|
|
Apparently on date Thu, 10 Nov 2005 08:59:11 GMT, "David B"
<tronospamchos@xxxxxxxxx> said:
>nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote in message
><9os4n1l5ns0vpvrgig2cgi5jjnpq577fl9@xxxxxxx>...
>>
>>Apparently on date Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:53:42 -0000, "David B."
>><davidb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>>>
>>>A)
>>>Here are [the lands] to which the English came; they take their name from
>>>their aridity- dried up, parched and desiccated equally in both the sun's
>>>heat and the cold.
>>
>>Which English are we talking about? Cabot?
>
>Given that the "1570" date of the map is almost certainly a misreading for
>the "1590" seen on some copies, we can probably include any others up to
>Frobisher as well, maybe even Davis.
One map, dated 1666 names the "Straet Davis" so that's clearly available to the
author of the document as a whole. The map in question is dated 1579 on my copy
so Frobisher would have been a distinct recent visitor.
You give it as "English", the word on the map is "Angle". Does that refer to
Englishmen plural, an Englishman, or is is ambiguous? If Stephanius is talking
about "an Englishman" in 1579 then that would surely have to be Frobisher? If
plural then it might mean a shipful, and more than one expedition, for all we
know, but in the singular...
If we extend the date to 1590, then there are Englishmen attempting to colonise
America in the region, if not where the A on the map has been put. Gilbert and
Raleigh? Dunno if this would be known in Iceland in 1590. Davis would also be a
possibility.
>>>B)
>>>Next to these is Vinland, which, on acount of the fecundity of the land
>and
>>>its richness in useful things is called Good. On this meridian is the end
>>>of the circulation of our ocean, but I infer from recent accounts that
>this
>>>[land] must be divided from America by a strait or gulf.
>>
>>Recent?
>
>The French had studied the areas around the St. Lawrence pretty thoroughly
>by the late 16th century.
I was thinking the document was written in 1669. There could easily be
political reasons for some of these things, e.g. French claims. I dunno.
>>>C)
>>>The call this the Land of the Giants because here are horned giants
>called
>>>the Scritefinns.
>>
>>Ooer. Narwhals or just myth?
>
>Confusion, probably. In reality perhaps large animals (maybe reindeer!) AND
>Scritefinns the people (see the illustration provided by Jerry T).
Looking at the original word, I'm wondering what it actually is, i.e. is it
definitely Scritefinn? The letters are a bit odd, "Skri" but then it looks like
a "c" followed by an "h" or something like it. Then four characters "fina",
identical to the next footnote where Klofina is mentioned, i.e. the original
word is possibly spelt "Skrichfina".
"Skrich" seems to be an Icelandic word meaning "write, pen, make out, get down,
charge", (and means "writer" in Norwegian.) I wonder if that is those who are
"literary" or "fictional"?
Klofina in Icelandic means "riven, parted, forked, divided, cleft", which seems
vaguely appropriate given the reference to claws, are there other possible
translations on that one? Like the coast of the ice cap would be riven / cleft
as if by some giant clawed thing. I dunno though.
Seems to me that finn / fina / finns is a Scandinavian construct rather than a
Latin one.
Is it possible these words are not Latin?
|
|