Chapter VII: Introduction: To the First Edition (4)

Considerant en moy mesme qu’ils avoient passé plus de dix semaines
dans un jour perpetuel sans avoir eu aucune nuict, & que pendant un
si long espace de temps le ciel n’avoit pas tousjours esté si clair
qu’on pût, à la faveur de sa lumière, marquer & compter exactement
chaque tour que le Soleil faisoit à l’entour de la terre, je leur
demandois s’ils estoient bien asseurez, qu’il fust le IV de
Novembre lors qu’ils perdirent de veuë le Soleil, d’autant qu’il
estoit en ce temps-là plus de 15 degrez vers le Sud par delà la
ligne; ils me respondirent qu’ils avoyent tousjours eu devant eux
leurs horologes, & leurs sables, en sorte qu’ils n’avoyent pas le
moindre sujet de douter de cette verité. Je m’enquestay de plus, si
leurs horologes, ou leurs monstres, n’avoient jamais manqué, ou
s’ils n’avoyent jamais trouvé leurs sables vuides; & voulus outre
cela sçavoir d’eux, de combien la Lune estoit âgée lors que le
Soleil leur avoit failly: ils demeurerent court à cette
interrogation; ce qui me donna lieu de croire qu’ils n’avoyent pas
bien compté les jours, & que la supputation qui leur marquoit pour
le IV de Novembre, le jour que le Soleil commença à s’absenter
d’eux, estoit fausse. Mais supposé, dis-je, que vous ayez si bien
rencontré dans vostre calcul qu’il fust alors le IV de Novembre,
que mesme vous ayez avec tres-grande justesse compassé tous les
jours d’Esté, d’où pouvez vous tirer certaine asseurance de ne vous
estre pas mesconté d’un seul jour pendant l’Hyver, que la nuit
duroit des onze semaines entieres, puisque vous demeuriez la
pluspart du temps comme ensevelis dans vostre maisonnette, & que
pour la crainte des extremes froidures, des tourbillons de neiges &
des autres rigueures, auxquelles ce climat est exposé durant une si
rude saison, vous n’osiez tant seulement mettre le nez dehors, & ne
pouviez par consequent voir ny Soleil, ny Lune, ny Estoilles.
Gerard de Veer me respondit, qu’ils avoyent perpetuellement veu
l’estoille Polaire par le trou de leur cheminée, par où ils avoyent
encor remarqué tres-distinctement tous les tours que la grande
Ourse faisoit à l’entour de ce Pole; joint qu’ils avoyent tousjours
eu devant eux des monstres, des horologes, & des sables, auxquels
ils prenoyent tres-soigneusement garde tous les jours. Je ne voulus
pas entrer en dispute avec luy là dessus, mais je ne pûs prendre
ses raisons pour argent comptant, & je n’en demeuray nullement
persuadé, veu mesme qu’en Esté ils estoyent assez empeschez à se
defendre de l’attaque des Ours, ainsi qu’ils disoient; & en Hyver
souvent occupez à la chasse des renards: de sorte que, selon mon
advis, ils n’avoient pas tousjours le loisir de vaquer comme il
faut aux observations celestes, ny de gouverner leurs monstres,
horologes, & sables avec l’assiduité necessaire, lesquelles,
peut-estre, ils ont fort souvent trouvé vuides, ou detraquées par
la gelée. Vous croyez donc, Maistre Robert, comme vous nous donnez
à entendre par vos raisons, repartit Iacob Heemskerck, que nous
nous sommes grandement abusez dans nostre calcul? Je n’ay pas cette
croyance là seulement, respondis je, mais de plus une ferme
persuasion, que la faute en est si grande, qu’il vous est
impossible de sçavoir au vray si vous estiez pour lors à la fin de
Ianvier, ou au commencement de Febvrier: car bienque je leur fisse
plusieurs interrogations pour apprendre en quelles parties du ciel
ils avoyent veu la Lune, les Planetes & les Estoilles, & par quel
moyen ils avoyent pris leurs hauteurs le 24 de Janvier, auquel jour
ils disoyent que le Soleil s’estoit monstré à eux, comme aussi pour
sçavoir si c’estoit à six heures du soir, ou à minuit, ou le
lendemain à six heures du matin, et dans quel rombe cette
apparition s’estoit faite, ils ne sceurent neantmoins respondre à
aucunes de mes demandes, d’autant qu’en ce temps-là ils avoyent
manqué de faire telles observations: c’est pourquoy je conclus,
qu’ils s’estoyent bien mespris dans leur compte de la valeur de dix
ou onze jours, ou plus. Le lendemain ils accoururent tous chez moy,
pour me dire qu’ils sçavoyent bien en quel endroit estoit la Lune
le 24 de Janvier, mais je leur respondis que la lecture de quelques
doctes Ephemerides les avoit rendu bien sçavans depuis quelques
heures, & leur avoit enseigné ce qu’ils ignoroient hier lors que je
leur en fis la demande. Gerard de Veer, qui a esté escrivain de la
navigation vers le Nord, me tint plusieurs discours aussi mal
fondez que les precedents, lesquels je m’estois au commencement
proposé de rediger par escrit; mais par apres je ne l’ay pas jugé
necessaire, & m’en suis abstenu, par ce qu’il est demeuré ferme
dans son opinion, & qu’il a du depuis fait imprimer son Journal,
dans lequel il a deduit tout au long cette histoire dans la page
34, & 35, mais escritte en autres caracteres que le reste, afin
qu’elle fust plus remarquable, [220] comme on peut voir dans ce
mesme livre imprimé à Amsterdam, en l’année 1598, où il escrit, que
tres-voluntiers il rendra compte de son dire: mais je n’ignore pas
quel est le compte, que Gerard de Veer a rendu & envoyé à Martin
Everard de Bruges, demeurant pour lors à Leyde, qui le luy avoit
auparavant demandé par lettre escritte à ce sujet; car luy mesme
m’a monstré cette lettre, et demandé advis de ce qu’il devoit faire
pour le mieux: je luy dis, que tout le conseil que j’avois à luy
donner, estoit qu’il reconnust sa faute, & confessast ingenuement,
que luy, & toute sa compagnie s’estoyent pû mesprendre de quelques
petites journées pendant le grand jour d’Esté qu’ils avoyent eu; &
que pendant la longue nuit d’Hyver, ils en avoyent peu laisser
escouler quelques petites, sans y prendre garde, pendant lesquelles
les insupportables rigueurs du froid les auroient accablez de
sommeil: mais toutes mes remonstrances ont esté vaines; car il
n’avoit pas mis en lumière son Journal pour le corriger par apres;
et jusques à la fin de sa vie il est demeuré dans l’erreur que ses
observations estoyent tres-asseurées: & ce Gerard de Veer a bien
sceu dans son Journal renfermer 56 jours entre le 24 de Ianvier &
le 21 de Mars, dans lequel il escrit que le Soleil estoit pour lors
elevé sur leur Horizon de 14 degrez seulement, au lieu que dans le
mesme temps de ces 56 jours il devoit avoir monté sur le mesme
Horizon à la hauteur de 19 degrez. Je tire cette conclusion de ce
que Gerard de Veer a bien sceu faire entrer 13 ou 14 jours de trop
dans le mesme espace compris entre le 24 de Ianvier & le 21 de
Mars, lesquels il n’a pas craint d’inserer en son Journal, afin de
maintenir & d’affermir son opinion, mais il n’a parlé d’aucune
declinaison: de sorte que je demeure tousjours ferme dans ma
premiere conclusion, à sçavoir, que durant la grande nuit d’Hyver
d’onze semaines, le sommeil les avoit pû gaigner si souvent, & si
long-temps, qu’il estoit le 6 ou 7 de Febvrier, lors qu’ils ont
creu, à cause de leur assoupissement, qu’il n’estoit que le 24 de
Ianvier, lesquels jours ils ont expres enfermez entre le 24 de
Ianvier et 21 Mars, afin de triompher par leurs belles
observations, et d’abuser ainsi les sçavans, & leur donner matiere
de dispute touchant le Iournal de Gerard de Veer. Je laisse aux
autres la liberté de juger ce que leur plaira sur cette affaire,
mais je crois que Gerard de Veer ressemble au Sacristain qui fait
aller l’horologe, laquelle n’ayant pas une fois sonné l’heure comme
le Soleil marquoit, & quelques-uns luy demandant la raison de cette
erreur, il respondit que le Soleil pouvoit mentir, mais que son
horologe ne mentoit jamais: [221] ainsi il me semble que Gerard de
Veer a plustost voulu rejetter la faute sur le Soleil, sur la Lune,
& sur les Estoilles, que de confesser pendant sa vie que son calcul
estoit faux. Voilà en peu de mots ce que j’ay à respondre sur
vostre demande, car je n’ay jamais crû, ny ne puis croire encor à
present, que le Soleil, à quelque hauteur qu’il fust le IV de
Novembre, pourveu qu’il passast par delà la ligne 15 degrez vers le
Sud, manquast à paroistre sur l’Horizon, et commençast à se
monstrer au mesme lieu le 24 de Janvier, eloigné de la ligne de
plus de 19 degrez vers le Sud, & se retrouvast justement à la
hauteur de 14 degrez sur le mesme Horizon; de façon que ce que
Gerard de Veer escrit dans son Journal page 39, contrarie la nature
& raison. C’est pourquoy je repete encor, que pendant le grand jour
d’Esté ils ont obmis à compter quelques revolutions du Soleil; de
mesme que durant la grande nuict d’Hyver le sommeil leur a derobé
beaucoup de temps, & qu’ils n’ont pû asseurement dresser leur
Journal comme auroient fait ceux qui auroient pû soirs & matins
distinguer en jour & en nuict le temps de 24 heures, et compter
ainsi nettement & exactement toutes les journées; chose impossible
à faire aux Pilotes de la Navigation vers le Nord, & auxquels il
faut pardonner en cette occasion; avec cela je finis. Le 15
Septembre, 1627. [222]

From this letter of Robert le Canu it will be perceived, that the fact of the sun’s disappearance on the 4th of November 1596 was equally denied by him with that of its reappearance on the 24th of January following. The former, though differing in degree, was, as far as regards the fact itself, deemed not less abnormal and “opposed to nature and to reason” than the latter. It is therefore of importance to demonstrate that the particulars recorded by Gerrit de Veer concerning the sun’s latest appearance and final disappearance, are in all respects absolutely and literally true.

On the 2nd of November, he states that the sun “did not show its whole disk, but passed in the horizon along the earth.” On that day, in latitude 75° 45′ (which was their true position, and not 76° as they supposed), the sun’s declination was—14° 53′,3; and the complement of the elevation of the Pole being 14° 15′, the sun’s centre was actually 38′3 below the horizon. But, with an assumed temperature of—8 Fahr., the refraction would have been as much as 39′,3; and, as “the land where they were was as high as the round-top of their ship”, an assumed height of thirty feet would give 5′,4 for the dip of the horizon. Hence, according to theory, 6′,4 more than the half of the sun’s disk should have been visible; that is to say, 22′ or 23′, or about seven-tenths of the entire disk. Consequently De Veer’s statement in this respect is literally true. On the following day the sun’s centre was actually 56′,9, and its upper edge about 40′,9, below the horizon. But the refraction 39′,3 and the dip 5′,4, would have raised it 44′,7 to the sight; so that 3′,8 or nearly twelve-hundredths of the sun’s disk ought still to have been visible. De Veer speaks therefore the pure truth when he says that, on the 3rd of November, “they could see nothing but the upper edge of the sun above the horizon.” [223] On the day afterwards the sun’s declination was 15° 30′,5, and consequently its centre was 1° 15′,5, and its upper edge 59′,5, below the horizon. And taking the sum of the refraction and the dip at 44′,7, the sun’s upper edge would have been actually 14′,8 below the visible horizon. Strictly in accordance with this, we have De Veer’s statement on the 4th of November, “but that we saw the sunne no more, for it was no longer aboue the horizon”.

Had Gerrit de Veer and his companions been weak enough to give way to the dogmatical assertion of their teacher, that “pendant le grand jour d’esté ils avoyent omis à compter quelques revolutions du soleil”, they might perhaps at the time, and during the two centuries and a half which have since elapsed, have enjoyed some little more credit than has been accorded to them; but they would eventually have deprived themselves of that triumphant vindication of their character for perfect truthfulness and sincerity which it is our good fortune to be the means of now affording to them.

The reappearance of the sun on the 25th of January 1597, is not, at least for the present, capable of so complete and satisfactory an explanation. But hitherto the subject has never been properly understood, because the facts have never been correctly stated. One of the most recent examinations of this phenomenon is that made by the Rev. George Fisher, in his remarks “On the Atmospheric Refraction,” contained in the “Appendix to Captain Parry’s Journal of a Second Voyage, etc.”, published in 1825.

Mr. Fisher’s words are:—“The testimony of De Veer, who wrote the particulars and who accompanied Barentz to Nova Zembla in his third voyage, where he wintered in latitude 76° N., in the year 1596–7, has been so often called in question, with respect to his account of the re-appearance of the sun, that it is but justice to state that he appears to be perfectly correct, and his observations consistent with those made during this voyage. [224] He reports that he, in company with two others, saw the edge of the sun from the sea side, on the south side of Nova Zembla, on the 24th of January (or the 3rd of February, new style) at which time the sun’s declination when it passed the meridian in that longitude was about 16° 48′ S., and therefore the true meridian depression of the upper limb at noon was 2° 32′ nearly, which ought to have been the amount of the refraction [so] that the limb might have been visible. Now, if the observation at the least apparent altitude observed on the 23rd January, 1823, at Igloolik, which was 8′ 40″, be reduced to the horizon, by observing the rapid law of increase in the refraction visible in the series of observations made on that day, the horizontal refraction cannot be estimated at less than 2° 30′, and which, if increased by the apparent dip (which sometimes amounts to more than 20′ in the winter time, as I have mentioned when speaking of the terrestrial refraction), will be quite sufficient to render the upper limb visible; and there is still less difficulty in believing that they ‘saw the sunne in his full roundnesse above the horizon’ three days afterwards, since the daily motion in declination at that time of the year is nearly 18 minutes to the northward.

“M. Le Monier, from the observations made on these two days, assures us that there must have been more than 4½ degrees of refraction, and that he ‘could neither explain these observations, reject them as doubtful, nor suppose any error, as was done by most other astronometers.’ How this conclusion has been deduced from the facts related in the Journal does not appear, neither is there the least occasion to reject as doubtful the simple and honest account of the Dutchmen.”

Now the facts of the case are in reality as follows:—In the first place, the Dutch reckoned their time according to the new style, which had already been adopted in the Netherlands. This is not only to be deduced from the correspondence of their several astronomical observations with this reckoning alone; but it also admits of direct proof from the express statement of William Barents, in his note on the tides at States Island, that the dates were “stilo novo.”

In the next place, Gerrit de Veer states explicitly that he and two of his companions “saw the edge of the sun” on the 24th of January, and that on the 27th of that month they “all went forth and saw the sunne in his full roundnesse a little aboue the horrison”; and again, that on the 31st they “went out and saw the sunne shine cleare”; and lastly, on the 8th of February, they “saw the sun rise south south-east, and went down south south-west.” On the intervening days, the weather being cloudy or otherwise unfavourable, they had no opportunity of observing the sun. [225]

Now, according to theory, the sun’s upper edge ought not, in 75° 45′ north latitude, to have been visible till the 9th of February; so that on the 25th of January (not the 24th, as De Veer erroneously supposed), at mid-day, the extraordinary and anomalous refraction was as much as 3° 49′, and on the 27th of that month it could not have been much, if at all, less. On the 8th of February, however, when they “saw the sun rise S.S.E. and go down S.S.W.”, the entire refraction would have been 2° 10′,7, which is about one degree and a half more than according to theory it ought to have been; and on the 19th of the latter month, when they took the sun’s height, the refraction had again attained its normal amount.

Without attempting any explanation of the phenomenon thus described, what we have now to do is to show that Gerrit de Veer and his companions could not possibly have been materially in error with respect to their dates.

Commencing then from the 4th of November, when it has been demonstrated that their time was strictly correct, we have their subsequent astronomical observations on December 14th and January 12th, which establish that till the latter date they were still right in their time. If, therefore, they lost their reckoning at all, it must have happened between the 12th and the 25th of January—an interval of only thirteen days; and certainly neither their oversleeping themselves (assuming them to have done so), nor any error, however great, in the rate of their twelve hours’ sand-glass, could in that short interval have occasioned any gross miscalculation with respect to the time of a phenomenon which extended over a period of fourteen days. Then again, on the 19th of February, and also on the 2nd of March, they obtained by similar astronomical observations the means of checking their time; so that it is utterly impossible for them to have fallen into any material error. The mistake of a few hours, which caused them to place the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter, and consequently the reappearance of the sun, on the 24th instead of the 25th of January, is only an additional proof in favour of their general correctness, as it is just such an error as they were likely to fall into from their inability to measure their time with strict precision.

But the fact of the conjunction itself has yet to be noticed. De Veer tells us that they had watched the approach of the two planets to each other, till at length they came together in a certain direction and at a certain time; and that contemporaneously with this occurrence the sun reappeared. Now there was no other conjunction of those two planets till 27¼ days later, namely, at noon on the 21st of February, and at that date the sun had been at least nine days above the horizon; besides which, the conjunction would not have been visible, on account of the daylight. Consequently, if the conjunction on the 25th of January is not intended, the whole account must be an invention and a fabrication. And to suppose this would assuredly be imputing to De Veer, not only more deceit, but also very much more skill than he possessed. For, even assuming him to have been capable of calculating the place of Jupiter and the time of that planet’s setting, he would have found (as Mr. Vogel has now found) that at the time of the conjunction that planet had already set 1 hour and 48 minutes, and was at the time actually 2° 44′ below the horizon; and it is altogether too much to suppose that he would have adduced a conjunction, which according to calculation was invisible, as evidence of another phenomenon which was equally opposed to the recognized laws of nature.

We have therefore no alternative but to receive the facts recorded by De Veer as substantially true, and to believe that owing to the peculiar condition of the atmosphere, there existed an extraordinary refraction, not merely on the 25th of January, but continuously during fourteen days afterwards, at first amounting to nearly four degrees, but gradually decreasing to about one degree and a half.

The true facts of the case having at length been clearly made out, they are left for elucidation by those who are best qualified to investigate and explain them. The problem is a curious, and, with our still insufficient knowledge of the laws of atmospheric refraction in high latitudes, a difficult one. Nevertheless we may confidently rely on the result being such as eventually to establish the entire veracity of our Dutch historian. [226]

With respect to the personal history of Gerrit de Veer we know almost nothing. From his familiar allusion to “the salt hills that are in Spaine”, it is to be inferred that he had visited that country at some time previously to the year 1595, when he joined Barents’s second expedition. From Robert le Canu’s letter we learn that he had studied navigation under him, and also that his death occurred some time previously to the year 1627, when that letter was written. The position of his name in the two lists of the crew of Heemskerck’s vessel, between those of the first mate and the surgeon, shows that he was one of the officers—probably the second mate; and we learn incidentally that he was a small man, “being the lightest of all their company”. More than this we know not.

Of the various editions, abridgments, and summaries of De Veer’s work, we have collected the following particulars.

The first printed account of these interesting voyages was published in Dutch at Amsterdam in the year 1598, under the following title:—

Waerachtighe Beschryvinghe van drie seylagien, ter werelt noyt soo
vreemt ghehoort, drie jaeren achter malcanderen deur de
Hollandtsche ende Zeelandtsche schepen by noorden Noorweghen,
Moscovia ende Tartaria, na de Coninckrijcken van Catthay ende
China, so mede vande opdoeninghe vande Weygats, Nova Sembla, en̄
van’t landt op de 80. gradē, dat men acht Groenlandt tezijn, daer
noyt mensch gheweest is, ende vande felle verscheurende Beyren ende
ander Zeemonsters ende ondrachlijcke koude, en̄ hoe op de laetste
reyse tschip int ys beset is, ende tvolck op 76. graden op Nova
Sembla een huijs ghetimmert, ende 10. maenden haer aldaer onthouden
hebben, ende daer nae meer als 350. mylen met open cleyne schuyten
over ende langs der Zee ghevaren. Alles met seer grooten perijckel,
moyten, ende ongeloofelijcke swaricheyt. Gedaen deur Gerrit de Veer
van Amstelredam.

Ghedruckt t’Amstelredam, by Cornelis Claesz, op’t water, int
Shrijf-boeck. Ao. 1598. Oblong 4o.

This rare and valuable book, a copy of which is in the British Museum, does not appear to have been hitherto noticed by bibliographers. It contains sixty-one numbered leaves, in addition to the Dedication on two leaves not numbered, six maps by Baptista à Doetechum, and twenty-five plates, which are coloured. The title-page also bears a plate, in eight partitions, four of which contain reductions from plates in the volume.

The following is a translation of Gerrit de Veer’s Dedication.

To the Noble, Mighty, Wise, Discreet, and very Provident Lords, the
States General of the United Netherlands, the Council of State, and
the Provincial States of Holland, Zeeland and West Friesland; and
also to the most illustrious Prince and Lord, Maurice, born Prince
of Orange, Count of Nassau, Catzenellenbogen, Vianden, Dietz, etc.,
Marquis of Vere and Flushing, etc., Lord of St. Vyt, Doesburg, the
city of Grave, and the countries of Kuyct, etc., Stadtholder and
Captain-General of Gelderland, Holland, Zeeland, West Friesland,
Utrecht, and Overyssel, and Admiral of the sea; and to the Noble,
Honorable, Wise, and Discreet Lords, the Commissioners of the
Admiralty in Holland, Zeeland, and West Friesland.

My Lords: the art of navigation, which in utility surpasses nearly
all other arts, has now in these latter years and within the memory
of man been wonderfully improved, and has more especially
contributed to the welfare of these States. This has been mainly
the result of the skilful use and practice of navigation, and of
the measurement of the latitudes and bearings of countries
according to the rules of mathematical science; whereby countries
lying on the very confines of the world have been reached, and
their products imported for our use. Thus this child of Astrology
has proved of greater service on the ocean than on land; for, there
it is merely a science, whereas here its usefulness is so much
extended, that various bearings, courses, headlands, and
promontories unmentioned by Ptolemy and Strabo, and unknown for a
long period after that time, have now become known by the
investigations and experiences of this science. And as many
previously unknown places were not found till after repeated
search, so now three unsuccessful trials have been made from these
States to find a passage round by the north to the kingdoms of
Cathay and China; which although hitherto unsuccessful, have not
been altogether useless, nor have they shown the attempt to be
hopeless. For these reasons I have drawn up a brief description of
the three aforesaid voyages (in the last two of which I myself was
engaged), which were made from these States by the north of Norway,
Muscovy, and Tartary, towards the aforesaid kingdoms of Cathay and
China. And I have done so because many interesting circumstances
happened in those voyages, and because I think that the right
course may still be discovered; inasmuch as the direction and
position of Vaygatz and Nova Zembla, and also the eastern part of
Greenland (as we call it) in 80°, are now ascertained, where it was
formerly thought there was only water and no land; and because
there in 80° it was less cold than at Nova Zembla in 76°, and in
80° aforesaid, in June early in the summer, plants and grass were
growing and beasts that feed on grass were found, while on the
contrary in 76°, in August in the hottest of the summer, there were
found neither plants nor grass, nor animals that feed on grass.
From all which it appears that it is not the proximity of the Pole
which causes the ice and cold, but the Sea of Tartary (called the
Frozen Ocean), and the proximity of the land, round about which the
ice remains floating. For, in the open sea between the land
situated in 80 degrees and Nova Zembla, which lie at a distance of
full 200 (800) miles E.N.E. and W.S.W. of each other, there was
little or no ice; but as often as we approached land we immediately
fell in with the cold and the ice. Indeed, it was by means of the
ice that we always first perceived that we were near land before we
saw the land itself. At the east end of Nova Zembla also, where we
passed the winter, the ice drifted away with a W. and S.W. wind,
and returned with a N.E. wind. Hence it certainly appears, that
between the two lands there is an open sea, and that it is possible
to sail nearer to the Pole than has hitherto been believed; and
this notwithstanding that ancient writers say that the sea is not
navigable within 20 degrees of the Pole because of the intense
cold, and that therefore nobody can live there; whereas we have
both been as far as 80 degrees, and in 76 degrees have with small
means passed the winter; and thus it appears that the said passage
may be effected between the two above-named countries by taking a
N.E. course from the North Cape in Norway. This too was the opinion
of the renowned pilot Willem Barentsz., as well as of Jacob
Heemskerck, our captain and supercargo, who would have dared to
undertake it by keeping that course, its accomplishment being left
to God’s mercy. Yea, notwithstanding that on our last voyage,
through our manifold difficulties, we were entirely exhausted and
ofttimes in peril of death, yet our courage was not so broken but
that if our ship (which became fast in the ice) had been set free a
little sooner, we would once more have made the attempt in that
direction, as a proof that we believed the passage might thereby
have been effected; although this last voyage had been very
troublesome, wherein we (speaking without vanity) made no account
either of labours, difficulties, or danger, in order to bring it to
a successful end, as will appear from the relation thereof; but
neither the time nor the opportunity permitted it. And as the
aforesaid three voyages were made through the gracious assistance
of your Lordships, and thus the fruits which may still result from
them belong to your Lordships, I have taken the liberty of
dedicating to you this narrative, which, if not an eloquent, is at
least a faithful one.

Praying to God that he will bless with success the government of
your Lordships, in honour of his name, and for the welfare of these
States,

Your noble, mighty, illustrious, wise, and provident Lordships’
obedient servant,

Gerrit de Veer.

From Amsterdam, the last day but one of April, in the year 1598.

Stuck, in his Verzeichnis von aeltern und neuern Land und Reise-beschreibungen, mentions an edition of De Veer’s work [227] in 1599; but this appears to be purely an error in date,—1599 for 1598,—as he leaves it to be inferred that he alludes to the first edition. It was reprinted at Amsterdam in 1605, at the same press.

Another edition was brought out, as the first part of a collection of early Dutch voyages at Amsterdam, with the following title:—

Oost-Indische ende Uvest-Indische voyagien, Namelijck, De
waerachtighe beschrijvinge vande drie seylagien, drie Jaren achter
malkanderen deur de Hollandtsche ende Zeelandtsche Schepen, by
noorden Noorweghen, Moscovien ende Tartarien nae de Couinckrijcken
van Catthay ende China ghedaen.

Tot Amsterdam. By Michiel Colijn, Boeck-verkooper, op’t Water, in’t
Huys-boeck, aen de Kooren-marckt. 1619. Oblong 4to.

This edition contains eighty numbered leaves. De Veer’s Dedication is omitted. The plates are copies from those in the former editions, but smaller and reversed. The colophon reads:—

Ghedruckt tot Enchuysen, by Jacob Lenaertsz. Meyn, Boeckvercooper
op de Nieuwe straet int vergulden schrijfboeck. Anno 1617.

Latin. In the same year that the first edition of these voyages was published in Dutch, viz., 1598, a Latin translation was brought out at Amsterdam by the same publisher. The translator signs himself C. C. A., and dates his preface, Leyden, July 7th (“nonis Julij”) 1598; thereby showing that little more than two months had elapsed since the appearance of the original work. It bears the following title:—

Diarivm Navticvm, seu vera descriptio Trium Navigationum
admirandarum, & nunquam auditarum, tribus continuis annis factarum,
à Hollandicis & Zelandicis navibus, ad Septentrionem, supra
Norvagiam, Moscoviam & Tartariam, versus Catthay & Sinarum regna:
tum ut detecta fuerint Weygatz fretum, Nova Zembla, & Regio sub 80.
gradu sita, quam Groenlādiam esse censent, quam nullus unquam
adijt: Deinde de feris & trucibus vrsis, alijsque monstris marinis,
& intolerabili frigore quod pertulerunt. Quemadmodum præterea in
postrema Navigatione navis in glacie fuerit concreta, & ipsi nautæ
in Nova Zembla sub 76. gradu sita, domum fabricarint, atque in ea
per 10. mensium spatium habitarint, & tandem, relictâ navi in
glacie, plura quam 380. milliaria per mare in apertis parvis
lintribus navigarint, cum summis periculis, immensis laboribus, &
incredibilibus difficultatibus. Auctore Gerardo de Vera
Amstelrodamense.

Amstelredami, ex Officina Cornelij Nicolaij, Typographi ad symbolum
Diarij, ad aquam. Anno M.D.XCVIII. Folio.

This edition contains forty-three numbered leaves, and has the same plates and maps as the Dutch edition; but the Dedication is omitted. A copy is in the British Museum.

French. In the same year, and probably near the same time as the preceding edition, appeared a French translation under the following title:—

Vraye Description de trois Voyages de mer tres admirables, faicts
en trois ans, a chacun an vn, par les navires d’Hollande et
Zelande, av nord par derriere Norwege, Moscovie, et Tartarie, vers
les Royaumes de China & Catay: ensemble les decouvremens du Waygat,
Nova Sembla, & du pays situé souz la hauteur de 80 degrez; lequel
on presume estre Greenlande, où oncques personne n’a esté. Plus des
Ours cruels & ravissans, & autres monstres marins: & la froidure
insupportable. D’avantage comment a la derniere fois la navire fut
arrestee par la glace, & les Matelots ont basti vne maison sur le
pays de Nova Sembla, situé souz la hauteur de 76. degrez, où ils
ont demeuré l’espace de dix mois: & comment ils ont en petittes
barques passé la Mer, bien 350. lieues d’eaue; non sans peril, a
grand travail, & difficultez incroyables. Par Girard Le Ver.

Imprimé a Amstelredam par Cornille Nicolas, sur l’eaue, au livre à
écrire. Anno M.D.XCVIII. folio.

This edition contains forty-four numbered leaves, and the same plates and maps as the original Dutch edition. There is a copy in the Grenville Library. It was reprinted in 1600 and in 1609. There is a copy of the edition of 1609 in the British Museum, in which the same plates and maps occur as in the first Dutch edition.

An edition in 8vo. was published at Paris by Chaudière in 1599, under the title of “Trois navigations admirables faites par les Hollandois et les Zélandois au Septentrion.”

Italian. An Italian translation, which was made at the instance of Gioan Battista Ciotti, by whom it is dedicated to Gasparo Catanei, appeared at Venice in 1599, in Italic characters. Its title runs thus:—

Tre Navigationi fatte dagli Olandesi, e Zelandesi al Settentrione
nella Norvegia, Moscovia, e Tartaria, verso il Catai, e Regno de’
Sini, doue scopersero il Mare di Veygatz, La Nvova Zembla, et vn
Paese nell’ Ottantesimo grado creduto la Groenlandia. Con vna
descrittione di tvtti gli accidenti occorsi di giorno in giorno a’
Nauiganti, Et in particolare di alcuni combattimenti con Orsi
Marini, e dell’ eccesiuo freddo di quei paesi; essendo nell’ ultima
Nauigatione restata la Naue nel ghiaccio, onde li Marinari
passorono infinite difficoltà, per lo spatio di diece mesi, e
furono forzati alla fine di passare con li Batelli trecento miglia
di Mare pericolosissimo. Descritte in Latino da Gerardo di Vera, e
Nuouamente de Giouan Giunio Parisio Tradotte nella lingua Italiana.

In Venetia, presso Ieronimo Porro, e Compagni. 1599. 4to.

It contains seventy-nine leaves, with copies of the usual maps and plates, but badly executed.

This was reprinted in the third volume of the 1606 edition of Ramusio’s Navigationi et Viaggi.

English. The only other language, as far as we are aware, into which De Veer’s work has been translated, is English; the first and only edition of which translation, now extremely scarce, is that reproduced in the present volume.

ABRIDGEMENTS.

German. The first and most important German edition of De Veer’s narrative was an abridgement, published at Nuremberg by Levinus Hulsius, the dedication of which bears date the 10th of August, 1598, being little more than three months after that of the original Dutch work. Its title runs thus:—

Warhafftige Relation der dreyen newen vnerhörten seltzamen
Schiffart, so die Holländischen vnd Seeländischen Schiff gegen
Mitternacht, drey Jar nach einander, als Anno 1594, 1595 vnd 1596
verricht. Wie sie Nortwegen, Lappiam, Biarmiam, vnd Russiam, oder
Moscoviam (vorhabens ins Königreich Cathay vnd China zukommen)
vmbsegelt haben. Als auch wie sie das Fretum Nassoviæ, Waygats,
Novam Semblam, vnd das Land vnter dem 80. Gradu latitud. so man
vermeint das Groenland sey, gefunden: vnd was für gefahr, wegen der
erschröcklichen Bern, Meerwunder, vnd dem Eyss, sie aussgestanden.
Erstlich in Niderländischer sprach beschrieben, durch Gerhart de
Ver, so selbsten die lezten zwo Reysen hat helffen verrichten, jezt
aber ins Hochteutsch gebracht, Durch Levinum Hulsium. Noribergæ,
Impensis L. Hulsij. Anno 1598. 4to.

Translator’s dedication two pages. Preface twelve pages. An address to the reader, headed and subscribed “Gerardus de Veer,” four pages. Text one hundred and forty-six numbered pages. Thirty-five plates and maps. The colophon reads:—

Gedruckt zu Nürnberg, durch Christoff Lochner, In verlegung Levini
Hulsii, anno 1598.

It was re-issued in the year 1602, as the “Dritter Theil” of Hulsius’s celebrated collection of voyages. This is, however, merely a duplicate of the edition of 1598, excepting the first sheet, which has been reprinted, apparently with the view of affording Hulsius an opportunity of alluding, on the fourth page of his Preface, to the publication of the beautiful book (“schones Buch”) of Linschoten the year before. The dedication is dated Nuremberg, 6th February.

A “secunda editio,” considerably abridged, appeared from the same press in the same year (1602), with the dedication dated Frankfort, 1st August: the text of this extends only to one hundred and twenty-one pages, and the address to the reader and colophon are omitted. In his dedication, Hulsius informs us, as a reason for this rapidity of republication, that upwards of 1,500 copies of the former edition had already been disposed of, and that the demand for the work was still very great.

A third and fourth edition, yet further abridged, and similarly forming the “Dritter Theil” of Hulsius’s collection, appeared respectively in the years 1612 and 1660.

Copies of all these editions are in the Grenville Library in the British Museum.

This work of Hulsius enjoys a degree of credit among bibliographers, to which intrinsically it would hardly seem to be entitled. On the title-page, and also in the publisher’s dedication, it professes to be a translation from the Dutch of Gerrit de Veer. But it is neither this, nor is it a true and genuine abridgement. On the contrary, copious omissions are made throughout, while at the same time passages are frequently introduced, which are not to be found in the original. It would be an almost endless task, and one quite out of place here, to attempt a collation of the two works. Still it is expedient that a specimen should be adduced of the liberties which Hulsius has taken with his author; and for this purpose the commencement of his narrative of the second expedition (pages 16–18) shall be given verbatim.

Im Jar nach unserer Erlösung 1595, sein von den Unirten Ständen in
Holl und Seeland, &c., und dem Duchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürsten
und Herren, Herren Mauritz, Grafen zu Nassaw, &c., siben Schiff
vorhabens, damit den Weg durch Waygats, und das Fretum Nassoviæ,
nach Cathay und China zufinden, zugerüstet worden: zwey zu
Amsterdam, zwey in Seeland, zwey zu Enckhausen, und einss zu
Roterdam. Deren sechs mit allerley Kauffmanns Wahren, unnd mit Geld
beladen gewest, das sibende aber, war ein Pinasse, welche befehl
hatte, wann die andern sechs Schiffe, umb den Capo oder
Promontorium Tabin (so dass eusserste Eck der Tartarey gegen
Mitternacht ist) gefahren weren, dass er als dann also bald wider
nach Holland um̄wenden und von den andern Schiffen zeittung bringen
solte.

Das Admiral Schiff war ein Boyer, von Middelburg, genandt der
Greiff, vermöchte 80 Last, das ist 3200 Centner ein zu laden, hatte
22 Stuck Eysern Geschütz, so Kügel 5 oder mehr pfunden geschossen,
auch zehen Mörser oder Pöler, und sein auff disem Schiff 64 Mann
gewesen.

Sein Jacht Schiff war ein Flieboot von Armuien in Seeland von 25
Last, oder 1000 Centner, darauff waren 8 stück, so 2 oder 3 Pfund
Eysen schossen, 4 Mörser, und 18 Mann.

Das Vice Admiral Schiff war von Enckhausen auss Holland, 96 last
gross, das man mit 3840 Centnern belagen können, und Spes oder die
Hoffnung genannt, darauff 24 stück Eysern Geschütz, so ungefehrlich
5 pfund Eysen geschossen, zween Mörser, und 58 Mann.

Sein Jacht Schiff war von Enckhausen von 28 Last, genandt die Jacht
von Glück unnd unglück, darauff waren sechs Eysene stück, 4 Mörser,
und 15 Mann.

Das Schiff von Amsterdam war ein Pinasse, auff 160 Last, oder 6400
Centner, genennet der Gülden Windhund, dar auff vier metallene
Stück, deren jedes 45 pfund Eysen schoss, 32 Eyserne Stück, zu 5
und 6 pfunden, am vordersten theil dess Schiffs waren zwo
Schlangen, die 38 pfund schossen, und 12 Mörser, auch 6 Trommeter,
und andere Spiel: etliche Diamant schneider, Goldarbeyter, auch
andere mehr Ambtleut, oder abgesandte der Stände, uñ 80
Schiffknecht, und also in allem 108 Mann. In disem Schiff war der
wolerfahren Wilhelm Barentz Oberster Pilot oder Stewrmann, und
Jacob Hembsskirch Oberster Commisari. Auff disem bin ich Gerhart de
Veer auch gewesen.

Sein Jacht Schiff war auch von Amsterdam, genandt S. Moritz, auff
27 Last gross, darauff 6 Eysene stück, 5 Mörser, und 13 Mann.

Das Schiff Roterdam war ein Pinasse, auf 39 Last, oder 1560
Centner, genandt S. Peters Nachen, darauff 6 Eysene Stück, und 8
Mörser gewesen.

Dise Schiff alle waren versehen mit allerley Proviant und Kriegs
munition auff zwey Jar, aussgenommen Roterdam, so allein auff 6
Monat Proviantirt, auss ursach dass es widerumb solte zu Ruck
kommen, wie gesagt.

Anno 1595 den 12 Junij, sein wir von Amsterdam nach Texel, da alle
Schiff solten zusamman-kom̄en, gesegelt.

Den 2 Julij nach Mittag, da der Wind Sudost, und gut für uns war,
namen wir unsern Cours in dem Namen Gottes gegen Nordwest zum Nord.

Den 5 dito, dess Morgens sahen wir Engelland.

Den 6 dito, war gross ungewitter auss N.O.

Den 12 hatten wir guten Wind, nach Mittag sahen wir viel Walfisch,
unnd theils unserm Schiff so nahe, das man auff sie hette springen
können, die am Stewrruder stunden, hetten zu thun genug das Schiff
von den Walfischen hinweg zu steuren.

Den 15 dito sahen wir das Land Nordwegen.

A comparison of the foregoing with Phillip’s translation in pages 42–44 of the present volume, will at once show how widely Hulsius’s version differs from the original text of Gerrit de Veer.

From the use made of De Veer’s name in the “Address to the Reader,” it might at first sight be imagined that Hulsius was in communication with the author, and had his authority for the interpolated passages; though, seeing that Latin and French versions, corresponding strictly with the original Dutch text, were being simultaneously published at Amsterdam, it would certainly be difficult to conceive that De Veer should have lent himself to a work so different in character as this German version. However, on a closer examination, it is apparent that this “Address,” notwithstanding that it is made to bear De Veer’s signature, with the date “Penult. Aprilis Anno 1598,”—which is that of the author’s original Dedication to the States General and other authorities of the United Provinces, of which a translation has been given in pages cxix–cxxii,—is merely made up from that dedication and from the introductory portion of the author’s narrative of the first voyage. And, indeed, Hulsius himself does not pretend to do more than give a translation into German from the original Dutch work; his words being, “Hab ich auch dise drey letzte Schiffarten gegen Mitnacht, so bald sie mir in Niderlandischer sprach zukommĕ, ins hochteutsch versetzt;” so that his use of the author’s name in the way adverted to is manifestly unjustifiable, and in fact nothing better than a fraud on the public.

The foregoing specimen of the differences between the two works has purposely been taken from the commencement of the narrative of the second expedition, because we have the independent authority of Linschoten to fall back upon; in whose work nothing is found to warrant the interpolations on the 5th and 12th of July, and whose official description of the vessels composing that expedition—which forms the basis of the statement made in previous pages of the present Introduction,—differs materially from that given by Hulsius.

It is scarcely to be doubted that the latter had an authority of some sort for these important variations; though had that authority been at all of an authentic nature, there is no conceivable reason why he should not have referred to it. On a consideration of the whole case, we are inclined to believe that he was desirous of imparting to his production the character of an original work; and hence these variations in the text, and also the fact that most of his illustrations are not copies, but free imitations of the plates in the original Amsterdam editions.

Before quitting this subject, which is perhaps not undeserving of a closer investigation, we may adduce a curious instance of erroneous translation on the part of Hulsius. In the introduction to the narrative of the second voyage (page 40 of the present work), De Veer speaks of Linschoten as having been on the first voyage the commissary or supercargo of the two ships of Zeeland and Enkhuysen—“daer Jan Huyghen van Linschoten comis op was.” This is rendered by Hulsius (p. 14): “darauff der Hocherfahrne in Schiffsachē Johan̄ Huyghen von Linschott, Comes oder Oberster gewesen war,” as if Linschoten had actually been the commander of those two vessels!

Another German abridgement of De Veer’s narrative was made by the brothers De Bry, in 1599, and is given as the third article in the third part of their India Orientalis (or that portion of their collection commonly known as the Petits Voyages), on the collective title of which it is described as follows:—

Drey Schiffahrten der Holländer nach obermeldten Indien durch das
Mittnächtigsche oder Eissmeer darinnen viel vnerhörte Ebentewer.
Sampt Vielen schönen künstlichen figurn vnd Landtafeln in Kupffer
gestochen vnd an Tag geben durch Jo. Theodor vnd Jo. Israel de Bry,
Gebrüder. Gedruckt zu Franckfurt am Mayn durch Mattheum Becker.
M.D.XCIX. folio.

It is from this German edition that the plates which accompany the present volume have been taken. They are copies from those of the original Amsterdam editions, reversed and more artistically finished. De Bry, doubtless having Hulsius’s work in his mind, says of them that they are: “Alles zierlich und nach dem aechten original fürgetragen.”

This abridgement was reprinted in the German editions of De Bry in 1628 and 1629.

Latin. The same abridgement was also given in Latin by De Bry, in the edition of the India Orientalis of 1601, on the collective title of the third part of which it is thus described:—

Tres nauigationes Hollandorum in modò dictam Indiam per
Septentrionalem seu glacialem Oceanum, vbi mira quædam et stupenda
denarrantur.

The sub-title, at page 129, is as follows:—

Tertia pars, Navigationes tres discretas, trib. continvis annis per
Septentrionem supra Norvegiam, Mvscoviam et Tartariam, freto
Weygatz & Noua Zembla detectis, ab Hollandis & Zelandis in Cathay &
Chinarum regnum versus orientem susceptas, describens.

This abridgement was reprinted in 1629, also as the third article in the third part of De Bry’s India Orientalis.

English. In the third volume of Purchas’s collection, pp. 473–518, is given a faithful abridgement of Phillip’s translation.

ABSTRACTS OR SUMMARIES.

Latin. An abstract of De Veer’s work was given in Linschoten’s—

Descriptio totius Guineæ tractus, Congi, Angolæ, et Monomotapæ,
eorumque locorum, quæ e regione C. S. Augustini in Brasilia jacent,
etc. Accedit noviter historia navigationum Batavorum in
Septentrionales Oras, Polique Arctici tractus, cum Freti Vaygats
detectione summa fide relata.

Hagæ-Comitis. Ex officinâ Alberti Henrici. Anno 1599. folio.

The narrative of the Three Navigations to the North, which occupies nine pages, commences at page 17, with the following head-title:—

Historia trium navigationum Batavorum in Septentrionem.
Admirabilium ac nunquam ante auditarum trium navigationum Batavorum
in Septentrionales Oras detegendi Freti Vaygats gratia, et in Novam
Zemblam, per hactenus incognita Maria, fidelis relatio.

This abstract appears to have been made by Linschoten himself, as Camus states (p. 191) that this Latin edition of his works was translated by himself from the Dutch of 1596.

Although the description of Guinea, to which this abstract forms an appendix, has a separate title-page and pagination, it is shown by the register to form part of—

Navigatio ac Itinerarium Johannis Hugonis Linscotani in Orientalem
sive Lusitanorum Indiam ... Collecta ... ac descripta per eundem
Belgice, nunc vero Latine redditum Hagæ Comitis ex officinâ Alberti
Henrici. Impensis authoris et Cornelii Nicolai, prostantque apud
Ægidium Elsevirum. Anno 1599. Fol.

From the circumstance of this abstract appearing at the end of Linschoten’s work, it has been by some confounded with his narrative of his own two Arctic voyages.

Dutch. In 1646, another abstract of the original narrative appeared in the first volume of the Dutch collection, entitled:—

Begin ende Voortgangh van de Vereenighde Nederlandtsche
Geoctroyeerde Oost-Indische Compagnie. 1646. obl. 4to.

This important work, which is profusely illustrated, has no editor’s name or place of imprint. It was, however, edited by Isaak Commelin, a learned Amsterdammer, and printed at Amsterdam, as we learn from Chalmot’s Biographisch Woordenboek de Nederlanden, in art. Commelin (Isaak). Chalmot had a good authority for this statement, namely, Isaak Commelin’s son, Kasper, who, at page 866 of his Beschryvinge van Amsterdam, declares his father to have been the editor, further mentioning that this and other works were all printed at Amsterdam by Jansson.

It was reprinted in 1648, under the following title:—

Verhael van de eerste Schip-vaert der Hollandische ende Zeeusche
Schepen doer’t Way-gat by Noorden Noorwegen, Moscovien ende
Tartarien om, na de Coninckrijcken Cathay ende China, Met drie
Schepen, uyt Texel gezeylt in den Jare 1594. Hier achter is
by-ghevoeght de beschrijvinghe van de Landen Siberia, Samoyeda,
ende Tingæsa. Seer vreemt on vermaackelijck om lesen. T’ Amsterdam.
Voor Ioost Hartgers, Boeck-verkooper in de Easthuys-steegh in de
Boeck-winckel bezijden het Stadt-huys, 1648. 4to.

And it re-appeared in 1650 with the same title. This work, though professing on the title-page to be an account of the first voyage only, contains an account of the second and third voyages also.

Another Dutch abstract was printed by G. J. Saeghman at Amsterdam, in 1663, with the following title:—

Verhael van de vier eerste Schip-Vaerden der Hollandtsche en
Zeeuwsche Schepen naar Nova Zembla, by Noorden Noorwegen, Moscovien
ende Tartarien om, na de Coninckrijcken Cathay en China. Uytgevaren
in de Jaren 1594, 1595, 1596, en 1609, ende hare wonderlijcke
avontueren, op de Reysen voor gevallen. Den laetsten druck van
nieuws ouersien, en met schoone Figueren verbetert. T’Amsterdam,
Gedruckt by Gillis Joosten Saeghman, Boeckdrucker en Boeck
verkooper, in de Nieuwe Straet. Anno 1663. 4to.

We have not had an opportunity of seeing this work, and therefore cannot say whether or not it is a reprint of the last-mentioned abstract. The fourth voyage of 1609 can only be that of Henry Hudson, who undertook it at the instance of the Dutch East India Company. The journal of this voyage, written by Robert Juet of Limehouse, “master’s mate”, is given by Purchas in his “Pilgrimes”, vol. iii, pp. 581–595.

An abstract of De Veer’s work is likewise contained in the first volume of the several editions of Blaeu’s “Great Atlas”, which have been already described in page cxxv: in the Latin at page 24; in the French at page 27; and in the Spanish at page 42. The Dutch edition we have not seen.

German. A translation from Saeghman’s abstract appeared in 1675, in a collection by Rudolf Capel, entitled, “Vorstellungen des Norden”. Hamburg, 1675, 4to.; in the fifth chapter of which it is entered as follows:—

Die von den Holländern zu vier unterschiedenen mahlen, nemlich in
Jahr c. 1594, 1595, 1596, und 1609, umsonst versuchte Seefarth
durchs Norden nach der Sineser Land Japan und Ost Indien. Auss der
Niederländischen in die Hochteutsche Sprache übersetzet.

Another edition appeared in 1678.

Another abstract in German was given in 1768, in Adelung’s Geschichte der Schiffahrten, published at Halle, 1768. In speaking of the great rarity of the original, Adelung acknowledges himself obliged to make use of the summary in the French collection, next described, which he collated with that of Capel.

French. The French collection to which we have just alluded, was edited by Constantin de Renneville, under the title:—

Recueil des Voyages qui ont servi à l’établissement et aux progrès
de la Compagnie des Indes orientales, formée dans les provinces
Unies des Pays Bas. Amst., 1702, 1710, 1716, 1725, in 6 vols.; and
in 1754, in 6 vols. in 12mo.

This is an unacknowledged translation, with a slight alteration in the language at the commencement of the work, from the Dutch collection already described, “Begin ende Voortgangh,” etc.

English. In the year 1703, was published an English translation of the above abstract, which was probably made from the French version by Renneville.

A very brief summary of the three voyages is also given in the first volume of Harris’s Navigantium et Itinerantium Bibliotheca, pp. 550–564. Lond. 1705. Fol.

The winter’s residence of the Dutch in Novaya Zemlya has been repeatedly treated of in various forms. The most recent work on the subject is probably a poem with the title—

De Overwintering der Hollanders op Nova Zembla gedicht van Tollens,
met Houtsneden van Henry Brown, naar teekeningen van I. H. I. van
den Bergh. Leeuwarden, G. T. W. Suringar, 1843. 4to.

Of the English translation by Phillip, which forms the text of the present volume, we are unable to speak in very favourable terms. Independently of a number of errors resulting evidently from the want of a thorough acquaintance with the Dutch language, the work is disfigured by numerous typographical errors, arising seemingly from the circumstance that the translator placed his manuscript in the printer’s hands, and never saw the work as it passed through the press. In the notes at the foot of the text, in the present edition, these errors are corrected, and attention is drawn to those cases in which subsequent writers, who merely consulted Phillip’s translation of Purchas’s abridgement of it, have thereby been misled. [228]