་ on a former occasion,* that Oviedo, in his history of the West Indies, represents the visit of an English ship at Porto Rico, &c., to have occurred not in 1517, but in 1527. It was then shewn that Herrera, in subsequently stating the same transaction, had given in greater detail the testimony of Gines Navarro, the Captain of the Caravel, who had incautiously gone off to the English ship. Let us now turn again to Navarro's statement : "They said that they were Englishmen, and that the ship was from England, and that she and her consort had been equipped to go and seek the land of the Great Cham, that they had been separated in a tempest, and that the ship pursuing her course had been in a frozen sea and found great islands of ice, and that taking a different course they came into a warm sea which boiled like water in a kettle, and lest it might open the seams of the vessel, they proceeded to examine the Baccalaos where they found fifty sail of vessels, Spanish, French, and Portuguese, engaged in fishing, that going on shore to communicate with the natives, the Pilot, a native of Piedmont, was killed; that they proceeded afterwards along the coast to the river Chicora, and crossed over thence to the Island of St. John. Asking them what they sought in these islands, they said, that they wished to explore in order to make report to the King of England, and to procure a load of the Brazil wood.”+ Comparing this with the letter of Rut, is it necessary to enforce the coincidence in the year-the sailing of the two ships from England-the separation by tempest—the struggle with the ice in the North-the return to Baccalaos-the vessels found there engaged in fishing? Mark too the death of the Italian pilot, under circumstances * See page 114. ↑ Dixeron que eran Ingleses, i que la nao era de Inglaterra, i que aquella i otra se avian armado, para ir á buscar la Tierra del gran Cán, i que un temporal las havia apartado: i que siguiendo esta nao su viage dieron en un mar elado, i que hallaban grandes Islas de ielo: i que tomando otra derrota, dieron en otra mar caliente, que hervia como el agua en una caldera; i porque no se les derritasse la brea, fueron á reconocer á los Bacallos, adonde hallaron cinquenta Naos Castellanas Francesas, i Portuguesas, pescando, i que alli quisieron salir en tierra, para tomar lengua de los Indios, i les mataron al Piloto, que era Piamontès i que desde alli avian costeado hasta el Rio de Chicora, i que desde este Rio atravesaron a la Isla de san Juan; i preguntando les le que buscaban en aquellas Islas, dixeron, que las querian ver, para dar relacion al Rei de Inglaterra i cargar de Brasil. (Herrera, Dec. ii. lib. v. cap. iii.) which correspond so well with the sad tale reported to the friends of Verrazani and recorded by Ramusio! It was probably the death of Verrazani, and despair of being rejoined by the Samson, that induced Rut, the main object being frustrated, to seek the only market which remained for the merchandise with which the Mary of Guilford was freighted. Navarro says, that the English spoke of having proceeded along the coast as far South as the River of Chicora. Now, in describing the movements of the expedition to Florida under Ayllon, in 1523, Peter Martyr (Dec. vii. ch. ii.) says, "They affirm that these provinces lie under the same parallel of latitude with Andalusia in Spain. They thoroughly examined the principal countries, Chicora and Duhare." Peter Martyr supposes these regions to "join the Baccalaos discovered by Cabotus from England." Amongst the provinces connected with the two first described, he (ib.) expressly mentions Arambe, and when we find Frobisher stating to Hakluyt, (3 Hakl. 129) a tradition that the surviving ship of the Expedition of 1527, after the disaster in the North, "shaped her course towards Cape Breton and the Coasts of Arambec," we find a degree of harmony pervading these unconnected accounts that is truly surprising. It would be too much, however, to expect a minute accuracy in every particular of Navarro's report as to what he heard on board the English ship. An error is probably committed by misplacing one of the incidents. The alarm about the opening of the seams of the vessel from extreme heat, which appears so absurd as referred to the North, becomes quite intelligible, when we recollect that the English are represented by Oviedo to have attempted to run down the coast of Brazil. The effect produced on the Mary of Guilford was, doubtless, the same as that experienced during the third voyage of Columbus, in 1498, when precisely the same apprehensions are represented to have seized his crew. The name of Robert Thorne is associated by Hakluyt and subsequent writers with this Expedition, but evidently without due consideration. Thorne, a native of Bristol, was a merchant-tailor of London,* who went to Spain and is said, without further particulars as to date, to have addressed the letter found in Hakluyt to Henry VIII. from Seville "in 1527." As the Expedition left the Thames on the 20th May, 1527, it is plainly absurd to suppose that a letter written during that year could have been forwarded -its suggestions considered and adopted-the course resolved on-the commanders selected-vessels suitable for such an enterprise prepared—and all the arrangements completed so as to admit of this early departure. Nor is there any evidence that the letter in question was ever forwarded. It was handed to Hakluyt, as he states in his work of 1582, by Cyprian Lucar, a son of Thorne's executor. No doubt Verrazani proceeded to England immediately on discovering that in the confused and exhausted state of France he had no chance of employment; and not more than sufficient time would thus be allowed for maturing all the necessary arrangements. Aside from the enterprising temper of Henry VIII., Verrazani was, perhaps, in some measure indebted for success in his application to the mood of Wolsey, whose resentment at the supposed treachery of Charles V. as to the election of a Pope had at this time passed into the politics of England. The Cardinal's zeal on behalf of the Expedition may have been quickened by knowing how much its success would startle and annoy the Emperor. We have already seen, in considering the voyage of 1517 with which this has been confounded, what alarm was created by intelligence of the visit of the Mary of Guilford to the Islands. The Emperor was struck with the inconveniences likely to result, and gave strict orders to seize and make an example of any future intruders. The abrupt termination of the enterprise prevents our being able to trace distinctly the influence on it of Cabot's previous voyages. Verrazani, in 1524, did not get further North than 50°, and so far as the Mary of Guilford advanced beyond that point we see * Stow's Survey of London; Fuller's Worthies. "Los inconvenientes que podria haver de la navigacion de esta Nacion a los Indias." Herrera, Dec. ii. lib. v. c. iii, only an effort to reach Hudson's Strait. It would be absurd to In ad suppose that the King who is found possessed of Verrazani's more limited map had not before him the bolder one of Cabot. dition to "the Card" which Lord Bacon speaks of as having been exhibited by Cabot, the history of the more recent voyage of 1517 must have been perfectly well known. Thorne speaks familiarly to Henry VIII. of the discoveries made on that occasion by "your Grace's subjects," and the very mariners employed ten years before would of course be sought for and engaged anew.* A future part of the subject will be understood more readily by noting here, that Frobisher was aware of the course taken on this occasion and of the loss of one of the ships in "a dangerous gulf between the North parts of Newfoundland and the country lately called by her Majesty, Meta Incognita." It is impossible to turn from this Expedition without adverting, in terms of indignation, to those who, instead of looking into the evidence which strikingly evinces the earnest and continued exertions of Henry VIII. in reference to this project, prefer the easier task of stringing together such paragraphs as the following: "Neither was the turbulent, voluptuous, proud, and cruel disposition of Henry VIII. any great encouragement to men of abilities and enterprise to undertake voyages of discovery, and thereby expose themselves to the king's fickle and tyrannical temper in case of miscarriage."+ "But it is more difficult to discover what prevented this scheme of Henry VII. from being resumed during the reigns of his son and grandson, and to give any reason why no attempt was made either to explore the Northern Continent of America more fully, or to settle in it. Henry VIII. was frequently at open enmity with Spain: the value of the Spanish acquisitions in America had become so well known, as might have excited his desire to obtain some footing in those opulent regions; and during a considerable part of his reign, the prohibitions in a papal bull would not have restrained him from making encroachments upon the Spanish dominions. But the reign of Henry was not favourable to the progress of discovery. During one period of it, the active part which he took in the affairs of the Continent, and the vigour with which he engaged in the contest between the two mighty rivals, Charles V. and Francis I. gave full occupation to the enterprising spirit both of the King and his No *See Appendix (E). + Forster, Northern voyages, p. 268. bility. During another period of his administration, his famous controversy with the Court of Rome kept the nation in perpetual agitation and suspense : engrossed by those objects, neither the King nor the Nobles had inclination or leisure to turn their attention to new pursuits; and without their patronage and aid, the commercial part of the nation was too inconsiderable to make any effort of consequence.” "That prince, (Henry VIII.) full of bustle, needy of money, and not devoid of intelligence, might have been supposed rather prompt to embark in such enterprises: but involved in so many disputes, domestic and theological, and studying, though with little skill, to hold the balance between the two great Continental rivals, Charles and Francis, he was insensible to the glory and advantages to be derived from Maritime Expeditions.”↑ * Dr. Robertson's America, book ix. + Edinburgh Cabinet Library, (vol. i. p. 98,) by Professors Leslie and Jameson, and Hugh Murray, Esq. |