Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Birds

1st Edition J. Eduardo P. W. Bicudo pdf download

https://ebookfinal.com/download/ecological-and-environmental-
physiology-of-birds-1st-edition-j-eduardo-p-w-bicudo/

Explore and download more ebooks or textbooks

at ebookfinal.com
We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebookfinal.com
for more options!.

Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Fish 1st

Edition F. Brian Eddy

https://ebookfinal.com/download/ecological-and-environmental-
physiology-of-fish-1st-edition-f-brian-eddy/

Environmental Physiology of Livestock 1st Edition R. J.

Collier

https://ebookfinal.com/download/environmental-physiology-of-
livestock-1st-edition-r-j-collier/

Plant Physiology and Development 6th Edition Eduardo

Zeiger

https://ebookfinal.com/download/plant-physiology-and-development-6th-
edition-eduardo-zeiger/

Birds of Gwent W. A. Venables

https://ebookfinal.com/download/birds-of-gwent-w-a-venables/
Environmental and Economic Sustainability Environmental
and Ecological Risk Assessment 1st Edition Paul E.
Hardisty
https://ebookfinal.com/download/environmental-and-economic-
sustainability-environmental-and-ecological-risk-assessment-1st-
edition-paul-e-hardisty/

Tolerance to Environmental Contaminants Environmental and

Ecological Risk Assessment 1st Edition Claude Amiard-
Triquet
https://ebookfinal.com/download/tolerance-to-environmental-
contaminants-environmental-and-ecological-risk-assessment-1st-edition-
claude-amiard-triquet/

Nucleation Theory and Applications 1st Edition J?Rn W. P.

Schmelzer

https://ebookfinal.com/download/nucleation-theory-and-
applications-1st-edition-jrn-w-p-schmelzer/

Environmental liability and ecological damage in European

law 1st Edition Monika Hinteregger

https://ebookfinal.com/download/environmental-liability-and-
ecological-damage-in-european-law-1st-edition-monika-hinteregger/

The diatoms applications for the environmental and earth

sciences 2ed. Edition J P Smol

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-diatoms-applications-for-the-
environmental-and-earth-sciences-2ed-edition-j-p-smol/
Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Birds 1st
Edition J. Eduardo P. W. Bicudo Digital Instant
Download
Author(s): J. Eduardo P. W. Bicudo, William A. Buttemer, Mark A. Chappell,
James T. Pearson, Claus Bech
ISBN(s): 9780199228447, 0199228442
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 2.70 MB
Year: 2010
Language: english
Ecological and Environmental
Physiology of Birds
This page intentionally left blank
Ecological and Environmental
Physiology of Birds

J. Eduardo P. W. Bicudo
Departamento de Fisiologia, Instituto de Biociências,
Universidade de São Paulo
William A. Buttemer
School of Biological Sciences,
University of Wollongong
Mark A. Chappell
University of California, Riverside
James T. Pearson
Department of Physiology, Monash University
Claus Bech
Department of Biology, NTNU, Norway

1
1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox 6dp
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press Inc., New York
© J. Eduardo P. W. Bicudo, William A. Buttemer,
Mark A. Chappell, James T. Pearson, and Claus Bech 2010
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)
First published 2010
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Data available
Typeset by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India
Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by
the MPG Books Group in the UK.

ISBN 978–0–19–922844–7 (Hbk.)

978–0–19–922845–4 (Pbk.)

1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
This page intentionally left blank
 Ecological and Environmental Physiology Series (EEPS)
Series Editor: Warren Burggren, University of North Texas

This authoritative series of concise, affordable volumes provides an integrated

overview of the ecological and environmental physiology of key taxa including
birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects, crustaceans, mollusks, and fish.
Each volume provides a state-of-the-art review and synthesis of topics that are
relevant to how that specific group of organisms have evolved and coped with the
environmental characteristics of their habitats. The series is intended for stu-
dents, researchers, consultants, and other professionals in the fields of physiology,
physiological ecology, ecology, and evolutionary biology.
A Series Advisory Board assists in the commissioning of titles and authors,
development of volumes, and promotion of the published works. This Board
comprises more than 50 internationally recognized experts in ecological and
environmental physiology, providing a combination of both depth and breadth
to proposal evaluation and series oversight.
The reader is encouraged to visit the EEPS website for additional information
and the latest volumes (http://www.eeps-oxford.com/). If you have ideas for new
titles in this series or just wish to comment on EEPS, please do not hesitate to
contact the Series Editor, Warren Burggren (University of North Texas; burg-
[email protected]).

Volume 1: Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Amphibians

Stanley S. Hillman, Philip C. Withers, Robert C. Drewes, Stanley D. Hillyard
Volume 2: Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Birds
J. Eduardo P.W. Bicudo, William A. Buttemer, Mark A. Chappell, James T. Pearson,
Claus Bech
Contents

Acknowledgements xii

Foreword xiii

1. Introduction — Blueprint of a Bird (Bauplan/Body plan) 1

1.1 What is a Bird? 1

1.2 Evolution of Birds 2
1.3 Summary of Passerine Bird Phylogeny 6
1.4 Evolution of Feathers 8
1.5 Developmental Biology of Feathers 10
1.6 Origin and Evolution of Flight 12
1.7 Energy Requirements for Flight 15
1.8 Migration 20
Modes of Locomotion 20
Molting 20
Migration Flocks 21
Nocturnal Migration 21
Evolutionary Aspects 22
Adaptations 23
1.9 Flightlessness 25
1.10 Overview 27

2. General Physiological Principles 28

2.1 Gas Diffusion 28

2.2 Gas Exchange 29
The Bird Lung 30
The Bird Egg 32
2.3 Temperature and Thermal Exchanges 34
Radiation 35
Conduction 36
Convection 37
viii Contents

Evaporation 38
Heat Balance 39
Thermoneutrality 40
2.4 Body Size 41
2.5 Water and Ion Fluxes 43
Osmosis 44
Bird Regulation of Water and Ion Fluxes 45
Salt Glands 48

3. Physiological Bases of Fecundity/Longevity Tradeoffs 49

3.1 Costs of Egg Laying 49

Nutrient and Energy Demands 49
Self-Maintenance/Egg Production Tradeoffs 54
Fitness Consequences 56
3.2 Male Mating Costs 59
Testosterone Phenology 59
Behavioral Effects of Testosterone 62
Physiological Effects of Testosterone 64
3.3 Costs of Parenting 75
Costs of Incubation 76
Costs of Chick Rearing 80
3.4 Oxidative Stress and Longevity 86
Oxidative Stress 86
Reactive O2 Species Production 87
Antioxidant Defenses 92
Membrane Lipids and Peroxidation Resistance 93

4. Adaptations: Obtaining and Processing Food 99

4.1 Energy and Nutrition 102

4.2 Energy and Structure and Function 105
4.3 Digestive Adaptation 106
Chemical Reactor Theory 107
4.4 Digestive Efficiency 110
Phenotypic Flexibility 112
4.5 Modulation of Digestive Enzymes 113
 Contents ix

4.6 Modulation of Absorption Rate 115

4.7 Modulation of Retention Time 118
Geometric Analysis 120
4.8 Digestion Rate and Digestive Efficiency 120
4.9 Handling and Digestion 123
4.10 Morphological Adjustments of the Gastrointestinal Tract 127
4.11 Adjustments during Reproduction 128
4.12 Adjustments in Migrant Birds 128
4.13 Plant Secondary Metabolites 131

5. Adaptations: Living in Specific Environments 134

5.1 Desert and Arid Environments 134

Evaporative Water Loss 136
Arid Environment and Phenotypic Plasticity in Birds 139
Hyperthermia 141
Cloacal Evaporation 142
Energy Expenditure and Water Influx in the Field 144
Controllable Vascular Thermal Radiator 145
5.2 Low Temperatures 147
Metabolic Heat Production 148
Adjustments to Basal Metabolic Rate 148
Non-Shivering Thermogenesis 150
Heat from Digestion 150
Heat Derived from Activity 151
Thermal Conductance 152
Hibernation and Torpor 152
Behavioral Adaptations 155
Adaptations to Low Food Supply 156
Coping with Global Warming? 156
5.3 High Altitude 157
Constraints at High Altitude 157
Respiratory Adaptations 160
Water Loss and Thermoregulation 162
Wind Speeds 165
x Contents

5.4 Studies on Birds 166

Energetics of Reproduction 167
Thermal Consequences of a Marine Lifestyle 168
Coping with High Salinity 171
5.5 Diving and Swimming 172
Surface Swimming versus Sub-surface Swimming 173
Thermal Exchanges while Swimming 179
Diving and Foraging Behavior 181
Dive Capacity 184

6. Adaptations: Neural and Sensory 187

6.1 Response of Birds to Novel Environments 189

6.2 Chemical Senses 192
Predator Detection 192
Foraging, Orientation, and Navigation 193
6.3 Magnetoreception 197
Field Studies 199
6.4 Visual Capacity 200
Night Vision 200
Eye Size and Foraging Methods 201
6.5 Vocalization 202

7. Adaptations: Developmental Physiology 208

7.1 Reproduction and Development 208

Nest Environments, Eggs, and Incubation 209
Neonate and Development 218

8. Approaches and Techniques 226

8.1 Methods for Measuring Energy Expenditure and Movement 226

Patterns of Free-living Birds 226
Free-living Energy Expenditure 227
Temporal Considerations 228
Calibration Requirements 229
Size Considerations 231
Recapture and Mobility Considerations 232
 Contents xi

8.2 Measuring Movement Patterns 234

Electronic Methods 234
Stable Isotopic Methods 235
8.3 Flight Energy Requirements 237
Mass Loss in the Field 238
Wind Tunnel Mass Loss, Metabolic, and Heart Rate Measurements 238
8.4 Evolutionary and Ecological Functional Genomics 240
Studies on Birds 241
8.5 Molecular Biology 242
MicroRNAs 242
Microarrays 243
Phenotypic Plasticity 245
8.6 Variability Analysis 246
Lévy Flight (or Walk) Searching Patterns 246

9. Conclusions and Future Directions 248

9.1 Responses to Habitat Variation 248

9.2 Changes in Movement Patterns and Food Use 249
9.3 Temperature Effects on Development 250
9.4 Maternal Effects on Development 251
9.5 Establishing Physiological Health Indices 251
9.6 Physiological Performance Measures 252

Bibliography 254

Index 309
Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all those who, through their work on birds, have been
important sources of inspiration to us for undertaking the task of writing a book
on Ecological and Environmental Physiology of Birds. They are too numerous to
list comprehensively, but our mentors, George A. Bartholomew, William R.
Dawson, Dick Grau, Craig Heller, Kejll Johansen, Knut Schmidt-Nielsen, and
Roger Seymour have been particularly inspiring, not only to us but to the whole
community of avian physiologists (indeed, of animal physiologists in general).
Their guidance in our early careers, and their deep enthusiasm and encourage-
ment for our different pursuits are much appreciated.
Writing a book like this is a very lengthy endeavor, and many people have contrib-
uted directly or indirectly towards its completion. Certainly our families, colleagues,
and students tolerated the sometimes intense focus on the work with encouragement
and good humor. One of us (Eduardo Bicudo) benefited from the hospitality of the
staff of the Animal Demography Unit (former Avian Demography Unit; ADU) at
the University of Cape Town (UCT), South Africa, during the early stages of writing.
Special thanks are due to Les Underhill (ADU chairman), John Cooper, Chris Lotz,
and Sue Kuyper, who were just superb hosts, and also to Margaret Koopman, librar-
ian at the Niven Library, Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology at UCT.
Eduardo, who also spent some time at the University of Wollongong, Australia, dur-
ing the early stages of writing, had the privilege to engage in stimulating discussions
with Lee Astheimer, Bill Buttemer, and Terry Dawson. Lee contributed substantially
to early discussions that shaped the book contents, but other obligations prevented
her further participation. During this period, Eduardo was supported by the University
of Wollongong as a Visiting Professorial Fellow. Jim Jones, at the University of
California, Davis, also hosted Eduardo, and kindly made available to him all the
facilities at UCDavis so he could continue to write the book while on his sabbatical
leave.
During much of his work on this volume, Mark Chappell was hosted by
Roberto Nespolo at the Universidad Austral de Chile in Valdivia, and by the
Polish Academy of Sciences Mammal Research Institute in Bialowieza, under a
Marie Curie Fellowship.
Other people have also helped us, and José Guilherme Chauí-Berlinck, Bill
Karasov, Joe Williams, and Gabrielle Nevitt kindly offered their invaluable advice
and assistance at different stages.
Foreword

Birds are a truly special group of vertebrates in many ways. They fly, mostly, and
while we easily accept this because of its familiarity, it is a very special lifestyle and
we are still uncertain as to how it evolved. Mammals are often considered to be
the vertebrates that dominate the continents but birds occur over more of the
Earth’s surface and play important roles in ecosystems on a global scale. They are
excellent bio-indicators in our changing world and improving our knowledge of
them is crucial to our understanding of these global environmental develop-
ments. The importance of this new volume on the Ecological and Environmental
Physiology of Birds sits squarely within this greater context.
From a personal perspective, a casual foray into bird ecophysiology markedly
enhanced my insights into the adaptive responses of birds in a variety of challeng-
ing environments. Birds are generally one of our first interfaces with wild ani-
mals, be they city pigeons, garden sparrows or the gulls at the beach. These
encounters can lead to a continuing fascination with birds, perhaps as amateur
bird watchers or even as professional biologists, such as the contributors to this
volume. My career in ecological physiology grew from such early experiences.
A collection of bird eggs obtained during my pre-teen wanderings in the dry bush
near my home in the Australian rangelands is my first remembered step along this
path. A curiosity about the odd Australian mammals (such as kangaroos) that
were also encountered in this environment has dominated much of my research
over the years but my interest in birds continued and increasingly I realised that
birds were functioning in extreme environments in ways that far exceeded their
physiological abilities, as then understood. It was the Emu (Dromaius noveahol-
landia) a supposedly primitive, giant bird that really awoke me to the very differ-
ent physiologies of birds and mammals and the adaptive potential of birds. While
the kangaroos at our field site hid in the shade to avoid the summer sun the Emus
spent the day foraging in the open desert, yet their reported urine concentrating
abilities were far lower than those of the kangaroos.
These observations resulted in a major excursion into avian ecological physiol-
ogy, with a necessary steep learning curve for my students and me to gain insights
into the unexpected complexity of the descendants of the dinosaurs. Luckily, we
had support from colleagues, several of whom are contributors to this volume.
William Calder III, a friend from my postdoctoral days in Knut Schmidt-Nielsen’s
lab at Duke University, visited and gave me my first lessons on avian metabo-
lism. William Dawson from the University of Michigan also visited and he
xiv Foreword

recommended the sturdy Bill Buttemer as someone with knowledge of bird ther-
mal biology who might also handle large Emus. We were doubly rewarded when
Bill also brought Lee Astheimer to the University of New South Wales. Erik
Skadhauge, a friend from my Duke University days came on sabbatical from
Denmark and provided much on-site training in bird excretory physiology to my
students, Shane Maloney and Robert Herd and me. Mark Chappell came to look
at Australian birds and gave much help, as did Eduardo Bicudo when he was
consulted on bird energetics. Eventually we came to understand the fascinating
features of the physiological ecology of the Emus, which also provided a refresh-
ing insight into the biology of kangaroos.
When Eduardo Bicudo was planning this book he asked if I would like to
contribute. I declined, however, since my knowledge is rather narrow and bird
comparative physiology has progressed significantly in the last few years.
Fortunately, I was able to make some appropriate suggestions leading to some of
those now contributing to this volume. Eduardo has kindly let me read chapters
as they have progressed and my education has continued apace.
Much knowledge across the spectrum of bird physiology has been gained in
the years since the Emu studies, but the authors of this volume have avoided an
exhaustive “laundry list” approach. Instead, they focus on our current under-
standing of a set of topics in ecological and environmental physiology that are of
particular interest to ornithologists, but also have broad biological relevance. The
introductory chapter covers the basic body plan of birds and their still-enigmatic
evolutionary history. The focus then shifts to a consideration of the essential
components of that most fundamental of avian attributes: the ability to fly. The
emphasis here is on feather evolution and development, flight energetics and
aerodynamics, migration, and as a counterpoint, the curious secondary evolution
of flightlessness that has occurred in several lineages. This sets the stage for subse-
quent chapters, which present specific physiological topics within a strongly eco-
logical and environmental framework. Chapter 2 covers gas exchange and thermal
and osmotic balance, together with the central role of body size. Chapter 3
addresses “classical” life history parameters – male and female reproductive costs,
parental care and investment in offspring, and fecundity versus longevity trade-
offs – from an ecophysiological perspective. Chapter 4 – “Adaptations and spe-
cializations” – offers a comprehensive analysis of feeding and digestive physiology,
adaptations to challenging environments (high altitude, deserts, marine habitats,
cold), and neural specializations (notably those important in foraging, long-dis-
tance navigation, and song production). Throughout the book, classical studies
are integrated with the latest research findings.
Of course, numerous important and intriguing questions await further work,
and the book concludes with a discussion of research methods and approaches –
emphasizing cutting-edge technology – and a final chapter on future directions
that should help point the way forward for both young and senior scientists. This
 Foreword xv

volume is broad and incisive; a similar one would have been invaluable when my
group started researching Emus in the 1980s. An informed colleague was not
always on hand.
Finally, returning to a more personal and subjective level, I believe it is impor-
tant for even the most dedicated and dispassionate of scientists to acknowledge
and, indeed, embrace the special emotional appeal of birds. The contributors to
this book are a diverse group of professional biologists from across the globe, each
with their own particular specialized training and expertise. Each is thoroughly
versed in the rigorous, disciplined, and objective methods of science and has used
them to build a career, in whole or in part, probing physiological questions and
adding to our understanding of how avian biology “works” at a mechanistic level.
But from a more emotive and aesthetic perspective, all have a boundless enthusi-
asm for, and appreciation of birds simply as the beautiful, elegant, and utterly
fascinating creatures that they are. I hope the contents of this volume will add to
that special sense of wonder engendered by the sight of a bird in the sky.

Terence J. Dawson
Emeritus Professor of Zoology, University of New South Wales
Sydney, Australia.
This page intentionally left blank
 1
Introduction – Blueprint of a Bird
(Bauplan/Body plan)

1.1 What is a Bird?

Birds are mostly recognized by their ability to fly, even though not all avian spe-
cies are capable of flight. However, the body plan of birds is essentially the same
irrespective of their mode of locomotion. Generally speaking, a typical bird pos-
sesses a streamlined and compact body covered with feathers, a pair of wings
(forelimbs), a pair of hind limbs and a pointed beak.
A closer look reveals that birds have a series of specific adaptations that distin-
guish them from other vertebrates. Many elements of the skeleton have been
modified; the major skull bones are fused, the wing and leg elements are reduced
in number, many bones are hollow and air-filled, the skull shows a unique form
of cranial kinesis (movement of all or part of the upper jaw relative to the brain-
case), the sternum possesses a carina (an expanded area for the attachment of the
two muscles associated with flight—the pectoral and the supracoracoid muscles),
and the clavicles have been fused into a furcula. Other changes include an exclu-
sively oviparous (egg laying) mode of reproduction, loss of teeth, development of
a muscular gizzard, air sacs (allowing a unidirectional flow of air in the parabron-
chi), loss of one ovary in most species and a great reduction in the mass of the
skin (which is paper-thin in most species of flying birds). This body plan may
seem to have imposed a number of constraints on birds, but on the other hand it
has allowed them to become one of the most successful of animal taxa (see e.g.,
Chatterjee 1997; Feduccia 1996; Padian 1986).
Birds occur over more of the Earth’s surface than any other vertebrate group
and play an important role in ecosystems on a global scale. Because of this, we
must understand how birds have evolved, and we also must know what environ-
mental and ecological circumstances existed at the time of their early adaptive
radiation.
With approximately 10,000 species catalogued to date, extant birds constitute
a highly successful vertebrate class. For example, major lineages of the approxi-
mately 5739 species of passerine birds (perching birds) have diversified in all
continents and now occupy nearly all terrestrial ecosystems. The songbirds
2 Introduction – Blueprint of a Bird (Bauplan/Body plan)

(oscines, suborder Passeri) alone comprise nearly half of all extant birds, encom-
passing a staggering ecological and behavioral diversity (Barker et al. 2004).
The most remarkable trait found in the majority of existing birds is, of course,
their ability to fly. Although we find species which can fly, or at least glide, within
other vertebrate taxa (fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals), for more than 90%
of the existing species of birds, flight is their major and most important mode of
locomotion. Therefore, there seems to be a strong and continual selection pressure
for the maintenance of the flight apparatus in birds. Flightlessness, on the other
hand, is a pervasive phenomenon. If there is not a strong and continual selection for
the maintenance of the flight apparatus, it tends to disappear (Feduccia 1996).

1.2 Evolution of Birds

How birds evolved is still a matter of great controversy. It is not the purpose of
this volume to enter into the debate that pervades this important and intriguing
topic. However, it is relevant to summarize it here, especially because new fossil
records have been discovered recently in China (Liaoning, north-east China).
Archaeopteryx, from the Jurassic, is still considered to be the oldest and most
primitive bird. However, well preserved and abundant new fossils of birds and
dinosaurs (Fig. 1.1) have provided unprecedented new evidence on the dinosau-
rian origin of birds, the arboreal origin of avian flight (not widely accepted), and
the origin of feathers prior to flapping flight (more commonly accepted) (Clarke
et al. 2006). The Mesozoic avian assemblage mainly comprises two major line-
ages: the prevalent extinct group Enanthiornithes, and the Ornithurae, which
gave rise to all modern birds, as well as several more basal taxa. Cretaceous birds
radiated into various paleoecological niches, particularly fish- and seed-eating.
Significant changes in size, morphology, ecology and diet, and variation in flight
capabilities ranging from gliding to strong muscle-powered flight, highlight the
diversification of the avian lineage in the early Cretaceous (145.5 million years
ago). There is little evidence, however, to support a Mesozoic origin of modern
avian groups (see e.g., Zhou 2004; Zhou and Zhang 2005).
The most recent discoveries in China (Yon et al. 2006) reveal that extant birds
(Neornithes) may have originated from a goose-like ancestor, Gansus yumenensis,
an amphibious, flight-capable bird from the Early Cretaceous.
Paleoecological evidence from the early Cretaceous points to the existence of a
warmer climate than at present and probably warmer on a worldwide basis than
at any other time during the Phanerozoic. The temperature difference from the
poles to the equator was about one-half the present gradient. Floral evidence sug-
gests that a tropical to subtropical climate prevailed over much of the planet
(Heimhofer et al. 2005). It is also likely that birds evolved in an O2 rich atmos-
phere correlated with a time of increasing air density, probably in the late Jurassic.
 Evolution of Birds 3

Fig. 1.1 Holotype of ornithurine bird Hongshanornis longicresta gen. et sp. nov. from the
Lower Cretaceous of Inner Mongolia, China (IVPP V14533). (Left) Part. (Right) Counterpart.
(Zhou and Zhang, 2005; with permission from the National Academy of Sciences).

Recent studies have shown that during the late Jurassic oxygen concentrations rose
to current levels, or slightly higher (Falkowski et al., 2005). The three independent
origins of vertebrate flapping flight, in pterosaurs, bats, and birds, may have also
been facilitated by a hyperdense (denser than early Jurassic levels, mainly due to
the higher molecular weight of oxygen versus nitrogen) and a hyperoxic atmos-
phere (reviewed by Dudley, 1998). This combination would provide increased lift
per unit of wing area, and a greater ability to power the oxidative metabolism that
provides the large flux of ATP necessary for flapping flight. In addition to the
potential role of hyperoxia in the evolution of animal flight, enhanced oxidative
metabolism contributes to augmentation of heat production, allowing mainte-
nance of the high levels of performance seen during powered flight. To picture the
precise environmental conditions which may have favored the evolution of avian
flight is not easy because most likely a mosaic of interplaying factors were involved.
At present, it is safe to say that the whole scenario seems to have been very favora-
ble in terms of energy and nutrient supplies, atmospheric physical conditions, and
the spreading of a new ecological niche to be exploited, i.e., the concomitant
expansion of the angiosperms (Heimhofer et al. 2005).
Paleontological studies show that modern avian groups probably first appeared
in the Paleocene or Eocene and experienced an explosive radiation in the early
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
It may, therefore, be supposed that a few merchants, and amongst them, beyond
all doubt, De Moucheron, influenced by the zealous persuasions of Brunel, proposed
to the noble Prince William the Taciturn a project for sending out an expedition in
order to try and discover the north-east passage to [xiv]the Indies. Probably they
claimed the aid of the Government to support their efforts; but the political situation
of the country was too unsettled to allow the States to risk their money in so
doubtful an undertaking. Nevertheless, the prince himself was greatly in favour of
the expedition; yet, to support it with the funds of the nation was out of the
question.

However, two such enterprising men as Brunel and De Moucheron were not so
easily daunted; for the first Netherland Arctic voyage was undertaken in 1584, and,
in all probability, was fitted out entirely at the expense of De Moucheron. But to
Brunel belongs the honour of the voyage. This indefatigable traveller sailed with a
ship belonging to the city of Enkhuizen, towards the north, to reach the far-off
Empire of Cathay. Brunel, like a true Dutchman of the period—for the Dutch were
then merchants to the very core—occupied himself on the way with entering into
commercial relations with the Samoyed tribes.

In the records of the Archives of Utrecht, among the papers of Buchelius, Mr. Muller
has discovered an old letter, in which it is recounted that Brunel had tried in vain to
pass through Pet Strait.

Be this as it may, it is quite certain that his expedition was most unfortunate. On his
return home, his ship, freighted with a rich cargo of valuable furs, mountain-crystal,
and Muscovy glass, was wrecked in the shallow mouth of the Petchora river. Brunel,
after this sad occurrence, being [xv]perfectly aware that his country was unable at
the moment to assist him in making a new effort, and not daring to return to the
service of his former masters, the Russians, resolved to seek a new scene of action.
Accordingly he presented himself to the King of Denmark, and offered him his
services, in order to try and find the long-lost Greenland colonies. The proposal of
the able Arctic traveller was eagerly accepted. Brunel immediately entered into the
Danish service, and did not abandon the task before three vain attempts, made one
after another, convinced him of the fruitlessness of his endeavours. But little more is
known of the remaining period of his life.

Mr. Muller has called attention to some information furnished by Purchas’ Pilgrimes
iii, p. 831, of which the following is an extract:—“The rest of this journall, from the
death of Master John Knight, was written by Oliuer Browne” (or Brownel, 2 this last
letter l is unfortunately not distinct).
It may appear strange that so distinguished a seaman should have been on board a
ship in a subordinate position. Yet, in all likelihood, this is the true Brunel, for other
reasons justify the idea that he was in English service.

Firstly, Josiah Logan, in 1611, knew very accurately how to describe the manner in
which Brunel had found “Kostin Shar”. 3 Those particulars he could not have known
from the very brief [xvi]details given in the Dutch accounts. Either he must have
been personally acquainted with Brunel or have read something that was written by
him.

And, secondly, the fact that Brunel, after his failure in his Arctic voyage (1584), had
been constantly in Danish and English service, would account for his absence in the
later Dutch Arctic voyages, and would sufficiently explain the want of acquaintance
of Hessel Gerritsz with Brunel’s further researches.

It, therefore, is by no means impossible that Brunel, together with Knight, quitting
the Danish for the English service, again visited the north-west. After this we lose
sight of Brunel. It is a great pity that the evening of the life of this great man
should be lost in total obscurity. Even the year of his death is not exactly known.
However, it is supposed to have taken place in the first years of the seventeenth
century, because, in 1613, Hessel Gerritsz wrote of Brunel’s voyage, as that of
“Oliverii cuiusdam Brunelli”.

The above is the history of Brunel, as related by Mr. S. Muller.

If his views are correct, then, in all probability, the first Dutch Arctic expedition took
place in 1584. Now, in that same year, the King of Spain prohibited to the
inhabitants of the Netherlands all trade with Portugal. Thus it is easy to
comprehend that attention was drawn towards the finding of a northern passage,
which would have enabled the Dutch to open a direct trade with the Indies.
Consequently [xvii]during three successive years we see different expeditions leaving
the Netherland ports, and boldly penetrating into the Arctic seas.

Dr. Beke has given, in his introduction, the principal outlines of the route taken by
these expeditions. However, led away by the example of the German geographer,
Petermann, Dr. Beke has made a mistake in laying down the track of Barendsz in his
third voyage. This can be proved almost mathematically by an extract taken from a
log, probably of Barendsz himself, which is preserved in the very rare work,
“Histoire du Pays, nommé Spitsbergen, etc., par Hessel Gerard, à Amsterdam,
1613.” This extract runs thus:—
“May 18, New Style. We set out from the Texel, and arrived on the 22nd at Fayril, 4 and in
the neighbourhood of the Orkneys.

“June 5. We encountered ice, which, according to our estimation, came from Greenland;
for we judged from our calculations that we were about 100 nautical miles distant from
the said Greenland. The water was green with a brownish colour. Sounded without finding
any bottom. The ice extended the whole length of the sea, south-east and north-west, and
was either in pieces or in floes. 5

“The next day we made our way N.E. and N.E. ¼ N. for a distance of 36 miles, and came
upon a great ice-field, through which it was impossible to pass. Found no bottom at 120
fathoms. In our opinion, we were N.W. 220 miles [xviii]off Luffoden Island, and 400 to 460
miles from the North Cape.

“Turning thence towards the east, we arrived at Bear Island on the 10th of June, in 74°
35′ latitude, and sailing N.E. we came upon an ice-field, against which we were anchored,
and were obliged to return under the island.

“From Bear Island we set out, shaping our course W.N.W., thinking to find towards the
north a better passage; for those of the other vessel wished constantly to draw towards
the west, whilst I desired to go more eastwardly. We made until night, W.N.W., 64 miles,
and during the night till the morning, N.W., 60 miles.

“June 14. Made till night, N. ¼ W., 88 miles. Then the weather clearing up, we found
ourselves in the neighbourhood of ice, and we fancied we could see land to the north, but
we were not certain.

“June 15. We hove to, sounded, without finding bottom with 150 fathoms. Sailed until
noon S.E. and S.E. ¼ E., 20 miles, having attained 78¼° latitude. Then we sailed, wind
aft east, 28 miles; and afterwards, till night, N.N.E., 20 miles. We passed a large dead
whale, on which were several sea-gulls.

“June 16. Foggy weather, wind west, we sailed until noon, N.N.E., 84 miles. Came into the
ice, and we had to keep away in order to follow the edge of the ice, N.E. 20 miles. Again
we had to put back S.E. 24 miles, clear of the ice, till shaping a course S.S.W. 16 miles, we
came again in the ice, which was in the morning.

“June 17. Weather calm until noon. We then found the latitude of 80° 10′. We tacked,
having the wind right ahead to keep clear from the ice (estoyons passe si, ou 6 lieues?)
Wind till night, west; found bottom at 90 fathoms. During the whole watch we continued
steering S.S.W. 16 miles, having wind from the S.E. We then saw land, but still kept on
towards the W.S.W. The land trended for about 32 or 36 miles, from W. ¼ S., towards E.
¼ N. [xix]It was high land, and entirely covered with snow, and it extended from the N.W.
to another point.

“June 18. S.W. ¼ W. 24 miles, and there we found the latitude of 80°. With wind W. and
N.W. we sailed against the wind along the land till noon, the 20th. Then we had the
western point of the land S.S.W. 20 miles. Continued to sail S.S.W. and S.W. ¼ S., 20
miles, and came close to a large bay, which extended into the land towards the south; and
another bay, before which was an island, and that bay extended far towards the south.
Then sailed anew from the land, and till night continued steering N.W. ¼ N., 8 miles, and
came again in the ice, owing to which we had to return towards the south.

“June 21. It blew very hard and snowed much from the S.W., and we steered close to the
wind, until night, anchored close under the land, near our companion, just before the
entry of the channel. At 18 fathoms sandy bottom. At the east point of the mouth was a
rock, which was moreover split, a very good landmark. There was also a small island or
rock, about 1⅓ from that eastern one. On the west point also, was a rock, very near.

“June 22. Took in ballast of 7 boatsful of stones, thus much because our ship was little
ballasted. And came a great bear, swimming towards the ship, which we pursued with
three boats. He was killed, and his skin was 12 feet long. This day we entered with the
boat into the entry, to find a better port, which was necessary, and found inside the land
all separated and broken and some islands, where was good anchorage in several spots.

“June 23. Looked for our true meridian by means of the Astronomical Circle, and found
before noon 11, and after noon 16 degrees declination, that the compasses, or the needle
turned towards the N.W., so that the circle proved not correct. We went out of the bay to
seek how far the coast could extend itself, for the weather was very clear. Could not
perceive the end of the land, which extended itself S. ¼ E., 28 miles, as far as a high and
mountainous cape, [xx]which looked as if it was an island. At midnight took the altitude of
the sun 13°, so that we were at the latitude of 79° 24′.

“June 24. Before noon it was calm, with the wind S.W. The land (along which we shaped
our course) was for the greatest part broken, rather high, and consisted only of mountains
and pointed hills; for which reason we gave it the name of ‘Spitsbergen’. 6 We sailed about
S.W. and S.W. ¼ S., 28 miles, and then we were about 40 or 48 miles from the spot where
we had anchored the first time more easterly.

“In the evening, we again kept out from the land, the north-western point of it was N.E. of
us, and steered out of the coast W. and W. ¼ S., 32 miles. Until the end of the first watch,
sailed towards the east, and steered S.E., 32 miles, until noon of the 25th. Then came
close to the land, and sailed with wind aft, N.N.E., 8 miles. And anchored behind a cape in
18 fathoms sandy bottom; and it seamed to us there was ebb and flow, for we found in
the time of 12 hours a current running from the S.W. and another running from the N.E.,
so strong that the buoys of our anchors hid themselves under the water. This bay, in which
we were, ran rather far inland, with still another interior creek; on the south side there
was a low cape, behind which one could sail, keeping along the northern coast and
stopping behind the cape, having shelter from all winds. Our men found there teeth of
walrus or sea-cows, for which reason we called that bay ‘Teeth-bay’. We also found there
much dung of stags, and some wool as of sheep. Just south of the cape was a little creek,
like a harbour.

“June 26. We had the wind north, made sail, and steered S. ¼ E., 40 miles. At noon we
arrived between the mountainous cape and the terra firma, thinking that the mountainous
cape was an island. We sailed within S. ¼ E. and S., and being a little distance inside the
cape, we found the depth 12 and 10 fathoms good sandy bottom, and being [xxi]entered,
32 miles; there was a depth of 50 fathoms stony bottom, and the land was all covered
with snow. Entering about 20 miles between the cape and the coast of the terra firma, we
 found that the cape, which we thought to be an island, was attached by a sand-bank to
the land; for we found a depth of 5 fathoms. There was ice on the shallows, so that we
were obliged to return. That cape, which we thought to be an island, lies at 79° 5′
latitude; we called it ‘Cape Bird’, because there were so many birds upon it and in the
neighbourhood.

“June 27. It was calm, so that we remained floating, without being able to advance
between Cape Bird and the land.

“June 28. We rounded it, and then sailed S.S.W., 24 miles, always keeping along the land,
which was very mountainous and sharp, with a beautiful shore. We sailed south and S. ¼
E., 24 miles, and afterwards S. ¼ W., 12 miles. Found, at noon, the latitude to be 78⅓°,
and we were then in the neighbourhood of ice. Sailed same distance seaward, to keep
clear of the ice, and sailed thus along the edge of the ice and in the neighbourhood of the
land S.E. ¼ S., 28 miles. And then we were close to a large bay, which extended itself in
the land E.N.E., and was on both sides high and mountainous. Sailed with N.N.E. wind
abaft till night all along the coast, S.S.E. and S. ¼ W., 20 miles. Then again there was a
large bay, in which was much ice under the land. To keep out of the ice we steered a little
W.S.W., and sailed S. ¼ W., 16 miles. Came into the ice, for which reason we sailed S.W.
12 miles.

“June 29. Continued, with a north wind, to sail S.E. ¼ E. and S.S.E. 20 miles. All along the
coast, till noon, south 16 miles, and found at noon the latitude of 76° 50′. Sailed south
and S.S.E. without finding land, until we saw Bear Island, on the first of July.”

This is all that Hessel Gerritsz has copied out of the log of Barendsz himself, as he
earnestly assures us. [xxii]

Dr. Beke, speaking in his introduction of this extract, says:—

“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 [xxiii]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
[xxiv]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 [xxv]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 [xxvi]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 [xxvii]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 [xxviii]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:— [xxix]

“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, [xxx]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
[xxxi]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. [xxxii]
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 [xxxiii]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, [xxxiv]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. [xxxv]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 [xxxvi]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. [xxxvii]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 [xxxviii]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. [xxxix]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 [xl]

“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.

Mr. de Jonge, speaking about this whaling cruise, remarks:—

“According to this account Vlamingh would have been near the house of Barendsz or
thereabout, but Witsen does not say that Vlamingh went on shore there. This information
leads us to conclude that Vlamingh did not see the wintering house at all, but simply
presumed that he had been near to it or thereabout, or else surely he would not have
failed to have mentioned it.”

For the rest, the account of Witsen is rather vague, and exclusively depends upon
verbal communications. These old voyages of the Dutch walrus-hunters, as well as
those of the Norwegian fishermen in the present day, clearly show us that here, as
well as in every other part of the Arctic Regions, a favourable season might allow
the fortunate [xli]navigator who happens to be on the spot to penetrate in a few
days further than any of his predecessors, notwithstanding their unequalled
perseverance and energy.
Within the last ten years the Norwegians, like the Dutch walrus-hunters of old, have
been making continual inroads into the Kara Sea. This has been principally due to
the discovery of rich fishing-grounds in that direction. The first of these Norwegian
explorers was Captain Carlsen. With a small fishing-boat of Hammerfest he sailed
through Pet Strait, and, following the Siberian coast, he reached White Island, near
the mouth of the Obi river, without having fallen in with any signs of ice. It was,
indeed, a bold undertaking to penetrate thus with so small a boat into the Kara Sea;
but Captain Carlsen was fully rewarded for the risk he had run, in making a vast
capture of blubber-yielding animals, which handed him over a profit of £1,100.

The voyage of the intrepid English walrus-hunter, Captain Palliser, who in that same
season sailed as far as the north coast of Novaya Zemlya, was of no less
importance. Being about half a degree north of Cape Nassau, he fell in with
extensive ice-fields, which, however, were soon broken up by stormy weather.

Captain Palliser writes:—

“After the ice was broken up and driven away by the heavy gales, I believe I could have
circumnavigated all Novaya Zemlya without much trouble. We were however prevented
from doing so, on account of having on board [xlii]the crew of a wrecked fishing smack. For
this reason a great decrease in our provisions had taken place, and consequently our store
would not have been sufficient for so long a voyage.”

Captain Palliser then shaped his course south, came through Matthew’s Strait into
the Kara Sea, and penetrated to within three or four miles of White Island.

However, both these voyages were surpassed in intrepidity by the interesting cruise
of the Norwegian, Captain Johannesen.

On the 1st of May 1869, the schooner Nordland, Captain E. H. Johannesen,

anchored at the Mersduscharsky Island, south of Kostin Shar. After sailing for some
time in the direction of Burrough Strait, Captain Johannesen changed his course
northwardly, and keeping the west coast continually in sight, he eventually passed
Matthew’s Strait on the 9th of June.

Ten days later he was close to Cape Nassau, where he experienced a strong
easterly current.

From here, turning south, the Nordland sailed on the 17th of July through
Matthew’s Strait, and running south in the land-water along the east coast, Captain
Johannesen was, on the 26th July, in Burrough Strait. At once he resolved to
penetrate into the Kara Sea. He followed the low coast of the country of the
Samoyeds in an easterly and afterwards north-easterly direction, and found himself
on the 8th of August in the immediate neighbourhood of White Island without
having been hindered by the ice. [xliii]

The day following he shaped his course north-west, and attained, on the 15th of
August, the estimated latitude of 75° 6′ N. and 71° E. longitude, where he
encountered his first ice. Thence, in a westerly direction, he returned to Novaya
Zemlya, which he sighted on the 20th in 75° 10′ N. latitude and 64° E. longitude.
He now sailed along the east coast, and passed through Burrough Strait on his
homeward voyage. He had repeatedly encountered a heavy swell from the south-
east, but had scarcely met with ice. He must, undoubtedly, have been close to
Barendsz’s winter house, which is placed by Captain Carlsen in 76° 12′ N. latitude
and 68° E. longitude.

Induced by these advantageous voyages, several Norwegian fishermen entered the

Kara Sea in the following year.

Again the skilful Captain Johannesen made a cruise which almost surpassed his
former one, having this time circumnavigated Novaya Zemlya, a feat never before
achieved. He visited the east coast of that island, passing close to, but without
perceiving, Barendsz’s winter quarters.

F. Torkildsen, commander of the schooner Alpha, was less fortunate. On the 24th of
June he passed through Burrough Strait and entered the Kara Bay, where he, on
the 13th of July, in 68° 40′ N. latitude and 68° E. longitude, lost his ship. The crew
was, however, saved. Captain E. A. Ulve sailed with his schooner Samson along the
west coast of Novaya Zemlya, and on the 1st of August attained the high
[xliv]latitude of 76° 47′ in 59° 17′ E. longitude, without sighting any ice.

Entering on the 8th of August through Matthew’s Strait into the Kara Sea, and
keeping between White Island and the Island of Vaigat, he, on the 24th of August,
when homeward-bound, sailed through Burrough Strait.

F. E. Mack, with his schooner Polarstern, found, on the 5th of July, Matthew’s Strait
blocked up with ice; but thirteen days afterwards he sailed through it, and after
crossing the Kara Sea in all directions, returned on the 21st of August through
Burrough Strait.

Another navigator, Captain P. Quale, pushed more eastwardly. With his yacht, the
Johan Mary, he, in the latitude of 75° 20′ N., attained the longitude of 74° 35′, and
thus found himself eastward of the meridian which goes across the mouth of the
Obi River.

The following year, encouraged by the partial success of these cruises, we find the
Norwegian seal-hunters again entering this new and prosperous ground. The
southern entries being closed by the ice, the captains directed their course
northwardly, in order to penetrate into the Kara Sea by rounding Novaya Zemlya.

Passing over in silence the cruises of Captain F. C. Mack and those of the brothers
Johannesen, we come to the interesting voyage of Captain Carlsen, the first
navigator, who, since 1597, has entered the Ice Harbour of Barendsz. Captain Elling
Carlsen, with [xlv]his sloop The Solid, left the harbour of Hammerfest on the 22nd of
May, 1871. When rounding the North Cape of Norway, he met with very heavy
squalls and snow-storms from the north-west.

On the 28th he passed Vardo, and on the 10th of June, in 68° N. latitude and 40°
36′ E. longitude, at the northern outlet of the White Sea, he fell in with the first ice.
On the 16th of June he met two other ships, of which the one had already killed
five hundred and the other a thousand seals.

On the 19th of July Captain Carlsen reached the coast of Novaya Zemlya, in the
neighbourhood of Mersduscharsky Island, and shaping his course towards the
north, he passed Cape Nassau, rounded Novaya Zemlya, and anchored on the 18th
of August at Cape Hooft, on the east coast.

On the 24th of August, when he had advanced in a southerly direction almost as far
as 76° N. latitude, he observed much drift ice at a distance of forty miles from the
coast.

On the 29th of August Carlsen again steered north, and anew anchored at Cape
Hooft. North of Matthew’s Strait, Captain Carlsen had fallen in with Captain F. Mack,
who was provided with better instruments, supplied by the Meteorological
Institution at Christiania. By means of these instruments, both captains made very
correct observations, with such success that they noted down the north-east point
of Novaya Zemlya as lying in 67° 30′ E. longitude, instead of in 73°, as was given in
the latest charts. They found that the land to the north-east [xlvi]of Novaya Zemlya
lay pointing more towards the north than to the north-east, as given in the previous
charts. These observations proved the calculations of the old Dutch navigators to
have been perfectly correct, and restored to them the reputation of which they had
been so long defrauded.
As for the subsequent part of Captain Carlsen’s voyage, we had better follow his
own ship’s log. In it he says:—

“Sept. 7. Strong breeze from the south with weather overcast, and two reefs in the
mainsail. Anchored in the afternoon under the land near Barendsz harbour, where
Barendsz wintered. Pumped the ship free.

“Friday, 8. Gale from the west with detached sky. We began to flinch (the animals we had
caught on the 6th). Afternoon we finished flinching and repaired the gaff, which was
broken. Let go also our port anchor. 8 o’clock pumped the ship free. During the night
strong breeze.

“Saturday, 9. Strong breeze from the S.W. Sky overcast. 8 o’clock forenoon we went under
sail and coursed south along the land. 6 o’clock in the afternoon, we saw walrus on the
ice, boats were lowered, and we caught two of them; we also saw a house on shore,
which had fallen down. At noon we observed the latitude 76° 12′, the distance from shore
guessed. The house on shore was 16 metres long by 10 metres broad, and the fir-wood
planks, of which it was composed, were 1½ inches thick by from 14 to 16 inches broad,
and as far as we could make out they were nailed together. The first things we saw
amongst the ruins of the house were two ships’ cooking pans of copper, a crowbar or bar
of iron, a gun-barrel, an alarum, a clock, a chest in which was found several files and other
instruments, many engravings, a flute, and also a few articles of dress. There were also
two other chests, but they [xlvii]were empty, only filled up with ice, and there was an iron
frame over the fire-place with shifting bar.

“Sunday, 10. Light breeze from the N.W., almost calm, clear sky, we sailed along the coast
S.S.E. In the afternoon we caught two walrus. 8 o’clock pumped the ship free. During the
whole night calm.

“Monday, 11. Light breeze from the west. Sky overcast. In the afternoon the wind
freshened from the west. We put three reefs in the mainsail. 8 o’clock pumped the ship
free. The whole night gale from the S.W.

“Tuesday, 12. Gale from the S.W. We are obliged to return to Ledenaji Bay (Ice Harbour),
where, on the evening of the 9th we had found the ruined house. At noon we anchored in
the bay, and went again on shore and found several things, viz., candlesticks, tankards
with lid of zinc, a sword, a halberd head, two books, several navigation instruments, an
iron chest already quite rusted.

“Wednesday, 13. Gale from the W.N.W. At noon we went under sail, but as we made a
little south the wind shifted to the S.W., and in order to keep off we had to let go both
anchors. Storm with snow. 8 o’clock pumped the ship free. During the night, light breeze.

“Thursday, 14. Calm with clear sky. 4 o’clock in the morning we went ashore further to
investigate the wintering place. On digging we found again several objects, such as
drumsticks, a hilt of a sword, and spears. Altogether it seemed that the people had been
equipped in a war-like manner, but nothing was found which could indicate the presence
of human remains. On the beach we found pieces of wood which had formerly belonged to
some part of a ship, for which reason I believe that a vessel has been wrecked there, the
 crew of which built the house with the materials of the wreck and afterwards betook
themselves to the boats. Five sailors’ trunks were still in the house, which might also have
been used as 5 berths, at least as far as we could make out. We now set to work to build
a cairn, and erected a wooden pole 20 feet high. We placed in the [xlviii]cairn a description
of what we had found, shut up in a double tin-case, after which we returned on board and
went under sail. At noon the wind was N.E., observed latitude about 76° 7′ N., longitude
68° E. (Greenwich). We steered in the direction S. by W. along the land. 8 o’clock pumped
the ship free. The whole night light breeze.”

Thus far, we have let the log speak for itself. After having quitted the house, Carlsen
intended to return home by circumnavigating the island. Following, therefore, the
east coast in a southerly direction, he soon passed several icebergs.

On the 16th of September he fell in with much ice, which probably by the west and
north-west wind was driven from the land.

On the 18th it froze so stiff that they had to cut their way through the ice.

On the 19th, being becalmed, the ship could move neither forward nor backward.
During the afternoon the wind freshened from the south-west, upon which they
tried to approach nearer to the land.

On the 20th they had again to cut their way through the ice, which was already
strong enough to bear them. Till eight o’clock in the evening they worked to reach a
lead close to the land.

On the 21st, Carlsen, in about 74° N. latitude, was, during a storm from the north-
east, in great danger of losing his ship. Closed in by the ice, he drifted that and
both the following days with the ice, in a south-western direction, during which time
he could see from the crow’s nest open water towards the north-east and east. Not
before the 30th of [xlix]September, in 72° 25′ N. latitude, did he again succeed in
reaching open water, thus, fortunately, escaping a fate similar to that of Barendsz.
 RELICS FOUND IN THE BARENTS’ HOUSE IN NOVAYA ZEMLYA.

The 3rd of October he sailed through Burrough Strait, and anchored on the 4th of
November at Hammerfest, thanking God for his prosperous voyage. Thus Carlsen
(like a true seaman) ends his log.

News of the discovery, by Captain Elling Carlsen, of a great number of relics on the
beach of Ice Harbour, was soon spread in Hammerfest. In consequence, on the
12th of November, 1871, in the Hammerfest newspaper called Finmarksposten,
there appeared a leading article entitled “Captain Elling Carlsen’s Voyage around
Novaya Zemlya”. A detailed account was given in it of the old Dutch voyages
towards the north-east. Notwithstanding some faults, the article was in its main
points correct, and proved that in the far North of Europe the expeditions of
Barendsz had attained a legendary celebrity.
 RELICS FOUND IN THE BARENTS’ HOUSE IN NOVAYA ZEMLYA

About the discovery of the winter quarters at Novaya Zemlya the Finmarksposten
communicates a few details which seem to have been given to the writer by Carlsen
himself.

“After a lapse of 275 years” (says the Finmarksposten), “Captain Carlsen found himself in
the very spot where, in 1596, Barendsz and his companions had come on shore, and near
to the ruins of the simple hut constructed by the unfortunate Dutchmen. Captain Carlsen,
as far as lay in his power, made researches on and about the spot, but the season being
far advanced and the obligation he was under of circumnavigating Novaya Zemlya, obliged
him to seize the first opportunity of proceeding on his voyage. Consequently [l]on the 10th
of September, without having brought his work to a conclusion, he was obliged to sail.

“On the 10th and 11th he remained cruising, but in the evening of the latter day he found
himself under the necessity of returning to Ice Harbour, and thus he was enabled to
proceed with his investigations.

“On the 13th he set sail, but was again forced to return and anchor.

“On the 14th he was enabled to complete his researches. The house, fallen completely
into decay, was so to speak covered and almost hermetically enclosed by a thick layer of
ice. All the objects were likewise covered by a thick sheet of ice, and this explains the
excellent condition in which many of the articles were found. Such was their unimpaired
condition that one would be inclined to suppose that they had been placed there but a
 short time previously, and one never would believe that they had, during almost three
centuries, been left uncared for. The house, as far as Captain Carlsen could make out, was
16 metres long by 10 broad, and nailed together out of fir-wood planks 1½ inches thick by
from 14 to 16 inches broad. The house was in part constructed out of the materials of the
wrecked ship, indications of which still existed in the remnants of a few oaken timbers
scattered on the beach. The house seemed to have contained for the occupants 5 standing
bed-places. There were 5 ship’s chests, which were however too decayed to be taken
away. In two of the chests were found a few instruments, such as files, sledge-hammer, a
borer, two pairs of compasses, a few caulking-irons, engravings, a flute, pieces of
navigation instruments, as well as a few books in the Dutch language, which latter makes
it almost certain that the relics belonged to Barendsz and his companions of the year
1596. In the centre of the house, where the fireplace had probably stood, a great iron
frame was found, on which two ship’s copper cooking pans still remained. A few porringers
were so rotten that one could only take away their copper mountings. In addition to
[li]these were found candlesticks and tin-tankards, a crow-bar, two or more gunbarrels, a
gunlock, an alarum with the clock and clock weight belonging to it, a great iron chest, a
grindstone, a few spears and a halberd. Carlsen relates that round the house were found
several large casks which had been provided with iron hoops, but the staves as well as the
hoops were so rotten that no part of them could be brought home. Before Captain Carlsen
left the place he erected in the neighbourhood of the house a cairn, on which he placed a
pole 10 metres long. In the cairn was deposited a double tin case, containing a written
account of his having been there on the 13th of September 1871, and of his having found
articles belonging to the men of the Dutch expedition under Barendsz, who had wintered
there in the years 1596–97.”

Such are the particulars about the discovery of the relics in the winter-house of
Novaya Zemlya.

Up to February 1872, the public in Holland remained ignorant of the discovery of

the winter quarters of Barendsz, and that several objects, including a few books
written in the Dutch language, were brought home. This news, however, when
spread, caused a general sensation throughout the Netherlands, and measures
were immediately taken by the Government to obtain possession of these
interesting relics. Information was at once obtained as to their whereabouts, and it
became known that they were already in the possession of Mr. Ellis C. Lister Kay,
who, travelling as an English tourist in Norway, and being by chance at Hammerfest
on the arrival of Carlsen, had immediately bought them. Upon learning the interest
which the Netherlands Government took in these relics, Mr. Kay kindly gave them
[lii]up, accepting only the same amount as he had given to obtain possession of
them. This courteous behaviour of Mr. Kay restored to the native land of the great
explorer these precious relics, which had remained hidden for nearly three
centuries. They were afterwards deposited in the model-room of the Naval
Department at the Hague, where a model-house, having an open front, has been
constructed for their reception. This is an exact imitation of the original at Novaya
Zemlya. There these old and touching memorials of a noble achievement have
found a final resting-place in the worthy company of a number of ancient objects,
which each for itself silently points to some one of the many glorious pages in the
annals of Dutch naval history. To demonstrate that these objects found by Captain
Carlsen originally appertained to Barendsz and his companions, Mr. De Jonge says:
—

“The relics bear in themselves the undeniable proof—1st, that they have belonged to
Dutch navigators; and 2nd, that they must belong to the last period of the 16th century,
and especially to that part included between 1592 and 1598, as I will prove out of the
following description of the objects:—

“1. An iron frame on four iron feet, with three iron cross bars of which one is moveable (a
kind of iron trivet), was found by Captain Carlsen in the centre of the house of Barendsz
and Heemskerck, exactly resembling that iron frame which we see also represented in the
centre of the house in the old illustration by Levinus Hulsius in 1598.

“2. A round copper cooking pan with handle. Found standing on the iron frames.

“3. A ditto larger one, with broken handle, the pan on [liii]the upper side a little dinted.
Found standing on the same place.

“4. Three copper bands, remains most likely of porringers, found close to the three objects
above alluded to.

“5. A fragment of a copper scoop with handle.

“6. A round grindstone with iron axis.

“7. Fragments of a chest with metal handle belonging to it, besides four other pieces of
iron. An iron box made to fit within the chest, in order therein to deposit valuables. All
these things were half crumbled away.

“8. The iron cover of the chest (spoken of in No. 7), with intricate lock-work.

“9. An iron crow-bar, bent in the middle, at the lower end a point, the upper end formed
like the tail of a swallow. The part which opens out is worn in a circular shape, having in
all probability served as a rest for the axis of a spit.

“10. The sieve of a copper scummer.

“11. A tin plate.

“12. An iron bar in two pieces. This bar was sawn across at Hammerfest, as it was
presumed to be a gun-barrel.

“13. Iron striker or sledge-hammer; the handle is broken.

“14. A borer or auger, with auger-bit. Such an auger is represented in the illustration, ‘How
made ready to sail back to Holland’.
“15. A ditto, one with larger auger-bit.

“16. Three gauges, without handles.

“17. A large chisel, with a wooden handle.

“18. An adze, of which the handle was broken.

“19. A caulking-iron.

“20. A borer, with the handle broken, and two other boring irons.

“21. Seven iron files, of different dimensions.

“22. A stone to whet tools.

“23. Two iron pairs of compasses.

“24. A broken pocket-knife or cutlass, with horn handle.

“25. A copper tap of a wine or beer cask. Excellently preserved. [liv]

“26. A wooden siphon of a beer or vinegar cask.

“27. A wooden trencher, painted red.

“28. An old Dutch earthenware jar, in which there was still a little grease. (See a similar
jug in the illustration, ‘How we were wrecked, and with great danger had to betake
ourselves to the ice’.)

“29. A tin tankard, with lid and handle. Decayed.

“30. The lower half of another tankard.

“31. Three tin spoons, of which one is broken. Of the form used in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries.

“32. The inner works of a lock.

“33. A ditto, larger one, with a part of the key.

“34. An iron weight, of 8 lbs.

“35. A padlock.

“36. Two leathern shoes or slippers. These shoes are too small for a full-grown man. They
must consequently have belonged to the ship’s boy, of whom there is mention in the
journal of De Veer, on the 19th of October, 1596.

“37. Iron clock-work, in which are seven cog-wheels; the cover is of iron plates, but partly
rusted. The dial-plate is lost, but one of the hands is still present. There is also a circular-
shaped flexible piece of iron, quite rusted, probably the spring. In the journal of Gerrit de
Veer, at the date of 27th of October, he makes mention, on that day: ‘They set up the dial
and made the clock strike.’ On the 3rd of December, 1596, ‘The clock was frozen and
might not go, although we hung more weight on it than before’. This clock agrees in form
almost perfectly with the clock drawn in the illustration of Hulsius. A similar clock is also
given in the work entitled: ‘Le Moyen-âge et la Renaissance, par P. Lacroix et F. Serré,
Paris, 1851’. In the article ‘Corporations de Métier, par A. Monteil et Rabutanz’, is found a
drawing: ‘L’horloger, facsimilé de planche dessinée et gravée, par Jost Ammon’. This
drawing represents a clock of similar construction to that found in Novaya Zemlya. This
print, in ‘Le Moyen-âge’, seems to have been copied out of the work of Hartin Schopperus,
entitled ‘Panoplia, [lv]Omnium illiberalium, mechanicarum aut sedentariarum artium genera
continens; Cum figuris a Jost Ammon. Francofurti, 1568’. Hence we come to the conclusion
that the clock, with its weight, found at Novaya Zemlya, belongs, as is proved by its
construction, to work of the sixteenth century. The application of the pendulum took place
later, in 1658.

“38. One of the weights belonging to the clock.

“39. A metal clock. This clock, with four perches, stood probably upon the mechanism
described in No. 37.

“40. A little iron hammer, without doubt part of the striking apparatus.

“41. Three copper scales of a balance, having served for weighing medicines. According to
the journal of Mr. G. de Veer, ‘a barber-surgeon joined the crew of Heemskerck and
Barendsz’.

“42. A six-holed German flute, of beechwood, but without the mouth-piece. It is broken at
the end.

“43. A part of an instrument, of which one end is constructed of wood. In this end is found
a groove, a round opening, and a wooden tongue. To this wooden tongue is fastened a
copper one, opening out in three parts, and ending in a point. It is difficult to say to what
instrument this belonged; but it is not quite improbable that it has been fastened on the
axis of a globe, in order to prick the chart. Globes and plain charts were used at this
period for want of Mercator’s projection.

“44. A wooden compass card, with moveable wooden hand, in the centre of which is found
a round opening for the point of the axis.

“45. A wooden rectangle, with three circular segments one within the other, and
subtending the rectangle. The longer arm is broken in three pieces.

“46. A semi-circular copper plate, whose case is curved in such a manner as to form a
parallel. Through the middle of the plate runs a meridian, having in its centre a small
screw, which was formerly moveable, but now fixed by rust. [lvi]On the left or on the west
side of the meridian are drawn nine arcs, having their centre in the point of intersection of
the meridian and parallel. On these arcs the degrees are indicated by ciphers, and
between these arcs are found the Dutch words: Wassende Noordoostersche, Afgaande
Noordoostersche, Wassende Noordwestersche, etc. It is difficult to say in what manner
this instrument was used, but probably it is an instrument that has served for examining
and determining the variations of the compass. If I dare express my opinion, I should say,
that this is the instrument which Plancius, the master of Barendsz, invented to calculate
the longitude at sea. Plancius was at that time much occupied with his theory of
determining the longitude at sea, by means of the variation of the needle. For farther
details see the work entitled: ‘Rise of the Dutch power in the East Indies,’ volume i, p. 86.
According to Plancius there existed 8 meridians, under 4 of which there was no variation,
and under the 4 others a maximum variation took place. Calculating upon these data
Plancius imagined that the true longitude could be found. He therefore adapted a copper
plate to the astrolabe employed at that period, and the object found by Carlsen is probably
this very copper plate, the only one now extant.

INSTRUMENT FOR FINDING LONGITUDE.

“47. The handle of a sword beautifully formed. A similar handle is represented on drawing
61, letter B in the work of Mr. D. van der Kellen, Jr., entitled: ‘Antiquities of the
Netherlands.’

“48. A sword with ditto handle.

“49. The point of a sword.

“50. A part of a spear, with iron spearhead.

“51. Ditto head without wood.

“52. The point of a halberd. A nearly equiform halberd is represented in the illustration.
‘The exact manner of the house wherein we wintered’.

“53. The barrel of a heavy musket or matchlock, with breach-pin, pan, matchstick, a sight
on the fore part of the barrel. In the work ‘Le Moyen-âge et la Renaissance’, [lvii]par P.
Lacroix et F. Seré, Paris, 1851, T. iv. in the article ‘Armurerie, armes à feu portatives’, folio
xxiii, by F. de Saulcy, is the following passage: ‘L’arquebuse à mêche resta pendant
longtemps l’arme ordinaire d’une partie de l’infanterie; seulement après en avoir diminué
le poids on lui donna le nom de mousquet, et le mousquet à mêche était encore en usage
dans les armées de Louis XIII’. To this kind of firearm belongs the barrel spoken of under
No. 53. The mechanism, with which the match was brought on the panpowder was called
‘le serpentin’. ‘Le serpentin’, says de Saulcy, ‘exigeait que le soldat eût constamment sur lui
une mêche allumée, ou le moyen de faire du feu: il fallait en outre compasser la mêche,
etc. Pour remédier à cet inconvénient on inventa les platines à rouet, qui furent employées
d’abord en Allemagne et fabriquées, dit on, pour la première fois en 1517 à Neuremberg.
Dans la platine à rouet la complication du mécanisme avait trop d’inconvénients, pour
qu’on ne cherchât pas à le perfectionner. Les Espagnols y parurent les premiers. La platine
espagnole, appelée souvent platine de miquelet, présentait au dehors un ressort qui
pressait à l’extrémité de sa branche mobile sur un bras du chien, l’autre bras de cette
pièce lorsqu’on mettait le chien au bandé appuyait contre une broche, sortant de l’intérieur
et traversant le corps de la platine. On retirait cette broche et le ressort poussait le chien,
qui n’était plus retenu, et la pierre frappait sur un plan d’acier cannelé, qui faisait corps
avec le couvercle du bassinet. Le choc de la pierre sur les cannelures de l’acier produisait
le feu’. The matchlock under No. 57 seems to be a fragment of such a platine de miquelet.

“54. The barrel of a gun of smaller calibre, with three sights.

“55. Ditto.

“56. Ditto (broken).

“57. A part of a matchlock, with cock, and flint-stones.

“58. Nineteen copper powder horns, some of them covered with leather, and some still full
of powder. These horns were suspended to a shoulder belt. [lviii]

“59. An iron cannon ball.

“60. A tin bracket pitcher, beautifully engraved. Style Renaissance. Probably it belonged to
the merchandise of which, according to de Veer, the ship’s cargo partly consisted. The
pitcher is in a perfect state of preservation.

“61. The upper half of another pitcher.

“62. Five tin candlesticks on pedestals, beautifully formed, as they were used in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Probably merchandise.

“63. Five ditto, of another form, of which three are broken. Merchandise.

“64. Thirteen ditto, but again of another and smaller form; in three of them the upper part
is wanting.

“65. Two tin boxes, each divided into four compartments, of which the lower part, if you
turn it, can be used as a drinking cup, the centre as a saltcellar, whilst the upper part is fit
for a pepper box, the top of which unscrews.

“66. Two ditto, of which only the drinking cups and the upper part of the pepper box have
been preserved.
“67. Two ditto, of which only the lower part of the drinking cups has been preserved.

“68. A tin medallion, on which is represented: ‘Time that uplifts truth from the earth’, and
on which a marginal inscription is to be read: ‘Abstrusam. Tenebris. Tempus. Me Educit. Tu
Auras. H. G. (Henry or Hurbert Goltzius)’. Inside the margin is found: ‘Veritas filia
temporis’. Probably also an object of merchandise. A description of similar medals is found
in the Dutch work of C. Leemans, in ‘de Verslagen der Koninklijke Akademie van
Wetenschappen’.

“69. A ditto medallion in a small wooden frame, representing a woman seated, holding in
her right hand a cross, and in her left a chalice or goblet, from which a flame like light
arises. Behind her lies one of the tables of the law. A symbol of religion, or of the New
Testament.

“70. Two ditto medallions, in wooden frames, representing a woman with a child in her
lap, and another in her [lix]arms. A third child seeks refuge near her; this is probably a
symbol of Mercy.

“71. Three copper parts of objects, the original destination of which is uncertain.

“72. Two wooden stoppers, either belaying pins, which are used on small ships to fasten
ropes, or pieces of furniture. These objects have been erroneously taken by Captain
Carlsen for drumsticks.

“73. Nine buttons, and the stopper of a tin bottle.

“74. The haft of a knife, and another object of carved wood. Not Dutch work, but
apparently of Norwegian or Russian origin. Barendsz or one of his companions might have
obtained these objects on the former expeditions. Moreover the trade with Archangel gave
them opportunities of buying Russian or Norwegian articles.

“75. A great number of prints from copper engravings. These prints have been completely
frozen together, and whilst in that state a beam or other part of the dwelling has fallen
upon them, for they seem to have been broken whilst in congealed condition, and a thaw
has reduced them to a compact mass. The prints are well executed, but the paper having
become too weak, only some of the engravings have been removed, and those in a torn
condition. Some of them represent Roman heroes, by Goltzius; the ‘Defenders of Harlem’,
by Goltzius. 1857, subscribed Londerseel; ‘Paradise’, by Spranger, subscribed Bosscher;
‘Pallas, Juno, and Venus in presence of Paris’, with ‘Bosscher excudit’. Scenes taken from
the Bible, such as ‘The meeting of Esau and Jacob’, ‘Tobias’, etc. Also representations of
Asiatic or Persian horsemen, etc.; a large drawing, showing a reposing lion, with the
monogram HTR. (The H and R written together, and the T interlaced in the H). The
manner of engraving the names of the engravers proves that all these must have been the
work of the sixteenth century. It may seem strange that Arctic navigators had prints or
engravings on board, but it is not at all so, for Heemskerck and Barendsz intended to go
as far as China, when they [lx]sailed to the North-East. For that purpose they had
merchandise on board, and prints or engravings were often used as such. This had also
been the case on the first voyage to the East Indies. On a list of goods and merchandise
left at Patani, in Siam, in 1602, a great number of drawings by de Gheyn, Goltzius,
Brengel, etc., are to be found, and among these, facsimiles of those discovered at Novaya
Zemlya, namely, ‘The Three Goddesses’, ‘The Roman heroes’, etc.

“76. A folio book bound in leather, and with copper clasps, but half the binding has
mouldered away. The beginning and the end of this book, as well as the edges, are much
decayed, and the title of the first volume is quite obliterated. The book is divided into two
parts; the first volume, of which the title is obliterated, has proved to be, after comparison
with another specimen of this work, ‘Die Cronycke van Hollant, Zeeland ende Vrieslant, tot
den jare 1517, etc., tot Delft, by Aelbert Hendricus, wonnende op ’t Meretveld, Anno
1585’. 23 The second volume, of which the title is intact, runs: ‘Short and true account of
the Government, and the most remarkable facts that occurred in the country of Holland,
Zeeland, and Friesland, by Albert Hendriksz, anno 1585’.

“77. A book in quarto (the edges of which are much decayed), entitled: ‘The Navigation, or
the Art of Sailing, by the excellent pilote, Pieter de Medina, a Spaniard, etc.; with still
another new Instruction on the Principal Points of Navigation, by Michel Coignet. ’t
Hantwerpen, anno 1580’. At the bottom of the page, where the fifth chapter of the new
instruction of Coignet begins, opposite to a copy of the Astrolabe (the number of the page
is worn out), there is written in the old Dutch, ‘… y myn Jan Aerjanss … Pieter Janss … y
(of 17) April ghinghen vij van … (lyberen [lxi]herte?)’. The two last words are almost
illegible. Gerrit de Veer gives, at the end of his recital, the names of those who returned
from Novaya Zemlya. Among these, the names of Jan Aerjanss and Pieter Janss are not to
be found. These were, most likely, the names of two of the missing crew of whom the
names are not mentioned. Of the seventeen persons who set out, only twelve returned
safely to the Netherlands. A new translation, by Mr. Martin Everart Brug, of the work of
Medina, had been published in 1598, by Cornelis Claesz, at Amsterdam, with Coignet’s
new instructions. As the copy found at Novaya Zemlya is a publication of 1580, it follows,
as a matter of course, that the Dutch navigators who had left this copy, dated 1580, at
Novaya Zemlya, must have started before the year 1598, or they would assuredly have
taken the latest edition of so important a work, especially when printed at Amsterdam,
from whence they started.

“78. A little book, with parchment cover, in octavo, having the form of a pocket-book,
entitled, ‘The History or Description of the great Empire of China’. This was first written in
Spanish by Juan Gonzales de Mendoza, monk of the Order of St. Augustin, and then
translated from the Italian into Dutch by Corn. Taemsz, and printed for Cornelis Claesz,
book-seller, living at the Gilt Bible, in North Street, Hoorn, by Jacob de M——, printer, in
the town of Alkmaar. The date of the edition of this copy cannot be given with exactitude,
by reason of the mouldering away of the lower part of the title-page. The origin of the
work can be deduced from the following facts: In the address to the Good Willing Reader,
verso of the title-page, is written that ‘this little book was edited after Jan Huyghen van
Linschoten had returned to the Netherlands, but somewhat before the publication of the
account of his voyage’. Jan Huyghen van Linschoten returned to Holland in the autumn of
1592, and the account of his voyage was published by Cornelis Claesz in 1595. Thus the
translation of Mendoza must have been published somewhere between [lxii]1592 and 1595.
I even believe that we can fix the date of the publishing to be 1595; for the copy found at
Novaya Zemlya is exactly similar, both in form and type, to another copy still extant,
published in Amsterdam by Cornelis Claesz in 1595. The edition of Amsterdam is exactly
similar to the edition of Hoorn, except the title and the first twelve pages of the preface,
 which in the edition of Amsterdam are of the same purport, but printed in another type.
The only difference between the two works consists in the type of the preface.”

On the 17th of August, 1875, M. Gundersen, commander of the Norwegian

schooner Regina, was the first after Carlsen who visited Barendsz’s Ice Harbour. In
a chest, the upper part of which was quite mouldered, he found an old journal, two
charts, and a grapnel with four flukes, three of which seemed to have been
purposely broken off. The charts, pasted upon sail-cloth, are much injured. The
words “Germania inferior” may be read on them. The journal has proved to be a
manuscript Dutch translation of the narrative of the English expedition of Pet and
Jackman, 1580.

For the numerous abridgements and summaries of De Veer’s work, I refer to the
learned book of Mr. P. A. Fiele, at Leyden, entitled Mémoire Bibliographique sur les
journaux des Navigateurs Néerlandais: Amsterdam, 1867. [lxiii]

See Dr. Beke’s Introduction. ↑

1
Brownel is the recognised English equivalent for Brunel. ↑
2
See Dr. Beke’s Introduction. ↑
3
Fair Island, an island half-way between the Orkneys and the Shetland Islands. ↑
4
Where, in the extract, miles are spoken of, they are nautical miles, or sixty in a degree
5 of the equator. ↑
Spits- (pointed) Bergen (mountains). ↑
6
Gerrit de Veer, son of Albert de Veer and Cornelia van Adrichem, belonged to an old and
7
illustrious Dutch family. He was a younger brother of Ellert de Veer, who occupied the position
of Councillor of Amsterdam, when Gerrit de Veer undertook his voyage to Novaya Zemlya. In April
1610, Ellert de Veer was sent to England as plenipotentiary, on which occasion he was knighted by
James I. Gerrit de Veer died, unmarried, abroad.—Heraldic Library, 1874. ↑
This chart is also to be found, with a few additions, in Asher’s Hudson the Navigator, and in
8
Pontanus’ History of Amsterdam, 1614. ↑
The south point of Prince Charles’s Foreland? ↑
9
The Red Bay and the Zeemosche Bay, with the Archipelago and the Mauritius Bay? ↑
10
Cloven Cliff, and the other islands of the archipelago? ↑
11
The north-western archipelago, with Amsterdam and Danish Islands? ↑
12
Magdalena Bay. ↑
13
Sir Thomas Smith Bay. ↑
14
What is called in the chart, from Purchas’ His Pilgrimes, vol. iii, “The Barr”? ↑
15
Faire Forelaud, still known in the Dutch charts as Vogelhoek (Cape Bird)? ↑
16
Ice Sound? ↑
17
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com