Because of remarks by the Trump administration, there has been a lot in the news again about buying or taking Greenland from Denmark. I think that based on the questionable historical accuracy of Norse sagas concerning the discovery of Greenland compared to the fact based modern historical record that the United States may actually have a valid claim to that arctic island that is better or as good as Denmark’s.

Also, the U.S. has considered purchasing Greenland on several previous occasions. The first was in 1866 when Secretary of State William Seward considered buying both Greenland and Iceland and in 1946 when the Harry Truman administration, concerned about Soviet activity in the Arctic, offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million in gold.

Norway’s claim to Greenland, which later passed to Demark by treaty, was based on tales of its discovery by that Viking roughneck Erik the Red. Born Erik Thorvaldsson he and his family were forced to leave Norway when his father committed manslaughter. So they sailed westward across the Atlantic to settle in Iceland where Erik grew into manhood and like his father had his own trouble with the law.

The first incident was a landslide dispute that began when Erik’s slaves, and you really have to wonder what they were up to, caused a landslide that destroyed a neighbor’s house.

A kinsman of the neighbor with the curious name of Eyiolf the Foul, killed the slaves in retaliation. Erik responded by killing Eyiolf and another man, leading to his banishment from his district in Iceland.

After moving to the island of Oxney, Erik still could not stay out of trouble. He entrusted his setstokkr, which was apparently a highly valued ornamental beam with some sort of mystical significance, to a neighbor named Thorgest. When Thorgest refused to return them, Erik took them by force, resulting in a battle where Erik killed Thorgest’s two sons and several other men.  I think these Vikings almost make Hamas look like a group of choir boys.

Following these killings, the local assembly declared him an outlaw and sentenced him to a three-year exile from Iceland. Because of his father’s previous banishment from Norway, Erik had nowhere to go but west, which we are told led to his exploration of what would come to be called Greenland. Around 982, Erik sailed to this little-known land.  According to the Saga of Erik the Red, Erik spent his three years of exile exploring this land. 

With his exile at an end he returned to Iceland. Erik must have been a great salesman. First he called his discovery Greenland hoping the name would attract settlers, ignoring the fact that its interior is covered by one of the largest ice sheets in the world.

By 985 AD he was able to convince more than 400 settlers to join him in colonizing Greenland. This group sailed in 25 boats of which only 14 made it to Greenland, the other 11 either turning back or lost at sea. Eventually settlements were established with Erik as their leader. He enjoyed great wealth but died in 1002 AD from a disease that ravaged the colony.

The Greenland colonies were abandoned gradually during the 14th and 15th centuries, due to the onset of some preindustrial climate change called the “Little Ice Age” which brought more storms, longer winters, and shorter springs reducing the availability of food for the colony.

What we know about Erik the Red and the settling of Greenland are found in ”Family Sagas” that are at best of only modest accuracy. They detail the lives of early settlers from 930 to 1030 CE but were written down 200 years later. While based on real people and genealogies, they often included exaggerations and historical inaccuracies stemming from their origin as oral traditions written down centuries after the events. Although the sagas focus on real people, they treated supernatural events as historical facts and often used creative fiction to explain the world around them.

U.S. Navy officer Robert Peary explored northern Greenland between 1886 and 1909 and claimed large areas for the United States, including a region later named Peary Land.  Unlike the Norse Sagas, his explorations were recorded in Geographic journals, magazines and books. Unfortunately the U.S. government did not officially annex these lands. In 1917, as part of the treaty to purchase the Danish West Indies now the U.S. Virgin Islands to prevent Germany from seizing the islands to use as a naval or U-boat base near the Panama Canal, the Wilson administration sadly agreed to relinquish all its territorial claims in Greenland and recognized Danish sovereignty over the entire island.

Based on the above a deep dive into history might show that the U.S. claim to Greenland is a valid one but Denmark would fight that claim. In the long run I believe there is a way to handle the matter.

Greenlanders want to be independent but are loath to do so because of the generous aid they receive from Denmark. If I were Donald Trump I would let the leaders of Greenland know that if they declare their independence the U.S. will replace that Danish aid and then some.

Greenlanders will rule with no interference from the U.S., but we will improve the nation’s infrastructure as we develop military bases and exploit Greenland’s natural resources in ways that will enrich the nation while providing jobs for its people. Sounds simple to me.

Thomas Kirkpatrick Sr. is a Silver Creek resident. Send comments to editorial@observertoday.com