The History of Australian Exploration from 1788 to 1888

by Ernest Favenc

CHAPTER XV

To exhaustively deal with the early maritime discoveries of this continent would require from the historian a vast power of research, and especially of caution, in deciding or allotting to any one country the priority of position as the "first-finders;" and while we know of few studies affording more intellectual pleasure and enjoyment, we doubt if the result would even then set at rest the mystery which still enshrouds those narratives.

Since the commencement of this work, however, the following original paper has been considered worthy of attention, as it presents the most reasonable and logical theory yet put forward for the right to consider the French as the original discoverers, and readers will have pleasure in following out the various deductions as made by one of our fellow-colonists, E. Marin La Meslée, Member of the Société de Géographie Commerciale de Paris, who has, by great research, compiled, in the following interesting article, the evidence relating to the voyage of the old Norman navigator, Paulmier de Gonneville, in 1503.

Without endorsing what is here put forward, there is much in its favour, and it shows a considerable degree of keen argument and cogent reasoning that, in any case, is a valuable contribution to this department of literature. Moreover, it may be the incentive for further exploration of the locality mentioned at some future time, with the view of solving the secrets of the strange carving and wonderful cave drawings, to which so much interest has been attracted.

* * * * *

Most of the modern histories of Australia contain, with regard to the voyage of De Gonneville, the same stereotyped remarks:—

"A claim has been set forth on behalf of a certain French sailor named De Gonneville, who is stated to have landed on the coast of Australia in 1503, but this claim can easily be dismissed, as there is little doubt that the country he describes is no other than the island of Madagascar."

This opinion, so generally entertained by modern writers is probably based on the authority of Admiral Burney, and the eminent English geographer, Mr. Major, who, in referring to Burney's remarks with regard to this voyage in his paper on "Early Voyages to Terra Australis," printed in 1861, merely endorses this statement without attempting to discuss it. The voyage of Jean Binot Paulmier de Gonneville is authenticated, however, beyond the possibility of a doubt, but the mystery to be cleared up as to what part of the Austral world the old Norman navigator landed upon requires careful handling and very close discussion.

De Gonneville left Honfleur in the month of June of the year 1503, in the good ship L'ESPOIR, and after having rounded the Cape of Good Hope he was assailed by tempestuous weather and driven into calm latitudes. After a tedious spell of calm weather, want of water forced him to make for the first land he could sight. The flight of some birds coming from the south decided him to run a course to the southward, and after a few days' sail he landed on the coast of a large territory, at the mouth of a fine river, which he compares to the river Orne, at Caen. There he remained for six months repairing his vessel, and making exploring excursions in the neighbourhood, holding meanwhile amicable intercourse with the inhabitants. He left this great Austral Land, to which he gave the name of "Southern Indies," as being situated, in his estimation, "not far from the true course to the East Indies," on the 3rd of July of the year 1504, taking with him two of the natives, one of whom was the son of the chief of the people among whom he had resided. On the return voyage no land was seen until the day after the Feast of St. Denis, I.E., the 10th of October of the same year; but on nearing the coast of France the ship was attacked off tile islands of Guernsey and jersey by an English privateer, who robbed the navigators of all they brought from the land they had visited, the most important loss being the journal of the expedition. On his arrival at Honfleur, De Gonneville immediately entered a plaint before the Admiralty Court of Normandy, and wrote a report of his voyage, which was signed by the principal officers of his vessel.

The following is a translation of the title of this document

"Judicial declaration made before the Admiralty Court of Normandy by
Sieur de Gonneville, at the request of the King's procurator, respecting
the voyage of the good ship L'ESPOIR, of the port of Honfleur, to the
'Southern Indies.'"

Extracts from this judicial declaration were published for the first time in 1663 by the bookseller Cramoisy, who had received them from a priest named J. B. Paulmier, then Canon of the Cathedral Church of St. Pierre de Lizieux. The document was addressed to Pope Alexander VII., and bears the title of:—

"Memorial for the establishment of a Christian mission in the third part of the world, or 'Terre Australe.' Dedicated to His Holiness Pope Alexander VII., by a priest originating from that country."

This priest was the direct descendant of one of the "Australians" (a term used for the first time by De Gonneville himself in referring to the inhabitants of "Terre Australe"), whom the Norman captain had brought to France, and to whom at his death he gave his name and fortune, in his desire to make some atonement for the wrong which the worthy sailor considered he had inflicted upon the native by taking him away from his country under a promise to return, which he was never able to redeem. De Gonneville married him to one of his relatives, and the priest in question was the grandson of the "Australian," whose native name was "Essomeric." Canon Paulmier appears to have been a man of mark in his time, since he was resident in France as representative of the King of Denmark. He was also a man of great learning, and Des Brosses informs us that he had made a particular study of geography and the history of voyages of discovery, with which he was perfectly acquainted.

The documents published by Des Brosses were translated and appeared for the first time in English in a work entitled "Terra Australis Cognita," by the Scotch geographer, Callender, who, like Des Brosses, was fully convinced that De Gonneville had landed somewhere on what is now known as the Australian Continent. This territory was named by Des Brosses AUSTRALASIA as far back as 1761, and was placed to the southward of the Little Moluccas, where our maps now show the north-western portion of the Australian Continent. Some English geographers, however, such as Admiral Burney and Flinders, differ from the conclusions arrived at by both Des Brosses and Callender. Burney inclines to the belief that the land visited by De Gonneville could be no other than Madagascar. After him, Major, than whom no higher or more respected authority exists in geographical matters of this kind, seems to have too readily accepted Burney's opinion. Perhaps they each considered the claim set up on behalf of De Gonneville as based on insufficient grounds, and were disposed to doubt, in the face of later knowledge of the natives of Australia, that De Gonneville could possibly have induced one of his relatives to marry a representative of these wretched races: and it must be admitted that herein lies the great stumbling block in the way of fixing the position of the territory upon which De Gonneville actually landed. It is also probable that Burney was led to the conclusion that Madagascar was the point visited by some inaccuracies in Callender's translation with regard to the kind of head-dress described as worn by the women, which would certainly appear to refer more to the inhabitants of the great African island than to the Australians. The mystery is a difficult one to clear up, but subsequent discoveries, and a closer scrutiny of the Norman captain's narrative, prove, we think, clearly that De Gonneville's "Southern Indies" could be no other than the Australian Continent, and that he landed in reality at the mouth of some of the rivers on the north-western coast.

In the first place, the judicial declaration cited above, which had been for more than three centuries and a half mislaid among the records of the Admiralty of Normandy, was discovered in the year 1873 by the French geographer, Benoit D'Avezac, who published it in a pamphlet in which he discusses this question, and concludes that the land visited by De Gonneville must have been some part of South America. But this official document, which is similar in almost all points to the memoirs of the priest, Paulmier, and establishes at once the fidelity of his extracts and the absolute truth of the voyage of the French captain, does not contain any additional information which could lead to such conclusion, based only on his description of the natives of the "Southern Indies." D'Avezac's contention cannot be sustained, and must give way before the evidence of other facts; but as the same arguments against his theory apply also to that of Burney and Major, we need not discuss it here for the present.

It is, however, necessary, in order that the reader may form a clear idea of the subject, to quote at length the original memoirs as published by the worthy priest. As the translation of Callender is, on the whole, a fairly good one—although it may be inferred that the Scotch geographer, who wrote in 1761, was better acquainted with the pure French of the eighteenth century than with the quaint terms of the old Norman dialect, in which De Gonneville's narrative is written—we shall transcribe here that portion which bears on the subject, reserving to ourselves the duty of pointing out the few inaccuracies which may have led Burney and others to erroneous conclusions.

EXTRACT FROM THE MEMOIRS OF J. B. PAULMIER.

It were to be wished that some better hand than mine were employed to give an account of these southern regions of the world; but I cannot, without being wanting to my character, to my birth, and to my profession, omit doing this duty to the natives of the Southern World. Soon after the Portuguese had discovered the way to the East Indies, some French merchants, invited by a prospect of sharing the gains of this trade, fitted out a ship, which, in its route to the Indies, being driven from the straight course by a tempest, was thrown upon this great southern land. The natives of this region received the French with the most cordial hospitality, and, during an abode of six months, did them every good office in their power. The French, willing to bring some of the natives home with them, prevailed upon the easy credulity of the chief of that nation to give them one of his sons, promising that they would return him to his country fully instructed in the European arts, particularly that of making war, which these Australians desired above all things. Thus was the Indian brought into France, where he lived long enough to converse with many who are yet living, and, being baptised, he received the name and surname of the captain who brought him over. His godfather, in order to acquit himself in some degree of what he owed to the Australians, procured him a small establishment in France, and married him to one of his own relations. One of the sons of this marriage was my grandfather. The solemn promise the French had given to the inhabitants to return him among them, and what I owe to my original country, induces me to give the following short account of the voyage, compiled from the memoirs of my own family:—

"The French having formed the design of following the steps of Vasco de Gama in the East Indies, equipped a vessel at Honfleur for that voyage, which, being commanded by the Sieur de Gonneville, weighed anchor in June, 1503, and, having doubled the Cape of Good Hope, was attacked by a furious storm, which, driving them far from their intended course, left them uncertain in what part of the world they were. Being in want of water, and their ship having suffered much by storm, the sight of some birds from the south induced them to hold their course that way, where they soon discovered a large country, to which they gave the name of Southern India, according to the usage of those days, when it was customary to give the name of India to every new discovered country. They cast anchor in a river, which they say was of the bigness of the Orne, near Caen. Here they spent six months refitting their ship, but the crew, being intimidated, obliged Gonneville to return to France. During his stay in this country he had time to form a most curious account of the country and the manners of its inhabitants, which he inserted in his journal; but, unfortunately, being just off the coast of France, he was taken near the isle of Guernsey by an English privateer, who robbed him of his journal and everything he had. On his landing he complained to the Admiralty, and, having emitted the following judicial declaration, at the request of the procurator of the King, he inserted it in a short relation of the discoveries he had made. This public act, authenticated by all the proper forms, is dated 19th July, 1505, and signed by the principal officers of the ship. From this the following are extracts:—

"ITEM. They say that during their stay in that country they conversed in all freedom with the natives, having gained their goodwill by some trifling presents. That the said Indians were simple people, leading a careless, easy life, subsisting by hunting and fishing, and on some roots and herbs which the soil furnishes spontaneously. Some wear mantles either of skins or of woven mats, and some of them are made of feathers, like those of the gypsies in our country, only they are shorter, with a kind of apron girt above the haunches, which the men wear down to the knee, and the women to the calf of the leg. The women wear collars made of bones and small shells. The men have no ornament of this sort, but carry a bow, and arrows pointed with sharp bones. They have also a sword, made of very hard wood, burned and sharpened at the end; and these are all their weapons. The women and girls go bare-headed, with their hair neatly tied up in tresses mixed with flowers of most beautiful colours. The men let their hair hang down, but they wear crowns of feathers, richly coloured.

"They say further, that having gone two days' journey into the country and along the coasts both to right and left, they found it very fertile, and full of many birds, beasts, and fish utterly unknown in Christendom. The late Nicole Le Fevre, of Honfleur, a volunteer in this voyage, had taken exact draughts of all these things. But everything was lost, together with the journals of the voyage when the ship was taken: and this makes their account very imperfect.

"ITEM. They say, further, that the country is not very populous, the natives living dispersed in villages consisting of thirty, forty, or eighty huts. Those huts are made of stakes drove into the ground, the intervals being filled up with herbs and leaves, and a hole at top to let out the smoke. The doors are formed of sticks neatly tied together, and are shut with wooden keepers like those of the stables in Normandy. The beds are made of soft mats, skins, or feathers. Their household utensils are formed of wood, even the pots with which they boil water but, to preserve them from burning, they are laid over with a kind of clay an inch thick.

"ITEM. They say that the country is divided into many cantons, each of which has its king, or chief. These kings are highly honoured and feared by their subjects, though no better dressed or lodged than they. They have power of life and death over the subjects, of which some of the crew saw a memorable example in the person of a young man of twenty years of age, who, in a fit of passion, had struck his mother. Though no complaint was made, yet the king sent for him and ordered him to be thrown into the river with a large stone tied to his neck, having previously called together the young men of that and the neighbouring villages to witness his punishment.

"The name of this king, to whose territory the ship came, was Arosca. His canton extended a day's journey within land, having about a dozen villages in it, each of which had its particular chief, but under Arosca. The said Arosca was, to appearance, about sixty, then a widower, but had six sons—from thirty to fifteen years of age—who came often to the ship. Arosca was of middle stature, thick set, of grave but pleasant countenance. He was then at peace with the neighbouring kings, but they and he were at war with the people in the inland country, against whom he marched twice, during the ship's stay there. Each time he had a body of 500 or 600 men with him, and when he returned the last time, there were great rejoicings made on account of a victory he had gained. There was nothing but excursions for a few days, in which they begged the French to march with them, in hopes of being assisted by their firearms, but the commander excused himself.

"ITEM. They say that there came five of their kings to see the ship, but they wore nothing to distinguish them but their plumes of feathers, which, contrary to those of their subjects, was of one colour. The principal inhabitants wore some feathers of the colour of the king's mixed with the others. Arosca had his of green.

"ITEM. They say that these friendly Indians received them as angels from Heaven, and were infinitely surprised at the bulk of the ship, the artillery, mirrors, and other things they saw on board. Above all, they were astonished at our method of communicating our thoughts to each other by letters from the ship to those on shore, not being able to divine how the letter could speak. For these reasons they greatly feared the French. At the same time they were so much beloved by them, on account of some axes, mirrors and knives they gave them, that they were always ready to do anything in their power to serve the strangers, bringing them great quantities of flesh and fish, fruits, and other provisions. Besides which, they brought them large quantities of skins, feathers, and roots, of dying in different colours, in exchange for which they received different kinds of hardware of small price, and thus the French got together above one hundred quintals of their goods.

"ITEM. They say that, intending to leave there some memorial that this country had been visited by Christians, they erected a large wooden cross, thirty-five feet high, and painted over, placed on an eminence in view of the sea. This they did with much ceremony on the Day of Pentecost, 504, the cross being carried by the captain and his officers, all barefooted, accompanied by the King Arosca and the principal Indians, after whom followed the crew, under arms, singing the Litany. These were accompanied by a crowd of Indians, to whom they gave to understand the meaning of this ceremony as well as they could. Having set up the cross, they fired volleys of their cannon and small arms, charging the Indians to keep carefully and honour the monument they had set up, and endeavoured to gain them to this by presenting them with a number of baubles, which, though of small value, were highly prized by them. On one side of this cross were engraved the name of the Pope and that of our Sovereign, the name of the Admiral of France, and those of the captain and all his crew. On the other side appeared the Latin verses following, made by the above Nicole Le Fevre, signifying the date of this transaction—

"HIC sacra paLMarIUs, post UIt gonIVILLabInotUs,
"GreX, foCIUs parIterqUe UtraqUe progenles.

"ITEM. They say that, having refitted their ship in the best way they could, they prepared to return to France, and being willing, after the manner of those who discover strange lands, to carry some of the natives with them, they persuaded the king, Arosca, to let them have one of his sons, promising to the father that they would bring him back in twenty moons at farthest, with others who should teach them the use of firearms, and how to make mirrors, axes, knives, and whatever else they admired among the Christians. These promises determined Arosca to let his son, called Essomeric, go along with them, to whom he gave for a companion an Indian of thirty-five years of age, called Namoa. He and his people convoyed them to the ship, giving them provisions, besides many beautiful feathers and other rarities, in order to present to the King of France. At parting, Arosca obliged them to swear that they would return in twenty moons, and when the ship got under way the whole people gave a great cry, and, forming the sign of the Cross with their fingers, gave them to understand that they would carefully preserve the one set up among them.

"ITEM. They say that they left this southern country July 3rd, 1504, and saw no land until the day after the Feast of St. Denis, during which time they were much distressed by a malignant fever, of which their surgeon and three more died, among whom was the Indian, Namoa. The young son of Arosca also falling sick, they baptised him by the name of Binot, after their captain, who stood godfather to him. This was done September 14th, after which the young Indian grew better and arrived in France."

Callender further remarks:—

"Thus far the judicial declaration emitted by De Gonneville before the Admiralty. The rest of the author's memoir is filled with exhortations to the French to profit by this lucky discovery, and send the writer back to the country of his ancestors; but this appears never to have been done. The author seems to have begun this extract from De Gonneville's declaration in that place where he talks of the manners of the inhabitants, omitting what went before, though it is highly probable that the navigator must have said something of the voyage outwards and the portion of the country where he landed, which would have been of great importance for us to know at this day. The French writer from whom we have translated the above account informs us that the Count de Maurepas caused search lately through all the records of the Admiralty in Normandy, in order to find the original of this declaration, but an interval of two centuries and a half, and the confusions occasioned by the civil wars, had dispersed all the old papers, and all the information that M. de Maurepas could obtain was that a tradition still subsisted there that such a piece was once among the records, but they could give no account of what was become of it. Thus the full account of an attempt which Magellan some years after finished with success is entirely lost, except the very lame extract we have been able to lay before the reader. Our French author tells us he has seen another copy of this memorial at the end of the dedication to Pope Alexander VII. The author signs his name thus, at full length, 'Paulmier, Prêtre Indien Chanoine de l'Eglise Cathédrale de Lizieux.' The proprietor of this copy has added a note, testifying that this copy was given him by the author himself in 1664. He commends him as a person of universal knowledge, and one who had travelled all over Europe. He had made the history of navigation his principal study, and was perfectly acquainted with it. In another note we are told that Essomeric, the son of Arosca, lived to the year 1583, and left posterity under the name of Binot. One of his grand-children, J. B. Binot, was President of the Treasury of Provence, and left an only daughter, who was m married to the Marquis de la Barbent, May 4th, 1725. Our readers will not be surprised that we have entered into a detail of facts in order to elucidate and confirm the truth of this first discovery of the Terra Australis, especially as this account was never seen in our language till now, and is therefore little known even to those who are otherwise well acquainted with voyages made to this part of the world."

Callender, however, has omitted to translate the remainder of Des Brosses' account, in which, among other facts, the important statement is made that the priest Paulmier had become personally known to M. Flaconet, who met him for the first time at the residence of the Lord Bishops of Heliopolis and Beryte, where he often met him in company with M. de Flacourt, who had commanded in Madagascar, and AI. Fernamel, father of the Superior of the Foreign Missions. The good abbe was doing all in his power to persuade these gentlemen to assist in sending a mission to these Australians, and it also appears that he had communicated his views on the subject to St. Vincent de Paul, who would have presented his memorial to the Pope had he not been prevented by death.

Before attempting to fix the position of the country visited by De Gonneville, it is necessary to refute here the various opinions expressed on the subject which refer to countries other than the Australian Continent. The most ancient is that brought forward by tile geographers, Duval and Nolin, and the navigator, Bouvet, who place those lands almost immediately to the south of the Cape of Good Hope. As there are no lands thereabout, this opinion is hardly worth quoting but, considering the very limited knowledge of the geography of that part of the world in those days, the error may be readily understood. Others, basing their opinion on the length of De Gonneville's voyage, have surmised that he might have landed on some part of the coast of Tasmania or of New Zealand, but this conclusion is equally untenable, as these islands are not situated within calm latitudes, and are not near or even in the direction of the "true course to the East Indies," which the French sailor was satisfied he was not far off, as, under this belief, he, on leaving the "Southern Indies" endeavoured to induce his crew to continue their voyage. Besides, the description given of the inhabitants and their manners, applies more to natives of a tropical or semi-tropical climate than to those of such cold regions as New Zealand and Tasmania.

We are, therefore, confronted with only one more opinion, which is held by most English geographers on the high authority of Admiral Burney.

"Let the whole account," says Burney, "be reconsidered without prepossession, and the idea that will immediately and most naturally occur is that Southern India, discovered by De Gonneville, was Madagascar. De Gonneville, having doubled (passed round) the Cape, was by tempests driven into calm latitudes, and so near to this land that he was directed thither by the flight of birds. The refusal of the crew to proceed to Eastern India would scarcely have happened if they had been so far advanced to the east as New Holland."

It is difficult to conceive how Burney could have expressed such an opinion, unless he was led to that conclusion by some errors in Callender's translations. There is, in fact, a passage having reference to the descriptions of the head-dress worn by the native women, in which the Scotch geographer has given the following version of Des Brosses' original:—

"The women and girls go bareheaded, with their hair neatly tied up in tresses, mixed with flowers of most beautiful colours."?

The original narrative reads thus:—

"Et vont les femmes et filles tête nue, ayant les cheveux gentiment teurchés de petits cordons d'herbes teintes de couleurs vives et luisantes."

Which means:—

"The women and girls go bare headed, having their hair ornamented with little strings of grass dyed in bright colours."

This, as will be seen, is a very different version. Callender evidently did not understand the old Norman expression—GENITMENT TEURCHÉS, which means "nicely ornamented," and translated it by the word that appeared to him more akin in form, TRESSES, hence, "the hair neatly tied up in tresses", which is a characteristic custom of the native women of the island of Madagascar.

But this is a small matter. It is, however, more difficult to dispose of another fact as telling against the Madagascar theory, which apparently did not strike Burney. Gonneville states that he was driven into calm latitudes, and after tedious navigation, was directed southward by the flight of birds. It is only necessary here to compare dates in order to show how misapplied would be this description to the latitudes within which Madagascar is situated.

De Gonneville left Honfleur in June, 1503, and quilted Southern India on the 3rd of July of the following year. As he stayed six months in that country, his outward voyage had, therefore, lasted about seven months, and he must have been in the vicinity of the Cape of Good Hope about December, 1503, or January, 1504. As it is a well-known fact that tempestuous weather is generally met with from the SOUTH-WEST and, moreover, that the prevailing wind during that season of the year is from the north-west, De Gonneville, whose true course lay to the north-east, was probably driven much more toward the east than he expected, for he expressly states that he was convinced he was not far from the true course to the East Indies. Had the tempests blown from the SOUTH-EAST, there would never, in all probability, have been any need discussing his account, for he would have had none to render, as his ship would have been driven very quickly against the East African coast, or the south-east coast of Madagascar and wrecked.

It must be assumed that De Gonneville was, for his time, a man of great ability, well versed in nautical matters, and the use of the primitive instruments which were then known, and his opinion as, to the position of his ship, and his desire to proceed to the East Indies, being inwardly satisfied that he was not far from the object of his voyage, is certainly entitled to some consideration, although, unfortunately, he has not left any indication of the latitude or longitude of the country he visited. If to this be added the facts that it is precisely in the season extending from December to March, that the Madagascar latitudes are constantly visited by hurricanes, and that the cyclones which originate in the Indian Ocean burst over the islands of Mauritius and Reunion, and generally travel towards these coasts, it will be apparent that the term "calm latitudes" must necessarily apply to some other part of the Indian Ocean. It is equally well-known that the belt which extends round the globe between 10 deg. of latitude, north, and 10 deg. of latitude, south, is in all parts of the ocean, and at all times, subject to very tedious calms, though the waters may occasionally be ruffled by very heavy hurricanes and storms. These facts force us to seek for the land visited in the neighbourhood of these latitudes. The objection raised by the sailors to proceed to the East Indies means nothing, as they had no idea of their position, while as ignorant and superstitious men, tired of a long and dangerous voyage, they had little reason to share in their chief's confidence in his estimate of the locality they had reached, and had no thought but that of returning homewards without facing again the dangers of unknown seas.

Further arguments are not wanting to refute the Madagascar theory. In the first place, the Portuguese, who discovered that island in 1506, and explored its coasts in the following years, could not have Ion. remained in ignorance of De Gonneville's voyage. The cross erected by his companion was, perhaps, not destroyed; but, so short a period having c-lapsed between their discoveries and the Norman captain's voyage, the natives could scarcely have forgotten so important an event. The only alternative theory would be that, in their explorations along the coast of the island, the Portuguese were so unfortunate as to land everywhere but near the spot where De Gonneville may be supposed to have resided. It is stated, moreover, that the priest Paulmier wrote his memorial to the Pope with the object of obtaining a Christian mission to the home of his ancestors; but the Portuguese missionaries were preaching the Gospel in Madagascar almost since the first visits of their countrymen to that island, and it is self-evident that the Abbe, who was often in the company of the priests who in Paris administered the foreign missions in non-Christian countries, must have been aware of this fact; while M. de Villermon positively states that he often met Paulmier in company with M. de Flacourt who had been Governor of Madagascar where France had established itself as far back as 1642. What would have been the necessity, it may be asked, of praying that a Christian mission should be sent to a country where missions had flourished for over a century, or of founding a French colony in an island which was already occupied by France, and had received resident governors ten years before the good priest wrote?

But there is one last point which is sufficient in itself to remove all doubts on the subject. Here, again, we must compare dates, and we find that:—

"They left that country on the 3rd of July, 15o4, and did not see land until the day after the Feast of St. Denis, i.e., 10th October, 1504."

De Gonneville's report to the Admiralty is dated 15th June, 1505, and admitting that there was some delay between his landing at Honfleur and the date of his report, which was signed by the principal officers of his vessel, he could hardly have reached France before March or April of that year. As he was, moreover, convinced that the country to which he had given the name of Southern India lay to the south of the East Indies, it is evident that on his return home his course must have been SOUTH-WEST, which, had he started from the east coast of Madagascar, or, as D'Avezac thinks, from that of South America, would have landed him on his starting point. It is evident that the land he sighted after three months' navigation could be no other than the Cape of Good Hope.

This is sufficient, we venture to think, to dispose of the Madagascar theory, as it does also of the South American one, which, it may be added, can hardly be admitted as possible, when the length of the return voyage of De Gonneville (about twelve months) is taken into consideration, together with the fact that the whole of the South American coast within the region where De Gonneville might have landed was explored and settled about the same time, and some record of his voyage would certainly have been found.

Where, then, shall we look for this Southern India, for that fine river, at the mouth of which De Gonneville remained six months, and for that fine country which his companions explored in their journeys with the natives?

A river of the size described pre-supposes a country of considerable extent, and therefore De Gonneville could not have landed on any of the islands lying between Madagascar and the Sunda Islands. It could not have been either of the latter named, as they lie to the north, and not the south of the calm latitudes referred to by De Gonneville. We are perforce obliged to admit that, as it was not and cannot have been Madagascar, it must have been Australia, and in all probability the north-west coast of the continent, about the Prince Regent and Glenelg rivers, where the explorers King and Grey found fine rivers and a rich country fairly populated with a race of warlike natives. It is certainly difficult when reading the description given of the "Australians," by De Gonneville, to imagine that they could possibly have had any resemblance to the races we are accustomed to meet with in almost all parts of Australia. Still less could they have resembled the wretched creatures which Dampier found inhabiting the west coast, between Cape Le veque and the North-west Cape, and we must, therefore, look further north for a country and a race of men answering better to the description of the Norman captain.

De Gonneville found a fine district, watered by a large river, and inhabited by men who possessed a kind of rudimentary civilization, a tribal organization, and obeyed some established individual authority. He further tells us that they lived in villages, or agglomerations of huts of the shape of the covered markets in the Normandy villages—that is to say, oval or round, made of stakes driven into the ground, and the intervals filled up with herbs and the leaves of trees; and that the speech of these people is soft and melodious. He also speaks of the birds, beasts, fishes, and other curious animals unknown in Christendom, of which Master Nicole le Fevre, of Honfleur, who was a volunteer in the voyage, had taken exact draughts. And, last of all, we are told that De Gonneville induced the chief or king of the country to allow him to take home his son and another Indian as a companion, promising to return with them in twenty "moons" at furthest, and owing to the impossibility of fulfilling that promise, he procured the young Australian an establishment in France, and married him to one of his relatives, from whom he had posterity. This last portion of the narrative would appear the most incredible of all, if we had not official and documentary evidence of its absolute truth, as it must certainly be presumed that the Australian could not possibly have belonged to the wretched races with whom we are familiar.

But, however difficult it may seem to reconcile the account of De Gonneville with our general knowledge of the natives of Australia, the task is not so hopeless as at first sight may appear; and we shall crave the attention of the reader to the following description of the country and the inhabitants of that part of North-west Australia which surrounds the Glenelg. and Prince Regent and other rivers in their neighbourhood, discovered and visited for the first time by Captain King and Lieutenant, now Sir George, Grey, the latter exploring it to some distance inland in the year 1838.

Referring to that part of the country, Lieut. Grey says in his "Expedition in North-Western and Western Australia," p. 179:—

"The peak we ascended afforded us a very beautiful view: to the north lay Prince Regent's River, and the good country we were now upon extended as far as the inlets which communicated with this great navigable stream; to the south and south-westward lay the Glenelg, meandering through as verdant and fertile a district as the eye of man ever rested on. The luxuriance of tropical vegetation was now seen to great advantage in the height of the rainy season. The smoke of native fires rose in every direction from the country which lay like a map at our feet; and when I recollected that all those natural riches of soil and climate lay between two navigable rivers, and that its sea coast frontage, not much exceeding fifty miles in latitude, contained three of the finest harbours in the world in which the tide rose thirty-seven and a half feet, I could not but feel we were in a land singularly blessed by nature."

Could any description more closely adapt itself to the fine country, fairly peopled (PEUPLÉE ENTRE DEUX) of which De Gonneville speaks. Further, on page 195 g S of the same work, Grey says:—

"We at length reached a watershed connecting the country we had left with that we were entering upon. . . This watershed consisted principally of a range of elevated hills, from which streams were thrown off to the Glenelg and to Prince Regent's River. The scenery here was fine, but I have so often before described the same character of landscape that it will be sufficient to say, we again looked down from high land on a very fertile country, covered with a tropical vegetation, and lying between two navigable rivers. I CAN COMPARE THIS TO NO OTHER AUSTRALIAN SCENERY, FOR I HAVE MET WITH NOTHING IN THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CONTINENT WHICH AT ALL RESEMBLE IT."

Referring to the fauna, the same authority says:—

"North Western Australia seems to be peculiarly prolific in birds, reptiles, and insects, who dwell here unmolested. . . ."

After mentioning several kinds of kangaroos, opossums, native dogs, etc., the former of which animals are constantly hunted down by the natives, Grey, speaking of the birds, says:—

"To describe the birds common to these parts requires more time than to detail the names of the few quadrupeds to be found. Indeed, in no other country that I have ever visited do birds so abound. Even the virgin forests of America cannot, in my belief, boast of such numerous feathered denizens. . . . The birds of this country possess, in many instances, an excessively beautiful plumage, and he alone who has traversed these wild and romantic regions, who has beheld a flock of many-coloured parrakeets sweeping like a moving rainbow through the air, can form any adequate idea of the scenes that then burst on the eye of the wondering naturalist. As to fish, the rivers abound in many species of excellent fish."

Could there be a more fitting description of that country which De Gonneville and his companions explored along the coast and in the interior to a distance of two days' journey, which "they found very fertile and full of many birds, beasts, and fish hitherto unknown in Christendom?" To what does this latter qualification apply? Certainly not to birds, beasts, or fish of either South America or Madagascar, as the American fauna was, to a certain extent, already known in Christendom, and that of Madagascar, which resembles that of the east coast of Africa, apart from a few species not particularly remarkable or numerous, was also well-known to Europeans. These beasts, of which, to use the old Norman phrase of "Master Nicole Le Fevre, avait pourtrayé les façons," must have struck him as very peculiar indeed when he refers to them as "utterly unknown in Christendom," and we know well that no other country can boast of a fauna so essentially different to that of any other part of the world as the Australian Continent.

And now as to the natives of this part of Australia, i.e., the neighbourhood of the Glenelg and Prince Regent's River. Grey, in page 251 of the above cited work, says:—

"My knowledge of the natives is chiefly drawn from what I have observed of their haunts, their painted caves, and drawings. I have, moreover, become acquainted with several of their weapons, some of their implements, and took pains to study their disposition and habits as far as I could.

"In their manner of life, their weapons, and mode of hunting, they closely resemble the other Australian tribes with which I have since become pretty intimately acquainted, WHILST IN THEIR FORM AND APPEARANCE THERE IS A STRIKING DIFFERENCE. They are, in general, very tall and robust, and exhibit in their legs and arms a fine, full development of muscle which is unknown to southern races. They wear no clothes, and their bodies are marked by scars and wales. They seem to have no regular mode of dressing their hair, this appearing to depend entirely on individual taste or caprice.

"THEY APPEAR TO LIVE IN TRIBES, SUBJECT, PERHAPS, TO SOME INDIVIDUAL
AUTHORITY, AND EACH TRIBE HAS A SORT OF CAPITAL OR HEAD-QUARTERS, WHERE
THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN REMAIN, WHILST THE MEN, DIVIDED INTO SMALL
PARTIES, HUNT AND SHOOT IN EVERY DIRECTION. The largest number we saw
together, including women and children, amounted to nearly two hundred.

"Their arms consist of stone-headed spears, of throwing-sticks, of boomerangs or kileys, clubs, and stone hatchets.

"These natives manufacture their water buckets and weapons very neatly, and make from the bark of a tree a light but strong cord.

"THEIR HUTS, OF WHICH I ONLY SAW THOSE ON THE COAST, ARE CONSTRUCTED, IN AN OVAL FORM, OF THE BOUGHS OF TREES, AND ARE ROOFED WITH DRY REEDS. THE DIAMETER OF ONE WHICH I MEASURED WAS ABOUT FOURTEEN FEET AT THE BASE.

"THEIR LANGUAGE IS SOFT AND MELODIOUS, SO MUCH SO AS TO LEAD TO THE INFERENCE THAT IT DIFFERS VERY MATERIALLY, IF NOT RADICALLY, FROM THE MORE SOUTHERN AUSTRALIAN DIALECTS, WHICH I HAVE SINCE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO INQUIRE INTO. Their gesticulation is expressive, and their bearing manly and noble. They never speared a horse or sheep belonging to us, and, judging by the degree of industry shown in their paintings, the absence of anything offensive in the subjects delineated, and the careful finish of some articles of common use, I should infer that, under proper treatment, they might easily be raised very considerably in the scale of civilisation.

"A REMARKABLE CIRCUMSTANCE IS THE PRESENCE AMONGST THEM OF A RACE, TO APPEARANCE, TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND ALMOST WHITE, WHO SEEM TO EXERCISE NO SMALL INFLUENCE OVER THE REST. I am forced to believe that the distrust evinced towards strangers arose from these persons, as in both instances when we were attacked, the hostile party was led by one of these light-coloured men."

We need only draw the attention of the reader to the close resemblance between the description of De Gonneville's "Australians" and that of Grey's in many particulars, especially in their tribal organization, the form of their houses, [Note, below] their language, and the fact of the existence among them, as leaders of the tribes, of that race of almost white men also observed about the same parts by Captain King, who thinks that they are of Malay origin.

[Note: Callender, in his translation omits a passage referring to the form of the huts of the Australians, which De Gonneville says were "EN FORME DE HALLES," i.e., in the form of covered markets such as seen in the villages of Normandy, which are generally oval structures.]

There are certain discrepancies, however, which cannot be explained away, unless it is taken into consideration that Grey visited those coasts three hundred and thirty years after the French sailor, and that during that interval of time the customs of the inhabitants cannot fall to have undergone a change. It may be also that the light-coloured people seen amongst them are but the remnants of once numerous tribes, probably of Malay origin, as these latter have left undeniable marks of their having not intermixed with the native races throughout the whole of northern Australia. One of the points of dissemblance which might be pointed out is the fact that De Gonneville describes them as using bows and arrows, which is at variance with our knowledge of the arms of the Australians, and equally differs from Grey's description of the same; but this objection exists also as regards the inhabitants of Madagascar, who, besides, had already attained a much higher degree of civilisation than that described by De Gonneville—being acquainted with the use of iron, the manufacture of cotton and silk goods, fine mats, and many other articles of value among civilised people. The Madagascar natives never made use of the skins of animals as an article of dress, whilst this custom is common to the aborigines of all parts of Australia, where the kangaroo, opossums, native bears, and emus, furnish them with the material, with which they could manufacture these garments of skins or beds of feathers described by De Gonneville. But if the theory is accepted, which we are about to put forward regarding the inhabitants of this part of Australia—that at the time of De Gonneville's visit a people of Malay origin inhabited it in fairly large numbers, of which the light-coloured natives seen by Grey are the descendants, and that with their disappearance from that district some of their customs disappeared with them, the natives of the present day retaining only those best suited to their actual mode of life—then the Norman captain's narrative will become intelligible. Besides, as regards the use of bow and arrow, certainly known to the Malays, although the intercourse of the latter with other tribes on the north Australian coast has been undoubtedly frequent, nowhere have the Australian natives adopted that kind of arm, whilst in New Guinea and all over Northern Polynesia the bow and arrow is the inevitable war accoutrement of the savage, who certainly obtained the knowledge of it from his Malay forefathers. No wonder, then, that in the district explored by Grey, these arms should have given way to the equally effective boomerang, throwing-stick, and spears, and other weapons of the North Australian savage.

The theory we have just submitted with regard to the country round the Glenelg River and that of the Prince Regent having been at one time inhabited by a different and superior race is no idle one, and is proved by the discoveries of remarkable paintings made by the same Lieutenant Grey in the caves near the mouth of the abovenamed rivers.

Again we shall have to quote this excellent author, whose clear and concise descriptions are of such value, and refer the reader to the following passages in the diary of his explorations in that part of the Australian Continent:—

"On this sloping roof the principal figure (1) which I have just alluded to was drawn. In order to produce the greater effect, the rock about it was painted black, and the figure itself coloured with the most vivid red and white. It thus appeared to stand out from the rock, and I was certainly surprised at the moment that I first saw this gigantic head and upper part of a body bending over and staring grimly down on me.

"It would be impossible to convey in words an adequate idea of this uncouth and savage figure; I shall, therefore, only give such a succinct account of this and the other paintings as will serve as a sort of description to accompany the annexed plates.

"Length of head and face 2 ft. 0 in.
"Width of face 0 ft 17 in. (sic)
"Length from bottom of face to navel 2 ft 6 in.

"Its head was encircled by bright red rays, something like the rays which one sees proceeding from the sun when depicted on the signboard of a public house. Inside of this came a broad stripe of very brilliant red, which was coped by lines of white; both inside and outside of this red space were narrow stripes of a still deeper red, intended probably to mark its boundaries. The face was painted vividly white and the eyes black, being, however, surrounded by red and yellow lines. The body, head, and arms were outlined red, the body being curiously painted with red stripes and bars.

"Upon the rock which formed the left hand wall of this cave, and which partly faced you on entering, was a very singular painting (2), vividly coloured, representing four heads joined together. From the mild expression of the countenances, I imagined them to represent females, and they appeared to be drawn in such a manner and in such a position as to look up at the principal figure which I have before described. Each had a very remarkable head-dress, coloured with a deep, bright blue, and one had a necklace on. Both of the lower figures had a sort of dress, painted with red, in the same manner as that of the principal figure, and one of them had a band round the waist. Each of the four faces was marked by a totally distinct expression of countenance, and although none of them had mouths, two, I thought, were otherwise rather good-looking. The whole painting was executed on a white ground, and its dimensions were:—

"Total length of painting 3 ft. 6¾ in.
"Breadth across two upper heads 2 ft. 6 in.
"Breadth across two lower heads 3 ft. 1½ in.

These remarkable paintings attracted Grey's attention, and led him wondering as to their origin. The solution to that problem he has however left to others. (Fig 1, see Appendix.)

According to him, the first two frescoes—i.e., those situated on the roof of the cave, representing the principal figure, and that representing the four persons (probably women), are one subject. A glance at their position, and the expression of their faces, leads one to accept Grey's opinion as not only admissible, but as the only accurate one. The group of women is placed in an attitude of prayer, or of submission towards the central figure, also representing a woman, as all except the head-dress, which is a little different, exactly resemble the others; it is also evident that the artist wished to represent a religious subject.

It is necessary to remark that the people among which these drawings have been found belong to an almost savage race, and in admitting that they may be the work of a superior race that once inhabited these parts (which, by the way, is the opinion of Sir George Grey), yet this superior race could hardly be any other but some Malay tribe. Among these latter, as well as among all savage, or semi-savage people, woman is considered as a being of an inferior order, more fit to become a slave than to be worshipped, and as the Malays had either adopted for centuries past, either one of two creeds, that of Buddhism from the Hindoos, or that of Mahomet from the Arabs, we look in vain, save in the former, and that in only one or two well-known instances, which cannot for a moment be entertained here, for the worship of a woman. The Malay religious artistic subjects that we know of are of an order far above that of which we have a sample here, and there is no resemblance at all in their paintings with anything depicted in these caves.

There are several points of importance with regard to these pictures, to which we beg to direct the reader's attention. In the first place, the perfect oval shape of the head; secondly, the colour of the face, which is painted VIVIDLY WHITE, evidently for some purpose; and thirdly, the fact that the kind of dress worn over the bodies exactly resembles that described by De Gonneville as worn by the women of the Southern Indies, made of some kind of matted material, sometimes also of skins, or of feathers, girt above the haunches and reaching to the knee. (Fig. 2, see Appendix.)

Compare, also, the date assigned by Grey to these pictures-two or three centuries, and this coincidence will appear still more remarkable.

But to return to the subject. It is difficult, if not impossible to credit the natives at the time of Grey's visit as being the authors of these paintings. The eminent traveller absolutely discredits such a possibility, and attributes them to a far distant epoch, and a totally different race. The perfect oval shape of the faces was not drawn so without a purpose, and neither were they painted so vividly white, if the artist had not desired to pourtray types of a race certainly not existing at present on the the Australian continent. It is difficult to admit that it might be of Malay origin, as tile head-dress, or to describe it more perfectly, the AUREOLA surrounding the head, is met with in Buddhist paintings or sculptures only as surrounding the head of gods, who can always be recognised by their peculiar and constant characteristics, and nowhere are these AUREOLAS surrounded with the rays in the shape of "FLAMÈCHES," which confront us in the drawing of the principal figure. (Fig. 3, see Appendix.) It resembles, indeed, much better Grey's own description:—

"Its head was encircled by bright red rays, something like the rays which one sees proceeding from the sun, when depicted on the sign board of a public house."

There is evidently here some strange mixture of European and Malay art, the former exhibited in the remarkable AUREOLAS which so commonly surround the heads of saints in the old images, in painted church windows of the middle ages, and the times of De Gonneville, and the latter in the kind of dress over the body, which appears to be meant to represent some sort of matted stuff. This painting is not the work of a native artist; it is unlikely that it could be the work of Malays, in the third place there is in its position and its peculiar appearance such a striking touch of an European conception, mingled with barbaric surroundings, that one is almost inclined to the belief that we are here in the presence of a subject of religious, nay, a Christian order.

This deduction may need additional evidence, and if the reader will kindly follow with us Lieutenant Grey's steps, he will be placed in the presence of a still more remarkable painting, which we shall presently describe.

"The cave was twenty feet deep, and at the entrance seven feet high and about forty feet wide. As before stated the floor gradually approached the roof in the direction of the bottom of the cavern, and its width also contracted so that at the extremity it was not broader than the slab of rock which formed a natural seat. The principal painting in it was the painting of a man ten feet six inches in length, clothed from the chin downwards in a red garment which reached to the wrists and ankles; beyond this red dress the feet and hands protruded, and were badly executed.

"The face and head of the figure were enveloped in a succession of circular bandages, or rollers, or what appeared to be painted to represent such. These were coloured red, yellow, and white, and the eyes were the only features represented on the face. Upon the highest bandage, or roller, a series of lines were painted in red, but although so irregularly done as to indicate that they have some meaning, it is impossible to tell whether they were intended to depict written characters or some ornament for the head. This figure was so drawn on the roof that its feet were just in front of the natural seat, whilst its head and face looked directly down on anyone who stood in the entrance of the cave, but it was totally invisible from the outside. The painting was more injured by the damp and atmosphere, and had the appearance of being much more defaced and ancient than any of the others which we have seen. There were two other paintings, one on each side of the rocks, which stood on either side of the natural seat: they were carefully executed, and yet had no apparent design in them, unless they were intended to represent some fabulous species of turtle; for the natives of Australia are generally fond of narrating tales of fabulous and extraordinary animals, such as gigantic snakes, etc." (Fig. 4, see Appendix.)

With this drawing, as well as in the others, it is evident that native talent had nothing to do. Neither had, in all probability, the Malays, as the form of the dress and its colour are incompatible with anything we know of these people. Then again the same AUREOLA surrounds the head of the figure, and we are inclined to think that this drawing is due to the same artist who painted those already described. Although Grey believes that it is a more ancient production, the face of it having suffered more than the other is in all probability due to it being more exposed to atmospheric, or other influences, rather than to its greater antiquity. There are, however, some very interesting points to examine in this drawing, and in the first place our attention is drawn to the curious signs inscribed on the AUREOLA surrounding the head.

At first sight, an illiterate person would at once exclaim, "these are
Latin characters."

G I T I L F

Five out of six undoubtedly are such, and the sixth appears to be part of an unfinished or defaced letter, probably F or E. This is evidently very remarkable, and more so is the fact which a closer examination discloses that near the right shoulder of the figure two additional characters, C D, also undoubtedly of Latin form, are there inscribed, proving the European origin of this drawing, which resembles exactly those paintings of the middle ages, representing some holy monk or nun in their habilaments, of a coarse, brown cloth, the hands, and still more so the feet in that, position which painters of religious subjects have rendered us so familiar with on the old church windows, and other paintings of those times. The practice of printing the name of the saint on the AUREOLA encircling the head is also a common one, and perhaps we may find there an explanation of that painting, which will also prove the others to be of like origin. These characters are, undoubtedly, Latin, whichever way one might like to turn them, and their appearance in such a spot is not due to chance alone. It would be a difficult task to attempt to explain their meaning, but, perhaps, a further exploration of these singular caves may bring to light information leading to their identification and explanation. Suffice it to say that they certainly tend to show the European and Christian character of these paintings, the first one probably representing the holy women praying before the Virgin, and the other some holy nun, as the line over the chin seems to indicate the well-known head-dress. It may be objected that the Virgin could hardly have been pourtrayed in such a costume, to which the answer may be made, that it was a common custom at the time, among the disciples of Francis Xavier who evangelised India, to represent the Virgin and the saints in the costume of the country, in order to bring them in an easier way to the conception of the native mind, a practice, need it be added, which brought on the head of the Jesuits the most severe condemnation.

If such is the case, and if these paintings are, as we believe, the work of Europeans, we might look in their vicinity for some other and still more convincing proof of their origin.

Such is afforded also, and the evidence is telling.

For the last time we shall quote the same eminent author, and at page 205 of vol. 1. of his work, we read:—

"After proceeding some distance, we found a cave larger than the one seen this morning; of its actual size, however, I have no idea, for being pressed for time I did not attempt to explore it, having merely ascertained that it contained no paintings. I was moving on when we observed a profile of a human face and head, cut out in a sandstone rock which fronted the cave; this rock was so hard that to have removed such a large portion of it with no better tool than a knife and hatchet made of stone, such as the Australian natives generally possess, would have been a work of very great labour. The head was two feet in length, and sixteen inches in breadth in the broadest part; the depth of the profile increased gradually from the edges where it was nothing, to the centre where it was an inch and a half. The ear was rather badly placed, but otherwise the whole of the work was good, and far superior to what a savage race could be supposed capable of executing. The only proof of antiquity that it bore about it was that all the edges of the cutting were rounded and perfectly smooth, much more so than they could have been from any other cause than long exposure to atmospheric influences.

"After having made a sketch of this head I returned to the party."

Now let us examine, without prepossession or prejudice, this remarkable sculpture, THE ONLY HEAD SCULPTURED IN ROCK EVER FOUND IN AUSTRALIA.

This profile is that of an European, the purity of the lines, the perfect shape of the head, the straight and well-formed nose, the finely-cut lips, the round chin, represent the most exact type of an European head that it could be possible to imagine. Indeed, the fact alone that the natives have no means of cutting out such a sculpture in the rock, is enough to induce one to seek elsewhere for its author, and the head is certainly not that of a Malay; the type is European, and that of the purest.

We shall go no further with this discussion, which the appearance of this sculptured profile of an European head closes on our behalf better than all volumes would do, and resume it in a few words.

De Gonneville, carried away by storms into unknown seas, lands on a coast which he estimates is situated to the south of India, and the Islands of Spices, and not far from the true course to the East Indies; at the entrance of a fine river, and in a fertile country, whose inhabitants he describes. They were in all probability of Malay stock, and there is no difficulty so far to understand his female relative having married a person of that race, the remnants of which have been met with since by other travellers.

Three hundred and thirty-five years after De Gonneville's voyage, King and Grey explore in the north-west part of Australia, a country whose description well answers to that visited by De Gonneville, and NEVER SET FOOT UPON BY EUROPEANS IN THE INTERVAL. There Grey finds a river such as De Gonneville describes—a land inhabited by races that have preserved many of the customs of the "Australians" described by the Norman captain with whom, as a volunteer in the voyage, had travelled a certain Nicole Le Fevre, a man of some learning' and a kind of artist, who had pourtrayed strange beasts, etc., "utterly unknown in Christendom." In that country', at a very short distance from the coast, Grey discovers curious paintings, some strikingly resembling the pictures of saints as represented on the Church windows of the time, one of them bearing some very remarkable European letters and characters, and last of all he finds there the head of an European sculptured in the hard rock, evidently with instruments such as the natives do not possess.

What are we to conclude from these facts? That there is strong evidence that De Gonneville, who could have landed nowhere else but on Australian soil, had precisely landed on that part of the country visited by Grey, and that the paintings discovered are the work of some of his companions.

But although such evidence is strong indeed, it is not yet absolutely perfect, even for one desirous of solving the problem of fixing the exact position of the spot visited by the Norman sailor. Others, perhaps, may give a different interpretation to the figures and the characters represented above; they are, however, worthy of attracting notice, and if the result of this investigation is only to draw the attention of those who are interested in ascertaining the previous history of the country they inhabit and love, be they members of scientific societies or of colonial governments, the task undertaken will not prove a thankless one.

One thing is settled, however, beyond the possibility of doubt, and that is, that De Gonneville landed on no other soil but that of Australia, and nowhere else but at the mouth of some of the north-western rivers.

The maps of the sixteenth century, known to have existed long before the voyages of the Dutch and the English, bear witness to the fact that the north-western part of the coast of Australia was sighted by the Portuguese on their voyages to and from the East Indies and the Spice Islands.

A critical examination of these charts, some of which have been reproduced for the Public Libraries of the chief Australian cities from the originals in the British Museums, tends to show—although most of the names of features on the north-west coast are in French—that some of them appear to have been translated from the Portuguese. The older of these charts bears the date of the year 1542, but there are two more maps in the "Bibliotheque Nationale de France" which are still more ancient. One, which is the work of Guillaume Le Testu, a pilot of Dieppe, shows a portion of the coast in a fairly correct position, indicating features which can easily be recognised, although their longitude and latitude are not exact; the names, which are all in French, do not exhibit any sign of having been translated from any other language; and there is little doubt that Le Testu, who published this chart in 1536, must have heard of the expedition of De Gonneville, which could hardly have failed to attract attention at the time among the sailors of note in the ports of the Normandy coast. Considering the state of geographical science at that epoch, the delineation of the north-west coast of the Australian continent is certainly as accurate as that of the island of Java and minor islands in those regions, which were much better known, and there is in this fact evidence enough that the data upon which Le Testu, Jean Rotz, and other cartographers worked, must have been fairly accurate. The Norman pilot shows on his map the entrance of several rivers and features which closely resemble the outline of this coast as at present known, but except in the vicinity of the rivers mentioned, the coast on the south and the north-east is prolonged without data, and merely indicates a probable extension of land in these directions. The other maps agree fairly well in this respect, the outlines of very small portions only of the coast being—susceptible of identification at present. From these facts we may infer that Guillaume Le Testu probably obtained much of his information from the report of De Gonneville, whilst Rotz and the authors of the maps in the British Museum had theirs from Portuguese sources, and as the latters' delineation of the north-west coast is less accurate, it may be that the Portuguese sailors, from whose reports this information was obtained, merely sighted these coasts without attempting to land.

To close this discussion, it may be added, that in most instances the early voyages of the Dutch or possibly the Portuguese to Western Australia were the result of such accidents as befell De Gonneville, as they were carried by storms out of their course to India or the Sunda Islands, and thrown on the west coast of the Australian Continent.

The first claim to the discovery of the Australian Continent may be, therefore, settled in favor of De Gonneville; although, there is little doubt that the existence of a great southern land was suspected by the Chinese, and also by the ancients. This great land, situated on the opposite side of the world, was named by them ANTI-CHTON, and its supposed inhabitants "Antichtones," and the fact of the possibility of it being inhabited at all gave rise to a good deal of discussion among ancient writers. They, however, agreed in the belief that "the fury of the sun, which burns the intermediate zone," rendered it inaccessible to the inhabitants of the world. Plinus, Pomponius Mela, Scipio, Virgilius, Cicero, and Macrobius considered this land as habitable, and the two last mentioned authors held the opinion that it was inhabited by a different race of beings.

This question was also debated by the early Christian fathers, and perhaps the most remarkable argument against the existence of the ANTICHTONES will be found in the works of the celebrated theologian and venerated father, St. Augustine, who devotes the whole of Chapter IX., Book XVI. of his admirable work, "De Civitate Dei," to the discussion of this knotty question.

"Quod verò," writes St. Augustine, "Antipodes esse fabulantur, id est, homines a contaria parte terrae, ubi sol oritur, quando occidit nobis, adversa pedibus nostris calcare vestigia, nulla ratione credendum est. Neque hoc ulla historica cognitione didicisse se affirmant, sed quali ratiocinando conjectant, es quod intra con vexa coeli terra suspenda sit, eum demque locum mundas habeat, et infirmum, et medium: et ex hoc opinantur alteram terra pattern, quae infra est, habitatione hominum carere non posse. Nec adtendunt, etiamsi figura conglobata et rotunda mundus esse credatur, sive aliqua ratione monstretur; non tamen esse consequens, ut etiam ex illa parte ab aquarum congerie nuda sit terra devide etiamus nuda sit, neque hoc statum necesse esse, ut homines habeat, Quoniam nulla modo Scriptura ista mentitur, quae narratis praeteritis facis sidem, eo quod ejus praedicta complentur: nimisque absurdurn est, ut dicatur aliquos hornines ex hae in illam partem, oceani immensitate trajecta, navigare ac pervenive potuisse, ut etiarn illic ex uno illo primo hornine genus institueretur hurnanurn?"

The substance of which is: "That there can be nothing more absurd than the belief of some ancient writers who imagined that the land on the opposite side of the world could be inhabited by human beings. Those who made this assertion admit they have no historical fact to base it upon, and that it is merely a logical deduction of philosophy. But if we accept as true the principles upon which they base their arguments, is it to be necessarily admitted that because these countries are habitable, that they are in reality inhabited. As the Holy Scripture, which is our guide in all matters of belief, makes no mention of this, and as it is an accepted fact that the descendants of our first parents could not have sailed to and reached these countries, how is it possible that they could be inhabited."

Although the existence of a great Austral land was a subject of philosophical and theological discussion among the ancients, they, however, never attempted to sail across that ocean which was the limit of the world they knew. It is possible that the Chinese may have been more bold, but it is very doubtful whether they ever sailed so far south as to land on the coast of the Australian continent. They have left no trace of their passage, either on the land itself, or among its inhabitants. Besides, the Chinese were never very enterprising sailors, the form of their junks, their peculiar sails, and the scantiness of their nautical knowledge prevented them from extending very far the radius of their maritime explorations. Marco Polo is the authority generally quoted in this matter, as he states that the people of Cathay knew of the existence of a great land far to the southward, with the inhabitants of which they were accustomed to trade. This is rather an indefinite description, and might apply to New Guinea as well as to the Australian Continent. More so to the former and the islands surrounding it on the north and east, where evidence exists of the voyage of the Chinese traders and fishermen in search of the precious trepang. But as these holothuriae are generally found in the vicinity of the coral banks of Polynesia, to the eastward of New Guinea, and not in the direction of the Australian coast, there is much reason to think that the Chinese claim to the discovery of this continent is purely mythical, although, like the ancients, they may have believed in its existence as a logical deduction of philosophy.