Chapter VI: Introduction: To the First Edition (3)

On the following day the indefatigable Barents “went on shoare on the south side of the States Iland, and layd a stone on the brinke of the water, to proue whether there were a tide, and went round about the iland to shoote at a hare; and returning”—as he says in the only writing undoubtedly of his original composition which has been preserved to us—“I found the stone as I left it, and the water neither higher nor lower; which prooueth, as afore, that there is no flood nor ebbe.” [158]

He could scarcely have returned on board before the fleet set sail from States Island, on their return to the strait; but the ice came in so thick and with such force, that they could not get through, and therefore had to put back in the evening. [159] Next day, however, they succeeded in again reaching Cape Dispute, where they anchored.

On the 11th, it was decided that they should once more sail towards the ice, for the purpose of removing all doubts as to the impossibility of proceeding; but they had not sailed three hours before they reached the firm ice, which stretched round in all directions, completely preventing all further passage. [160] They therefore returned and anchored at Cross Point, where they remained till the morning of the 14th, when Barents weighed his anchor and set his top mast, thinking once again to try what he could do to further his voyage; but the admiral, being of another mind, lay still till the 15th of September. [161]

On that day, as Linschoten relates in no very courteous language, “seeing how the weather had set in, the Amsterdammers thought better of the matter, and let their obstinacy somewhat abate (lieten hun obstinaetheyt wat sincken), agreeing to conform with all the rest.” [162] The following protest, which had been drawn up by Linschoten, was accordingly signed by Barents together with the other officers, [163] and the same day the whole fleet sailed out from the west end of the strait homeward bound.

PROTEST.

On this day, the 15th of September, 1595, in the country and in the
roads of the Cross Point, in the Strait of Nassau, where the ships
are now lying at anchor all together, by desire and command of the
admiral, Cornelis Cornelisz., the captains or pilots of all the
aforesaid ships being assembled and met together in the cabin of
the ship of the said admiral, in order that, jointly and each of
them severally, they may without dissimulation and freely declare
their opinion and final decision, and so consult together as to
what is best and most advantageous to be done and undertaken in
respect of the voyage which they have commenced round by the north
towards China, Japan, etc.; and they having maturely and most
earnestly considered and examined the subject, and also desiring
strictly to carry out, as far as is practicable and possible, the
instructions of His Excellency and the Lords the States, for the
welfare and preservation of the same ships, their crews and
merchandize: It is found that they have all of them hitherto done
their utmost duty and their best, with all zeal and diligence, not
fearing to hazard and sometimes to put in peril the ships and their
own persons (whenever need required it), in order to preserve their
honour in everything, and so as to be able with a clear conscience
to answer for the same to God and to the whole world. But inasmuch
as it has pleased the Lord God not to permit it on the present
voyage, they find themselves most unwillingly compelled, because of
the time that has elapsed, to discontinue the same navigation for
this time, being prevented by the ice caused by the severe and
unusually long frost, which, from what they have heard on the
information of others and from their own experience, has this year
been very hard and extraordinary in these parts. All which having
been well considered and discussed by them together, they find no
better means, being forced by necessity, than, with the first fit
weather and favourable wind, to take their course homewards, all
together and in the order in which they came, using every diligence
so as if possible to preserve themselves from the frost which is
momentarily expected to set in, and with God’s help to bring the
ships, before all the perils of winter, into a safe harbour;
inasmuch as at the present time no other better means can be found
to lead them to a better judgment. Protesting before God and the
whole world, that they have acted in this matter as they wish God
may act in the salvation of their souls, and as they hope and trust
cannot be gainsaid or controverted by any of those who have
accompanied them; and they willingly submit themselves to defend
this at all times, if requisite, by means of the fuller and more
detailed journals and notes, which each of them, separately and
without communication with the others, has kept thereof. And in
order that there may be no disorder or idle talking unjustly spread
abroad, to the disadvantage or derogation of those who with such
good will have braved so many perils for the honour and advantage
of our country, whereby they might be deprived of their merited
reward, they have, for their defence and in order to provide before
hand against the same, unanimously signed this Act, which I, Ian
Huyghen van Linschoten, have drawn up at their request, and
together with Françoys de la Dale, as chief commissioners of the
said fleet, have, with the like affirmation and in further
corroboration, in like manner signed, the day and date above
written.

Cornelis Cornelisz.
Brant Ysbrantsz.
Willem Barentsz.
Lambert Gerritsz.
Thomas Willemsz.
Harmen Ianssz.
Hendrick Hartman.
Ian Huyghen van Linschoten.
Françoys de la Dale.

It may well be conceived that it was no easy task for a bold and resolute sailor, and at the same time a devout and conscientious man, as William Barents undoubtedly was, to “protest before God, as he wished He might act in the salvation of his soul”, that it was impossible for him to do more than he had done, so long as his ship was staunch and he had a crew willing to go forward with him, or even to brave a winter residence in those inhospitable regions. Linschoten speaks of the dissentient Amsterdammers in the plural number; whence it is to be inferred that Barents did not stand alone, but that Harmen Ianszoon, the master of the other Amsterdam vessel, was at first of the same opinion; and, most probably, it was only when he yielded, that Barents saw himself, however reluctantly, forced to give in.

After the protest had been so signed, the fleet proceeded on its homeward voyage, and on the 30th of September reached Wardhuus, where it remained till the 10th of the following month. The vessels then again set sail all together; but the vice-admiral’s ship, the Hope, on board of which was Linschoten, managed to get the start of the rest, arriving at the Texel on the 26th of October. It was not till the 18th of the following month that Barents’s vessel arrived in the river Maas.

The journal of the proceedings of the fleet, which was kept by Linschoten in pursuance of his instructions, was communicated by him to the Government immediately on his arrival; but it was not till six years afterwards that he published his very interesting and valuable narrative of this voyage, as well as of that of the preceding year so far as concerns the Enkhuysen vessels, which had sailed through Yugorsky Shar—“Pet’s Strait” or the “Strait of Nassau”—into the Sea of Kara.

So little appears to be known by bibliographers respecting Linschoten’s narrative of these voyages, that we have scarcely the means of describing any other editions than those which happen to exist in the British Museum.

The earliest of these appeared in Dutch, in 1601, in folio, under the following title:—

Voyagie, ofte Schip-vaert, van Ian Hvyghen van Linschoten, van by
Noorden om langes Noorwegen, de Noortcaep, Laplant, Vinlant,
Ruslandt, de Witte Zee, de Custen van Candenoes, Swetenoes,
Pitzora, &c. door de Strate ofte Engte van Nassau tot voorby de
Revier Oby. Waer inne seer distinctelicken Verbaels-ghewijse
beschreven ende aenghewesen wordt, alle t’ghene dat hem op de selve
Reyse van dach tot dach bejeghent en voorghecomen is. Met de af
beeldtsels van alle de Custen, Hoecken, Landen, Opdoeningen,
Streckinghen, Coursen, Mijlen, ende d’ander merckelicke dingen
meer: Gelijc als hy’t alles selfs sichtelicken en̄ waerachtelicken
nae’t leven uytgeworpen ende gheannoteert heeft, &c. Anno 1594 en̄
1595.

Ghedruct tot Franeker, by Gerard Ketel.

The colophon has—

Ghedruct tot Franeker, by Gerard Ketel, voor Ian Huyghen van
Linschoten, resideerende binnen Enchuysen, anno 1601.

This rare edition consists of thirty-eight numbered leaves, with a dedication to the States General, dated June 1st, 1601, on two leaves unnumbered, and contains numerous maps and coast views by Johannes and Baptista a Doetechum. It was reprinted at Amsterdam in 1624, likewise in folio, with the same plates.

In the first edition, between the dedication and the text, are inserted several eulogistic poems, the longest of which is an ode on “Vaygats ofte de Straet van Nassau”, by C. Taemssoon van Hoorn, and another is a “Lof-dicht”, by Jacobus Viverius, which is directed to be sung to the tune of the forty-second Psalm. It is worthy of remark, that, even so early as 1595, allusion was made to the first north-east voyage of Linschoten in the commendatory verses (which included also the poem on Vaygats above referred to) at the commencement of the “Reys-gheschrift van de Navigatien der Portugaloysers in Orienten.........door Jan Huyghen van Linschoten. Amstelredam, MDXCV. folio”; which work, though it bears the date of 1595, the register shows to be a portion of the author’s “Itinerario, Voyage ofte Schipvaert van Jan Huygen van Linschoten naer Oost ofte Portugaels Indien”, the title-page of which is dated a year later. This was reprinted in 1604 with the same verses.

An abstract in Dutch of Linschoten’s narrative was printed at Amsterdam by G. J. Saeghman, in 4to., with the following title:—

Twee Journalen van twee verscheyde Voyagien, gedaen door Jan Huygen
van Linschooten, van by Noorden om, langhs Noorwegen, de
Noordt-Caep, Laplandt, Findlandt, Ruslandt, de Witte Zee, de Kusten
van Candenoes, Sweetenoes, Pitzora, etc., door de Strate ofte
Enghte van Nassouw, tot voorby de Reviere Oby, na Vay-gats, gedaen
in de Jaren 1594 en 1595. Waer in seer pertinent beschreven ende
aen gewesen wordt, al het geene hem op de selve Reysen van dagh tot
dagh voor gevallen is, als mede de Besschryvingh van alle de
Kusten, Landen, Opdoeningen, Streckingen en Courssen, etc.
T’Amsterdam, Gedruckt by Gillis Joosten Saeghman, in de
Nieuwe-Straet, Ordinaris Drucker van de Journalen ter Zee, en de
Reysen te Lande.

This has no date, but was probably printed in or about 1663, the year in which Saeghman printed the “Verhael van de vier eerste Schip-vaerden der Hollandtsche en Zeeuwsche Schepen naar Nova Zembla, etc.”, which will be more particularly described when we come to speak of the editions of Gerrit de Veer’s work.

We learn from Mr. Henry Stevens that a copy of this abstract is in the possession of John Carter Brown, Esq., of Providence, Rhode Island.

In 1610, appeared a French translation of Linschoten’s voyages, with the following title:—

Histoire de la Navigation de Iean Hvgves de Linscot, Hollandois, et
de son voyage es Indes Orientales: contenante diuerses descriptions
des Pays, Costes, Haures, Riuieres, Caps, et autres lieux iusques à
present descouuerts par les Portugais: Obseruations des coustumes
des nations de delà quant à la Religion, Estat Politic et Domestic,
de leurs Commerces, des Arbres, Fruicts, Herbes, Espiceries, et
autres singularitez qui s’y trouuent: Et narrations des choses
memorables qui y sont aduenues de son temps. Avec annotations de
Bernard Paludanus, Docteur en Medecine,...... à quoy sont
adiovstées quelques avtres descriptions tant du pays de Guinee et
autres costes d’Ethiopie, que des nauigations des Hollandois vers
le Nord au Vaygat et en la nouuelle Zembla. Le tovt recveilli et
descript par le mesme de Linscot en bas Alleman, & nouuellement
traduict en Francois. A Amstelredam, de l’Imprimerie de Theodore
Pierre, MDCX. folio.

Although the voyages to the north are thus announced in the title-page, they are not inserted in the only copy which we have been able to consult, namely, that in the British Museum; nor is any light thrown on the matter by bibliographers.

In the title of the third edition, published at Amsterdam in 1638, fol., these northern voyages are not announced, nor are they given, but the edition is described as “troixiesme édition augmentée”.

The second French edition has not fallen within our reach, but we believe the date to be 1619.

The only French version of Linschoten’s narrative of his northern voyages with which we are acquainted, is that inserted in the fourth volume of the “Recueil de Voiages au Nord”, published in eight volumes, Amsterdam, 1715–27, 12mo.; of which another edition, in ten volumes, 12mo., was published at the same place, 1731–38.

This French version formed the basis of the German description of these voyages given by Johann Christoph Adelung, at pp. 107–213 of his Geschichte der Schiffahrten, published at Halle, 1768, 4to.

An abstract of Linschoten’s work is given in Latin, at fol. 31 of the first volume of Blaeu’s “Atlas Major sive Cosmographia Blaviana, qua Solum, Salum, Cœlum accuratissime describuntur”. Eleven volumes in folio, Amsterdam, 1662.

In the French edition, entitled “Le Grand Atlas ou Cosmographie Blaviane”, etc., 12 vols. in folio, Amsterdam, 1663, and republished in 1667, the same appears at fol. 35 of the first volume of the latter edition, which is the only one in the British Museum.

It is also at fol. 52 of the first volume of the Spanish edition, entitled “Atlas Mayor, Geographia Blaviana”, etc.; Amsterdam, 1659–72, 10 vols., fol.

In the elaborate dissertation on the works of John Blaeu, contained in the fourth volume of Clement’s “Bibliothèque Curieuse”, mention is made, at page 277, of an “Atlas Flamand de l’an 1662”. This is apparently a Dutch edition, to which reference is made by Lütke, under the title of “J. Blaeu’s Grooten Atlas, of Werelt Beschrijving, Erste Deel, ’t Amsterdam, 1662”. Beyond this reference, we know nothing of that edition.

A German edition is also described by Brunet as announced in a catalogue of Blaeu’s; but it is not alluded to by Clement, nor can we find any other trace of it. If ever printed or in progress of printing, it may have been consumed in the great fire, by which, on the 22nd February, 1672, nearly all Blaeu’s stock in trade was destroyed.

In part XII, pp. 20–23, of Levinus Hulsius’s Collection, is an extract from Linschoten’s Navigation, stating the progress of the Dutch in the attempt to find the passage, the discovery of which formed a favourite scheme of his countrymen at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries.

Summaries more or less concise, derived apparently from Blaeu’s abstract, the French “Recueil de Voyages au Nord”, or Adelung’s “Geschichte der Schiffahrten”, have also been given in most of the histories of Arctic discovery.

Gerrit de Veer’s description of the second voyage, contained in the present volume, must be understood to relate almost exclusively to the proceedings of Barents’s vessel, as forming one of the fleet under Nai’s command. This reconciles or explains away such differences as may appear to exist between his narrative and that of Linschoten.

Seeing the signal failure of the second expedition, the States General, after mature deliberation, decided that no further attempt should be made at the public expense to discover a north-east passage. Nevertheless, they were still willing to encourage any private undertaking, by the promise of a considerable reward in the event of success. [164] And Plantius and Barents persisting in their opinion that a passage might be effected by the north of Novaya Zemlya, the authorities and merchants of Amsterdam were induced to take on themselves the fitting out of another expedition to proceed in that direction. It consisted of only two vessels—the names and tonnage of which are not mentioned—of which the one was commanded by Jacob van Heemskerck, who was also supercargo, and the other by Jan Corneliszoon Rijp, in the like double capacity. Barents accompanied Heemskerck, with the rank of chief pilot (opperste stuerman). Surprise has been expressed that though Barents thus occupied a subordinate station, yet in the narrative of the voyage he is made to perform the principal part. This is, however, a mistake, arising from the fact that in the abridgements and summaries of this narrative, which alone appear to have been consulted by modern writers, most of the personal matters are omitted. For it will be seen that in De Veer’s original work, the skipper (or “maister”, as he is called in Phillip’s translation) is repeatedly mentioned, and Barents’ subordinate position is clearly and unequivocally shown. [165]

A better founded cause of surprise might be, that Barents himself had not the command of the expedition. Yet for this a sufficient reason suggests itself. He was evidently resolved to perform (as it were) impossibilities, rather than fail in a project on which he had set his heart; and the merchants, however willing to risk their property on the adventure, may naturally have been disinclined to entrust it absolutely to one, who would not have hesitated to sacrifice it, or even his own life, in the attempt to accomplish his long-cherished undertaking.

In being made subordinate to a nobleman like Jacob van Heemskerck, who, though no seaman by profession, had already sailed with him, and had thus had an opportunity of learning and appreciating his many estimable qualities, Barents, a man of humble birth, could however in no wise have felt himself humiliated or aggrieved. It was a case similar to that of Sir Hugh Willoughby and Richard Chancellor, and was moreover quite in accordance with the practice of those times, which afford repeated instances of the command of a naval expedition being entrusted to a soldier, who had probably never before been on salt water.

But while Heemskerck thus held the superior rank of captain, Barents’s relation to him was evidently that of an equal, rather than that of an inferior. This is particularly evidenced in the conversation which took place between them shortly before Barents’s death, when the latter called his nominal commander “mate”. [166] And that the crew looked on Barents as virtually the leader of the expedition is shown, not only by their appeals to him on all important occasions, but by the curious fact that in the signatures to the “letter” which they wrote on the eve of their departure from their winter quarters, [167] the name “WILLEM BARENTSZ.” is printed in capital letters, while that of Heemskerck, though placed in rank above Barents’s name, is only in ordinary type, like those of the rest of the crew.

We have now to take a rapid glance at some of the most important results of this third voyage, into the particulars of which, as they are recorded in De Veer’s journal, it is unnecessary to enter.

The experience of the two former voyages appears to have impressed Rijp, even more than Barents himself, with the expediency of giving the land to the east a wide sea room; for, notwithstanding that they at first steered their course much more to the northward than before, yet it was not long before disputes arose between them, Barents contending that they were too far to the west, while Rijp’s pilot asserted that he had no desire to sail towards Vaigats. [168] Barents gave way; and the result was, that on the 9th of June they came to a small steep island, in latitude 74° 30′, to which they gave the name of Bear Island, from the circumstance of their killing there a large white bear. [169]

Seven years later this island was visited by Stephen Bennet, who called it Cherie Island, after his patron, Master (subsequently Sir) Francis Cherie, a distinguished member of the Russian Company. This latter name has usually been inscribed in our English maps, though unjustly, inasmuch as the merit of the first discovery of the island unquestionably belongs to the Dutch. Captain Beechey says, indeed, that “a passage in Purchas seems to imply that it had been known before Barents made this voyage;” [170] but the only passage bearing on the subject which we have been able to find, is the statement of Captain Thomas Edge, in “A briefe Discouerie of the Northern Discoueries of Seas,” etc., that the Dutch came “to an iland in the latitude of 74 degrees, which wee call Cherie Iland, and they call Beare Iland,” [171] as if the former name had been given before the latter. It is to be hoped that in future English maps, the original and correct name will always be inserted.

From Bear Island our adventurers continued their course northwards, and on the 19th of June, when in latitude 79° 49′ N., they again saw land, [172] which was supposed by them to be a part of Greenland, but which subsequent investigation has shown to be the cluster of islands known by the name of Spitzbergen. Round this land they coasted till the 29th, when they again sailed southwards towards Bear Island. [173]

The first discovery of this country by our Dutch navigators is now universally admitted, though formerly the idea was entertained that they had been anticipated by Sir Hugh Willoughby. But that Spitzbergen was actually circumnavigated by them is a fact which, as far as we are aware, has never been adverted to by any writer on Arctic discovery. The details of this portion of Barents’ and Rijp’s voyage are neither full nor precise enough to enable us to follow them minutely in their course; added to which, the maps of Spitzbergen, especially of its eastern side, are still not sufficiently trustworthy to render us much assistance in laying down their track. There can, however, be no doubt that they sailed up its eastern shores, passed along its northern extremity, and returned by the western coast. That part of Spitzbergen which they first saw in 79° 49′ N. lat., seems to be the south-east coast of the Noord Ooster Land of the Dutch maps, along which they sailed in a westerly direction, and entered Weygatz or Hinlopen Strait. This assumption agrees with the above latitude and with those of the subsequent positions in 79° 30′ [174] and 79° 42′, [175] as also with the time it took—several days—to get out of that strait. The two havens described under the date of June 24th, [176] may be the Hecla Bay and Lomme Bay of Parry. The considerable bay or inlet (gheweldigen inham) under 79°, to which they came on the following day, and “whereinto they sailed forty miles at the least, holding their course southward”, [177] can only be Weide Bay. Finding that its southern extremity “reached to the firme land”, they were forced to work their way back against the wind, till they “gate beyonde the point that lay on the west side, where there was so great a number of birds that they flew against their sailes”. [178] This point, in consequence, received the name of Bird Cape. From thence their course is plainly to be traced along the western coast of Spitzbergen, and so back to Bear Island.

On the 1st of June, when near that island, disputes again arose between Rijp and Barents as to the course which they should take. The result was that they separated, Rijp returning northwards, while Barents proceeded southwards because of the ice. [179]

Of Rijp’s subsequent proceedings nothing is known except that he is stated to have sailed back to Bird Cape, on the west side of Spitzbergen, whence he returned with the intention of going after Barents. [180] How far he carried his intention into effect is not said; but nothing worthy of remark can have occurred to him, or otherwise it could not have failed to be recorded. We may therefore conclude that he soon gave up his search after Barents and returned to Holland, and that, in the following year, he went from thence on a trading voyage to the coasts of Norway or Russia, and was on the point of sailing from Kola on his way home, when Heemskerck and the survivors of his crew arrived there, as is related by De Veer. [181]

Meanwhile Barents, having cleared the ice, held on his course to the east till he reached the western shore of Novaya Zemlya, in about latitude 73° 20′, [182] whence he coasted along the land till he had passed considerably beyond the furthest point reached by him on his first voyage, and had rounded the north-eastern extremity of that country. Here, being at length quite shut in by the ice, and unable to make his way either forwards towards the north-east, or round by the eastern side of the land, or even back again by the way he had come, he and his adventurous companions, on the evening of the 26th of August, “got to the west side of the Ice Haven, where they were forced, in great cold, poverty, misery, and grief, to stay all that winter.” [183]

Before adverting to the subject of the memorable wintering of the Dutch at this spot, it is necessary to make a few remarks with respect to the identification of the several points along the coast, which were reached and noted by them during the course of their first and third voyages. This is the more needful, because widely different opinions are entertained by two of the highest living authorities on the subject, Admiral Lütke and Professor von Baer.

The former, as is well known, was engaged in surveying the Northern Ocean between the years 1821 and 1825, during which period he visited many parts of the western coast of Novaya Zemlya between its southern extremity and Cape Nassau to the north, and identified most of the points visited by the Dutch, which he laid down in the map accompanying the published account of his four voyages, to the German translation of which allusion has already been made. Professor von Baer, on the other hand, who also made a scientific visit to Novaya Zemlya in the year 1837, read in the preceeding year, before the Imperial Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, a “Report of the latest Discoveries on the Coast of Novaya Zemlya”, an illustration of a map of that country constructed by a pilot in the Russian navy, named Zivolka; of which report a German translation is published in Berghaus’s “Annalen der Erd-Vôlker- und Staatenkunde.” [184]

In this report the learned Professor comes to widely different conclusions from those of Lütke with respect to the identification of the several stations visited by the Dutch; the great point of difference between them being, that Baer bases his arguments almost exclusively on the distances along the western coast of Novaya Zemlya recorded by De Veer, especially in the Table given near the end of his third voyage. [185]

This Table, however, we cannot but regard as little better than a mere list of the various stations reached by the Dutch on their return voyage; the distances, and even the bearings, therein recorded, being quite untrustworthy, as may indeed be perceived on the most cursory inspection. Every allowance has, of course, to be made for any inaccuracies that may exist in that Table, in consideration of the circumstances under which the return voyage was made; but, even were we to assume the distances sailed by them in their two small open boats to have been correctly noted down, still there is a sufficient reason for contending that those distances, in themselves, are no sure guide, but, on the contrary, only lead to very erroneous conclusions. For, on a comparison of them with the differences of latitude recorded by De Veer,—which, as being the results of astronomical observations made by so experienced a navigator as Barents was, are subject only to the imperfections of the instruments employed by him,—it will be seen that the former, especially between Langenes and Cape Nassau, are throughout much too small. No reason is given by De Veer for this discrepancy; and, indeed, it would be difficult to account for it, were it not for the fact established by the observations of Admiral Lütke, that a very powerful current from south to north sets along the western coast of Novaya Zemlya as far as Cape Nassau. The velocity of this current was ascertained by that intelligent seaman to be as much as sixty miles per diem, [186] and owing to it he frequently found himself in a latitude from forty-five to fifty-five miles further north than was shown by his dead reckoning. [187] A remarkable confirmation of this fact is afforded by Henry Hudson’s journal of his visit to Novaya Zemlya, printed in the Appendix to the present work, [188] in which, under the date of 28th June 1608, it is stated that, between eight o’clock on the previous evening and four o’clock in the morning, they were drawn back to the northwards, by a stream or tide, as far as they were the last evening at four o’clock. Applying this, then, to the case of our Dutch navigators, we obtain a satisfactory explanation of the apparent discrepancies in their several data.

Having premised thus much, and remarking further that the southern portion of the coast of Novaya Zemlya, and also the northern coast of Russia, require no discussion here, we shall proceed to the investigation of the position of the principal points between Langenes and Cape Nassau, with respect to which a difference of opinion exists. The former point (as has already been stated) is that which was first approached by Barents on his first voyage. On the 4th of July 1794, he found himself, by observation, in latitude 73° 25′, being then about five or six miles west of Langenes,—a low projecting point reaching far out into the sea. [189] This agrees best with the Dry Cape (Trockenes Cap) of the Russian map, which lies in latitude 73° 45′; and Lütke accordingly identifies Langenes with it. Baer, however, contends for Britwin Cape, [190] which, after Dry Cape, is the nearest projecting point of importance. But that cape lies a whole degree further to the south, and would consequently differ as much as 40′ from Barents’s observed latitude; and such a difference is more than we are justified in admitting, inasmuch as 15′ or 20′ must be taken as the maximum of error.

The next point to be noted is Loms Bay, which is stated by De Veer to lie under 74⅓°; [191] the observation not being further particularized, as in most other cases. This would make its difference of longitude from Langenes to be 55′; whereas, in De Veer’s map, the difference is only 20′. Lütke [192] identifies Loms Bay with Cross Bay, though without sufficiently stating his reasons for so doing. Baer [193] follows Lütke’s example, saying, however, still less on the subject. The latitude of Cross Bay is 74° 10′ (Lütke says 74° 20′, but this must be an error, as his map shows 10′, as does that also of Ziwolka), making a difference of 25′ from Dry Cape. This would agree with De Veer’s map, and might, in this case, constitute a reason for considering the latitude of Loms Bay, as stated by him in his text in so very general a way, less trustworthy than that in his map. De Veer also gives [194] a separate plan of Loms Bay, which neither Lütke nor Baer alludes to, evidently from their not being acquainted with it. On a comparison of this special plan, as also of De Veer’s general chart, with the Russian maps, it seems much more probable that Loms Bay is not Cross Bay, but the bay immediately to the south of it. For Cross Bay is, in fact, not a bay, but an extensive inlet, of which the end has not yet been explored, and which is indeed regarded by the best Russian authorities as forming a strait or passage completely across Novaya Zemlya, and communicating with Rosmuislov’s Unknown Bay. [195] The Dutch, however, anchored in Loms Bay, went ashore, erected a beacon there, and made a plan of the surrounding country; so that they must assuredly have ascertained whether Loms Bay was a bay or strait. Moreover, they distinctly describe a “great wide creek or inlet” [196] as lying to the north-east of Loms Bay, which is also shown in their plan, and which cannot be any other than Cross Bay itself; and from this alone it would seem to follow that the bay to the south of that inlet must be Loms Bay. Had Lütke made a careful survey of the bay, which he was prevented from doing, and had he also been acquainted with the Dutch plan, he would no doubt have been able to set this point at rest. Meanwhile we deem ourselves justified, from what has been adduced, in regarding the Flache Bay of Lütke, or the Seichte Bay of Ziwolka (both terms meaning “Shallow Bay”), as the Loms Bay of the Dutch; and hence Cross Bay will be their “great wide creek or inlet,” while Lütke’s Cape Prokofyev and Wrangel’s Island [197] will be respectively their “Capo de Plantius” and their “small Island seawards from the point.”

The Admiraliteyts Eyland of the Dutch [198] is unquestionably the Admiralty Island or Peninsula of the Russians, there not being any other point to the northward which answers to the description. Its latitude is not given; but the Dutch and Russian maps agree satisfactorily.

Capo Negro, or De Swart Hoeck (Black Point), is stated to be in latitude 75° 20′, [199] and answers to the first prominent cape in Lütke’s maps, after passing Admiralty Island, which lies in 75° 28′.

Willems Eyland [200] is the Wilhelms Insel of Lütke, and the Bücklige Insel of Ziwolka. For this point the elements of Barents’s observation for latitude are given, and they can consequently be checked. It is most satisfactory to find that it differs only 9′ from the latitude given in the Russian maps, the former being 75° 56′, and the latter 75° 47′. This also confirms the probable correctness of the identifications of Admiralty Island and Black Point.

De Hoeck van Nassau, placed by Barents in 76° 30′, [201] can be no other than Lütke’s Cape Nassau, in 76° 34′. Not only does the latitude agree within 4′, but likewise its general bearing. There is also another point of correspondence. It was not till the Hollanders reached Cape Nassau that their real difficulties began, especially on the first voyage. This was the most northerly point ever attained by Lütke, and twice did he come within sight of this cape, but without being able to reach it. Adverse winds and currents seem always to prevail here, even in the height of summer. Baer differs, however, [202] from Lütke’s opinion, and regards his Cape Nassau as the north-easternmost point of Novaya Zemlya, and identical with either the Ice Cape or Cape Desire of the Dutch, while he places their Cape Nassau much further down towards the south-west, though without being able to fix its precise position. But, for the reasons which have already been adduced, we feel bound to dissent entirely from the learned Professor’s conclusions; and we cannot but think that, had he been acquainted with De Veer’s original narrative, he too would have seen that Lütke’s general identifications cannot well be disturbed.

As regards the north-eastern portion of Novaya Zemlya beyond Cape Nassau, Lütke justly argues [203] that the general accuracy of Barents’s coast-line, as far as he has been able to check it,—namely, as far as Cape Nassau,—warrants the assumption that those parts which lie beyond that cape are in a similar degree correct; and, accordingly, he adopts from the Dutch map the entire extent of country to the eastward of Cape Nassau, as laid down in De Veer’s chart. This sound conclusion is, however, impugned by Baer, [204] who does not hesitate to erase the whole from his predecessor’s map, and to round off the north-eastern extremity of Novaya Zemlya at a short distance beyond Cape Nassau.

Nevertheless, after mature consideration of the entire subject, we are bound to declare that not only do we concur in Lütke’s opinion generally, but we must add that no part of the coast of Novaya Zemlya was so thoroughly explored by Barents as just that portion which Baer has thus thought fit to dispute. Barents traced that coast no less than four times, and his observation of the longitude of his winter station, which has now for the first time been accurately calculated by Mr. Edward Vogel (assistant at Mr. Bishop’s observatory), [205] shows a difference of only about twenty-five miles in the distance between that spot and Cape Nassau, as laid down in Gerrit de Veer’s chart:—a result which, as being derived from totally independent data, is conclusive as to the general accuracy of that chart.

Consequently, without waiting for any corroboration to be obtained from future surveys, we deem it perfectly safe to reinsert in our maps the north-eastern portion of Novaya Zemlya, which has been omitted on the authority of Zivolka and Baer. This is a matter not without importance, inasmuch as an extent of at least ten thousand square geographical miles will thereby be restored to the Russian dominions. And we likewise consider it due to the memory of the first and only explorer of this region, that it should bear the specific designation of “Barents’s Land,” which name is accordingly given to it in the accompanying map. To that portion of Novaya Zemlya which lies between Barents’s Land and Matthew’s Land, we have further thought that no more fitting appellation can be given than “Lütke’s Land,” in honour of that able navigator, who has done more for the geography of Novaya Zemlya than any one since the time of Barents.

For a considerable portion of the preceding remarks on the geography of Novaya Zemlya we are indebted to Mr. Augustus Petermann, who has otherwise rendered us much assistance during the progress of our labours, and by whose care the track of Barents on his several voyages has been laid down in the accompanying charts, [206] from the data furnished by Gerrit de Veer’s journals. The route from Kildin to Langenes on the first voyage, was found by him to agree precisely with the true distance between the former place and Dry Cape; but the route from Bear Island to the coast of Novaya Zemlya, on the third voyage, from its not being so minutely described, could only be laid down approximately. Those along the more northerly portion of Novaya Zemlya are sufficiently correct, and some of them are exceedingly precise, as has been shown in the preceding pages.

On these voyages a number of soundings were taken in an otherwise unknown sea, the value of which will be appreciated by nautical men. Those to the north of Novaya Zemlya are most important. In about latitude 77° 45′, the highest point reached by Barents, they give a depth of one hundred and fifty fathoms, without bottom; [207] showing the unlikelihood of the existence of any other land in that vicinity. We feel persuaded that navigators of all nations will concur with us in the propriety of distinguishing the mare innominatum between Spitzbergen and Novaya Zemlya by the appellation of “the Spitzbergen, or Barents’s Sea,” as it is called in Mr. Petermann’s chart.

Barents made so many discoveries and traced so large an extent of coast, both of Spitzbergen and Novaya Zemlya, that the surveys of the whole of our recent explorers, put together, are insufficient to identify all the points visited by him. One inference is obvious, namely, that an able, fearless, and determined seaman like Barentz might yet achieve much in those seas. Admiral Lütke was twice prevented by the ice from proceeding beyond Cape Nassau; but he frequently alludes to the unfitness of his vessel to venture among the ice, and gives it clearly as his opinion, at the end of his work, [208] that better success might be expected from vessels similar to those despatched from England to the Arctic regions.

The ten months’ residence of Barents and his companions at the furthest extremity of Novaya Zemlya, has so often formed the subject of comment on the part of writers on Arctic discovery, that we deem it unnecessary to dilate on it here, especially as our other introductory remarks have already extended to so great a length.

There can be no doubt that their stay at this particular spot was a forced one. At the same time, when we bear in mind that, on the second voyage in the year preceding, Barents and his colleague, Harman Janszoon, proposed that two of the vessels should winter in the Sea of Kara; and that, on the fitting out of this third expedition, they took up “as many vnmarryed men as they could, that they might not be disswaded, by means of their wiues and children, to leaue off the uoyage;” [209] it will not be unreasonable to infer that they went fully resolved and prepared, if obliged, to winter in those inhospitable regions.

No words are sufficient to extol their exemplary conduct during their long and miserable stay there. Though no means are afforded of determining the precise degree of cold to which they were exposed, various incidents narrated by De Veer prove that it must have been intense; and it was not merely a sharp clear cold, which the experience of other Arctic explorers has shown may be borne to an almost inconceivable degree, but it was accompanied by terrific storms of wind and snow, so that “a man could hardly draw his breath,” [210] and they “could hardly thrust their heads out of the dore.” [211] One advantage was however derived from the snow which fell in such quantities as completely to cover up their house, and thereby imparted to it a degree of comparative warmth, without which it is most probable that their residence in it would not have been endurable.

Yet during the whole time perfect order, discipline, and subordination, joined to the greatest unanimity and good feeling, prevailed among them. Scarcely a murmur passed their lips; and when, in the beginning of May, after they had remained shut up more than eight months, and the weather had the appearance of favouring their departure, some of the men “agreed amongst themselues to speake unto the skipper (Heemskerck), and to tell him that it was more than time to see about getting from thence”; [212] still each man was reluctant to be the spokesman, “because he had given them to understand that he desired to staie vntil the end of June, which was the best of the sommer, to see if the ship would then be loose”. [213] And even when at length they “agreed to speake to William Barents to moue the master to goe from thence”, De Veer is careful to explain that “it was not done in a mutinous manner, but to take the best counsell with reason and good advice, for they let themselves easily be talked over.” [214]

Gerrit De Veer’s simple narrative has further an air of unaffected and unostentatious piety and resignation to the will of Providence, which contrasts remarkably with the general tone of Linschoten’s works, of which some instances have been given in the preceding pages; and we may perceive that the reliance of himself and his comrades on the Almighty was not less firm or sincere because His name was not incessantly on their lips. Cheerfulness, and even frequent hilarity, could not fail to be the concomitants of so wholesome a tone of mind; and these, joined to the bodily exercise which they took at every possible opportunity, and the labour which they were compelled to perform in preparing for their return voyage, must have been very instrumental in preserving them from sickness.

Still, with all the means employed to keep themselves in health,—and of these warm bathing was no inconsiderable one,—it would be wrong to imagine that they were able to preserve themselves from that dreaded scourge of Arctic navigators, the scurvy. Lütke observes [215] that “it is most remarkable that in the account of their long sufferings this disease is not once mentioned, and that of seventeen men only two died in Novaya Zemlya.” But it is from having known only the abbreviated translations of Gerrit de Veer’s journal that the Russian admiral has been led to view the position of those unfortunate men in this favourable light. For we see from De Veer’s narrative, [216] that as early as the 26th of January, 1597, when one of the crew died, he had even then long lain seriously ill: and two days later it is expressly stated, [217] that, from their having “long time sitten without motion, several had thereby fallen sick of the scurvy.” Indeed, when we consider what they had to undergo for six months, during which period we find it positively recorded that they suffered from the scurvy, until on the 28th of July they first met with a remedy, [218]—and how long previously the disease had shown itself among them cannot be said,—it is almost miraculous that only five (not two) out of the seventeen should have fallen victims to it.

The tradition of the memorable wintering of the Hollanders in the Ice Haven (Ledyanoi Gávan) is still preserved among the Novaya Zemlya morse and seal hunters, who call the spot where they so resided Sporai Navolok. It is not known however whether any remains of the Behouden-huis, or “house of safety”, have ever been found. [219]

The most remarkable occurrence during their stay in Novaya Zemlya, was the unexpected reappearance of the sun on the 24th of January, 1597. This phenomenon not only caused the greatest surprise to the observers and their companions, but after their return to Holland gave rise to much controversy among the learned men of the day. Their opinion generally was unfavourable to the truth of the alleged fact, as being “opposed to nature and to reason”. Among these was Robert Robertsz. le Canu, “homme fort entendu en l’art de la marine, et qui faisoit profession de l’enseigner aux autres”, who wrote a letter on the subject to William Blaeu, the father of the celebrated John Blaeu, which was published by the latter in his Great Atlas. This letter shall be reproduced here, not merely on account of its giving the objections which were raised at the time, but because it likewise contains some curious matters relating personally to our author and his companions, which it would be wrong to omit.

Mon bon amy Guillaume Jansse Blaeu,

Puisque vous m’avez témoigné desirer que je vous envoyasse un
extrait du discours que j’ay eu avec Jacob Heemskerck, Gerard de
Veer, Jean Corneille Rijp, et plusieurs autres de mes escoliers,
lesquels ayant fait voile en l’an 1596, retournerent en 1597, sans
avoir rien effectué touchant la commission qu’ils avoyent de
reconnoistre les Royaumes de la Chine, & du Cathay, & dans la mesme
année 1597 me vinrent trouver pour me raconter les merveilleuses
aventures de leur voyage, entre lesquelles la plus remarquable
estoit, que le Soleil leur estoit disparu le IV de Novembre en l’an
1596, & avoyent commencé de le revoir l’an 1597 le 24 de Ianvier,
sous la mesme hauteur de 76 degrez, sous laquelle ils avoient basty
leur maison dans la Nouvelle Zemble, matiere suffisante, ainsi
qu’ils ont escrit, pour exercer long-temps les beaux esprits: &
puis qu’outre vostre propre satisfaction vous me conviez encor à
vous declarer mon sentiment sur ce sujet par l’advis que vous me
donnez des contentions & debats survenus à cette occasion entre
tous les sçavans de l’Europe, je veux vous faire un court recit du
Dialogue que j’ay eu là dessus avec tous ces Messieurs que j’ay
deja nommez, qui avoyent esté spectateurs d’une chose si
extraordinaire, & qui me la raconterent avec grand estonnement; je
raisonnois donc avec eux comme il s’ensuit: