"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.