Footnotes

1. Two voyages for discovering a North-West passage, through Hudson’s Bay, were then performed; one under the command of Captain Middleton, in his Majesty’s ships the Furnace, and the Discovery Pink, in 1741 and 1742; the other under the direction of Captains Smith and Moore, in the ships Dobbs and California, fitted out by subscription, in 1746 and 1747.

2. Captain, now Admiral, Byron had under his command the Dolphin and Tamer. He sailed in June, 1764, and returned in May, 1766.

3. Captain Wallis had under his command the Dolphin and Swallow. He sailed in August, 1766, and returned, with the Dolphin, in May, 1768.

4. The Swallow, commanded by Captain Carteret, having been separated from Wallis, and, by keeping a different route, having made different discoveries, this may be considered as a distinct voyage. The Swallow returned to England in March 1769.

5. Captain Cook, in the Endeavour, sailed in August 1768, and returned in July, 1771.

In his second voyage, he had the Resolution and Adventure under his command. They sailed from England in July, 1772, and returned on the 30th of July, 1775.

6. The account of the four first of these voyages, compiled by Dr. Hawkesworth, from the Journals of the several commanders, was published in 1772, in three volumes quarto; and Captain Cook’s own account of the fifth, in 1777, in two volumes quarto.

7. See Lord Anson’s Voyage, quarto edition, p. 91.

8. These are Captain Cook’s words, Introduction to his Voyage, vol. iii. p. 7.; and the evidence on which he forms this judgment may be met with in Hawkesworth’s Journal of Byron’s Voyage, vol. i. p. 23, 24, 51, 52, 53, 54.

9. See the Chart of Discoveries in the South Atlantic. Cook’s Voyage, vol. iv. p. 211.

10. Magalhaen’s Voyage was undertaken in 1519.

11. See the particulars of their discoveries in Mr. Dalrymple’s valuable Collection of Voyages in the South Pacific Ocean.

12. Bougainville, in 1768, did no more than discover that the land here was not connected but composed of islands. Captain Cook, in 1774, explored the whole group. See vol. iv. p. 88.

13. Vol. iv. p. 219.

14. See vols. i. and ii.

15. See vol. ii. p. 69.

16. Vol. iii. chap. 7.

17. Vol. ii. p. 202.

18. From October 6. 1769, to March 31. 1770.

19. Its southern extremity nearly in latitude 47°, and its northern in 351⁄2°. See Captain Cook’s chart, in Hawkesworth, vol. ii. p. 281.

20. See the track of Torré, in one of Quiros’s ships, in 1606, between New Holland and New Guinea, upon Mr. Dalrymple’s Chart of Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean, before 1764.

21. M. de Brosses says of New Guinea: “C’est une longue isle, ou presqu’ isle, si elle touche à la Nouvelle Hollande.” Navigations aux Terres Australes, tom. i. p. 434.

22. “Le triste état où nous étions réduits, ne nous permettoit de chercher en faisant route a l’ouest, un passage au sud de la Nouvelle Guinée, qui nous frayât par le Golfe de la Carpenterie une route nouvelle & courte aux iles Moluques. Rien n’étoit à la vérité plus problématique que l’existence de ce passage.” Voyage autour du Monde, p. 259.

23. Hawkesworth, vol. iii. p. 660.

24. Hawkesworth, vol. i. p. 563.

25. The position of the Solomon Islands, Mendana’s celebrated discovery, will no longer remain a matter in debate amongst geographers, Mr. Dalrymple having, on the most satisfactory evidence, proved, that they are the cluster of islands which comprizes what has since been called New Britain, New Ireland, &c. The great light thrown on that cluster by Captain Carteret’s discovery, is a strong confirmation of this. See Mr. Dalrymple’s Collection of Voyages, vol. i. p. 16-21.

26. It must be observed, however, that Monsieur le Monier, in the Memoirs of the French Academy of Sciences for 1776, pleads for the existence of Cape Circumcision, seen by Bouvet in 1738, which our English navigator sought for in vain, and supposes to have been only an island of ice. Mr. Wales, in a paper read before the Royal Society, very forcibly replied to M. le Monier’s objections; and the attack having been repeated, he has drawn up a more extended defence of this part of Captain Cook’s Journal, which he hath very obligingly communicated, and is here inserted.

Arguments, tending to prove that Captain Cook sought for Cape Circumcision under the proper Meridian; and that the objections which have been made to his conduct, in this respect, are not well founded.

In the Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris for 1776, printed in 1779, M. Le Monier has made some remarks with a design to show that Captain Cook sought the land, usually called Cape Circumcision, in a wrong place; and that, instead of looking for it under the meridian of 91⁄2° or 10° of east longitude, he ought to have looked for it under a meridian which is only 3°, or 31⁄2° to the eastward of the meridian of Greenwich; and consequently that this land may exist, notwithstanding all that has yet been done to find it. M. Le Monier has also two additional Memoirs on the same subject, in the volume for 1779, occasioned, as it appears, by some objections which have been made to his former Memoir before the Academy. For some reason or other, the Academy has not thought proper to print the objections which have been made to M. Le Monier’s hypothesis; nor has he been particular enough in his two Memoirs which reply to them, to enable me to say of what importance the objections are. I can only gather, that they contain some exceptions to the quantity by which M. Le Monier asserts the variation alters in 10° of longitude, under the parallel of 54° south; and which, I conceive, has little to do in the dispute.

Whether the land, usually called Cape Circumcision, exists or not, is a point of small importance to geography; as the most strenuous asserters of its existence must allow it to be a very inconsiderable island, and of no use. This, therefore, is not in itself a matter worthy of dispute; but in asserting this, M. Le Monier has, and I am sorry to observe it, with some asperity too, particularly in his second Memoir, endeavoured to censure the judgment and conduct of Captain Cook, whose memory I have every reason to revere, as well as the judgment of those who were with him; and, on this account, I cannot help feeling myself called on to explain the motives which induced Captain Cook to place no dependence on the arguments now adduced by M. Le Monier in support of his supposition; and which, M. Le Monier must know, were not unattended to at that time, from what the Captain has said, p. 236. Vol. II. of his account of the voyage. And it may be proper to observe here, that what fell from Captain Cook on this subject, was to show that this circumstance was then attended to, and not to throw blame on M. Bouvet, for whose memory and abilities Captain Cook entertained great respect: nor is it incompatible with the utmost respect, for a man to have a favourable opinion of his own labours; or to endeavour to show why he thinks the disagreement between them and those of another person, when there is one, does not arise from an error committed by himself. There could, therefore, be no occasion for M. Le Monier to express himself as he has done in several parts of his second Memoir.

The substance of M. Le Monier’s argument is this. In 1739, when M. Bouvet’s discovery is supposed to have been made, the methods for determining the longitude of a ship at sea were very defective; and, of course, the longitude of any land which happened accidentally to be seen by one, was equally uncertain. On a presumption that this was the case with respect to Cape Circumcision, M. Le Monier enquires into the quantity of the variation of the magnetic needle, observed by M. Bouvet at that place, and also into observations of the same kind, made at other places in the neighbourhood of it, about the same time, as well as both before and since. And by comparing these observations together, he concludes, that at the time when Captain Cook was in these seas, the variation of the needle at Cape Circumcision must have been 10° westerly: whereas, in the most westerly point of Captain Cook’s track, where he was sufficiently near the parallel of 54° south, to have seen land situated in it, the variation was 131⁄2° westerly. This difference of 31⁄2°, in the variation, answers to about 7° of longitude, in this part of the parallel of 54° south: and by so much did Captain Cook fall in with this parallel to the eastward of what he ought to have done to see the land in question. “Hence (M. Le Monier infers), that it is not surprising the British navigator should not find Cape Circumcision under a meridian which is 281⁄2° to the eastward of Ferro, when it is really situated under a meridian which is but 211⁄2° to the eastward of it.”

In replying to these allegations, I shall first show, that, granting the dependence which M. Le Monier supposes may be placed on observations of the variation made at sea, he has stated the quantity of the variation observed on board the Resolution, very erroneously.

Secondly, I shall prove, beyond contradiction, that observations of the variation, made at sea, cannot be depended on for the purposes to which M. Le Monier has applied them.

And, lastly, that no material error had crept into M. Bouvet’s reckoning; but that if any error did exist, it must have been of a contrary nature to that which M. Le Monier supposes.

That M. Le Monier has not given altogether a true representation of the matter, will appear from hence. On the 16th of February, at noon [27] , the Resolution was in latitude 54° 311⁄2ʹ south, which is sufficiently near the parallel of 54° south, to see high land, the northern extremity of which lies to the southward of that parallel; and at that time we were in 6° east of Greenwich, or 233⁄4° east of the island of Ferro: that is, 43⁄4° less than is assigned for our situation by M. Le Monier. On the evening of the same day, the ship being in latitude 54° 24ʹ, and longitude 6° 30ʹ, or 241⁄4° east of Ferro, the variation was no more than 12° 7ʹ west, which also is near a degree and a half less then M. Le Monier says it was, when we first arrived in a proper parallel for seeing Cape Circumcision. It is true, the next morning, in latitude 54° 211⁄2ʹ south, longitude 8° 6ʹ east, we had 13° 42ʹ west variation; but this was after we had run more than two degrees within sight of the parallel of 54° south. It is, moreover, highly probable, that both these variations were too great; for, on the 17th, in the evening, latitude 54° 25ʹ south, and longitude 9° 20ʹ east; that is, 11⁄4° more to the eastward, and after we had run 31⁄3° on the parallel we were then on, the variation was no more than 13° 16ʹ west. It is also worthy of remark, that on the 14th, in the evening, latitude 56° 141⁄2ʹ south, and longitude 4° 50ʹ east, which is but 1° 10ʹ to the westward of the point, where the Resolution came first into a proper situation to see land, situated in the parallel of 54° south, the variation observed was no more than 6° 50ʹ west. And we may further add, that on the 1st of March, 1774, the Adventure had no more than 123⁄4° west variation, though she was then considerably both to the northward and eastward of our situation on the 17th of February in the morning, on both which accounts the variation ought to have been greater, instead of a whole degree less. From all these circumstances, there can be little doubt but that the two variations, observed by us on the 16th and 17th of February, were too great; or that the variation, at the point where the Resolution first came sufficiently near the parallel of 54° south, to see land, the northern extremity of which is situated in that parallel, could not be more than 111⁄2° west, instead of 131⁄2°, as M. le Monier has represented it.

Under this head of enquiry, I may also observe, that, although the Resolution was too much to the southward of the parallel of 54° south, when she crossed the meridian which is 211⁄2° to the eastward of Ferro, that is, 33⁄4° east of Greenwich, the longitude which M. Le Monier assigns for Cape Circumcision, to see if it had been in that situation, yet her consort, the Adventure, was for several degrees on each side of that meridian; and especially when she had 101⁄2° of west variation, full as near to the parallel of 54° south as M. Bouvet was to the land when he saw it [28] ; and on the day that she actually passed that meridian, had fine clear weather. [29] Hence, therefore, granting M. Le Monier his own arguments, which, however, I have proved to be erroneous, and that observations made at sea, for the variation of the compass, may be depended on for the purpose of finding the longitude, it is utterly impossible that both the Resolution and Adventure could have passed Cape Circumcision without seeing it. But I shall now show, that these observations are liable to a much greater error than the whole quantity, so vigorously insisted on by this gentleman.

I will not here run the risk of incurring M. Le Monier’s displeasure, by calling the accuracy of M. Bouvet’s observations in question; but will admit every thing that he himself can think due to the instruments and observations of that deserving navigator. It is enough for my argument, and it is but too evident from the observations themselves, that ours were by no means capable of determining the variation to so small a quantity as that which M. Le Monier rests his whole cause upon; and if so, his arguments, which depend wholly on a supposition, that not only they, but M. Bouvet’s also, were capable of determining it with the utmost exactness, must fall to the ground.

1st, It appears, from various instances, that the variations observed by the same compass would differ 3° to 5°, 6°, and sometimes even 10°, from no other cause whatever, but putting the ship’s head a contrary way. [30]

2d, That the same compass, in the same situation in every respect, within a few miles, but at two different times of the same day, would give variations differing from one another, 3°, 4°, 5°, 6°, and even 7° [31] .

3d, That the same compass, on the same day, and in the hands of the same observer, will give variations differing from one another by 5°, on board the same ship, when under sail, and when at anchor in a road-stead. [32]

4th, Compasses made by the same artists at the same time and place, but on board different ships, differed 3°, 4°, and even 5° in the variation. [33]

5th, The same compasses, on board the same ship, and within a few miles of the same situation, but at different times of our being there, gave variations differing by 4° and 5°, or upwards. [34]

6th, Different compasses, at the same time, on board the same ship, and in every respect under the same circumstances, will give variations differing from one another, 3°, 4°, 5°, and 6°. [35]

These differences, several of which happened very near the place in question, are all of them at least equal to, most of them much greater, and some of them double that which M. Le Monier founds his argument on, even according to his own account of it, which I have already shown is by no means admissible, and, therefore, totally invalidate it. To allege that the instruments made use of in Captain Cook’s two voyages were bad, or that the observers were not expert in the use of them, will answer no purpose: they are the instruments and observers which M. Le Monier’s argument must rest on; and, therefore, let those of the French, or any other navigator, have been ever so much better than they were (which few will be hardy enough to assert, and fewer still found weak enough to believe), it will avail nothing to the point in dispute, which must evidently fall to the ground, if the observations made for finding the variation in Captain Cook’s voyage are not sufficient to support it. What then must become of it, if M. Bouvet’s observations, of this kind, were liable to an equal, or a greater error? which, without any reasonable cause for offence, we might suppose they were.

It is not necessary to account for these differences in the observed variations in this place, nor yet to point out the reasons why such anomalies have not been noticed in observations of this kind before. I shall, however, remark, that I have hinted at some of the causes in my introduction to the observations which were made in Captain Cook’s second voyage; and many others will readily offer themselves to persons who have had much practice in making these observations, and who have attentively considered the principles on which the instruments are constructed, and the manner in which they are fabricated. Nor is it at all surprising, that the errors to which the instruments and observations of this kind are liable, should not have been discovered before, since no navigators before us ever gave the same opportunity, by multiplying their observations, and making them under such a variety of circumstances as we did.

Having now fully shown, that the circumstances, brought forward by M. Le Monier, in support of his argument, are neither such as can be depended on, nor yet fairly represented, I shall next attempt to demonstrate, that it is utterly improbable M. Bouvet could be out, in his account of longitude, so much as is here supposed, in the short run which had been made from the island of St. Catherine, the place they took their departure from: on the contrary, that there is sufficient reason to believe the error, of whatever magnitude it might be, was of a different nature from that contended for, and that the two ships, instead of being to the westward of their account of longitude, were actually to the eastward of it. For according to their journals, extracted from the archives of the French East-India Company, by M. D’ Apres, printed under his inspection, and published by Mr. Dalrymple, F. R. S. amongst other voyages made for the purpose of examining the southern parts of the Atlantic Ocean, the longitude, according to the Eagle’s run from St. Catherine’s, was, 26° 27ʹ, and according to the Mary’s, 26° 20ʹ east of Teneriff; that is, 9° 57ʹ, and 9° 50ʹ east of Greenwich, or 27° 43ʹ, and 27° 36ʹ east of Ferro. But the Mary, which went to the Cape of Good Hope, made 7° 13ʹ east longitude from the land in question, to that place. Consequently the Cape of Good Hope being in longitude 18° 23ʹ east of Greenwich, Cape Circumcision will be in 11° 10ʹ east of Greenwich, or 1° 20ʹ more to the eastward than the run by the same ship from the island of St. Catherine’s makes it. Again the Eagle made the difference of longitude between Cape Circumcision and the island of Rodrigues 49° 44ʹ; and by the observations of M. Pingre, this island is in 62° 50ʹ of east longitude from Greenwich: Cape Circumcision is therefore in 13° 6ʹ east of Greenwich, or 2° 9ʹ more to the eastward than by the Eagle’s run from St. Catherine’s. Hence, therefore, as the longitude of this land resulting from a comparison of that shown by each of the ships, on their making land at places where the longitude is exceedingly well determined, is greater than that which results from their run from St. Catherine’s, the longitude of which is not known with certainty within several degrees, we may infer, with great safety, that whatever the quantity of M. Bouvet’s error might be, when he is supposed to have seen Cape Circumcision, it must have been in defect, and not in excess, as M. Le Monier supposes it.

Christ’s Hospital,

April 20. 1784.         W. WALES.

27. I here go by the dates in “The Original Astronomical Observations,” printed by order of the Board of Longitude; which, after the 14th of February, 1775, differ one day from Captain Cook’s date.

28. See The Original Astronomical Observations, p. 185., and Bouvet’s Voyage, published by Mr. Dalrymple, p. 4. and 11.

29. See the Observations p. 218.

30. See the Original Astronomical Observations, made in the second voyage, March 11. 1773, p. 372., January 24. 1774, p. 375., and July 28. p. 378.

31. Observations in the second voyage, February 2. 1773, p. 371., and January 19. 1775, p. 382. Also observations in last voyage, July 17. 1776, p. 179 August 30. p. 131., January 24. 1777, p. 192., and September 15. 1778 p. 205.

32. Astronomical Observations of second voyage, July 14. 1775, p. 385.

33. Compare the Astronomical Observations, made in the second voyage, August 8. and 9. and September 4. 1772, p. 181., with those of the same dates, p. 369. Those of January 11. and 14. and February 7. 1773, p. 182., with those of the same dates, p. 371. Also Astronomical Observations, made in the last voyage, of December 27. 1776, p. 191, February 22. 1778, p. 201., May 5. and 8. p. 102, July 9. and 24. 1779, p. 209., and January 16. 1780, p. 212., with those of the same dates, p. 291., 293., 294., 297., and 298.

34. Compare Astronomical Observations, made in the second Voyage, February 10. p. 375., with Observations of December 11. 1774, p. 381. Also Observations made in the last Voyage, May 3. and June 18. 1779, p. 208.

35. Observations made in the second Voyage, February 2. 1773. p. 371. March 18. p. 372., and January 24. 1774, p. 375. See also Observations made last Voyage, August 18. 1776, p. 180. October 7. and 14. p. 189, and 190. December 12. p. ibid. January 24. 1777, p. 192. March 10. p. 195. July 9. and 17. 1779, p. 209. January 16. 1780, p. 212. March 24. p. 213. and May 19. p. 214.

36. The judgment of the ingenious Author of Recherches sur les Américains, on this question, seems to be very deserving of a place here: “Qu’on calcule, comme on voudra, on sera toujours contraint d’avouer, qu’il y a une plus grande portion de continent située dans la latitude septentrionale, que dans la latitude australe.

“C’est fort mal à-propos, qu’on a soutenu que cette répartition inégale ne sauroit exister, sous prétexte que le globe perdroit son équilibre, faute d’un contrepoids suffisant au pole méridionale. Il est vrai qu’un pied cube d’eau salée ne pese pas autant qu’un pied cube de terre; mais on auroit dû réfléchir, qu’il peut y avoir sous l’ocean des lits & des couches de matières, dont la pésanteur spécifique varie à l’infini, & que le peu de profondeur d’une mer, versée sur une grande surface, contrebalance les endroits où il y a moins de mer, mais où elle est plus profonde.” Recherches Philosophiques, tom. ii. p. 375.

37. See Vol. IV. p. 219.

38. See the history of former attempts to sail toward the north pole, in the introduction to Lord Mulgrave’s Journal. Mr. Barrington has collected several instances of ships advancing to very high latitudes. See his Miscellanies, p. 1-124.

39. See the Statutes at Large, 18 George II. chap. 17.

40. See the Statutes at Large, 1776, 16 George III. chap. 6.

41. From his MS. Instructions, dated May 14. 1776.

42. In the Philosophical Transactions, Vol. lxviii. p. 1057, we have the track of Pickersgill’s voyage, which, probably, may be of use to our Greenland ships, as it contains many observations for fixing the longitude and latitude of the coasts in Davis’s Straits. But it appears that he never entered Baffin’s Bay, the highest northern latitude to which he advanced being 68° 14ʹ. As to Young’s proceedings, having failed absolutely in making any discovery, it is of less consequence, that no communication of his journal could be procured.

43. See the Abstract of his Journal, published by Mr. Dobbs.

44. Ellis’s Voyage, p. 328.

45. Ibid. p. 330.

46. Account of the voyage, by the clerk of the California, Vol. ii. p. 273. Mr. Dobbs himself says, that he thought the passage would be impracticable, or, at least, very difficult, in case there was one farther North than 67°.—Account of Hudson’s Bay, p. 99.

47. Printed for Jeffreys, in 1768. His words are, “There remains then to be searched for the discovery of a passage, the opening called Pistol Bay, in Hudson’s Bay.” P. 122.

48. Mr. Hearne’s Journey, back from the Copper-mine river, to Fort Prince of Wales, lasted till June 30. 1772. From his first setting out till his return, he had employed near a year and seven months. The unparalleled hardships he suffered, and the essential service he performed, met with a suitable reward from his masters, and he is now the Governor of Fort Prince of Wales, where he was taken prisoner by the French in 1782; and last summer returned to his station.

49. The Hudson’s Bay Company have a trading post called Hudson’s House, above five hundred miles up the country, in lat. 53° 0ʹ 32ʺ, and in long. 106° 27ʹ 30ʺ.

50. This day, Jan. 11. 1772, as the Indians were hunting, some of them saw a strange snow-shoe track, which they followed, and at a considerable distance came to a little hut, where they found a young woman sitting alone. They brought her to the tents; and, on examining her, found that she was one of the western Dog-ribbed Indians, and had been taken prisoner by the Arathapescow Indians in the summer 1770; and, when the Indians who took her prisoner, were near this part in the summer 1771, she eloped from them, with an intent to return to her own country; but it being so far off, and, after being taken prisoner, having come the whole way in canoes, with the winding of rivers and lakes, she had forgot the way; and had been in this little hut ever since the first setting in of the fall. By her account of the moons past since her elopement, it appears to be the middle of last July when she left the Arathapescow Indians, and had not seen a human face ever since. She supported herself very well by snaring of rabbits, partridges, and squirrels, and was now in good health and flesh; and, I think, as fine a woman of a real Indian, as I have seen in any part of North America. She had nothing to make snares of but the sinews of rabbits’ legs and feet, which she twisted together for that purpose; and of the rabbits’ skins had made herself a neat and warm winter’s clothing. The stock of materials she took with her when she eloped, consisted of about five inches of an iron hoop for a knife; a stone steel, and other hard stones as flints, together with other fire-tackle, as tinder, &c.; about an inch and half of the shank of the shoeing of an arrow of iron, of which she made an awl. She had not been long at the tents, when half a score of men wrestled to see who should have her for their wife. She says, when the Arathapescow Indians took her prisoner, that they stole on the tents in the night, when the inhabitants were all asleep, and killed every soul except herself and three other young women. Her father, mother, and husband were in the same tent with her, and they were all killed. Her child, of about five months old, she took with her, wrapped in a bundle of her clothing, undiscovered, in the night. But, when arrived at the place where the Arathapescows had left their wives, which was not far off, it being then day-break, these Indian women immediately began to examine her bundle; and having there found the child, took it from her and killed it immediately. The relation of this shocking scene only served the savages of my gang for laughter. Her country is so far to the Westward, that she says she never saw any iron, or other kind of metal, till taken prisoner; those of her tribe making their hatchets and chisels of deers’ horns, and knives of stone and bone; their arrows are shod with a kind of slate, bones, and deers’ horns; and their instruments, to make their wood work, are nothing but beavers’ teeth. They have frequently heard of the useful materials the nations to the east of them are supplied with from the English; but, instead of drawing nearer to be in the way of trading for iron work, &c. are obliged to retreat farther back, to avoid the Arathapescow Indians, as they make surprising slaughter amongst them every year, both winter and summer. Hearne’s MS. Journal.

51. Journal of a Voyage in 1775 by Don Francisco Antonio Maurelle, in Mr. Barrington’s Miscellanies, p. 508.

52. Ibid. p. 507. We learn from Maurelle’s Journal that another voyage had been some time before performed upon the coast of America; but the utmost northern progress of it was to latitude 55.

53. Dr. Campbell, speaking of Beering’s voyage in 1741, says, “Nothing can be plainer than this truth, that his discovery does not warrant any such supposition, as that the country he touched at was a great continent making part of North America.”

54. See Coxe’s Russian Discoveries, pp. 26, 27, &c. The fictions of speculative geographers in the Southern hemisphere, have been continents; in the northern hemisphere, they have been seas. It may be observed, therefore, that if Captain Cook in his first voyages annihilated imaginary southern lands, he has made amends for the havock in his third voyage, by annihilating imaginary northern seas, and filling up the vast space, which had been allotted to them, with the solid continents of his new discoveries of American land farther west and north than had hitherto been traced.

55. The Russians seem to owe much to England in matters of this sort. It is singular enough that one of our countrymen, Dr. Campbell [See his edition of Harris’s voyages, vol. ii. p. 1021.] has preserved many valuable particulars of Beering’s first voyage, of which Muller himself, the historian of their earlier discoveries, makes no mention; that it should be another of our countrymen, Mr. Coxe, who first published a satisfactory account of their later discoveries; and that the King of Great Britain’s ships should traverse the globe in 1778, to confirm to the Russian empire the possession of near thirty degrees, or above six hundred miles of continent, which Mr. Engel, in his zeal for the practicability of a north-east passage, would prune away from the length of Asia to the eastward. See his Mémoires Geographiques, &c. Lausanne, 1765; which, however, contains much real information; and many parts of which are confirmed by Captain Cook’s American discoveries.

56. See Maupertuis’s Letter to the King of Prussia. The author of the Preliminary Discourse to Bougainville’s Voyage aux Isles Malouines, computes that the southern continent (for the existence of which, he owns, we must depend more on the conjectures of philosophers, than on the testimony of voyagers) contains eight or ten millions of square leagues.

57. See Vol. III. p. 107.

58. Messrs. Hodges and Webber.

59. Mr. Green, in the Endeavour; Messrs. Wales and Bayly, in the Resolution and Adventure; Mr. Bayly, a second time, jointly with Captains Cook and King in this voyage; and Mr. Lyons, who accompanied Lord Mulgrave. The observations of Messrs. Wales and Bayly during Captain Cook’s second voyage are already in the hands of the public, by the favour of the Board of Longitude; and those of Captains Cook and King, and Mr. Bayly, during this last, will appear immediately after our publication. [First Edit.]

60. The Abbe’s words are, “Si ceux qui promettent une si grande precision dans ces sortes de methodes, avoient navigué quelque tems, ils auroient vû souvent, que dans l’observation la plus simple de toutes, qui est celle de la hauteur du soleil à midi, deux observations, munis de bons quartiers de reflexion, bien rectifiés, different entr’eux, lorsqu’ils observent chacun à part, de 5ʹ, 6ʹ, 7ʹ, & 8ʹ.”

Ephémer. 1755-1765. Introduction, p. 32.

It must be however mentioned, in justice to M. de la Caille, that he attempted to introduce the lunar method of discovering the longitude, and proposed a plan of calculations of the moon’s distance from the sun and fixed stars; but, through the imperfection of his instruments, his success was much less than that method was capable of affording. The bringing it into general use was reserved for Dr. Maskelyne, our astronomer royal. See the preface to the Tables for correcting the Effects of Refraction and Parallax, published by the Board of Longitude, under the direction of Dr. Shepherd, Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy at Cambridge, in 1772.

61. In addition to Mr. Wales’s Remark, it may be observed, that the proficiency of our naval officers in taking observations at sea, must ultimately be attributed to the great attention paid to this important object by the Board of Longitude at home; liberal rewards having been given to mathematicians for perfecting the lunar tables, and facilitating calculations; to artists for constructing more accurate instruments for observing, and watches better adapted to keeping time at sea. It appears, therefore, that the voyages of discovery, and the operations of the Board of Longitude went hand in hand; and they must be combined in order to form a just estimate of the extent of the plan carried into execution since his Majesty’s accession, for improving astronomy and navigation. But, besides the establishment of the Board of Longitude on its present footing, which has had such important consequences, it must also be ever acknowledged, that his present Majesty has extended his royal patronage to every branch of the liberal arts and useful science. The munificent present to the Royal Society for defraying the expence of observing the transit of Venus;—the institution of the Academy of Painting and Sculpture;—the magnificent apartments allotted to the Royal and Antiquary Societies, and to the Royal Academy, at Somerset Place;—the support of the Garden of Exotics at Kew, to improve which, Mr. Mason was sent to the extremities of Africa;—the substantial encouragement afforded to learned men and learned works, in various departments; and particularly that afforded to Mr. Herschell, which has enabled him to devote himself entirely to the improvement of astronomy; these and many other instances which might be enumerated, would have greatly distinguished his Majesty’s reign, even if he had not been the patron of those successful attempts to perfect geography and navigation by so many voyages of discovery.

62. See Dr. Shepherd’s Preface, as above.

63. Dr. Solander, Dr. Foster and his son, and Dr. Sparman. Dr. Foster has given us a specimen of the botanical discoveries of his voyage in the Characteres Generum Plantarum, &c.; and much curious philosophical matter is contained in his Observations made on a Voyage round the World. Dr. Sparman also, on his return to Sweden, favoured us with a publication, in which he expatiates on the advantages accruing to natural history, to astronomy, geography, general physic, and navigation, from our South-Sea voyages.

64. See Vol. IV. p. 266.

65. Preface to his History of English Poetry.

66. Tom. i. p. 331.

67. History of Japan, vol. i. p. 93.

68. That the Malayans have not only frequented Madagascar, but have also been the progenitors of some of the present race of inhabitants there, is confirmed to us by the testimony of Monsieur de Pages, who visited that island so late as 1774. “Ils m’ont paru provenir des diverses Races; leur couleur, leurs cheveux, et leur corps l’indiquent. Ceux que je n’ai pas cru originaires des anciens naturels du pays, sont petits et trapus; ils ont les cheveux presque unis, et sont olivâtres comme les Malayes, avec qui ils ont, en général, une espece de resemblance.”

Voyages des M. des Pages, T. ii. p. 90.

69. Archæolog. vol. vi. p. 155. See also his History of Sumatra, p. 166, from which the following passage is transcribed. “Besides the Malaye, there are a variety of languages spoken on Sumatra, which, however, have not only a manifest affinity among themselves, but also to that general language which is found to prevail in, and to be indigenous to, all the islands of the eastern seas; from Madagascar to the remotest of Captain Cook’s discoveries, comprehending a wider extent than the Roman or any other tongue has yet boasted. In different places, it has been more or less mixed and corrupted; but between the most dissimilar branches, an eminent sameness of many radical words is apparent; and in some very distant from each other, in point of situation: As, for instance, the Philippines and Madagascar, the deviation of the words is scarcely more than is observed in the dialects of neighbouring provinces of the same kingdom.”

70. We are indebted to Sir Joseph Banks, for a general outline of this, in Hawkesworth’s Collection, vol. iii. p. 777. The reader will find our enlarged Table at the end of the third volume, Appendix, No. 2.

71. See Crantz’s History of Greenland, vol. i. p. 262.; where we are told that the Moravian Brethren, who, with the consent and furtherance of Sir Hugh Palliser, then Governor of Newfoundland, visited the Esquimaux on the Labradore coast, found that their language, and that of the Greenlanders, do not differ so much as that of the High and Low Dutch.

72. See Appendix, No. 6. The Greenlanders, as Crantz tells us, call themselves Karalit; a word not very unlike Kanagyst, the name assumed by the inhabitants of Kodiack, one of the Schumagin islands, as Stæhlin informs us.

73. A contempt of revelation is generally the result of ignorance, conceited of its possessing superior knowledge. Observe how the Author of Recherches Philosophiques sur les Américains, expresses himself on this very point. “Cette distance que Mr. Antermony veut trouver si peu importante, est à-peu-près de huit cent lieues Gauloises au travers d’un ocean perilleux, et impossible à franchir avec des canots aussi chetifs et aussi fragiles que le sont, au rapport d’Ysbrand Ides, les chaloupes des Tunguses,” &c. &c. t. i. p. 156. Had this writer known that the two continents are not above thirteen leagues (instead of eight hundred) distant from each other, and that, even in that narrow space of sea, there are intervening islands, he would not have ventured to urge this argument in opposition to Mr. Bell’s notion of the quarter from which North America received its original inhabitants.

74. Soon after our departure from England, I was instructed by Captain Cook to complete a map of the world as a general chart, from the best materials he was in possession of for that purpose; and before his death this business was in a great measure accomplished: That is, the grand outline of the whole was arranged, leaving only those parts vacant or unfinished, which he expected to fall in with and explore. But on our return home, when the fruits of our voyage were ordered by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to be published, the care of the general chart being consigned to me, I was directed to prepare it from the latest and best authorities; and also to introduce Captain Cook’s three successive tracts, that all his discoveries, and the different routs he had taken might appear together; by this means to give a general idea of the whole. This task having been performed by me, it is necessary, for the information of the reader, to state the heads of the several authorities which I have followed in such parts of the chart as differ from what was drawn up immediately under the inspection of Captain Cook. And when the public are made acquainted, that many materials, necessary to complete and elucidate the work, were not at the time on board the Resolution, or in his possession, the reason will appear very obvious, why these alterations and additions were introduced contrary to the original drawing.

First, then, I have followed closely the very excellent and correct charts of the Northern Atlantic Ocean, published by Messrs. de Verdun de la Crenne, de Borda, et Pringre in 1775 and 1776; which comprise the coast of Norway from the Sud Hoek, in the latitude of 62 degrees north, to Trelleburg, Denmark, the coast of Holland, north coast of Great Britain, Orkneys, Shetland, Ferro Isles, Iceland, coasts of France, Spain, and Portugal, to Cape St. Maria on the coast of Africa; including the Azores, Canaries, Cape de Verd, Antilles, and West Indian islands from Barbadoes to the east end of Cuba; the north part of Newfoundland and the Labradore coast, as far as the latitude of 57° north.

Ireland, and part of the coast of Scotland, is laid down from Mr. Mackenzie’s late surveys; and the south coast of England from a chart published by Mr. Faden in 1780, taken from M. l’Abbé Dicquemare.

The north part of the coast of Labradore, from the latitude of 57° north, to Button’s Islands in the entrance of Hudson’s Strait, is taken from Monsieur Bellin’s chart, as is also the north coast of Norway and Lapland, including the White Sea, Gulph of Bothnia, Baltic Sea, and the east coast of Greenland.

The Gulf of Finland, from a large (MS.) chart, now engraving for the use of some private merchants.

The West India islands, from the east end of Cuba to the west end, including Jamaica and the Bahama islands, are from a chart published in London by Sayer and Bennett in 1779.

The south side of Cuba, from Point Gorda to Cape de Cruz, is laid down from Monsieur Bellin, in 1762.

The coasts of Newfoundland, and the Gulf of St. Laurence, from the surveys made by Captain Cook, and Messrs. Gilbert and Lane.

Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, Island of St. John, River St. Laurence, Canada, and New England to the River Delaware, from J. F. W. des Barres, Esq. in 1777 and 1778; and charts published in France by order of the King, in 1780, intituled, Neptune Americo-Septrentrional, &c. And from these charts also are taken the coast of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, East and West Florida, as well as the interior parts of the country to the east side of Lake Ontario.

The other parts of this lake, as likewise Lakes Erie, Hurons, Michigan, and Superior, were copied from Mr. Green’s maps of America: The northern part of this last-mentioned lake is fixed from the astronomical observations made by order of the Hudson’s Bay Company, at Mishippicotton House.

The whole of Hudson’s Bay I took from a chart, compiled by Mr. Marly, from all the most authentic maps he could procure of those parts, with which I was favoured by Samuel Wegg, Esq. F. R. S. and Governor of that Company, who also politely furnished me with Mr. Hearne’s Journals, and the map of his route to the Coppermine River, which is faithfully inserted on the chart, together with the survey of Chesterfield Inlet made by Captain Christopher and Mr. Moses Norton, in 1762; and the discoveries from York Fort to Cumberland, and Hudson Houses (this last is the most western settlement belonging to the company), extending to Lake Winipeg, from the drafts of Mr. Philip Turnor, made in 1778 and 1779, corrected by astronomical observations. And from this lake, the disposition of the other lakes to the southward of it, and which communicate with it, is formed, and laid down from a map constructed by Mr. Spurrel, in the company’s service. The Albany and Moose rivers to Gloucester House, and to Lake Abitibbe and Superior, are also drawn from a map of Mr. Turnor’s, adjusted by observations for the longitudes.

The west coast of Greenland, as chiefly laid down from the observations made by Lieut. R. Pickersgill in the Lion brig in 1776, which determine the line of the coast only, as the immense quantities of ice choke up every bay and inlet on this coast, which formerly were, in the summer season, quite free and open.

From the mouth of the Mississippi River, including its source, and the other rivers branching from it; all the coast of New Leon to Cape Rozo, and the western coast of America, from Cape Corrienties to the Great Bay of Tecoantepec, is taken from Monsieur D’Anville.

The Gulf of California I have laid down from a German publication in 1773, put into my hands by Sir Joseph Banks, Bart. P. R. S.; and the western side of it is brought together from a Spanish MS. chart with which A. Dalrymple, Esq. F. R. S. obliged me.

The coast of Brazil, from Sera to Cape Frio, is copied from a small chart of that part by Mr. Dalrymple.

For the southern part of Africa, from the Cape of Good Hope to Point Natal, I have taken the authority of the chart of Major J. Rennels, F. R. S. shewing the extent of the bank of Lagullus.

For the existence of the small islands, shoals, and banks to the eastward of Madagascar, together with the Archipelago of the Maldive and Laccidive islands; for the coasts of Mallacca, part of Cambodia, and the island Sumatra, I have used the latest authority of Monsieur D’Après de Mannevillette’s publications in the Neptune Oriental.

The coasts of Guzerat, Malabar, Coromandel, and the opposite shore, containing the Great Bay of Bengal, and the Island of Ceylon, and exhibiting the Heads of the Ganges, and Barampooter or Sanpoo rivers, are inserted from the work of the ingenious author of the map of Hindoostan, published in 1782.

The China sea is laid down from the chart published by Mr. Dalrymple; but the longitude of Pula Sapara, Pulo Condore, Pulo Timoan, Straits of Banca and Sunda, and the parts we saw are, as settled by us, together with the east coast of Niphon, the principal of the Japanese islands.

The Jeso and Kurile islands, the east coast of Asia and Kamtschatka, as well as the sea of Okotsk, and the islands lying between Kamtschatka and America that were not seen in the voyage, are taken from a Russian MS. chart, got by us at the island of Oonalashka.

The northern countries from Cape Kanin, near the White Sea, as far east of the River Lena, I have given from the Great Russian map, published at Petersburgh in 1776, including the Euxine, Caspian, and Aral Seas, as also the principal lakes to the eastward; the intent of which is to show the source of the large rivers that empty themselves into the different oceans and seas.

Every other part of the chart not mentioned in this account, is as originally placed by Captain Cook.

The whole has been corrected from the latest astronomical observations, selected from the tables compiled by Mr. William Wales, F. R. S. and mathematical master of Christ’s Hospital, for the Nautical Almanacs: from those in the Mariner’s Guide by the Rev. Dr. Maskelyne, F. R. S. and Astronomer Royal, published in 1763; from the Connoissance des Tems for 1780 and 1781; From Professor Mayer’s Geographical Table; from the Voyages of Messrs. d’Eveux de Fleurieu, Verdun, de Borda, and Chabet, &c.; from the Table lately published by Mr. Dalrymple for the use of the East India ships; from the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society; and from the Observations of our late Navigators.

HEN. ROBERTS.

Shoreham, Sussex, May 18. 1784.

75. The very copious Vocabulary of the language of Otaheite, and the comparative specimen of the languages of the several other islands visited during the former voyage, and published in Captain Cook’s account of it, were furnished by Mr. Anderson.

76. The late Sir Joseph.

77. See the instructions in the Introduction.

78. Captain Le Crass, Admiral Amherst having struck his flag some days before.

79. It appears from Captain Cook’s log-book, that he began his judicious operations for preserving the health of his crew, very early in the voyage. On the 17th, the ship was smoked between decks with gun-powder. The spare sails also were then well aired.

80. Though no such instance was known to those from whom Captain Cook had this information, we learn from Glas, that some years before he was at Teneriffe, almost all the shipping in the road were driven on shore. See Glas’s Hist. of the Canary Islands, p. 235. We may well suppose the precautions now used, have prevented any more such accidents happening. This will sufficiently justify Captain Cook’s account.

81. Formerly, there was made at Teneriffe a great quantity of Canary sack, which the French call Vin de Malvesie; and we, corruptly after them, name Malmsey (from Malvesia, a town in the Morea, famous for such luscious wine). In the last century, and still later, much of this was imported into England; but little wine is now made there, but of the sort described by Captain Cook. Not more than fifty pipes of the rich Canary was annually made in Glas’s time; and he says, they now gather the grapes when green, and make a dry hard wine of them, fit for hot climates, p. 262.

82. See an account of a journey to the top of the Pic of Teneriffe, in Sprat’s History of the Royal Society, p. 200, &c. Glas also went to the top of it. History of the Canary Islands, p. 252 to 259. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xlvii. p. 353-356, we have Observations made, in going up the Pic of Teneriffe, by Dr. T. Heberden. The Doctor makes its height, about the level of the sea, to be 2566 fathoms, or 15,396 English feet; and says, that this was confirmed by two subsequent observations by himself, and another made by Mr. Crosse, the consul. And yet, I find, that the Chevalier de Borda, who measured the height of this mountain in August 1776, makes it to be only 1931 French toises, or 12,340 English feet. See Dr. Forster’s Observations during a Voyage round the World, p. 32.

83. Glas, p. 231., speaking of this plant, says, that he cannot imagine why the natives of the Canaries do not extract the juice, and use it instead of pitch, for the bottoms of their boats. We now learn from Mr. Anderson their reason for not using it.

84. Its extended name is St. Christobal de la Laguna; and it used to be reckoned the capital of the island, the gentry and lawyers living there; though the Governor-General of the Canary Islands resides at Santa Cruz, as being the centre of their trade, both with Europe and America. See Glas’s Hist. p. 248.

85. The writer of the Relation of Teneriffe, in Sprat’s History, p. 207, takes notice of this lemon as produced here, and calls it Pregnada. Probably, emprennada, the Spanish word for impregnated, is the name it goes by.

86. This agrees with Dr. T. Heberden’s account, who says that the sugar-loaf part of the mountain, or la pericosa (as it is called), which is an eighth part of a league (or 1980 feet) to the top, is covered with snow the greatest part of the year. See Philosophical Transactions, as quoted above.

87. This port was then filled up by the rivers of burning lava that flowed into it from a volcano; insomuch that houses are now built where ships formerly lay at anchor. See Glas’s Hist. p. 244.

88. Glas, p. 342., says, that they annually export no less than fifteen thousand pipes of wine and brandy. In another place, p. 252, he tells us, that the number of the inhabitants of Teneriffe, when the last account was taken, was no less than 96,000. We may reasonably suppose that there has been a considerable increase of population since Glas visited the island, which is above thirty years ago. The quantity of wine annually consumed, as the common beverage of at least one hundred thousand persons, must amount to several thousand pipes. There must be a vast expenditure of it, by conversion into brandy; to produce one pipe of which, five or six pipes of wine must be distilled. An attention to these particulars will enable every one to judge, that the account given to Mr. Anderson, of an annual produce of 40,000 pipes of wine, has a foundation in truth.

89. It was otherwise in Glas’s time, when a few families of the Guanches (as they are called) remained still in Teneriffe, not blended with the Spaniards. Glas, p. 240.

90. As a proof of Captain Cook’s attention, both to the discipline and to the health of his ship’s company, it may be worth while to observe here, that it appears from his log-book, he exercised them at great guns and small arms, and cleared and smoked the ship below decks, twice in the interval between the 4th and the 10th of August.

91. On board his Majesty’s ship Elizabeth, from 1758 to 1764; by William Nichelson, master of the said ship. London, 1773.

92. Dampier’s Voyages, vol. iii. p. 10.

93. On the 18th, I sunk a bucket with a thermometer seventy fathoms below the surface of the sea, where it remained two minutes; and it took three minutes more to haul it up. The mercury in the thermometer was at 66, which before, in the air, stood at 78, and in the surface of the sea at 79. The water which came up in the bucket contained, by Mr. Cavendish’s table, 1⁄25, 7 part salt; and that at the surface of the sea 1⁄29, 4. As this last was taken up after a smart shower of rain, it might be lighter on that account. Captain Cook’s log-book.

94. The particulars are mentioned in his log-book. On the 14th of August, a fire was made in the well, to air the ship below. On the 15th, the spare-sails were aired upon deck, and a fire made to air the sail-room. On the 17th, cleaned and smoked betwixt decks, and the bread-room aired with fires. On the 21st, cleaned and smoked betwixt decks; and on the 22d, the men’s bedding was spread on deck to air.

95. The afternoon, as appears from Mr. Anderson’s Journal, was spent in performing the old and ridiculous ceremony of ducking those who had not crossed the equator before. Though Captain Cook did not suppress the custom, he thought it too trifling to deserve the least mention of it in his Journal, or even in his log-book. Pernetty, the writer of Bougainville’s Voyage to the Falkland Islands, in 1763 and 1764, thought differently; for his account of the celebration of this childish festival on board his ship, is extended through seventeen pages, and makes the subject of an entire chapter, under the title of Baptême de la Ligne.

It may be worth while to transcribe his introduction to the description of it. “C’est un usage qui ne remonte pas plus haut que ce voyage célébre de Gama, qui a fourni au Camoens le sujet de la Lusiade. L’Idée qu’on ne sçauroit être un bon marin, sans avoir traversé l’Equateur, l’ennui inséparable d’une longue navigation, un certain esprit republicain qui regne dans toutes les petites societés, peut-être toutes ces causes reunies, on pu donner naissance à ces especes de saturnales. Quoiqu’il en soit, elles furent adoptées, en un instant, dans toutes les nations, et les hommes les plus eclairés furent obligés de se soumettre à une coutume dont ils reconnoissoient l’absurdité. Car, partout, des que le peuple parle, il faut que le sage se mette à l’unison.” Histoire d’un Voyage aux Isles Malouines, p. 107, 108.

96. See vol. IV. p. 252.

97. P. 11.

98. See Hawkesworth’s Collection of Voyages, vol. ii. p. 15.

99. “The most remarkable thing in the Cape sheep, is the length and thickness of their tails, which weigh from fifteen to twenty pounds. The fat is not so tallowish as that of European mutton, and the poorer sort use it for butter.” Kolben’s Cape of Good Hope [English translation], vol. ii. p. 65. De la Caille, who finds every thing wrong in Kolben, says, the weight of the tails of the Cape sheep is not above five or six pounds. Voyage de la Caille, p. 343. If the information given to Captain Cook may be depended upon, it will prove that, in this instance at least, Kolben is unjustly accused of exaggeration.

100. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. lxvi. p. 268 to 319, is an Account of Three Journies from the Cape Town into the Southern parts of Africa, in 1772, 1773, and 1774; by Mr. Francis Masson, who had been sent from England for the discovery of new plants, towards the improvement of the Royal Botanical Garden at Kew. Much curious information is contained in Mr. Masson’s account of these journies. M. de Pagés, who was at the Cape in 1773, gives some remarks on the state of that settlement, and also the particulars of his journey from False Bay to the Cape Town. Voyage vers le Pole du Sud, p. 17 to 32.

101. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. lxviii. part I. p. 102, we have a Letter from Mr. Anderson to Sir John Pringle, describing this remarkable stone. The account sent home from the Cape, and read before the Royal Society, is much the same with that now published, but rather fuller. In particular, he tells Sir John, that he went to see it at Mr. Mason’s desire, who, probably, had not had an opportunity of sufficiently examining it himself. In the account of his journies, above referred to, p. 270, he only says, “there are two large solid rocks on the Perel Berg, each of which (he believes) is more than a mile in circumference at the base, and upwards of two hundred feet high. Their surfaces are nearly smooth, without chink or fissures; and they are found to be a species of granite, different from that which composes the neighbouring mountains.”

Mr. Anderson having, with his letter to Sir John Pringle, also sent home a specimen of the rock, it was examined by Sir William Hamilton, whose opinion is, that “this singular, immense fragment of granite, most probably has been raised by a volcanic explosion, or some such cause.” See his Letter to Sir John Pringle, annexed to Mr. Anderson’s, in the Philosophical Transactions.

102. It is strange that neither Kolben nor de la Caille should have thought the Tower of Babylon worthy of a particular description. The former [vol. ii. p. 52, 53, English Translation,] only mentions it as a high mountain. The latter contents himself with telling us, that it is a very low hillock, un très-bas monticule. Voyage de la Caille, p. 341. We are much obliged to Mr. Anderson for his very accurate account of this remarkable rock, which agrees with Mr. Sonnerat’s, who was at the Cape of Good Hope so late as 1781. His words are, “La Montagne de la Perle, merite d’être observée. C’est un des plus hautes des environs du Cap. Elle n’est composée que d’un seul bloc de granit crévassé dans plusieurs endroits.” Voyage aux Indes, tom. ii. p. 91.

Mr. Sonnerat tells us, that Mr. Gordon, commander of the troops at the Cape, had lately made three journies up the country, from which, when he publishes his Journal, we may expect much curious information.

103. Vol. III. p. 35.

104. Nichelson.

105. Mr. Dun.

106. See Vol. IV. p. 243. These islands are there said to be in the latitude of 48° S., that is, two degrees farther south, than what here appears to be their real position.

107. See Vol. IV. as above. Dr. Forster, in his observations made during that voyage, p. 30., gives us this description of the chart then communicated by Monsieur Crozet; that it was published under the patronage of the Duke de Croye, by Robert de Vaugondy. Captain Cook tells us lower in this chapter that it was published in 1773.

108. Captain Cook’s proceedings, as related in the remaining part of this chapter, and in the next, being upon a coast newly discovered by the French, it could not but be an object of his attention to trace the footsteps of the original explorers. But no superiority of professional skill, nor diligence in exerting it, could possibly qualify him to do this successfully, without possessing, at the same time, full and authentic intelligence of all that had been performed here by his predecessors in the discovery. But that he was not so fortunate as to be thus sufficiently instructed, will appear from the following facts, which the reader is requested to attend to, before he proceeds to the perusal of this part of the journal.

How very little was known, with any precision, about the operations of Kerguelen, when Captain Cook sailed in 1776, may be inferred from the following paragraph of his instructions: “You are to proceed in search of some islands said to have been lately seen by the French in the latitude of 48° S., and in the meridian of Mauritius.” [109] This was, barely, the amount of the very indefinite and imperfect information, which Captain Cook himself had received from Baron Plettenberg at the Cape of Good Hope, in November 1772 [110] ; in the beginning of which year Kerguelen’s first voyage had taken place.

The Captain, on his return homeward, in March 1775, heard, a second time, something about this French discovery at the Cape, where he met with Monsieur Crozet, who very obligingly communicated to him a chart of the southern hemisphere, wherein were delineated not only his own discoveries, but also that of Captain Kerguelen. [111] But what little information that chart could convey, was still necessarily confined to the operations of the first voyage; the chart here referred to, having been published in France in 1773; that is, before any intelligence could possibly be conveyed from the southern hemisphere of the result of Kerguelen’s second visit to this new land; which we now know happened towards the close of the same year.

Of these latter operations, the only account (if that can be called an account which conveys no particular information) received by Captain Cook from Monsieur Crozet was, that a later voyage had been undertaken by the French, under the command of Captain Kerguelen, which had ended much to the disgrace of that commander. [112]

What Crozet had not communicated to our author, and what we are sure, from a variety of circumstances, he had never heard of from any other quarter, he missed an opportunity of learning at Teneriffe. He expresses his being sorry, as we have just read, that he did not know sooner that there was on board the frigate an officer who had been with Kerguelen, as he might have obtained from him more interesting information about this land than its situation. And, indeed, if he had conversed with that officer he might have obtained information more interesting than he was aware of; he might have learnt that Kerguelen had actually visited this southern land a second time, and that the little isle of which he then received the name and position from the Chevalier de Borda, was a discovery of this later voyage. But the account conveyed to him being, as the reader will observe, unaccompanied with any date, or other distinguishing circumstance, he left Teneriffe, and arrived on the coasts of Kerguelen’s Land, under a full persuasion that it had been visited only once before. And, even with regard to the operations of that first voyage, he had nothing to guide him, but the very scanty materials afforded to him by Baron Plettenberg and Monsieur Crozet.

The truth is, the French seem, for some reason or other, not surely founded on the importance of Kerguelen’s discovery, to have been very shy of publishing a full and distinct account of it. No such account had been published while Captain Cook lived. Nay, even after the return of his ships in 1780, the gentleman who obligingly lent his assistance to give a view of the prior observations of the French, and to connect them on the same chart with those of our author, though his assiduity in procuring geographical information can be equalled only by his readiness in communicating it, had not, it should seem, been able to procure any materials for that purpose, but such as mark the operations of the first French voyage; and even for these, he was indebted to a MS. drawing.

But this veil of unnecessary secrecy is at length drawn aside. Kerguelen himself has, very lately, published the journal of his proceedings in two successive voyages in the years 1772 and 1773; and has annexed to his Narrative a chart of the coasts of this land, as far as he had explored them in both voyages. Monsieur de Pagés also, much about the same time, favoured us with another account of the second voyage, in some respects fuller than Kerguelen’s own, on board whose ship he was then an officer.

From these sources of authentic information we are enabled to draw every necessary material to correct what is erroneous, and to illustrate what, otherwise, would have remained obscure, in this part of Captain Cook’s Journal. We shall take occasion to do this in separate notes on the passages as they occur, and conclude this tedious, but, it is hoped, not unnecessary detail of facts, with one general remark, fully expressive of the disadvantages our author laboured under. He never saw that part of the coast upon which the French had been in 1772; and he never knew that they had been upon another part of it in 1773, which was the very scene of his own operations. Consequently, what he knew of the former voyage, as delineated upon Crozet’s chart, only served to perplex and mislead his judgment; and his total ignorance of the latter, put it out of his power to compare his own observations with those then made by Kerguelen; though we, who are better instructed, can do this, by tracing the plainest marks of coincidence and agreement.

109. See the Instructions in the Introduction.

110. See Vol. III. p. 36.

111. Vol. IV. p. 243.

112. Vol. IV. p. 244.

113. Captain Cook was not the original discoverer of these small islands which he now fell in with. It is certain that they had been seen and named by Kerguelen, on his second voyage, in December, 1773. Their position, relatively to each other, and to the adjoining coasts of the greater land, as represented on the annexed chart, bears a striking resemblance to Kerguelen’s delineation of them; whose chart, however, the public may be assured, was unknown in England till after our’s had been engraved.

114. This is the isle to which Kerguelen gave the name of Croy or Crouy. Besides delineating it upon his chart, he has added a particular view of it, exactly corresponding with Captain Cook’s account of its being of considerable height.

115. Kerguelen called this Isle Rolland, after the name of his own ship. There is also a particular view of it on the French chart.

116. The observations of the French and English navigators agree exactly, as to the position of these smaller isles.

117. The situation of Kerguelen’s Isle de Clugny, as marked on his chart, shows it to be the third high island seen by Captain Cook.

118. This isle, or rock, was the single point about which Captain Cook had received the least information at Teneriffe; and we may observe how sagacious he was in tracing it. What he could only speak of as probable, a comparison of his chart with that lately published by Kerguelen, proves to be certain; and if he had even read and copied what his predecessors in the discovery says of it, he could scarcely have varied his account of its shape. Kerguelen’s words are, “Isle de Réunion, qui n’est qu’une roche, nous servoit de rendezvous, ou de point de ralliement; et resemble à un coin de mire.”

119. The French and English agree very nearly (as might be expected) in their accounts of the latitude of this island; but the observations by which they fix its longitude, vary considerably.

The pilot at Teneriffe made it only 64° 57ʹ E. from Paris, which is about 67° 16ʹ E. from London; or 1° 24ʹ more, westerly than Captain Cook’s observations fix it.

Monsieur de Pagés says it is 66° 47ʹ E. from Paris, that is 69° 6ʹ E. from London, or twenty-six miles more easterly than it is placed by Captain Cook.

Kerguelen himself only says that it is about 68° of E. longitude, par 68° de longitude.

120. Hitherto, we have only had occasion to supply defects, owing to Captain Cook’s entire ignorance of Kerguelen’s second voyage in 1773; we must now correct errors, owing to his very limited knowledge of the operations of the first voyage in 1772. The chart of the southern hemisphere, his only guide, having given him, as he tells us, the name of Cape St. Louis (or Cape Louis) as the most northerly promontory then seen by the French; and his own observations now satisfying him that no part of the main land stretched further N. than the left extreme now before him; from this supposed similarity of situation, he judged that his own perpendicular rock must be the Cape Lewis of the first discoverers. By looking upon our chart, we shall find Cape Louis lying upon a very different part of the coast; and by comparing this chart with that lately published by Kerguelen, it will appear, in the clearest manner, that the northern point now described by Captain Cook, is the very same to which the French have given the name of Cape François.

121. This right extreme of the coast, as it now showed itself to Captain Cook, seems to be what is represented on Kerguelen’s chart under the name of Cape Aubert. It may be proper to observe here, that all that extent of coast lying between Cape Louis and Cape François, of which the French saw very little during their first visit in 1772, and may be called the N. W. side of this land, they had it in their power to trace the position of in 1773, and have assigned names to some of its bays, rivers, and promontories, upon their chart.

122. Kerguelen’s Isle de Clugny.

123. Cape François, as already observed.

124. The observations of the French, round Cape François, remarkably coincide with Captain Cook’s in this paragraph; and the rocks and islands here mentioned by him, also appear upon their chart.

125. The (d), no doubt, is a contraction of the word Domino. The French Secretary of the Marine was then Monsieur de Boynes.

126. On perusing this paragraph of the Journal, it will be natural to ask, How could Monsieur de Boisguehenneu, in the beginning of 1772, leave an inscription, which, upon the very face of it, commemorates a transaction of the following year? Captain Cook’s manner of expressing himself here, strongly marks, that he made this supposition only for want of information to enable him to make any other. He had no idea that the French had visited this land a second time; and, reduced to the necessity of trying to accommodate what he saw himself, to what little he had heard of their proceedings, he confounds a transaction which we, who have been better instructed, know, for a certainty, belongs to the second voyage, with a similar one, which his chart of the Southern Hemisphere has recorded, and which happened in a different year, and at a different place.

The bay, indeed, in which Monsieur de Boisguehenneu landed, is upon the west side of this land, considerably to the south of Cape Louis, and not far from another more southerly promontory, called Cape Bourbon; a part of the coast which our ships were not upon. Its situation is marked upon our chart; and a particular view of the bay du Lion Marin (for so Boisguehenneu called it), with the soundings, is preserved by Kerguelen.

But if the bottle and inscription, found by Captain Cook’s people, were not left here by Boisguehenneu, by whom and when were they left? This we learn most satisfactorily, from the accounts of Kerguelen’s second voyage, as published by himself and Monsieur de Pagés, which present us with the following particulars: That they arrived on the west side of this land on the 14th of December, 1773; that, steering to the north-east, they discovered, on the 16th, the Isle de Réunion, and the other small islands as mentioned above; that, on the 17th, they had before them the principal land (which they were sure was connected with that seen by them on the 14th), and a high point of that land, named by them Cape François; that beyond this Cape the coast took a south-easterly direction, and behind it they found a bay, called by them Baie de l’Oiseau, from the name of their frigate; that they then endeavoured to enter it, but were prevented by contrary winds and blowing weather, which drove them off the coast eastward; but that, at last, on the 6th of January, Monsieur de Rosnevet, Captain of the Oiseau, was able to send his boat on shore into this bay, under the command of Monsieur de Rochegude, one of his officers, who took possession of that bay, and of all the country, in the name of the King of France, with all the requisite formalities.

Here, then, we trace, by the most unexceptionable evidence, the history of the bottle and inscription; the leaving of which was, no doubt, one of the requisite formalities observed by Monsieur de Rochegude on this occasion. And though he did not land till the 6th of January, 1774, yet, as Kerguelen’s ships arrived upon the coast on the 14th of December, 1773, and had discovered and looked into this very bay on the 17th of that month, it was with the strictest propriety and truth that 1773, and not 1774, was mentioned as the date of the discovery.

We need only look at Kerguelen’s and Cook’s charts, to judge that the Baie de l’Oiseau, and the harbour where the French inscription was found, is one and the same place. But besides this agreement as to the general position, the same conclusion results more decisively still, from another circumstance worth mentioning: the French, as well as the English visitors of this bay and harbour, have given us a particular plan of it; and whoever compares ours, published in this volume, with that to be met with in Kerguelen’s and de Pagés’s voyages, must be struck with a resemblance that could only be produced by copying one common original with fidelity. Nay, even the soundings are the same upon the same spots in both plans, being forty-five fathoms between the two Capes, before the entrance of the bay; sixteen fathoms farther in, where the shores begin to contract; and eight fathoms up, near the bottom of the harbour.

To these particulars, which throw abundant light on this part of our author’s Journal, I shall only add, that the distance of our harbour from that where Boisguehenneu landed, in 1772, is forty leagues. For this we have the authority of Kerguelen, in the following passage: “Monsieur de Boisguehenneu descendit le 13 de Février, 1772, dans un baie, qu il nommé Baie du Lion Marin, et prit possession de cette terre au nom de Roi; il n’y vit aucune trace d’habitants. Monsieur de Rochegude, en 1774, a descendu dans un autre baie, que nous avons nommé Baie de l’Oiseau, et cette seconde rade est à quarantes lieues de la première. Il en a également pris possession, et il n’y trouva également aucune trace d’habitants.” Kerguelen, p. 92.

127. Cap François, for reasons already assigned.

128. If there could be the least doubt remaining of the identity of the Baie de l’Oiseau, and Christmas Harbour, the circumstance of the perforated rock, which divides it from another bay to the south, would amount to a strict demonstration. For Monsieur de Pagés had observed this discriminating mark before Captain Cook. His words are as follow: “L’on vit que la côte de l’est, voisine du Cap François, avoit deux baies; elles étoient separées par une pointe très-reconnoissable par sa forme, qui representoit une porte cochère, au travers de laquelle l’on voyoit le jour.” Voyages du M. de Pagés, vol. ii. p. 67. Every one knows how exactly the form of a porte cochère, or arched gateway, corresponds with that of the arch of a bridge. It is very satisfactory to find the two navigators, neither of whom knew any thing of the other’s description, adopting the same idea; which both proves that they had the same uncommon object before their eyes, and that they made an accurate report.

129. In the last note, we saw how remarkably Monsieur de Pagés and Captain Cook agree about the appearance of the south point of the harbour; I shall here subjoin another quotation from the former, containing his account of the harbour itself, in which the reader may trace the same distinguishing features observed by Captain Cook in the foregoing paragraph.

“Le 6, l’on mit à terre dans la première baie à l’est du Cap François, et l’on prit possession de ces contrées. Ce mouillage consiste en une petite rade, qui a environs quatres encablures, ou quatre cents toises de profondeur, sur un tiers en sus de largeur. En dedans de cette rade est un petit port, dont l’entrée, de quatres encablures de largeur, presente au sud-est. La sonde de la petite rade est depuis quarante-cinq jusqu’à trente brasses; et celle du port depuis seize jusqu’à huit. Le fond des deux est de sable noir et vaseux. La côte des deux bords est haute, et par une pente très-rude; elle est couverte de verdure, et il y a une quantité prodigieuse d’outardes. Le fond du port est occupé par un monticule qui laisse entre lui, et la mer une plage de sable. Une petite rivière, de très-bonne eau, coule à la mer dans cet endroit; et elle est fournie par un lac qui est un peu au loin, au-dessus du monticule. Il y avoit sur la plage beaucoup de pinguoins et de lions marins. Ces deux espèces d’animaux ne fuyoient pas, et l’on augura que le pays n’étoit point habité; la terre rapportoit de l’herbe large, noire, et bien nourrie, qui n’avoit cependant que cinque pouces ou plus de hauteur. L’on ne vit aucun arbre, ni signe d’habitation.” Voyage du Monsieur du Pagés, tom. ii. p. 69, 70.

130. Cap François.

131. Cap François.

132. Though Kerguelen’s ships, in 1773, did not venture to explore this part of the coast, Monsieur de Pagés’ account of it answers well to Captain Cook’s. “Du 17 au 23, l’on ne prit d’autre connoissance que celle de la figure de la côte, qui, courant d’abord au S. E., et revenant ensuite au N. E., formoit un grand golfe. Il étoit occupé par des brisans et des rochers; il avoit aussi une isle basse, et assez étendue, et l’on usa d’une bien soigneuse precaution, pour ne pas s’affaler dans ce golfe.” Voyage du M. de Pagés, tom. ii. p. 67.

133. Cap François.

134. Cap François.

135. This part of the coast seems to be what the French saw on the 5th of January, 1774. Monsieur de Pagés speaks of it thus: “Nous reconnumes une nouvelle côte etendue de toute vue dans l’est, et dans le ouest. Les terres de cette côte étoient moins elevées que celles que nous avions vues jusques ici; elles étoient aussi d’un aspect moins rude.” De Pagés, tom. ii. p. 68.

136. See Hawkesworth’s Collection of Voyages, Vol. ii. p. 42.

137. If the French observations, as marked upon Captain Cook’s chart, and still more authentically upon that published by their own discoverers, may be depended upon, this land doth not reach so far to the west as the meridian of 68°; Cape Louis, which is represented as its most westerly point, being laid down by them to the east of that meridian.

138. The idea of Cape Louis being this projecting point of a southern continent, must have soon vanished, as Cape François, within a year after, was found, by the same discoverer, to lie above one third of a degree farther north upon the same land. But if Kerguelen entertained any such imagination at first, we are sure that, at present, he thinks very differently. This appears from the following explicit declaration of his sentiments, which deserves to be transcribed from his late publication, as it does equal honour to his candour, and to Captain Cook’s abilities. “La terre que j’ai découverte est certainement une isle; puisque le célèbre Capitaine Cook a passé au sud, lors de son premier voyage, sans rien rencontrer. Je juge même, que cette isle n’est pas bien grande. Il y a aussi apparence, d’après le Voyage de Monsieur Cook, que toute cette étendue de mers meridionales, est semée d’isles ou de rochers; mais qu’il n’y a ni continent ni grande terre.” Kerguelen, p. 92.

139. Kerguelen, as we see in the last note, concurs with Captain Cook as to this. However, he tells us, that he has reason to believe that it is about two hundred leagues in circuit; and that he was acquainted with about fourscore leagues of its coast. “J’en connois environs quatre-vingt lieues des côtes; et j’ai lieu de croire, qu’elle a environ deux cents lieues de circuit.” Kerguelen, ibid.

140. Some of Monsieur de Kerguelen’s own countrymen seem more desirous than we are, to rob him of this honour. It is very remarkable that Monsieur de Pagés never once mentions the name of his commander. And, though he takes occasion to enumerate the several French explorers of the southern hemisphere, from Gonneville down to Crozet, he affects to preserve an entire silence about Kerguelen, whose first voyage, in which the discovery of this considerable tract of land was made, is kept as much out of sight, as if it never had taken place. Nay, not satisfied with refusing to acknowledge the right of another, he almost assumes it to himself. For, upon a Map of the World annexed to his book, at the spot where the new land is delineated, we read this inscription: Isles nouvelles Australes vuées par Monsieur de Pagés, en 1774. He could scarcely have expressed himself in stronger terms, if he had meant to convey an idea that he was the conductor of the discovery. And yet we know, that he was only a lieutenant [enseigne de vaisseau] on board one of the three ships commanded by Kerguelen; and that the discovery had been already made in a former voyage, undertaken while he was actually engaged in his singular journey round the world.

After all, it cannot but be remarked that Kerguelen was peculiarly unfortunate, in having done so little to complete what he had begun. He discovered a new land indeed; but, in two expeditions to it, he could not once bring his ships to an anchor upon any part of its coasts. Captain Cook, as we have seen in this, and in the foregoing chapter, had either fewer difficulties to struggle with, or was more successful in surmounting them.

141. Pennant’s Patagonian penguin. See his Genera of Birds. Tab. 14. p. 66.

142. Voyage autour du Monde, p. 69.

143. Voyage à la Nouvelle Guinée p. 181, 182. Tab. 113. 115.

144. The sheath-bill. See Pennant’s Genera of Birds, p. 43.

145. The most striking difference seems to be with regard to the texture of the hair. The natives whom Captain Cook met with at Endeavour River in 1769, are said, by him, to have naturally long and black hair, though it be universally cropped short. In general it is straight, but sometimes it has a slight curl. We saw none that was not matted and filthy. Their beards were of the same colour with the hair, and bushy and thick. See Vol. II. p. 211. of this Edition of Cook’s Voyages.

It may be necessary to mention here, on the authority of Captain King, that Captain Cook was very unwilling to allow that the hair of the natives now met with in Adventure Bay was woolly, fancying that his people, who first observed this, had been deceived, from its being clotted with grease and red ochre. But Captain King prevailed upon him afterward to examine carefully the hair of the boys, which was generally, as well as that of the women, free from this dirt; and then he owned himself satisfied that it was naturally woolly. Perhaps we may suppose it possible, that he himself had been deceived when he was in Endeavour River, from this very circumstance; as he expressly says, that they saw none that was not matted and filthy.

146. And yet Dampier’s New Hollanders, on the western coast, bear a striking resemblance to Captain Cook’s at Van Diemen’s Land, in many remarkable instances:

1st, As to their becoming familiar with the strangers.

2dly, As to their persons; being straight-bodied, and thin; their skin black; and black, short, curled hair, like the negroes of Guinea; with wide mouths.

3dly, As to their wretched condition; having no houses, no garment, no canoes, no instrument to catch large fish; feeding on broiled muscles, cockles, and periwinckles; having no fruits of the earth; their weapons a straight pole, sharpened and hardened at the end, &c. &c.

The chief peculiarities of Dampier’s miserable wretches are, 1st, Their eye-lids being always half closed, to keep the flies out, which were excessively troublesome there: and, 2dly, Their wanting the two fore-teeth of the upper jaw, and their having no beards. See Dampier s Voyages, vol. i. p. 464, &c. There seems to be no reason for supposing that Dampier was mistaken in the above account of what he saw.

147. Captain Cook’s account of the natives of Van Diemen’s Land, in this chapter, no doubt proves that they differ, in many respects, as he says, from the inhabitants of the more northerly parts of the east coast of New Holland, whom he met with in his first voyage. It seems very remarkable, however, that the only woman any of his people came close to in Botany Bay, should have her hair cropped short; while the man who was with her, is said to have had the hair of his head bushy, and his beard long and rough. See Vol. II. p. 87. of this Edition. Could the natives of Van Diemen’s Land be more accurately described, than by saying that the hair of the men’s heads is bushy, and their beards long and rough, and that the women’s hair is cropped short? So far north, therefore, as Botany Bay, the natives of the east coast of New Holland seem to resemble those of Van Diemen’s Land in this circumstance.

148. Vol. III. chap. vii.

149. Vol. II. p. 167. of this Edition of Cook’s Voyages.

150. Ibid. p. 159.

151. Tom. ii. p. 211. 12mo. Planche xvii.

152. Iter Palæstinum.

153. Tasman, when in the bay of Frederick Henry, adjoining to Adventure Bay, found two trees, one of which was two fathoms, and the other two fathoms and a half in girth, and sixty or sixty-five feet high, from the root to the branches. See his Voyage, in Harris’s Collection, Campbell’s Edition, vol. i. p. 326.

154. The ingenious Author of Récherches sur les Américains, illustrates the grounds of this assertion in the following satisfactory manner: “C’est quelque chose de surprenant, que la foule des idiomes, tous variés entr’eux, que parlent les naturels de l’Amérique Septentrionale. Qu’on réduise ces idiomes à des racines, qu’on les simplifie, qu’on en sépare les dialectes et les jargons dérivés, il en resulte toujours cinq ou six langues-mères, respectivement incomprehensibles. On a observé la même singularité dans la Sibérie et la Tartarie, où le nombre des idiomes, et des dialectes, est également multiplié; et rien n’est plus commun, que d’y voir deux hordes voisines qui ne se comprennent point. On rétrouve cette même multiplicité de jargons dans toutes les Provinces de l’Amérique Méridionale.” [He might also have included Africa.] “Il y a beaucoup d’apparence que la vie sauvage, en dispersant les hommes par petites troupes isolées dans des bois épais, occasione nécessairement cette grande diversité des langues dont le nombre diminue à mesure que la société, en rassemblant les barbares vagabonds, en forme un corps de nation. Alors l’idiome le plus riche, ou le moins pauvre en mots, devient dominant, et absorbe les autres.” Tom. i. p. 159, 160.

155. Dampier seems to be of this opinion. Vol. iii, p. 104, 125.

156. We find Mr. Anderson’s notions on this subject conformable to those of Mr. Marsden, who has remarked, “that one general language prevailed (however mutilated and changed in the course of time) throughout all this portion of the world, from Madagascar to the most distant discoveries eastward; of which the Malay is a dialect, much corrupted or refined by a mixture of other tongues. This very extensive similarity of language indicates a common origin of the inhabitants; but the circumstances and progress of their separation are wrapped in the darkest veil of obscurity.” History of Sumatra, p. 35.

See also his very curious paper, read before the Society of Antiquaries, and published in their Archæologia, vol. vi. p. 155; where his sentiments on this subject are explained more at large, and illustrated by two tables of corresponding words.

157. See the chart of Queen Charlotte’s Sound, in Hawkesworth’s Collection, vol. ii. p. 385.

158. In 1772.

159. See Vol. I. p. 383.

160. See Vol. III. p. 132.

161. See Vol. IV. p. 145.

162. See Vol. IV. p. 144.

163. See his Narrative, Vol. IV. p. 232.

164. In a separate memorandum-book, Mr. Anderson mentions the monstrous animal of the lizard kind, described by the two boys after they left the island.

165. See Hawkesworth’s Collection, vol. iii. p. 474, 475, and Captain Cook’s Voyage, Vol. ii. p. 364.

166. A very ingenious and satisfactory account of the cause of the surf, is to be met with in Marsden’s History of Sumatra, p. 29. 32.

167. The inhabitants of the Palaos, New Philippine, or rather Caroline Islands, at the distance of almost fifteen hundred leagues from Mangeea, have the same mode of salutation. “Leur civilité, et la marque de leur respect, consiste à prendre la main ou le pied de celui à qui ils veulent faire honneur, et s’en frotter doucement tout le visage.” Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 208. Edit. 1781.

168. Something like this ceremony was performed by the inhabitants of the Marquesas, when Captain Cook visited them in 1774. See his 2d Voyage, Vol. III. It is curious to observe, at what immense distances this mode of receiving strangers prevails.—Padillo, who sailed from Manilla in 1710, on a voyage to discover the Palaos Islands, was thus received there. The writer of the relation of his voyage says, “Aussitôt qu’ils approchèrent de notre bord, ils se mirent à chanter. Ils régloient la cadence, en frappant des mains sur leurs cuisses.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 323.

169. The dances of the inhabitants of the Caroline Islands have a great resemblance to those here described. See Lettres Edif. et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 315. See also, in the same volume, p. 207, what is said of the singing and dancing of the inhabitants of the Palaos Islands, which belong to the same group.

170. Such accidents as this here related, probably happen frequently in the Pacific Ocean. In 1696, two canoes, having on board thirty persons of both sexes, were driven by contrary winds and tempestuous weather, on the isle of Samal, one of the Philippines, after being tost about at sea seventy days, and having performed a voyage from an island called by them Amorsot, 300 leagues to the east of Samal. Five of the number who had embarked, died of the hardships suffered during this extraordinary passage. See a particular account of them, and of the islands they belonged to, in Lettres Edifiantes and Curieuses, tom. xv. from p. 196 to p. 215. In the same volume, from p. 282 to p. 320, we have the relation of a similar adventure, in 1721, when two canoes, one containing twenty-four, and the other six persons, men, women, and children, were driven from an island they called Farroilep, northward to the isle of Guam, or Guahan, one of the Ladrones or Mariannes. But these had not sailed so far as their countrymen, who reached Samal as above, and they had been at sea only twenty days. There seems to be no reason to doubt the general authenticity of these two relations. The information contained in the letters of the Jesuits, about these islands, now known under the name of the Carolines, and discovered to the Spaniards by the arrival of the canoes at Samal and Guam, has been adopted by all our later writers. See President de Brosse’s Voyages aux Terres Australes, tom. ii. from p. 443. to p. 490. See also the Modern Universal History.

171. See Vol. III. book ii. chap. 1., where this island is said to be about six leagues in circuit.

172. The reader will observe, that this name bears little affinity to any one of the names of the three chiefs of Wateeoo, as preserved by Mr. Anderson.

173. See Vol. IV. p. 2., 5.

174. Mr. Anderson, in his journal, mentions the following particulars, relative to Palmerston’s Island, which strongly confirm Captain Cook’s opinion about its formation. “On the last of the two islots, where we landed, the trees, being in great numbers, had already formed, by their rotten parts, little risings or eminences, which, in time, from the same cause, may become small hills. Whereas, on the first islot, the trees being less numerous, no such thing had as yet happened. Nevertheless, on that little spot, the manner of formation was more plainly pointed out. For, adjoining to it, was a small isle, which had, doubtless, been very lately formed; as it was not, as yet, covered with any trees, but had a great many shrubs, some of which were growing among pieces of coral, that the sea had thrown up. There was still a more sure proof of this method of formation a little farther on, where two patches of sand, about fifty yards long, and a foot or eighteen inches high, lay upon the reef, but not, as yet, furnished with a single bush or tree.”

175. For an account of the discovery of Savage Island; a description of it; and the behaviour of its inhabitants, on Captain Cook’s landing, see Vol. IV. p. 3. to p. 6.

176. That is, Little Annamooka.

177. See Captain Cook’s last Voyage, Vol. IV. p. 7.

178. See Tasman’s account of this island, in Mr. Dalrymple’s valuable Collection of Voyages to the Pacific Ocean, vol. ii. p. 79, 80. The few particulars mentioned by Tasman, agree remarkably with Captain Cook’s more extended relation.

179. As a proof of the great difficulty of knowing accurately the exact names of the South Sea Islands, as procured from the natives, I observe that what Captain Cook calls Aghao, Mr. Anderson calls Kao; and Tasman’s drawing, as I find it in Mr. Dalrymple’s Collection of Voyages, gives the name of Kaybay to the same island. Tasman’s and Captain Cook’s Amattafoa, is, with Mr. Anderson, Tofoa. Captain Cook’s Komango, is Tasman’s Amango. There is scarcely an instance in which such variations are not observable. Mr. Anderson’s great attention to matters of this sort being, as we learn from Captain King, well known to every body on board, and admitted always by Captain Cook himself, his mode of spelling has been adopted on the engraved chart of the Friendly Islands, which has made it necessary to adopt it also, in printing the journal.

180. Mr. Anderson’s account of the night dances being much fuller than Captain Cook’s, the reader will not be displeased that it has been adopted.

181. In a former note, at p. 258. it was observed, that the songs and dances of the Caroline Islanders, in the north Pacific, bear a great resemblance to those of the inhabitants of Wateeoo. The remark may be now extended to those of the Friendly Islanders, described at large in this chapter. That the reader may judge for himself, I have selected the following particulars from Father Cantova’s account. “Pendant la nuit, au clair de la lune, ils s’assemblent, de temps en temps, pour chanter et danser devant la maison de leur Tamole. Leurs danses se font au son de la voix, car ils n’ont point d’instrument de musique. La beauté de la danse, consiste dans l’exacte uniformité des mouvemens du corps. Les hommes, séparés des femmes, se postent vis-à-vis les uns des autres; après quoi, ils remuent la tête, les bras, les mains, les pieds, en cadence.—Leur tête est couverte de plumes, ou de fleurs; et l’on voit, attachées à leurs oreilles, des feuilles de palmier tissues avec assez d’art.—Les femmes, de leur côté, se regardant les unes les autres, commencent un chant pathétique et langoureux, accompagnant le son de leur voix du mouvement cadencé de la tête et des bras.” Lettres Edifiantes & Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 314, 315.

182. See Vol. III. book ii. ch. 2. The name of this extraordinary personage is there said to be Kohagee-too Fallangou; which cannot, by the most skilful etymologist, be tortured into the least most distant resemblance of Latooliboula. It is remarkable, that Captain Cook should not take any notice of his having called the same person by two names so very different. Perhaps we may account for this by supposing one to be the name of the person, and the other the description of his title or rank. This supposition seems well founded, when we consider, that Latoo, in the language of these people, is sometimes used to signify a great chief; and Dr. Foster, in his Observations, p. 378, 379, and elsewhere, speaks of the sovereign of Tongataboo, under the title of their Latoo. This very person is called by Dr. Foster, p. 370, Latoo-Nipooroo; which furnishes a very striking instance of the variations of our people in writing down the same word as pronounced by the natives. However, we can easily trace the affinity between Nipooroo and Liboula, as the changes of the consonants are such as are perpetually made, upon hearing a word pronounced, to which our ears have not been accustomed. Mr. Anderson here agrees with Captain Cook in writing Latooliboula.

183. Tangata, in their language is man; Arekee, king.

184. Marks of profound respect, very similar to those paid by natives of the Friendly Islands to their sovereign, are also paid to the principal chiefs, or Tamoles of the Caroline Islands, as appears from father Cantova’s account here transcribed. “Lorsqu’un Tamole donne audience, il paroît assis sur une table élevée: les peuples s’inclinent devant lui jusqu’à terre; et du plus loin qu’ils arrivent, ils marchent, le corps tout courbé, et la tête presqu’entre les génoux, jusqu’à ce qu’ils soient auprès de sa personne; alors ils s’asséyent à plate terre; et, les yeux baissés, ils reçoivent ses ordres avec le plus profond respect. Quand le Tamole les congedie, ils se retirent, en se courbant de la même manière que quand ils sont venus, et ne se relèvent que lorsqu’ils sont hors de sa présence. Ses paroles sont autant d’oracles qu’on revère; on rend à ses ordres une obeissance aveugle; enfin, on baise les mains et les pieds, quand on lui demande quelque grace.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 312, 313.

185. The same sort of evening concert is performed round the house of the chief, or Tamole, at the Caroline Islands. “Le Tamole ne s’endort qu’au bruit d’un concert de musique que forme une troupe de jeunes gens, qui s’assemblent le soir, autour de sa maison, et qui chantent, à leur manière, certaines poësies.” Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 314.

186. See Vol. I. p. 209.

187. Mr. Anderson’s description of the entertainments of this day being much fuller than Captain Cook’s, it has been adopted, as on a former occasion.

188. The burying-places of the chiefs at the Caroline Islands, are also inclosed in this manner. See Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 309.

189. The following account of kava, to the end of this paragraph, is inserted from Mr. Anderson’s journal.

190. From the 4th to the 7th of October.

191. See his Characteres Generum Plantarum. Lond. 1776.

192. Voyage à la Nouvelle Guinée, Tab. cii.

193. This is the fiatooka mentioned above by Mr. Anderson, p. 379.

194. See p. 371.

195. In the account of Captain Cook’s former Voyage, he calls the only chief he then met with at this place, Tioony. See Vol. III. p. 200.

196. Those islands; which the natives represented as large ones, are distinguished in Italics.

197. Tasman saw eighteen or twenty of these small islands, every one of which was surrounded with sands, shoals, and rocks. They are also called, in some charts, Heemskirk’s Banks. See Dalrymple’s Collection of Voyages to the South Pacific Ocean, vol. ii. p. 83.; and Campbell’s edition of Harris’s, vol. i. p. 325.

198. See Captain Wallis’s Voyage, in Hawkesworth’s Collection, vol. i. p. 492-494. Captain Wallis there calls both these islands high ones. But the superior height of one of them may be inferred, from his saying, that it appears like a sugar-loaf. This strongly marks its resemblance to Kao. From comparing Poulaho’s intelligence to Captain Cook, with Captain Wallis’s account, it seems to be past all doubt, that Boscawen’s Island is our Kootahee, and Keppel’s Island our Neeootabootaboo. The last is one of the large islands marked in the foregoing list. The reader, who has been already apprized of the variations of our people in writing down what the natives pronounced, will hardly doubt that Kottejeea and Kootahee are the same.

199. Neither Dalrymple nor Campbell, in their accounts of Tasman’s voyage, take any particular notice of his having seen such an island. The chart here referred to by Captain Cook is probably Mr. Dalrymple’s, in his Collection of Voyages, where Tasman’s track is marked accurately; and several very small spots of land are laid down in the situation here mentioned.

200. In two or three preceding notes, extracts have been made from the Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, as marking a strong resemblance between some of the customs of the inhabitants of the Caroline Islands, and those which Captain Cook describes as prevailing at an immense distance in the islands which he visited in the South Pacific Ocean. Possibly, however, the presumption, arising from this resemblance, that all these islands were peopled by the same nation, or tribe, may be resisted under the plausible pretence, that customs very similar prevail amongst very distant people, without inferring any other common source, besides the general principles of human nature, the same in all ages, and every part of the globe. The reader, perhaps, will not think this pretence applicable to the matter before us, if he attends to the following very obvious distinction: Those customs which have their foundation in wants that are common to the whole human species, and which are confined to the contrivance of means to relieve those wants, may well be supposed to bear a strong resemblance, without warranting the conclusion, that they who use them have copied each other, or have derived them from one common source; human sagacity being the same every where, and the means adapted to the relief of any particular natural want, especially in countries similarly uncultivated, being but few. Thus the most distant tribes, as widely separated as Terra del Fuego is from the islands east of Kamtschatka, may, both of them, produce their fire by rubbing two sticks upon each other, without giving us the least foundation for supposing, that either of them imitated the other, or derived the invention from a source of instruction common to both. But this seems not to be the case with regard to those customs to which no general principle of human nature has given birth, and which have their establishment solely from the endless varieties of local whim, and national fashion. Of this latter kind, those customs obviously are, that belong both to the North, and to the South Pacific Islands, from which, we would infer, that they were originally one nation; and the men of Mangeea, and the men of the New Philippines, who pay their respects to a person whom they mean to honour, by rubbing his hand over their faces, bid fair to have learned their mode of salutation in the same school. But if this observation should not have removed the doubts of the sceptical refiner, probably he will hardly venture to persist in denying the identity of race, contended for in the present instance, when he shall observe, that, to the proof drawn from affinity of customs, we have it in our power to add that most unexceptionable one, drawn from affinity of language. Tamoloa, we now know, is the word used at Hamoa, one of the Friendly Islands, to signify a chief; and whoever looks into the Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, will see that this is the very name by which the inhabitants of the Caroline Islands distinguish their principal men. We have in two preceding notes, inserted passages from Father Cantova’s account of them, where their Tamoles are spoken of; and he repeats the word at least a dozen times, in the course of a few pages. But I cannot avoid transcribing from him, the following very decisive testimony, which renders any other quotation superfluous. “L’autorité du gouvernement se partage entre plusieurs familles nobles, dont les chefs s’appellent Tamoles. Il y a outre cela, dans chaque province, un principal Tamole, auquel tous les autres sont soumis.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 312.

201. Vol. III. p. 218, 219.

202. Ibid. p. 220, &c.

203. See Vol. IV. p. 19., where Captain Cook gives a particular account of meeting with a person afflicted with this disease, at Annamooka, on his landing there in 1773.

204. So at the Caroline Islands. “Ils sont accoutumés à se baigner trois fois le jour, le matin, à midi, et sur le soir.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 314.

205. How remarkably does Captain Cook’s account of the employments of the women and men here, agree with Father Cantova’s, of the Caroline Islanders!—“La principale occupation des hommes, est de construire des barques, de pêcher, et de cultiver la terre. L’affaire des femmes est de faire la cuisine, et de mettre en œuvre un espèce de plante sauvage, et un arbre, pour en faire de la toile.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 313.

206. Vol. III. p. 222, 223. The reader, by comparing that account, with what Cantova says of the sea-boats of the Caroline Islands, will find, in this instance, also, the greatest similarity. See Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, p. 286.

207. Cantova says of his islanders, “Ils prennent leur repos dès que le soleil est couché, et ils se levent avec l’aurore.” Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 314.

208. If, to the copious descriptions that occur in the preceding pages, of the particular entertainments exhibited in Hapaee and Tongataboo, we add the general view of the usual amusements of the inhabitants of these islands, contained in this paragraph, and compare it with the quotations from the Jesuit’s Letters, in a former note (p. 255.), we shall be still more forcibly struck with the reasonableness of tracing such singularly resembling customs to one common source. The argument, in confirmation of this, drawn from identity of language, has been already illustrated, by observing the remarkable coincidence of the name by which the chiefs at the Caroline Islands, and those at Hamao, one of the Friendly ones, are distinguished. But the argument does not rest on a single instance, though that happens to be a very striking one. Another of the very few specimens of the dialect of the North Pacific islanders, preserved by father Cantova, furnishes an additional proof. Immediately after the passage above referred to, he proceeds thus: “Ce divertissement s’appelle, en leur langue, tanger ifaifil; qui veut dire, la plainte des femmes.” Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 315. Now, it is very remarkable, that we learn from Mr. Anderson’s collection of words, which will appear in this chapter, that la plainte des femmes, or, in English, the mournful song of the women, which the inhabitants of the Caroline Islands express in their language tanger ifaifil, would, by those of Tongataboo, be expressed tangee vefaine.

If any one should still doubt, in spite of this evidence, it may be recommended to his consideration, that long separation and other causes have introduced greater variations in the mode of pronouncing these two words, at places confessedly inhabited by the same race, than subsist in the specimen just given. It appears, from Mr. Anderson’s vocabulary, printed in Captain Cook’s second voyage, that what is pronounced tangee at the Friendly Islands, is taee at Otaheite: and the vefaine of the former, is the waheine of the latter.

209. Cantova says of his Caroline islanders, “La pluralité des femmes est non seulement permise à tous ces insulaires, elle est encore une marque d’honneur et de distinction. Le Tamole de l’isle d’Huogoleu en a neuf.”—Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 310.

210. At the Caroline Islands, “Ils ont horreur de l’adultère, comme d’un grand péché.” Ibid. tom. xv. p. 310.

211. How the inhabitants of the Caroline Islands express their grief on such occasions, may be seen, Ibid. tom. xv. p. 308.

212. Cantova’s account of the practice of the Caroline Islands is as follows: “Lorsqu’il meurt, quelque personne d’un rang distingu, ou qui leur est chère par d’autres endroits, ses obsèques se font avec pompe. Il y en a qui renferment le corps du défunct dans un petit édifice de pierre, qu’ils gardent au-dedans de leurs maisons. D’autres les enterrent loin de leurs habitations.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 308, 309.

213. See Vol. III. p. 228.

214. It may be proper to mention here, on the authority of Captain King, that it is common for the inferior people to cut off a joint of their little finger, on account of the sickness of the chiefs to whom they belong.

215. This is peculiar to the men; the women always sitting with both legs thrown a little on one side. We owe this remark to Captain King.

216. Cantova gives us the same account of the profound submission of the Caroline Islanders to the orders of the Tamole. “Ils reçoivent ses ordres avec le plus profond respect. Ses paroles sont autant d’oracles qu’on révère.”

Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, tom. xv. p. 312.

217. The reader need not be reminded that Tamoloa, which signifies a chief, in the dialect of Hamao and Tammaha, become the same word, by the change of a single letter, the articulation of which is not very strongly marked.

218. See this vocabulary, at the end of vol. ii. of Dalrymple’s Collection of Voyages. And yet, though Tasman’s people used the words of this vocabulary, in speaking to the natives of Tongataboo (his Amsterdam), we are told in the accounts of his voyage, that they did not understand one another; a circumstance worth observing, as it shows how cautious we should be, upon the scanty evidence afforded by such transient visits as Tasman’s, and, indeed, as those of most of the subsequent navigators of the Pacific Ocean, to found any argument about the affinity, or want of affinity, of the languages of the different islands. No one now will venture to say, that a Cocos man, and one of Tongataboo, could not understand each other. Some of the words of Horn Island, another of Schouten’s discoveries, also belong to the dialect of Tongataboo. See Dalrymple, as above.

Transcriber’s Note

This book uses inconsistent spelling and hyphenation, which were retained in the ebook version. Some corrections have been made to the text, including normalizing punctuation. Further corrections are noted below:

p. iv: Specicimen of thier Language -> Specimen of their Language

p. 31: produce intermediate disovaries -> produce intermediate discoveries

p. 32: in the the latitude of -> in the latitude of

p. 42: the fabric of inposture -> the fabric of imposture

p. 73: the name asumed by the inhabitants -> the name assumed by the inhabitants

p. 95: the watch watch gave 1° -> the watch gave 1°

p. 112: China and japan -> China and Japan

p. 115: PRECAUTIONS AGANST THE RAIN -> PRECAUTIONS AGAINST THE RAIN

Footnote A p. 116: worth while to obseve here -> worth while o observe here

p. 130: some artifical work -> some artificial work

p. 142: a prodigious sea runing -> a prodigious sea running

Footnote 91: not the orginal discoverer -> to the original discoverer

p. 155: which lie of Chrismas Harbour -> which lie of Christmas Harbour

Footnote 145: the most stiking difference -> the most striking difference

Footnote 156: two tables of coresponding words -> two tables of corresponding words

p. 183: gratification which they they have -> gratification which they have

p. 217: which the New Zelanders distinguish -> which the New Zealanders distinguish

p. 218: subsequent visiters from Europe -> subsequent visiors from Europe

p. 229: and theirwork is often ornamented -> and their work is often ornamented

p. 242: at day-dreak the next morning -> at day-break the next morning

p. 261: the busines we came upon -> the business we came upon

p. 263: victuals that that had been -> victuals that had been

p. 267: roots which they all taro -> roots which they call taro

p. 269: the whole assemly -> the whole assembly

illustration facing p. 301: View at Anamooka -> View at Annamooka

p. 322: I applied to Fenou -> I applied to Feenou

p. 330: anchorage and a a passage -> anchorage and a passage

p. 332: fetch in with Fotooha -> fetch in with Footooha

p. 332; clear of the the shoals -> clear of the shoals

p. 348: Young Fattafaihe following -> Young Futtahaihe following

p. 357: had not danced defore -> had not danced before

p. 365: on our asking the reason, the said -> on our asking the reason, they said

p. 408: it seems all of of them -> it seems all of them

p. 409: strong ripling and whirpools -> strong riplings and whirlpools

p. 443: EMPLOYMENTS OE THE WOMEN -> EMPLOYMENTS OF THE WOMEN

p. 447: unmaried men and women -> unmarried men and women

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE THREE VOYAGES OF CAPTAIN COOK ROUND THE WORLD. VOL. V. BEING THE FIRST OF THE THIRD VOYAGE ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE