Your Worships' Obedt. Servant
WILLEM JANSZ.
B.
Worshipful Wise Provident Discreet Gentlemen,
See the Maps numbered VII, C and D (1616).
X. (1619)?
FURTHER DISCOVERY OF THE SOUTH-COAST OF NEW-GUINEA BY THE SHIP HET WAPEN VAN AMSTERDAM? [*]
Instructions for Tasman 1644.
...In the interim in the year 1619 the ship 't Wapen van Amsterdam, passing Banda on her way thither, was east on the south-coast of Nova Guinea where also some of her crew were slain by the barbarian inhabitants, so that no certain information respecting the situation of the country was obtained...
[* I place a note of interrogation here. The matter is not quite clear. For the sake of completeness I mention it here, but without drawing any conclusion. On p. 95, note 5 of my "Life of Tasman" in Fred. Muller's Tasman publication I say: "Leupe, Zuidland, p. 35, cites a letter sent by the Directors to the Gov.-Gen. and Councillors, of Sept. 9, 1620. In this letter there is question of the discoveries made by d'Eendracht, Zeewolff, 't Wapen van Amsterdam, and quite recently by Commanders Houtman and D'Edel". When, we may ask, did the ship 't Wapen van Amsterdam survey the South-land? There certainly was a ship of that name by the side of another vessel, named Amsterdam pur et simple. According to the Register of departures of vessels of the E.I.C., preserved in the State Archives at the Hague, this ship set sail from the Netherlands on May 11, 1613. I have found no reliable trace of later date of this vessel, and the documents know nothing of any exploration of the South-land by her. I am inclined to think that Leupe is mistaken here. The letter itself, which is contained in the copying-book of letters, preserved in the State Archives, has suffered much from theravages of time. Between the words "Zeewolff" and "Amsterdam" the paper has suffered so much that nothing is left of the intervening letters. L. C. D. Van Dijk, in his Mededeelingen uit het Oost-Indisch archief. Amsterdam, Scheltema, 1859 p. 2, note 2, has also printed the letter in question. He puts the words: "'t Wapen van" in parentheses, in order to denote that they are merely conjectural. Leupe may have inadvertently omitted these parentheses. Perhaps the original text read: "ende Amsterdam". In this case there would have been two times question of Dedel's voyages: once by a reference to the ship Amsterdam; and afterwards by mentioning Dedel's name itself. I must not however omit to make mention here of what the Instructions for Tasman's second voyage, dated January 29, 1644, say about an unsuccessful expedition undertaken by the ship 't Wapen van Amsterdam to the south coast of New Guinea in 1619.]