NOMENCLATURE OF THE CURRENT 113 



current, extending for a great distance along the South American coast, he gives fewer 

 data: these and his conclusions are discussed on pp. 190-215. 



Sverdrup (1930) and Schweigger (1931) published original observations collected 

 respectively in the open ocean and close to the coast, and these represent the first 

 attempt to collect hydrological data below the surface with modern instruments. 

 Schweigger 's observations were made in the upper 100 m. and include temperature, 

 salinity, pH and the velocity of the current ; but they lack serial arrangement. The work 

 of the ' Carnegie ' extended far into the ocean and traversed the eastern South Pacific in 

 several directions. These observations are to some extent complementary to the work 

 of the ' William Scoresby ' and are therefore of particular value to us ; it will be ap- 

 propriate, before attention is drawn to them, to consider the nomenclature of the 

 currents referred to in this report. 



Writers up to 1837, including Humboldt himself, give no specific name to the 

 currents on the west coast. Berghaus (1837, p. 572), therefore refers to it as " Der Strom 

 kalten Wassers langs der West Kiiste von Siidamerika, geschildert von A. von Hum- 

 boldt", which on p. 584 becomes contracted to " peruanischen Stromung"; and only 

 in a footnote does he suggest the alternative name " Humboldt's-Stromung ". The more 

 authoritative of later writers have used the geographical designation, though Humboldt's 

 name came into vogue in the second half of the eighteenth century, mainly owing to the 

 veneration in which it was beginning to be held. In a recent effort to revive this vogue, 

 Wiist (1935) not only misquotes Berghaus and Sverdrup, but also appears to mis- 

 construe their sense. His other arguments likewise reflect a partiality in his handling 

 of the evidence and are thus hard to accept. 



Uncertainty of the breadth of the current, and therefore of the region to which these 

 names should be applied, has given rise to many expressions of opinion. In his Physikal. 

 Atlas of 1839, Berghaus distinguishes a second current by the name of" Pvientor's Gegen- 

 Drift".^ It lies to the westwards of the Peruvian Coastal Current of cold water, and 

 flows partly towards the east; it is therefore oceanic and warm. Kerhallet (1856) 

 followed Berghaus and Johnstone in making the distinction of the inshore and offshore 

 currents, but interprets the "Mentor Current" differently, regarding it as having only 

 northerly flow. Laughton (1870) suggested that the Mentor Current and the Peruvian 

 Cold Current or Humboldt's Current were indistinguishable, and that in consequence 

 retention of the name Mentor Current was not justified. This view implied enormous 

 breadth in the Humboldt or Peru Current and that it was no longer to be regarded as a 

 merely coastal current. In 1931 Sverdrup took the same view, calling it the Peruvian 

 Current. Other writers, however, refer the names Humboldt Current and Peru 

 Current to a relatively narrow zone. 



In view of these widely different expressions of opinion it is necessary to reconsider 

 the question of nomenclature in the light of conclusions reached in the present work. 



The currents under discussion cover the area we recognize to-day as the eastern limb 

 of the South Pacific anticyclonic gyratory movement. In the following pages it is 

 1 Counter to the direction of the South Equatorial Current. The chart in question is dated 1837. 



