In June and July, 1668, four tracts on the Isle of Pines from the same
pen were licensed and published in London, which may for convenience
be designated the first and second parts of the narrative, and the two
parts in continuation. From London the tract soon passed to Holland,
which had ever been a greedy consumer of voyages of discovery, for the
greatness of that nation depended upon the sea, at once its most potent
enemy and friend.{1} Three Dutch editions have been found, the earliest
in point of time being that made by Jacob Vinckel, [14]of Amsterdam.
1 Holland was the centre of map publication as the twenty
yean before 1668 saw the issue of atlases by Jansson, Blaeu,
Mercator, Doncker, Cellarius, Loon, Visscher, and Goos, all
published at Amsterdam. Phillips' list for this period gives
atlases published elsewhere--those of Boissevin (Paris,
1653), Lubin (Paris, 1659), Nicolosi (Rome, 1660), Dudley
(Florence, 1661), Du Val (Paris, 1662), Jollain (Paris
1667), Cluver (Wolfen-bûttel, 1667?) and Ortelius (Venice,
1667).
His second title is an exact translation of the second title of the
London first part. This version, however, omitted an essential part of
the relation. The London second title is also that of the issue made at
Amsterdam by Jacob Stichter, being the Vinckel version, word for word,
and almost line for line, but the type used is the gothic, and the
spelling of words is not the same. Further, Stichter was possessed of
some imagination and decorated his title-page with a map of a part of
the island, showing ranges of hills, a harbor or mouth of a river, with
conventional soundings, and two towns or settlements. As each of these
issues contains only eight pages of text, the first London part only was
known to the publishers. The third Dutch edition was put out by Joannes
Naeranus, at Rotterdam, and in a foreword he gives the following reason
for issuing the tract:
To the Reader A part of the present relation is also printed by Jacob
Vinckel at Amsterdam, being defective in omitting one of the
principal things, so do we give here a true copy which was sent to us
authoritatively out of England, but in that language, in order that the
curious reader may not be deceived by the poor translation, and for
that reason this very astonishing history fall under suspicion. Lastly,
admire God's wondrous guidance, and farewell.
His publication contains twenty pages of text, and is not an accurate
translation of the English tract in parts, but rather a paraphrase of
the text. To make the confusion the greater, he [15]expressly states on
the title-page that he used a copy received from London, and gives the
London imprint which will fit only the first London part. For "by S. G."
appears only on the title-page of that part.