“Want of time and space prevents us from giving the subject any
lengthened consideration. But from what we have been able to make
out, our impression decidedly is, that it was never written by
Barendsz, but was attributed to him solely for the purpose of
giving to it an authority which it might otherwise not have
possessed.”
Dr. Beke then gives his arguments in support of this opinion, and in
order to refute them Mr. Muller makes the following remarks:—
I do not see (he says) why, after the death of Barendsz, the important
ship’s log should have fallen into the hands of an inferior officer,
even had he been a friend of the deceased. It would seem more probable,
that after Barendsz’s death the skipper and supercargo, Jakob
Heemskerck, would have taken all possible care of that interesting
document, and, on his return to his native country, would have
delivered it to Plancius, or others entitled to it. Admitting that the
log came into the hands of Plancius, we are not at all surprised that
he should allow the perusal of its contents by his friend Hessel
Gerritsz, to assist him in his work of proving that the Dutch were the
real discoverers of Spitsbergen.
Dr. Beke’s chief argument against the authenticity of the extract above
given, is that in it, instead of Greenland, the newly discovered land
is spoken of as being Spitsbergen, a name, according to him, only given
to that island years afterwards. But Barendsz’s opinion that they
sailed along Greenland is no reason why they should not have given the
name of Spitsbergen to a part of that coast.
Mr. De Jonge, assistant-keeper of the Royal Archives at the Hague, and
author of the “History of the Dutch East Indies Company”, sets at least
this question at rest by making mention of evidence which he found in
the Archives at the Hague, given by Barendsz’s companion, Captain Rijp,
before the magistrates of Delft, in which it is said:—“And we gave to
that land the name of Spitsbergen, for the great and high points that
were on it.”
De Veer, [7] it is true, does not make any mention of this name in his
account, but the extract from the ship’s log of William Barendsz, as
Hessel Gerritsz gives it, contains other peculiarities, which are not
found in “De Veer”.
Dr. Beke, moreover, brings a charge against Hessel Gerritsz of having
intentionally invented wrong courses, but there is no reason why he
should have done so. For, in order to prove the discovery of
Spitsbergen by the Dutch, he had only to refer to the work of “De
Veer”, and the invention of new courses would in no respect have
strengthened his arguments. The difference in the statements of the
courses, and here and there in the account of the circumstances, proves
sufficiently that we have here to do with two quite distinct documents.
And then, as Mr. Muller remarks, the journal of Barendsz, which gives
fewer anecdotes but more courses, merits even more confidence than the
indistinct statements of De Veer. The very accurate account kept of the
courses, as well as of the observations, the total neglect of all that
could give the journal an agreeable form, everything, in fact,
concerning it, marks the extract as being a log, that is to say, a work
not destined to be used as a pleasant history of the voyage. Moreover,
Barendsz’s statements are much more correct. Barendsz gives
continually, and with great accuracy, the courses which are often
changed several times on the same day, whilst De Veer says repeatedly:
“The courses were about northerly”, without giving any further
indication. Barendsz gives what happened every day, whilst De Veer
sometimes omits a few days. But the journal of De Veer especially loses
in value when we come to compare his account with that of Barendsz. At
once we perceive that he did not keep a strict daily account, but
rather that he had written it at different intervals during the voyage;
for whilst in the main points both accounts quite coincide, the
chronology of De Veer is entirely incorrect. Combining all these
arguments, we may come to the final conclusion:—that the extract given
by Hessel Gerritsz is truly taken from Barendsz’s log, and as such
merits more credit than the account of De Veer.
This granted, we see that Barendsz’s true track does not go north along
the east coast, as Dr. Beke believes, but runs up along the west side
of the land. Dr. Beke and Dr. Petermann have supposed Barendsz to have
sailed up the east side, and to have circumnavigated the largest island
in the group. This is not possible, for then Barendsz would have known
it to be an island, and therefore could never have thought it to be a
part of Greenland. The track as Dr. Petermann lays it down, has, up to
the present day, never been followed by any known ship, although in the
last ten years many attempts have been made.
One of the most successful of these voyages was that of Captain Nilsen,
a Norwegian, who, in the remarkably favourable season of 1872, with his
schooner De Freia, pushed as far as 79° 20′ N. latitude, the farthest
point yet attained, on the east coast of Spitsbergen, coming from the
south. Arriving at the very entrance of Hinlopen Strait, Captain Nilsen
was prevented by impenetrable pack-ice from entering that strait, and
had, after sighting Cape Torell, to retrace his steps.
The question whether Barendsz went north along the west or along the
east coast of Spitsbergen, has been fully treated by Mr. P. A. Tiele,
archivaris at Leyden, who has also demonstrated that the ship’s track,
laid down in the chart of J. Hondius, “Tabula Geographica” of the year
1598, [8] has been printed after a drawing of William Barendsz himself.
With the extract from the log of Barendsz in our hand, and following
the chart, we believe the true track of Barendsz’s third voyage to have
been as follows:—
On the 18th of May, 1596, the two ships left the Netherlands, and
arrived on the 10th of June at Bear Island; from whence they departed
on the 13th, shaping their course in a north-westerly direction.
In the evening of the 14th, or in the morning of the 15th, they fancied
they saw land. [9]
On the 15th they made more easting, till at the beginning of the first
watch, when they began to steer again more north. On this course they
made, till noon of the 16th, 84 nautical miles. The weather was foggy,
and prevented their seeing any land towards the east. There they
encountered ice, and sailed along the edge of it as much as the wind
allowed, and late on the 17th they saw high land, entirely covered with
snow.
Till noon of the 20th they continued, in latitude about 80°, to sail
along that land, when they had the western point of the land S.S.W.,
only 20 miles. Continuing to sail S.S.W. and S.W. ¼ S., they passed two
bays, which both stretched into the land towards the south. [10] In the
evening of that day they made a fresh effort towards the N.W., but were
again hindered by the ice from pushing further north, and had to
return, anchoring on the evening of the 21st close under the land, in
18 fathoms, sandy bottom, surrounded by several rocks, of which one was
split, “very good to recognise”. [11]
On the 22nd they inspected, with one of their boats, the north-westerly
point of the land, which they found to be only islands with many good
anchorages. [12]
The following day they went out of the bay, and, the weather being very
clear, they saw the coast stretching in a southerly direction, and
found at midnight the latitude to be 79° 34′. In the evening they again
made a vain effort to push farther in a more westerly direction.
On the 25th they anchored in a bay, [13] about 10 miles north of a high
point, which they afterwards christened Cape Bird. That bay ran rather
far inland, and by sailing round its northern shore, it was possible on
the south side of the bay to find shelter from all winds behind a low
point.
Early in the morning of the 26th they weighed the anchor, made sail,
and arrived at noon between the mountainous cape and the terra firma.
[14] After sailing about 20 miles in a southerly direction, they saw
much ice aground, and on sounding they found only 5 fathoms. These
shallows [15] obliged them to return, but having to strive with foul
winds, and being becalmed, they only, on the 28th, rounded the
mountainous cape, which they called “Cape Bird”, “because there were so
many birds upon it and in the neighbourhood.” This cape lay in 79° 5′
N. latitude. [16] Steering about 60 miles in a southerly course, they
came close to a large bay, which ran into the land E.N.E. [17] Twenty
miles farther they passed another large bay, [18] in which was “much
ice under the land.” To keep clear of the ice the course now became
more westerly, and at noon on the 29th, in latitude 76° 50′, they lost
sight of the land. [19] Sailing S. and S.S.E. they, on the 1st of July,
returned to Bear Island, where they agreed to separate.
Barendsz, as we know, went to Novaya Zemlya, and Rijp steered again
towards the north.
In deciding whether Rijp steered along the west, or went north along
the east coast, opinions are again at variance. Hessel Gerritsz, in the
same work, “Histoire de Spitsbergen, etc.”, speaking on this question,
says:—
“Rijp and Barendsz, anchoring at Bear Island on the first of July,
differed much in their opinions. Rijp calculated that the spot
where they were lay N.E. of the North Cape in Norway, whilst
Barendsz, on the contrary, maintained that it was N.W. Whilst the
calculations of Barendsz led him to believe that he was 1000 miles
distant from the Ice Cape of Novaya Zemlya, Rijp pretended to be
only 250 miles distant from the same point, and because Barendsz
thought it better to extend his knowledge of a land already
somewhat known, and thus render easier the passage to the Strait of
Anian, they resolved to separate. They both agreed that Rijp should
investigate towards the north-west and Barendsz towards the N.E. So
that Rijp again set sail towards the north, and came, after
marvellous accidents from ice and winds, to the spot where they had
anchored for the first time in 80°. He had also been up again to
Cape Bird, and he returned from thence with the intention of
rejoining Barendsz.”
This statement of Hessel Gerritsz that Rijp proceeded to the same spot
in 80°, where he had already been in company with Barendsz, agrees with
the account of Pontanus in his work on Amsterdam, published in 1614; as
well as with the information of Rijp himself, found in the old records
by Mr. De Jonge.
Pontanus (p. 168), says: “That Rijp pretended they ought to retrace
their steps till 80°.” Whilst Rijp himself says “that they returned to
the same spot where they had first been” (et prévient au lieu où ils
avoyent esté premièrement).
This granted, and with the experience of past navigators before us, to
prove the almost impossibility of going north along the east coast of
Spitsbergen, one would be inclined to conclude that Rijp must again
have gone up along the west coast.
Dr. Beke’s opinion, “that nothing worthy of remark can have occurred to
him, or otherwise it could not have failed to be recorded”, seems fully
borne out by later research.
Sailing up to 80° N. latitude, Rijp found his further passage again
intercepted by that ice-barrier which (as we are now aware) yearly
obstructs the sea north of Spitsbergen. Not long after he sailed to
Kola, and from thence returned home.
It is perfectly clear why Barendsz and Rijp should have followed the
west coast in preference to the east. In his previous expeditions
towards Novaya Zemlya, Barendsz had had to contend with masses of ice
constantly driven towards the west, so that he had a perfect knowledge
of the western current; and, consequently, he could not expect to
penetrate along the east coast, against which the ice would be
accumulating.
Not daunted in his heroic purpose by the remembrance of all the
difficulties with which he had to grapple along the coast of Novaya
Zemlya in penetrating through the pack ice, Barendsz decided upon again
trying what could be done in that direction.
Subsequent research has added nothing to Dr. Beke’s Introduction, as
far as the further voyage of Barendsz is concerned; but we are able to
lay before our readers the results of several other Arctic expeditions
made by the Dutch after the return on the 29th of October, 1597, of the
survivors of Barendsz’s heroic companions.
The results of the three voyages made before that date had been, as far
as their real object was concerned, insignificant, and could not be
called an encouragement to make another attempt to find the north-east
passage; and, besides this, the necessity to search for it no longer
existed.
In the same year in which Heemskerck and his companions entered the
Maas, Houtman returned to the Netherlands with the first Dutch fleet
coming from the East Indies. He had found, without great difficulty,
his way to the East Indies, around the Cape of Good Hope, and
consequently there was no longer any necessity to find a new route
through the Polar ice.
But when, in 1602, the Dutch East India Company was established, and
received, by its charter (to the detriment of all other Netherlands
ship-owners), the exclusive permission to sail to the East Indies round
the Cape of Good Hope or round Cape Horn, a new inducement was given to
the interlopers to seek the northern passage. The East India Company
saw the danger which threatened it on that side, and was compelled, in
its own interests, if possible, to be the first to discover the north
passage, hoping thus to obtain the monopoly of the northern, as it
already possessed that of the southern route.
The origin of most of the subsequent expeditions can be traced back to
the contest between monopoly and free trade.
Hudson, the celebrated English navigator, had just returned from his
voyage in 1608, when the East India Company seized the opportunity, and
invited him over to the Netherlands, desiring to retain him in their
service. After long negotiations, an agreement was entered into, in
which Hudson engaged to seek the north-east passage. Accordingly, on
the 6th of April, 1609, Hudson started from the Texel in a small vessel
called De Halve Maan (the Half Moon).
But among the interlopers was one Isaac le Maire, a clever merchant and
an inveterate adversary of the Company, who, seeing the preparations
made for the departure of Hudson, had not remained inactive. Thirty
days later, by his zealous exertions, another ship was fitted out, in
order, if possible, to out-do Hudson, and, consequently, the hated East
India Company. This expedition was under the command of Melchior van
Kerckhoven, who left the Dutch ports on the 5th of May, 1609.
Hudson had gone out with instructions to follow the example of
Barendsz, in seeking for a passage north of Novaya Zemlya. On this
occasion he was again unfortunate; for, as on his preceding voyage in
1608, he could not succeed in rounding Novaya Zemlya.
On the 5th of May he arrived at the North Cape of Norway; but before he
had sighted Novaya Zemlya he was obliged by his mutinous crew to
return.
On the 19th he again passed the North Cape, and from thence sailed
towards the N.W. to make new discoveries in that direction. In this he
was much more successful.
On the other hand, the expedition of Isaac le Maire came to no better
result. Melchior van Kerckhoven penetrated some distance into Pet
Strait, but finding it perfectly blocked by ice of extraordinary
thickness, he was obliged to return without having effected his object.
Both these expeditions tended to confirm the opinion already
entertained of the great difficulty of finding, in that direction, the
passage to the Indies. The number of those who maintained the
possibility of finding a way straight across the Pole daily increased.
So early as 1527 an Englishman, Robert Thorne, who lived at Sevilla,
had strongly recommended this direction for reaching the Indies. A warm
defender of his doctrines was found in the Dutch cosmographer Plancius.
Maintainer of the existence of an open Polar Sea, Plancius argued that
the cold gradually augmented as far as 66° latitude, but that from
thence to the Pole it again decreased.
Accordingly, when in 1610 a certain Helisarius Roslin, medical doctor
at Buchsweiler and court physician to the Count of Hanau, presented to
the States a small book, in which he attributed the ill-luck of the
former expeditions only to taking the wrong direction, this coincided
with the views of the supporters of the doctrines proclaimed by
Plancius.
Consequently, in the year following, two Netherlanders, Ernst van de
Wal and Pieter Aertsz de Jonge, requested the States-General and the
Admiralty of Amsterdam to assist them in fitting out a new expedition.
They positively believed they would find the northern passage, and
jokingly remarked: “That the sun at the far north was rather a
manufacturer of salt than of ice”. The plan, notwithstanding the
disapprobation of many, found support, and in 1611 the Admiralty of
Amsterdam decided on giving their sanction to the new expedition. Two
ships, De Vos and De Craen, were fitted out for the voyage. As
commander of the expedition, Jan Cornelisz May, surnamed “The
Man-Eater”, was appointed. This experienced and skilful sailor had
already been, in 1598, among the first Dutch navigators to round the
Cape of Good Hope on his way to the Indies. On board of the ship De Vos
Ernst van de Walle was appointed supercargo and Pieter Fransz mate. The
ship De Craen, with Pieter Aertsz de Jonge as supercargo and Cornelis
Jansz Mes as mate, was commanded by Symon Willemsz Cat.
On the 18th of March, 1611, the ships started; but, instead of going
straight north, they again sailed towards Novaya Zemlya, visited Kostin
Shar, but were prevented by the ice from penetrating into the Kara Sea.
The ships were so damaged by their collisions with the ice, that they
were obliged to return to Kildin to repair. From thence they sailed to
North America, wintered there, and afterwards explored the coast-line
between 47° and 42½′ N. latitude. In one of the attempts to land,
Pieter Aertsz de Jonge was killed by the natives.
In the beginning of 1612 the De Craen returned to Holland, but Captain
May, with his ship the De Vos, sailed again towards Novaya Zemlya,
where he arrived on the 30th of June, 1612. Setting out from thence he
sailed to the north, along the coast of the island; but,
notwithstanding his great perseverance, he met with no better success.
He was checked by a vast barrier of ice, which stretched itself from
the land in a north-westerly direction. He followed the edge of it
until the 14th of July, when he had attained the latitude of 77°, and
then returned to the coast of Novaya Zemlya, where he arrived on the
20th.
Between the 29th of July and the 9th of August he renewed his
endeavours, and came as far as 77° 45′ N. His attempt to sail straight
to the Pole proved a complete failure.
On the 26th of August he resolved to give up his trials, and to return
to Holland, where he safely anchored about the 15th of September. Yet
all these misfortunes did not affect the courage of the enterprising
Netherlands merchants.
The many ships which in the following years left the Dutch ports, bound
on voyages of discovery, were, however, without one exception, sent
towards the north-west, where Hudson, in the last years, had gathered
such unfading laurels. All these trials to the north-west gave,
however, no better results than those to the north-east, and after many
fruitless expeditions in a north-western direction, we see, in the year
1624, a return to the old plans of the sixteenth century, which were
all based on the principle of following a coast-line.
A ship called De Kat, with twenty-four hands on board, and provided
with stores for two years and a half, was fitted out to renew the
investigations towards the north-east. Cornelis Fennisz Bosman was
appointed commander of the expedition, whilst Willem Joosten Glimmer
accompanied him as supercargo.
As late as the 24th of June they left the Texel with the design to sail
along the Russian coast through Pet Strait, in the direction of the
Obi. From thence they intended to try to reach Cape Fabin, and seek
through Strait Anian the way to Cathay. The highest expectations were
entertained of this expedition, but the result did not bear them out.
On the 24th of July, passing the island of Kalgojew, they reached
Novaya Zemlya on the 28th in 70° 55′ N.
On the 10th of August they entered Pet Strait, and only by great
exertion did they succeed in pushing through it.
But on the 17th, when the sails were frozen as hard as a plank, so as
to render all working of the ship impossible, the wind drove the
ice-floes with such force against the ship, that it was driven back in
the direction of Pet Strait. Anchoring in the strait, they had to
contend with very heavy storms. The ship was parted from her anchors,
and the strait getting choked with ice, they resolved to retreat.
Upon the return of Bosman to Holland in the beginning of September,
without having effected his object, the public was greatly
disappointed, and almost denied the strenuous efforts he had made to
conquer all difficulties. It seems that after this bad success the
Netherlands merchants gave up all trials towards the north-east.
The English and Russians who afterwards continued to seek for a passage
in that direction did not meet with better success.
In the year 1676 an English expedition was sent towards the north-east;
but the commander, Wood, only explored the edge of the ice between
Spitsbergen and Novaya Zemlya, without rounding this latter island.
Russian walrus-hunters and fishermen have also made many excursions in
the seas around Novaya Zemlya. The greater part of the Russian
expeditions were made with the object of reaching the Siberian rivers.
Seldom did they go along the east coast northward of Matthew’s Strait.
In the Archiv für Wissenschäftliche Kunde von Russland, these
excursions are described more or less completely. Chronological order
is adhered to, and this rather detailed account of the Russian
expeditions extends from the year 1690 down to the voyages of Lütke,
Bäer, and Krüsenstern.
One of the most remarkable recorded is that of the Russian navigator,
Sawwä Löschkin, in 1760, of which it is written:—
“That in the year 1760 a certain Sawwä Löschkin from Olonoz, formed
the bold design of exploring the east coast of Novaya Zemlya,
because this coast, till then never visited by Russian hunters,
would surpass all other places in abundance of fur-animals. From
this account of the expedition, which in a nautical point of view
has never been surpassed, we know that Löschkin sailed along the
east coast from Burrough Strait, as far as the N.E. point of Novaya
Zemlya in 76° 9′. During this unprecedented voyage he had to
overcome so many obstacles, in consequence of the ice, that he was
obliged to winter twice on the east coast, and to use three summers
in sailing to the N.E. point.”
This information leads Mr. de Jonge to the conclusion that Löschkin
must have wintered much more southwardly than Barendsz, else he would
not have wanted three summers to reach the north-east point. For the
rest, that the Russians seldom visited the north-east coast of Novaya
Zemlya may be proved from the fact that, on a chart of the Northern
Polar Sea of 1864, drawn after Russian data and published in the review
of Erman, above alluded to, the north-east coast of Novaya Zemlya is
laid down between 75° N. and 76° 59′, as being very uncertain and
doubtful, and only with the three old Dutch names—“Ice Harbour, Cape
Flessingue, and Cape of Desire”. [20]
The Russian admiral, Lütke, who was employed in surveying the coast of
Novaya Zemlya from 1821 to 1824, made all his attempts along the west
coast, without being able, however, to round Cape Nassau. All these
trials, made towards the north-east, fully show us the great
difficulties which Barendsz had to encounter, and the gallant
perseverance which enabled him to penetrate thus far into the frozen
seas. A greater proof of this exists in the fact that in 1872 we find
that the steamer Tegethof, under the skilful command of Lieutenant
Weyprecht, not only failed in rounding Novaya Zemlya, but was entirely
closed in by the mighty ice-floes, and driven powerlessly towards the
north-east. However, the sea north of Novaya Zemlya was not always
found obstructed by the ice. During a favourable season ships could
penetrate far to the north-east without the slightest difficulty. This
was often proved by the old Dutch whalers or walrus-hunters, who,
sailing north of Novaya Zemlya, even passed into the Kara Sea.
The journal of Gerrit de Veer sufficiently proves that the year 1596
was by no means a favourable season. The Dutch walrus-hunters, among
others Theunis Ys, Cornelis Roule, and William de Vlamingh, [21]
repeatedly frequented these seas north of Novaya Zemlya; but we find no
mention made of their having discovered Barendsz’s winter quarters.
Skipper William de Vlamingh seems to have passed nearest to it. Witsen,
in his work, North and East Tartary, speaks of this skipper’s voyage
thus:— [22]
“I was informed by skipper William de Vlamingh of Oost Vlielend,
that when he sailed in the year 1664 to catch whales, he succeeded
in passing along the northern shore of Novaya Zemlya, and rounded
the N.E. point of the island in order to try and be more prosperous
in his fishery than he had been towards the west. Steering S. and
S.W. he came near or about the house in which Heemskerck had
wintered in the year 1596. From the house he sailed E.S.E. till in
about 74° latitude, where he saw nothing but open water. He
afterwards sailed back in the same direction, and 16 days after
having lost sight of Novaya Zemlya he again anchored in the Vlie.”
Combining all the information we find in the work of Witsen, there are
reasons for believing that De Vlamingh went on shore on the west and on
the north coasts of Novaya Zemlya, but not on the east coast.