414 THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. (The 10th. | 
prodigy, too exacting in its claims for the most extravagant credul- 
ity of modern days to regard with favour. As seen above, its name 
and that of Kraken are popularly used as synonymous. And never- 
theless, Pontoppidan, Bishop of Bergen, whose “Natural History 
of Norway” (translated into English m 1755) is the usual standard 
of authority on both subjects, treats of them separately in appro- 
priate sections of his work. Of the Kraken he says, “I come now 
to the third, and incontestably the largest sea-monster in the 
world: it is called Kraken, krasen, or, as some name it, krabben, 
that word being applied by way of eminence to this creature”. Its 
back or upper part he described as truly gigantic, bemg a mile 
and a half or more in circumference, and it is provided with limbs 
so strong as to be able to pull boats and the smaller sailing crafts 
under water. Some deem the original of this story to have been a 
Sepia or Medusa of enormous size; others set it down for an optical 
illusion; Pontoppidan himself thinks that “in all probability it may 
be reckoned of the polypi or of the starfish kind’. One cannot help 
being reminded, on reading the above, of the passage in Milton 
where he compares Satan, “prone on the flood’, to “That sea- 
ers tatemer ese &c. — 
“Commentators have been divided in opinion whether Milton 
supposed the leviathan to be a crocodile or a whale. The former 
idea derives little support from the text; the whale, which has 
only lately been divested of its “scaly rind”, puts forward more 
plausible pretentions: nevertheless, the vast bulk of the creature 
alluded to, and its position, “slumbring in the Norway foam”, 
suggest the inquiry whether the poet may not have had in his 
mind a tradition of the kraken. I may mention here that the 
Norwegian Bishop believed that the Leviathan of Job and Isaiah 
had been detected in the sea-serpent. Of the latter animal Pont- 
oppidan says: “The soe-ormen”’”’....... &e. 
“It would serve little purpose to occupy these pages with mere 
copies of the published narratives and depositions tending to prove 
the existence of the animal under our consideration. Whatever 
discrepancies may perplex us with regard to subordinate details, 
it is important to remember that the one ruling form, that of a 
serpent, is the foundation of all the descriptions. The form may 
vary — in length, perhaps, from forty to a hundred feet and 
upwards; in the relative dimensions of the head and different parts 
of the body; in the presence or absence of a mane or paddles; 
and more particularly with respect to an appearance of dorsal 
