38 AM