30 DAHLGREN, THE DISCOVERY OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 



to which, as they seemed green and beautiful, we gave the name of Ii Giardini; they lie about the same 

 latitude as the said Ii Coralli, and we saw palms and other trees, but we did not cast anchor. Sailing 

 hence in the same direction, namely to the west, about 280 leagues, we found a little island which re- 

 ceived the name of Matelotes and which is situated in the same latitude as those previously named, 

 that is 9 to 10 degrees. When we sought shelter under this island, but without going ashore, we saw 

 that it was covered with palms and inhabited by people, who gave us some fish and cocoa-nuts. While 

 we were sailing from here in the same direction 30 leagues, we found another island, which received the 

 name of Isola de los Arezifes. This island is about 25 leagues in circumference. We saw there many 

 human dwellings and many palm groves; and from there we sailed WSW. without landing. Af ter we 

 had sailed about 140 leagues, we discovered the island which is called Migindanao. . . 



It must be admitted that this account is distinguished neither by precision nor by 

 clearness: much of the information, such as the distance between Santo Tomas and 

 Roca Partida and the number of the days on the voyage, are so plainly incorrect that 

 they must have arisen through errors of writing or printing. If, however, we compare 

 this document with La Pérouse's version, several noticeable variations occur. In the 

 first place, the course was not so unchangeably west as he supposed. Before they had 

 reached Isole delli Re, they supposed they were in the neighbourhood of San Bartolomé 

 in 13° — 14°; and if, as La Pérouse supposes, the latitude of the first islands was put 10 

 degrees too much to the south, then either the same mistake must be ascribed to the lati- 

 tude-statements for all the other islands to the west thereof — and where then can there 

 be found a place for them to the west and in the neighbourhood of Hawaii? — or the dis- 

 tance-figures must be extremely faulty. As for La Pérouse' s other arguments it can only 

 be a coincidence that the distance (900 leagues) from Mexico to Los Reyes agrees with 

 the real distance to Hawaii — if we add together all Gaytan' s distances we get as the 

 distance between Mexico and Mindanao 1420 leagues, which falls short of the real distance 

 by more than 800 leagues, 1 but which shows that Gaytan placed Los Reyes nearer the 

 Asiatic si de than the American, while the relation is the reverse in the case of Hawaii; 

 — and what Gaytan says of the natural features of the islands, their products and in- 

 habitants suits the Carolines as well as, if not better than, the Hawaiian Islands; that 

 he has not a word about the high mountains and the volcanoes which are so character- 

 istic of the latter islands speaks strongly against their alleged identity with Los Reyes. 



For the consideration of these conditions we have a far greater amount of material 

 at our disposition than was the case in La Pérouse's time. Besides Juan Gaytan's account, 

 we have at least four narratives of Villalobos' expedition, two of which consist of official 

 reports made by participators in the expedition to the Viceroy of Mexico, Don Antonio 

 de Mendoza: one, by the friar Jeronimo de Santisteban, is dated Cochin in India, 

 22 January 1547 ; 2 the second, which is more detailed, has as its author one of the offi- 

 cers of Villalobos, Garcia de Escalante Alvarado, dated Lisbon 1 August 1548. 3 



1 Similar erroneous calculations occur in many of Gaytan's contemporaries: anotlier of Villalobos' follow- 

 ers reckons 1500 leagues from Navidad to Mindanao (Col. de doc. ined., V, p. 120); for the same distance 1600 

 to 1700 leagues are given in an anonymous description of India from the sixtccnth century (ibid. XV, p. 530); and, 

 according to Antonio Galvåo (op. cit. p. 175), Saavedra reckoned 1500 leagues from New Spain to the Moluccas. 



8 Col. de docum. ined., XIV. 1870, pp. 151—165. 



3 Ibid., V, 1866, pp. 117—205. 



