SUMMARY 73 



WITH ARNHEM LAND, and incidentally that instead of a passage 

 to the south there was merely the GULF OF CARPENTARIA. 



SUMMARY 



The loss of Tasman's journal reduces us to conjecture and the 

 weighing of probabilities when we attempt to realise what it 

 was that he accomplished, the groundwork or text of such specu- 

 lations being the sketch-chart containing the names which he 

 bestowed on certain inlets or capes. 



So far as the Cape York Peninsula was concerned, he was 

 apparently supplied with a very imperfect and misleading 

 " SPECIALLY MADE " CHART of the voyage of his predecessor, 

 CARSTENSZOON (in the " Pera "). He failed to procure the copies 

 of Carstenszoon's journal and chart which it was expected he 

 might pick up at Banda. Carstenszoon's journal, however, is 

 available to us, although it was denied to him, so that we are in a 

 position to judge how far he succeeded in identifying the inlets, 

 etc., named by Carstenszoon. 



The truth is that he was very unsuccessful ; but this must 

 be attributed entirely to the defects of the " specially made " 

 chart and to no fault of his own. 



He began his exploration of the Peninsula by rediscovering 

 the " Percfs " "WATERING-PLACE" in or near 11 S. lat., but 

 did not give it the additional name of the " REVIER VAN SPULT " 

 which Carstenszoon had bestowed on it. He next made a very 

 bad guess at the locality of Carstenszoon's COEN REVIER, but either 

 correctly identified or copied from his " specially made " chart 

 (which seems to have been correct in this instance) Carstenszoon's 

 VEREENIGDE REVIER (the MITCHELL RIVER). 



Carstenszoon's NASSAU and STATEN REVIERS were incorrectly 

 located by Tasman, the latter inlet being placed north instead of 

 south of 17, because the " specially made " chart had erroneously 

 fixed that latitude as Carstenszoon's southern limit. 



He was the first l to notice PORT MUSGRAVE, which probably 

 misguided by the " specially made " chart he seems to have 

 taken at first for Carstenszoon's Staten Revier (before he realised 

 that the latter was in the neighbourhood of 17). 



He next found a new inlet (12 i3 / -i8 / ) which he named the 

 PRINCE REVIER. The name never " caught on." For a good part 

 of the nineteenth century this inlet was believed (incorrectly) to 

 be Carstenszoon's COEN, and towards the end of that century 

 was officially, and irrevocably, named the PENNEFATHER. 



He indicated a " REVIER MIT BOSCH " just inside of DUYFKEN 

 POINT, where modern maps now show the mouth of PINE or 



1 Unless he was anticipated by Janszoon, in the " Duyfken," of which there is no 

 record. 



