386 I. P. Косн. 
The estimates given rest on a very uncertain foundation, and 
there will hardly be anything to prevent the distance of 4.5 km from 
being double or half the size. The computations performed, there- 
fore, do not disprove the fact that Point 4 of the panorama may be 
Kap Schmelck. As a positive result it may on the other hand be 
stated that the distance at Point 1 of the panorama becomes nearly 
15km, which can only be brought to harmonize with the presumption 
followed, i. e. that HAGEN's standing place is near the southern coast 
line of the fjord. 
It must further be noted that in case Point 4 is to be identical 
with Kap Schmelck, Glacier B in the panorama must correspond to 
FREUCHEN’s Glacier I. In the panorama the distance 3—9 is about 
280 mm; to this should correspond an angular distance of about 
ses >< 280 — about 69°.3. On FREUCHEN's map the angular distance 
as seen from the cairn is about 34°, whereas if we suppose Point 9 
of the panorama to be in reality situated in the direction N 55° W 
from the cairn, it becomes about 48°. This seems to me such a 
serious consequence of considering Point 4 as identical with Kap 
Schmelck that there is every reason to test other possibilities. 
Such a possibility — and, I suppose, the only one left — is that 
Glacier В in the panorama 1$ to correspond to Glacier П in FREUCHEN’S 
map. Peak 7, which is especially marked in the panorama, must 
then be supposed to be Navy Cliff, Peak 8 becomes Kap Lundbohm 
and Peak 10 becomes Kap Schmelck. 
As the first test of this possibility we will compare the linear 
measures 2—7, 7—8 and 8—9 of the panorama with the corresponding 
angular measures in the map. In this connection I consider Point 2 
to be given by the bearing N 153? — 14" W. Navy Cliff, which in 
FREUCHEN’s map is not indicated by any sharply defined point, I 
have constructed by means of Prary’s co-ordinates: Lat. 81°37'.1, 
long. 34°05’ W. 
Linear measure Angular measure Centimeter per degree 
2-7 bot oem about 10° about 0.9 
1—8:: 4, about, 9cm about 12? about 0.8 
89.22 а от about 11°.5 about 1.1. 
The harmony is almost аз good аз might Бе expected. The 
discrepancies do not arouse serious doubt and may, moreover, simply 
be explained by the fact that Kap Lundbohm (Point 8) is not a 
sharply defined point, neither in the panorama nor on the map. If 
this point is left out of the comparison, we get: 
Linear measure Angular measure Centimeter per degree 
7—9.... about 22cm about 23°.5 about 0.9 
