Viking + Bigfoot = Myth

Some will argue that the earliest documented Bigfoot sighting was recorded when Leif Erickson visited the new world in 986 A.D. Many base this off of Samuel Morison's account of the Viking travels in his book The European Discovery of America - The Northern Voyages. (1971. Oxford University Press) In this account Erickson describes creatures as "monsters that were horribly ugly, hairy, swarthy and with great black eyes".  Also attributed to the creature is a horrible sounding howl or screech. Sounds convincing at first glance right?

 And although I do love the subject of Sasquatch I also believe in history and historical evidence. The sagas of Erickson are actually easy to read and understand. Since I wanted to know more about the first "American" Bigfoot encounter I read up on them.

As it turns out the term Skrelling (or Skellring) is used when talking directly about the native people. The Skrelling trade pelts, use weapons, speak native dialect, and build both boats and dwellings. I don't personally think these things combined are very sasquatch-ish.

When it comes to the physical descriptions of hairy creatures, both the original translations as well as Internet translation sources translate that phrase as "bad hair on their heads" and later on "ill looking and dark skinned". Other words taken directly from the sagas show what the Vikings thought, that the natives were quite ugly to them.

When I read the sagas I looked for wildlife references and found very few. Salmon are noted by name and said to be large. Other than that wildlife is virtually left out all together. In fact there is only one English translation that leads to the conclusion of a possible Sasquatch which translates to Skrelling being of course hair. In the other versions I read the translations all are very clear that Erickson is talking about the native people.

“People say they love truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true."
 
Robert J. Ringer