CAETOGEAPÏÏY TO CHAMPLAIN. 49 



of the coast.' It is so easy for us, looking down upon good charts iu our studies, to see 

 this islaud, that it is difiicult for us to put ourselves in the position of those who first 

 came to it. The early navigators had little to attract them to that region. Cartier showed 

 there was no hope of finding a western passage there ; the fishing was not so good as off 

 Newfoundland nearer home; the shoals were dangerous and good harbours few. Is it any 

 wonder that it was avoided ? 



How then did Isle St. John get its name ? This I cannot answer, but three possible 

 ways occur to me : — 



(1.) Champlain had the Cabot maps before him, aud thought its Isle St. John must 

 be the same as the other large island mentioned by Sieur Prevert, aud hence that the 

 latter should have the same name. This, while a possible, is an extremely improbable 

 explanation. 



(2.) The name was given de novo by some of the French voyagers in the latter part 

 of the sixteenth century, or immediately preceding 1603. This seems to me highly 

 probable ; the name St. John was a favorite with early explorers. 



(3.) Another explanation which receives support from the maps, will be found by 

 comparing the Mercator map with the Molineaux Grlobe of 1592," with Lescarbot's map 

 of 1600, and with Champlain's of 1G12. In the former, Cartier's Cape St. John, which 

 really was on Newfoundland, has been transferred to Cape Breton, where it also appears 

 on Lescarbot's map. Transferred still further, it has become C. S. Jean on the Molineux 

 Globe, which stands almost exactly in the position of the little "ille St. Jean" of 

 Champlain's 1612 map. This appears to me hardly as probable an explanation as that 

 given above, since Champlain knew it as a large Island with this name as early as 1603. 



Further material is needed to decide which of these three possible interpretations is 

 the correct one. 



IV. 



Voyages between Caktier and Champlain. 



After Cartier, there was no oificial explorer of the Gi-ulf until . Champlain ; yet, that 

 there were numerous private voyages in the interval there can be no doiibt. Evidence on 

 this point is constantly accumulating. Dr. De Costa quotes ' Gosselin's work on the 

 marine of Normandy, as showing that French vessels engaged in the fishery went to New- 

 foundland during the twenty years subsequent to Cartier's voyages, and some of these 

 probably Aasited the Gulf. The only actual narratiA^es of voyages, however, that we have, 

 are those contained in Hakluyt. He gives a narrative of a voyage to Isle Ramea (the 

 Magdalenes) for the capture of walruses in 1591, and another to the same place in ISOI, 

 with some others relating to the Gulf and Cape Breton. They add very little to geogra- 

 phical knowledge, however, as the place names used in them iu most cases cannot 

 be identified. * It is interesting to note, however, that the names used in these narratives 



' There is geological evidence to show that the coast in this region is steadily sinking, and that the water must 

 have been even shallower in its harbors in Cartier's time than it is now. 



• America, iii. 213. 3 j^j^j,^ j^ gO, 62. 



' They are considered further on p. 55. 



Sef. II, 1889. 7. 



