KUNGL. SV. VET. AKADEMIENS HANDLINGAR. BAND 57. N:0 4- 17 



d't7es découvertes par le capitaine Cook. On pourroit écrire au-dessus de cet archipel: Hes Sandwich, 

 reconnues et nommées par le capitaine Cook en 1778; anciennement découvertes par les navigateurs 

 espagnols. Ce seroit énoncer ce qui appartient aux mödernes, en rendant aux anciens ce qu'ils ont droit 

 de réclamer. 



Without anticipating the closer examination of M. Fleurieu's hypotheses, we 

 may even now characterize part of them as absolutely baseless: they show the danger 

 of founding an argument on surmised new discoveries, with the risk that the future will 

 cross out such combinations, be they never so ingenious. No new island "La Desgracia- 

 da" has ever been foimd. And the comparative maps which he prints, and which we here 

 reproduce in f acsimile ( Fig. 2 & 3) , show how weak are the evidences that Fleurieu drew 

 from the division of the Sandwich Archipelago into two separate groups. 



We may also briefly point out here that Fleurieu did not venture to indicate the 

 name of the supposed Spanish discoverer of Hawaii: he expressly refrains from acknow- 

 ledging Mendaha as such; nor will he — in opposition to La Pérouse, whom he only cites 

 in passing, despite the fact that he seems to have drawn his chief arguments from him 

 — assign the honour of discovery to Juan Gaetan. 



The same cautious attitude is observed by two authors who expressed their opinion 

 on the matter next after Fleurieu, namely Humboldt 1 and Burney: 2 they merely express 

 their conviction of the identity of La Mesa with Hawaii and base their view on the Anson 

 chart, which Burney subjects to a detailed investigation, while Humboldt contents him- 

 self with a reference to Marchand's voyage. The Russian Admiral Krusenstern, who 

 also approves of the theory of the Spanish discovery, says definitely, on the other hand, 

 that "c'est a tort qu'on Pa attribuée a Gaetan". 3 



With the missionary William Ellis, who has earned high praise for his knowledge 

 of the Polynesian races, a new element enters into the legendary history of Hawaii. He 

 noted down and published a number af traditions which mention that before Cook's 

 time strangers, who have been presumed to have been Europeans, came to Hawaii on 

 various occasions. Ellis supposes that these were shipwrecked Spaniards or possibly 

 mutineers — "cutprits committed by their countrymen to the mercy of the waves". It 

 is also supposed as a possibility that one or other of the islands was observed by some 

 Spanish ship on the passage between Acapulco and Manila; but he thinks it scarcely likely 

 that they were ever visited by these vessels, for, he says, "an event so interesting to the 

 people would not have been left out of their traditions, which contain manj^ things much 

 less important", and he repeats the same reflection that was made by Cook, that, if the 

 Spaniards had really discovered the islands, they would assuredly have availed them- 

 selves of the advantages they offer as places of call during the voyages across the ocean. 4 



Similar traditions have since been published by other authors; and some, less cri- 

 tical than Ellis, have not hesitated to connect them with historical events. Tlius the 

 Swede Abraham Forna:nder wishes to make out that some of the foreigners of which 



1 Essai politique sur la Nouvelle-Espagne, T. IV, Paris 1811, p. 418. 



2 A Chronological History of the Voyages and Discoveries in the South Sea, Vol. V, Lond. 1817, 

 pp. 157—162. 



3 Krdsenstern, Becueil de mémoires hydrographiques, T. II, St-Pétersb. 1827, p. 281 note. 



4 Ellis, Narrative of a Tour ihrough Hawaii, 2d ed., Lond. 1827, pp. 446 — 450. 



K. Sv. Vet. Akad. Haadl. Band 57. N:o 4. 3 



