Kraken
The kraken () is a legendary sea monster of enormous size said to appear off the coasts of Norway. Kraken, the subject of sailors' superstitions and mythos, was first described in the modern age at the turn of the 18th century, first in a travelogue by Francesco Negri in 1700, followed by writings by Dano-Norwegian natural history. Egede (1741) described the kraken in detail and equated it with the "hafgufa" of medieval lore, but the first description of the creature is usually credited to the Norwegian bishop Pontoppidan (1753). Pontoppidan was the first to describe the kraken as an  octopus (polypus) of tremendous size, and wrote that it had a reputation of pulling down ships, but the French malacologist Denys-Montfort of the 19th century is better known for these. The great man-killing octopus entered French fiction when novelist Victor Hugo (1866) introduced the "" octopus of Guernsey lore, which he identified with the kraken of legend, and this led to Jules Verne's depiction of the kraken, which he did not really distinguish between squid or octopus. The legend may have indeed originated from sightings of giant squid, which may grow to 13–15 meters (40–50 feet) in length . If Linnaeus wrote on the kraken, he only did so indirectly. Linnaeus had published on the "Microcosmus" genus (an animal with various other organisms or growths attached to it, comprising a colony). And these, including Bartholin's "cetus" called "hafgufa", and Paullini's "monstrous marinum". These have been referred to as "krakens" by subsequent authors. The claim that Linnaeus printed the vernacular name "kraken" in the margin of a later edition of "Systema Naturae" fails to be confirmed, and another claim that he published on the cephalopod species "Sepia microcosmus" has been shown to be erroneous, though these continue to  repeated as fact by modern-day writers. Etymology. The English word "kraken" (in the sense of sea monster) derives from Norwegian "kraken" or "krakjen", which are the definite forms of "krake". According to a Norwegian dictionary, "krake", in the sense of "malformed or crooked tree" originates from Old Norse "kraki", meaning "pole, stake". And "krake" in the sense of "sea monster" or "octopus" may share the same etymology. Swedish "krake" for "sea monster" is also traced to "krake" meaning "pole". However, Finnur Jónsson remarked that the "krake" also signified a grapnel (') or anchor, which readily conjured up the image of  a cephalopod. He also explained the synonym of "krake", namely horv was an alternate form of ' 'harrow' and conjectured that this name was suggested by the inkfish's action of seeming to plow the sea. Shetlandic "krekin" for "whale", a taboo word, is listed as etymologically related. Some of the synonyms of "krake" given by Erik Pontoppidan were, in Danish: , . The form "krabbe" also suggests an etymological root cognate with the German verb "krabben" 'to crawl". First descriptions. The first description of the "krake" as ""sciu-crak"" was given by Italian writer Negri in "Viaggio settentrionale" (Padua, 1700), a travelogue  about Scandinavia. The book describes the "sciu-crak" as a massive "fish" which was many-horned or many-armed. The author also distinguished this from a sea-serpent. The kraken was described as a many-headed and clawed creature by Egede (1741), who stated it was equivalent to the Icelanders' "hafgufa", but the latter is commonly treated as a fabulous whale. Erik Pontoppidan (1753) who popularized the kraken to the world noted that it was multiple-armed according to lore, and conjectured it to be a giant sea-crab, starfish or a "polypus" (octopus). Still, the bishop is considered to  have been instrumental in sparking interest for the kraken in the English-speaking world, as well as becoming regarded as the authority on sea-serpents and krakens. Although it has been stated that the kraken () was "described for the first time by that name" in the writings of Erik Pontoppidan, bishop of Bergen, in his "Det første Forsøg paa Norges naturlige Historie" "The First Attempt at [a] Natural History of Norway" (1752–53), a German source qualified Pontoppidan to be the first source on "kraken" available to be read in the German language. A description of the kraken had been anticipated  by Hans Egede. Denys-Montfort (1801) published on two giants, the "colossal octopus" with the enduring image of it attacking a ship, and the "kraken octopod", deemed to be the largest organism in zoology. Denys-Montfort matched his "colossal" with Pliny's tale of the giant "polypus" that attacked ships-wrecked people, while making correspondence between his kraken and Pliny's monster called the "arbor marina". Finnur Jónsson (1920) also favored identifying the kraken as an inkfish (squid/octopus) on etymological grounds. Egede. The "krake" (German, English: kracken) was described by Hans Egede in his "Det gamle Grønlands nye perlustration  (1729; Ger. t. 1730; tr. Description of Greenland ", 1745), drawing from the "fables" of his native region, the of Norway, then under Danish rule. According to his Norwegian informants, the kraken's body measured many miles in length, and when it surfaced it seemed to cover the whole sea, and "having many heads and a number of claws". With its claws it captured its prey, which included ships, men, fish, and animals, carrying its victims back into the depths. Egede conjectured that the "krake" was equitable to the monster that the Icelanders call "hafgufa", but as he has not obtained  anything related to him through an informant, he had difficuty describing the latter. According to the lore of Norwegian fishermen, they can mount upon the fish-attracting kraken as if it were a sand-bank ( 'fishing shoal'), but if they ever had the misfortune to capture the kraken, getting it entangled on their hooks, the only way to avoid destruction was to pronounce its name to make it go back to its depths. Egede also wrote that the krake fell under the general category of "sea spectre" ( ["søe"]-), adding that "the Draw" (, definite form) was another being within that sea  spectre classification. Hafgufa. Egede also made the aforementioned identification of "krake" as being the same as the "hafgufa" of the Icelanders, though he seemed to have obtained the information indirectly from medieval Norwegian work, the "Speculum Regale" (or "King's Mirror", ). Later in "Historie von Grönland" ("History of Greenland", 1765) also reported "kraken" and the "hafgufa" to be synonymous. An English translator of the "King's Mirror" in 1917 opted to translate "hafgufa" as "kraken". And the hafgufa from the 13th-century Old Norse work continues to be identified with the "kraken" in some scholarly writings, and if this equivalence  were allowed, the kraken-hafgufa's range would extend, at least legendarily, to waters approaching Helluland (Baffin Island, Canada), as described in "Örvar-Odds saga". The description of the "hafgufa" in the "King's Mirror" suggests a garbled eyewitness account of what was actually a whale, at least to some opinion. Halldór Hermannsson also reads the work as describing the "hafgufa" as a type of whale. Finnur Jónsson (1920) having arrived at the opinion that the kraken probably represented an inkfish (squid/octopus), as discussed earlier, expressed his skepticism towards the standing notion that the kraken originated from the "hafgufa . Pontoppidan. Erik Pontoppidan's Det første Forsøg paa Norges naturlige Historie" (1752, actually volume 2, 1753) made several claims regarding kraken, including the notion that the creature was sometimes mistaken for a group of small islands with fish swimming in-between, Norwegian fishermen often took the risk of trying to fish over kraken, since the catch was so plentiful (hence the saying "You must have fished on Kraken"). However, there was also the danger to seamen of being engulfed by the whirlpool when it submerged, and this whirlpool was compared to Norway's famed Moskstraumen often known as "the Maelstrom . Pontoppidan also described the destructive potential of the giant beast: it is said that if [the creature's arms] were to lay hold of the largest man-of-war, they would pull it down to the bottom". Kraken purportedly exclusively fed for several months, then spent the following few months emptying its excrement, and the thickened clouded water attracted fish. Later Henry Lee commented that the supposed excreta may have been the discharge of ink by a cephalopod. Taxonomic identifications. Pontoppidan wrote of a possible specimen of the krake, "perhaps a young and careless one", which washed ashore and died  at Alstahaug in 1680. He observed that it had long "arms", and guessed that it must have been crawling like a snail/slug with the use of these "arms", but got lodged in the landscape during the process. 20th century malacologist Paul Bartsch conjectured this to have been a giant squid, as did literary scholar Finnur Jónsson. However, what Pontoppidan actually stated regarding what creatures he regarded as candidates for the kraken is quite complicated. Pontoppidan did tentatively identify the kraken to be a sort of giant crab, stating that the alias "krabben" best describes its characteristics. However, further down  in his writing, compares the creature to some creature(s) from Pliny, Book IX, Ch. 4: the sea-monster called "arbor", with tree-branch like multiple arms, complicated by the fact that Pontoppidan adds another of Pliny's creature called "rota" with eight arms, and conflates them into one organism. Pontoppidan is suggesting this is an ancient example of "kraken", as a modern commentator analyzes. Pontoppidan then declared the kraken to be a type of "polypus" (octopus) or "starfish", particularly the kind Gesner called "Stella Arborescens", later identifiable as one of the northerly ophiurids or possibly more specifically as one of  the Gorgonocephalids or even the genus "Gorgonocephalus" (). This ancient "arbor" (admixed "rota" and thus made eight-armed) seems an octopus at first blush but with additional data, the ophiurid starfish now appears bishop's preferential choice. The ophiurid starfish seems further fortified when he notes that "starfish" called "Medusa's heads" ("caput medusæ"; pl. "capita medusæ") are considered to be "the young of the great sea-krake" by local lore. Pontoppidan ventured the 'young krakens' may rather be the eggs ("ova") of the starfish. Pontopiddan was satisfied that "Medusa's heads" was the same as the foregoing starfish ("Stella arborensis  of old), but Medusa's heads" were something found ashore aplenty across Norway according to von Bergen, who thought it absurd these could be young "Kracken" since that would mean the seas would be full of (the adults). The "Medusa's heads" appear to be a Gorgonocephalid, with "Gorgonocephalus spp. being tentatively suggested. In the end though, Pontoppidan again appears ambivalent, stating "Polype, or Star-fish [belongs to] the whole genus of Kors-Trold ['cross troll'], .. some that are much larger, .. even the very largest.. of the ocean", and concluding that "this Krake must be of the Polypus kind". By  this Krake here, he apparently meant in particular the giant "polypus" octopus of Carteia from Pliny, Book IX, Ch. 30 (though he only used the general nickname "ozaena" 'stinkard' for the octopus kind). Denys-Montfort. <!-- |upright=1.4|thumbnail|Kraken attacking merchant ship. Category:Mythological aquatic creatures|Monster Category:Mythological cephalopods Category:Scandinavian legendary creatures Category:Sea monsters