Terre Napoleón; a History of French Explorations and Projects in AustraliaScott, Ernest, Sir
History
Terre Napoleón; a History of French Explorations and Projects in Australia
Scott, Ernest, Sir
Australia -- Discovery and exploration; Baudin, Nicolas, 1754-1803; Napoleon I, Emperor of the French, 1769-1821
It is also clear that Flinders did not misunderstand Baudin. He was an
extremely exact man, and as he said that he was "particular in detailing
all that passed," we may take it that one with whom precision was
something like a passion would be careful not to misunderstand on so
important a point. Brown, too, was with him, a trained man of science,
who would have been quick to correct his chief in the event of a
misapprehension. Flinders so far relied on Baudin's statement that when,
on April 26, he sighted Port Phillip heads himself, he thought he was off
Westernport, which his friend George Bass had discovered in 1798. "It was
the information of Captain Baudin which induced this supposition," he
wrote.* (* See also the entry in his journal, Appendix B.) It was not
till he bore up and took his bearings that he saw that he could not be at
Westernport; and he then congratulated himself on having made "a new and
useful discovery"--unaware, of course, that Murray had found Port Phillip
in the Lady Nelson in the previous January.
It must be noted in addition that Baudin wrote a letter to Jussieu, the
distinguished French botanist and member of the Institute, nine months
later, in which he gave an account of his voyage up to date.* (* Printed
in the Moniteur, 22 Fructidor, Revolutionary Year 11. (September 9,
1803).) Therein he said not a word about seeing Port Phillip, nor did he
allude to the possibility of there being a harbour between Westernport
and Encounter Bay.
Baudin, then, knew nothing about Port Phillip when he met Flinders on
April 8. But if somebody else saw it from the masthead on March 30, why
was not the fact reported to the commander? Why was he not asked the
question whether so large a bay should be explored? Again, if Le
Geographe did sight Port Phillip, why did she not enter it? Here was a
magnificent chance for discoverers. They were necessarily unaware of
Murray's good fortune in January. As far as their knowledge could have
gone, the port was absolutely new to geography. If we believe Peron and
Freycinet, surely these were the most negligent explorers who ever sailed
the seas.* (* It is true that Cook did not enter Port Jackson when he
discovered and named it on May 6, 1770. But exploration, it must always
be remembered, was not the primary object of the voyage of the Endeavour,
as it was of Le Geographe. Cook, when he achieved the greatest extent of
maritime discovery made at one time by any navigator in history, was
simply on his way homeward from a visit to Tahiti, the primary purpose of
which was to enable astronomers to observe the transit of Venus. Cook,
too, made a record of the latitude and longitude of Port Jackson. No such
entry was made by the French relative to Port Phillip, as will presently
be shown.) But if we believe that Baudin spoke the truth to Flinders--and
the absence of all reference to the port in his letter to Jussieu is
alone sufficient to show that he did--what shall we say of the statements
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account