Review of Berings First Expedition, 1725-30. 133 
familiarity with nautical surveying or cartography; and of being 
apparently unacquainted with the best modern charts of the region. 
His criticisms of others are couched in very heated and not altogether 
parliamentary language, and he is the victim of a narrow spirit of 
nationalism which is sometimes mistaken for patriotism. Nevertheless 
he has brought together a great deal of information; it is evident, in 
spite of his violent criticisms, that he has not intended to be unfair, 
since he puts on record in several instances evidence damaging to his 
own views which would not otherwise have come to ight; and he has 
certainly exhibited Bering’s valuable qualities in a manner which will 
do much towards rehabilitating his reputation.* 
Review : Bulletin of the American Geographical Society for 
1885. New York, the Society, 1885. pp. 285-298. 
This review forms part of a ‘‘ Reply to criticisms upon the voyage of 
the Vega around Asia and Europe,” by Baron A. E. von Nordenskiold, 
translated from the Swedish by Vere A. Elfwing. It is addressed only 
toward certain points in Lauridsen’s work, and contains valuable cor- 
rections of certain errors therein, and information in regard to the work 
* T may take opportunity in this place of replying to certain criticisms 
of Mr. Lauridsen on the chronological chapter of my work on Alaska 
and its Resources published in 1870. 
That chapter was and was stated in its introductory paragraph to be 
a compilation from the authorities on the subject. It contained no 
original matter except that relating to explorations subsequent to 1865. 
For Bering’s two voyages I consulted the report on the Russian Dis- 
coveries printed by order of the Empress and under the auspices of the 
Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg, prepared by the dis- 
tinguished geographer Miiller, himself a member of the second expedi- 
tion and personally acquainted with the actors in those scenes. No 
more authoritative printed document exists on the subject. The sup- 
posed errors animadverted upon by Mr. Lauridsen are either taken 
directly from Miller, or are inferences drawn from his report. Some 
of them the critic has misunderstood or misconstrued, which from the 
necessarily extreme condensation of my table is particularly easy. The 
expression of surprise that Bering passed through Bering Strait without 
seeing the Diomedes, was warranted by the fact that Bering nowhere 
mentions their name or speaks of seeing any islands in their location, 
nor are they on his earliest printed charts. This point, however, will 
be more fully dealt with later. If I were to re-write that chapter I 
should probably modify the criticisms of Bering’s character which 
appear in it; but at the time it was written I was fresh from four years’ 
exploration in the same region, and was particularly impressed with his 
failure to secure better results when to do so would have been so easy, 
as well as directly in the line of his duty. 
