Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1943, Blaðsíða 13

XI
editions of it in the years 1606-09, and a smaller edition in 16071.
In the latter we also find GuSbrandur borlåksson’s map of Iceland,
on a reduced scale, from Mercator’s edition of 1595. But Mercator’s
legend is here replaced by a lengthy description, for the most part
copied from Ortelius’ account of Iceland. Various items are left out,
however, and the arrangement of the subject matter is entirely altered.
On the other hånd, Hondius has only a few insignificant remarks
beyond those of Ortelius. Conceming the question as to whether
Iceland was the Thule of antiquity Ortelius has a long statement
in which he adopts the standpoint of Arngrfmur Jonsson that Iceland
cannot be Thule. This part has been much abridged by Hondius
who leaves the question open. But in doing so he happens to omit
the first reference to Amgrimur Jonsson’s work, so that the later
references to it are left afloat.
Hondius’ Atlas was issued in a number of impressions2 and be-
came of much importance for the cartography and geography of
posterity. A comparison of his description of Iceland with the
treatises of the two Icelandic bishops at once shows that the ques-
tions which have been put to the bishops must have been based
directly on the description of Hondius. The arrangement of the two
treatises follows Hondius section by section and as a further con-
firmation we find the distorted Icelandic names in the very same
form in Hondius that they must have had in the inquiries sent to
the two bishops (see sections 9 and 14 with notes), while Ortelius
in certain cases has more correct forms. We must therefore suppose
that the person who composed the questions to the two bishops either
simply copied from Hondius’ account or at any rate made very co-
pious extracts from it. On a certain passage which may perhaps
point to an alteration in the copy, see the note to p. 318. It does not
conflict with this that Bishop Brynjolfur also mentions Mercator in
his title, as Hondius’ Atlas was a new edition of Mercator’s, and
Brynjolfur himself moreover used Mercator’s Atlas (see p. 2412 with
note). There is nothing in the two treatises to suggest that the ques-
tions referred to other sources, so it must be inferred that Hondius’
account was the sole basis of the inquiries.
1 Atlas minor Gerhardi Mercatoris a I. Hondio ... auctus atque illustratus.
Amstelodami 1607. Cf. Islandica XVII pp. 21-22.
2 See Islandica XVII pp. 21-22.