The Endeavour had been built for the coal trade, and a vessel of that construction was preferred for many reasons, particularly because she was what the sailors called a good sea-boat, was more roomy, would take and lie on the ground better, and might be navigated by fewer men than other vessels of the same burden.
Her complement of officers and men was Lieutenant Cook the commander, with two lieutenants under him, a master and boatswain, with each two mates, a surgeon and carpenter, with each one mate, a gunner, a cook, a clerk and steward, two quarter-masters, an armourer, a sail-maker, three midshipmen, forty-one able seamen, twelve marines, and nine servants, in all eighty-four persons, besides the commander: she was victualled for eighteen months, and took on board ten carriage and twelve swivel guns, with good store of ammunition and other necessaries. The Endeavour also, after the astronomical observation should be made, was ordered to prosecute the design of making discoveries in the South Seas. What was effected by these vessels in their several voyages, will appear in the course of this work, of which it is now necessary to give some account.
It is drawn up from the journals that were kept by the commanders of the several ships, which were put into my hands by the lords commissioners of the admiralty for that purpose: and, with respect to the voyage of the Endeavour, from other papers equally authentic; an assistance which I have acknowledged in an introduction to the account of her voyage.
When I first undertook the work, it was debated, whether it should be written in the first or third person; it was readily acknowledged on all hands, that a narrative in the first person would, by bringing the adventurer and the reader nearer together, without the intervention of a stranger, more strongly excite an interest, and consequently afford more entertainment; but it was objected, that if it was written in the name of the several commanders, I could exhibit only a naked narrative, without any opinion or sentiment of my own, however fair the occasion, and without noting the similitude or dissimilitude between the opinions, customs, or manners of the people now first discovered, and those of nations that have been long known, or remarking on any other incident or particular that might occur. In answer to this objection, however, it was said, that as the manuscript would be submitted to the gentlemen in whose names it would be written, supposing the narrative to be in the first person, and nothing published without their approbation, it would signify little who conceived the sentiments that should be expressed, and therefore I might still be at liberty to express my own. In this opinion all parties acquiesced, and it was determined that the narrative should be written in the first person, and that I might, notwithstanding, intersperse such sentiments and observations as my subject should suggest: they are not indeed numerous, and when they occur, are always cursory and short; for nothing would have been more absurd than to interrupt an interesting narrative, or new descriptions, by hypothesis and dissertation.[5] They will, however, be found most frequent in the account of the voyage of the Endeavour; and the principal reason is, that although it stands last in the series, great part of it was printed before the others were written, so that several remarks, which would naturally have been suggested by the incidents and descriptions that would have occurred in the preceding voyages, were anticipated by similar incidents and descriptions which occurred in this.
[Footnote 5: It is highly questionable if this substitution of writer for adventurer have the efficiency ascribed to it, when the reader knows before hand, and cannot but remember, that it is artificial, and avowedly intended for effect. This is so obvious, that one cannot help wondering how the parties concerned in the publication of these Voyages should have acquiesced in the mode of their appearance. The only way of accounting for it, perhaps, is this; it was imagined that no one but an author by profession was competent to fulfil the expectations that had been formed in the public mind. The opinion generally entertained that Mr Robins was the author of the Account of Anson's Voyage, might have contributed to this very groundless notion; and the parties might have hoped, that a person of Dr Hawkesworth's reputation in the literary world, would not fail to fabricate a work that should at least rival that excellent production. It would be unfair not to apprise the reader, that this hope was not altogether realised. Public opinion has unquestionably ranked it as inferior, but has not however been niggard in its praise. The work is read, and always will be read, with high interest. This, perhaps, is capable of augmentation; and the Editor much deceives himself if he has not accomplished this effect by his labours, as well in pruning off the redundant moralizings and cumbrous ratiocinations of Dr Hawkesworth, as in contributing new but relevant matter to the mass of amusing and instructive information which that gentleman has recorded. He confesses that he has far less delicacy in doing either of these offices in the present case, than he would chuse to avow, had the account emanated purely and directly from the pens of those who performed the voyages; nor can he help feeling a regret, that such persons as Byron and Cook, both of whom have given most satisfactory proofs of their possessing every literary requisite, were not permitted to edify the public as they thought good, without the officious instrumentality of an editor. These men needed no such interference, though their modesty and good sense availed them, undoubtedly, in profiting by the merely verbal corrections of friendship; and their own productions have the charm of simplicity and genuineness of narrative, which, it is certain, the ability acquired by mere drudgery in composition is by no means adequate to produce.--E.]
Some particulars that are related in one voyage will perhaps appear to be repeated in another, as they would necessarily have been if the several commanders had written the account of their voyages themselves; for a digest could not have been made of the whole, without invading the right of each navigator to appropriate the relation of what he had seen: these repetitions, however, taken together, will be found to fill but a few pages of the book.[6]
[Footnote 6: These repetitions have been studiously avoided in this work, wherever omission could be practised, or reference to different parts of the collection seemed unembarrassing.--E.]
That no doubt might remain of the fidelity with which I have related the events recorded in my materials, the manuscript account of each voyage was read to the respective commanders at the Admiralty, by the appointment of Lord Sandwich, who was himself present during much the greatest part of the time. The account of the voyage of the Endeavour was also read to Mr Banks and Dr Solander, in whose hands, as well as in those of Captain Cook, the manuscript was left for a considerable time after the reading. Commodore Byron also, Captain Wallis, and Captain Carteret, had the manuscripts of their respective voyages to peruse, after they had been read at the Admiralty in their presence, and such emendations as they suggested were made. In order thus to authenticate the voyage of Captain Cook, the account of it was first written, because it was expected when his journal was put into my hand, that he would have sailed on his second voyage in less than five months.
[Some paragraphs, containing reasons or apologies for certain minute specifications of courses, bearings, &c. &c. are here omitted, as unnecessary where the things themselves, to which objections were anticipated, are not given. Some cuts also alluded to are of course unsuitable to this work, and the references to them are in consequence left out. Dr Hawkesworth occupies the remainder of this introduction in discussing two subjects, about which it is thought unadvisable to take up the reader's attention at present--the controversy respecting the existence of giants in Patagonia, asserted by Byron, Wallis, and Carteret; and the justifiableness of attempting discoveries, where, in prosecution of them, the lives of human beings in a savage state are of necessity sacrificed.]