I
THE VOYAGE OF VESPUCCI PAST THE MOUTHS OF THE MISSISSIPPI
According to the historical researches set forth in this first paper of
a series on the discoveries and explorations of the Mississippi in
various portions of its course, the river appears to have been earliest
discovered and mapped at its mouth in a voyage of Pinzon and Solis, with
Amerigo Vespucci as astronomer and cartographer, probably in March or
April, 1498, less than six years from the first landfall of Columbus.
Twenty-one years then passed before the Mississippi was next seen in the
voyage of Pineda, in 1519, being reached by ascending a bayou from Lakes
Pontchartrain and Maurepas. In 1528 one of the mouths of the Mississippi
was seen in the forlorn last voyage of Narvaez; and in 1541 the river
was crossed far above its mouth, by the ambitious but ill-fated
expedition of De Soto, and after his death it was descended by the
survivors in boats to the Gulf. Four times within a period of
forty-three years, the Spaniards reached by sea and by land the lower
part of the Mississippi. They sought gold or silver in vain, and the
extreme disasters of the last two expeditions caused them to abandon
their purpose of planting colonies and making this region a part of New
Spain. The entire river, excepting its sources, was to be explored and
owned by others, but much later, for acquiring wealth by commerce, and
for extending the dominion of France.
More than a hundred years after De Soto, the Mississippi was
re-discovered by Europeans, this time in its upper course, when
Groseilliers and Radisson in 1655, with many Indian canoes, ascended it
from near the Wisconsin river to Prairie Island, if I have rightly
understood the narrative of Radisson; and they crossed it higher, at or
near the site of Minneapolis, in 1660, when they went to visit the
Prairie Sioux at the farthest limit of their second western expedition.
Halfway in time between De Soto and these men, a Spanish expedition
under Oñate, coming from New Mexico in 1601, probably reached the
Mississippi near the mouth of the Arkansas river; but we have only
scanty records of this exploration, which some have ascribed to the year
1662, following a fictitious narrative that would make Peñalosa the
leader.
Eighteen years after Groseilliers and Radisson’s first trip, Joliet and
Marquette navigated the Mississippi for a long distance southward from
the Wisconsin river, to the Arkansas; and again, after seven years more,
in 1680, it was navigated between the Illinois and Rum rivers by
Hennepin, and also, above the Wisconsin, by Du Luth. In 1682 La Salle
led an expedition from the Illinois to the mouth of the Mississippi, and
there proclaimed its vast drainage area to be the property of France. A
few years later, about 1685–90, Le Sueur and his relative by marriage,
Charleville, canoed from Lake Pepin far upward beyond the Falls of St.
Anthony, probably to Sandy Lake; and in the last year of the seventeenth
century, just forty-five years after Groseilliers superintended
corn-raising by the Hurons on Prairie Island, Le Sueur and a large
mining party navigated the whole extent of the Mississippi from near its
mouth to the Minnesota river, and then advanced up that stream to the
Blue Earth river.
Without seeking or suggestion by himself, the name of Amerigo Vespucci
(also commonly known, in Latin, as Americus Vespucius) was bestowed upon
the New World, of which, next after Columbus, he was the most notable
discoverer in the sense of bringing to the knowledge of Europe what he
saw in four voyages. Though not in command of these expeditions,
Vespucci was a skilled geographer, and his services as astronomer and
pilot were required to determine and chart their courses, with the newly
discovered lands. His letters of description, written to friends without
expectation of publication, were printed and proved to be of such
popular interest that they passed through many editions and
translations, leading to the adoption of the name America, after his
death, on maps and globes. It was at first applied to Brazil, which
Vespucci coasted on his second, third, and fourth voyages, and was later
extended to both North and South America. In his first voyage, with four
vessels, leaving Spain May 10, 1497, and returning October 15, 1498, he
appears to have sailed along the shores of Honduras, Yucatan, the Gulf
of Mexico, Florida, and our southeastern seaboard north to Pamlico
Sound.
Between Vespucci and Columbus a cordial and mutual friendship existed,
and the Florentine pilot had no wish nor thought of taking away from the
Genoese admiral any part of the honor and gratitude due to him. Both
sailed in the service of Spain, but Vespucci also made two voyages for
Portugal. It was a Latin book by a German geographer, Waldseemüller,
published in the little college town of St. Dié, in a valley of the
Vosges mountains in northeastern France, April 25, 1507, which first
proposed the name America for the region described by Vespucci south of
the equator. There was at that time no intention to include under it the
countries farther north discovered and explored by Columbus, Cabot, and
other navigators. Winsor and Fiske have traced very instructively the
growth of European knowledge of the New World, whereby it was finally
learned that all the coasts explored from Labrador to the strait of
Magellan are connected parts of one vast continent, on which Mercator
bestowed the single name America in 1541, twenty-nine years after
Vespucci’s death.
Succeeding generations long imputed blame to Vespucci for this
supplanting of Columbus in the name of the new continent; but either
would have scorned to wrong the other, or to falsify or exaggerate
intentionally in the narrations of their voyages. The personal honor of
Vespucci has been vindicated by the researches of Alexander Humboldt and
the Brazilian historian, Varnhagen; and the latter, in 1865 and 1869,
well ascertained that Vespucci’s first voyage, made in 1497–98,
concerning which much doubt and misunderstanding remained because of the
lack of many details in the narration, was the source of the first
mapping of Yucatan, the Gulf of Mexico, and Florida. In Vespucci’s chart
of that very early date the Mississippi river was unmistakably
delineated, with a three-mouthed delta projecting into the Gulf.
Varnhagen’s luminous researches, published between thirty and forty
years ago, were brought more fully to the attention of readers of our
English language by Hubert Howe Bancroft in 1883 (_Central America_,
vol. I, pp. 99–107), and especially by John Fiske’s work, _The Discovery
of America_, published in 1892. No official reports nor chart of
Vespucci’s first voyage, which was probably under the commandership of
Pinzon and Solis, are preserved; but two very early maps, evidently
drafted in part from the chart of that expedition, still exist, and were
essentially reproduced ten years ago by Harrisse, Winsor, and Fiske, in
their elaborate discussions of the Columbian and later discoveries.
One of these two maps was drafted in 1502 by some unknown Portuguese
cartographer for Alberto Cantino, an Italian envoy at Lisbon, and hence
is called the Cantino map. It delineated crudely the southeastern coast
of the United States from the “Rio de los Palmas” (River of
Palms)—thought by Fiske to be the Apalachicola river—eastward around
Florida and onward north to Pamlico Sound, according to my
identification. The coast bears many names of rivers, capes, etc.; and
the end of the Florida peninsula is called “C. do fim do Abrill” (Cape
of the end of April), whence it is inferred that the expedition in which
Vespucci sailed on his first voyage, whose chart supplied this part of
the Cantino map, passed through the strait separating Florida from Cuba
at the end of April, 1498. The west edge of this map is at its River of
Palms, so that it fails to give any information of the part of the Gulf
of Mexico farther west.
Comparing the Cantino map with our southeastern coast line, to determine
how far Vespucci saw it, I recognize, in their order from south to
north, Jupiter Inlet or Indian River Inlet, Cape Canaveral, the St.
John’s river (or, probably better, Cumberland Sound and St. Mary’s
river, or St. Andrew’s Sound, or the Altamaha), then Warsaw and Tybee
capes and the Savannah river, Cape Romain, the Santee river, Winyah Bay
and the Pedee river, Cape Fear, New River Inlet, Cape Lookout, the Neuse
and Pamlico rivers, and Long Shoal Point (or Sandy or Stumpy Point),
extending into the north part of Pamlico Sound. The coast is represented
as wholly trending to the north, instead of its curvature to the
northeast. Entering Pamlico Sound by Ocracoke Inlet (or whatever passage
existed near there four hundred years ago), the ships were probably
repaired for the homeward voyage at some very favorable harbor among the
many along the exceedingly irregular landward side of this sound, or at
some distance up either of its large tributary rivers. The chart failed
to note the long beach ridge of sand which forms Cape Hatteras and
separates the sound (“mar vaano”) from the ocean.
Waldseemüller, the geographer at St. Dié, drafted the second of these
maps, at some date probably after 1504 and certainly not later than
1508. It was published at Strasburg in an edition of Ptolemy in 1513,
and was entitled “Tabula Terre Nove.” From its reference to a “former
Admiral,” probably Columbus, it has been often called “the Admiral’s
map.” This bears testimony that the expedition described by Vespucci as
his first voyage passed the Mississippi and charted its mouths; for west
of the Atlantic coast and Florida, where the shores and names are
closely like the Cantino map, Waldseemüller gave a distorted outline of
the Gulf of Mexico, with a large river emptying into it by three mouths,
pushing its delta far into the gulf, in which respect the Mississippi
surpasses any other river, this being indeed the most remarkable feature
of its embouchure. I cannot doubt, therefore, that Vespucci sailed past
the Mississippi delta early in the year 1498, surveying the mouths of
the river from the masthead, or very likely entering the river and
spending some time there.
The original “Letter of Amerigo Vespucci upon the Isles newly found in
his Four Voyages” was published in facsimile pages, with English
translation, under the editorship of George Young, in Philadelphia in
1893, forming a book entitled “The Columbus Memorial,” its earlier half
being occupied by facsimiles, translations, and notes of letters by
Columbus. Only a very scanty statement was given by Vespucci concerning
the voyage from some port on the west coast of the Gulf of Mexico,
probably that of Tampico, at the mouth of the Panuco river, to “a
harbour the best in the world,” which appears to have been on Pamlico
Sound or river, whence, after repairing their vessels, the expedition
returned to Spain. Vespucci wrote of the voyage between these ports: “We
navigated along the coast, always in sight of land, until we had run 870
leagues of it, still going in the direction of the maestrale
[northwest], making in our course many halts, and holding intercourse
with many peoples; and in several places we obtained gold by barter, but
not much in quantity, for we had done enough in discovering the land and
learning that they had gold.”
According to Varnhagen and Fiske, the direction of their sailing, noted
as northwestward, referred only to the first start from the port in
Mexico, after which they continued along the irregular coast line 870
leagues. It seems to me also noteworthy that they came to this Mexican
port by a northwestward course, and so perhaps Vespucci meant only that
they went directly onward along the coast, which in that part curves
very gradually to a nearly north course. From his statements of time,
with the date indicated by the maps for passing the south end of
Florida, it is probable that the expedition was at the Mississippi river
late in March or early in April, 1498. Our history of this river, as
known to Europeans, thus extends through four centuries.
As my study of the limit of this voyage of Vespucci on the coast of the
United States, regarded thus to be at Pamlico Sound, differs somewhat
from the conclusions of either Varnhagen or Fiske, it should be remarked
further that the Pamlico region had a considerable Indian population,
with many little villages, when it was described ninety years later by
Thomas Hariot (or Harriott), a member of the unfortunate colony founded
there in 1585 on Roanoke island, under the patronage of Sir Walter
Raleigh. The Indians at first were very friendly to these colonists, as
their forbears had been (if my identification of the locality is true)
to Vespucci and his companions. The translation of this part of
Vespucci’s narrative, given by Young, is as follows:
“We found an immense number of people, who received us with much
friendliness ... the land’s people gave us very great assistance, and
continually furnished us with their victuals, so that in this port we
tasted very little of our own, which suited our game well, for the stock
of provisions which we had for our return passage was little and of
sorry kind. Where [_i. e._ there] we remained 37 days, and went many
times to their villages, where they paid us the greatest honour: and
[now] desiring to depart upon our voyage, they made complaint to us how
at certain times of the year there came from over the sea to this their
land, a race of people very cruel, and enemies of theirs, and by means
of treachery or of violence slew many of them, and ate them; and some
they made captives, and carried them away to their houses or country;
and how they could scarcely contrive to defend themselves from them,
making signs to us that [those] were an island people and lived out in
the sea about a hundred leagues away.
“And so piteously did they tell us this that we believed them, and
promised to avenge them of so much wrong, and they remained overjoyed
herewith; and many of them offered to come along with us, but we did not
wish to take them for many reasons, save that we took seven of them on
condition that they should come [_i. e._ return home] afterwards in
canoes, because we did not desire to be obliged to take them back to
their country: and they were contented, and so we departed from those
people, leaving them very friendly towards us: and having repaired our
ships, and sailing for seven days out to sea between northeast and east,
at the end of the seven days we came upon the islands, which were many,
some [of them] inhabited, and others deserted: and we anchored at one of
them, where we saw a numerous people who call it Iti: and having manned
our boats with strong crews, and [taken] three guns in each, we made for
land, where we found [assembled] about 400 men and women, and all naked
like the former [peoples].”
Hard fighting ensued. Many of the natives of the islands were killed,
and at last the Spaniards put them to flight and returned to their
ships. The next day the natives came again to renew the contest, for
which the Spaniards landed.
“After a long battle,” wrote Vespucci, describing this second day, “[in
which] many of them [were] slain, we put them [again] to flight, and
pursued them to a village, having made about 250 of them prisoners; and
we burnt the village, and returned to our ships with victory and 250
prisoners, leaving many of them dead and wounded; and of ours there were
no more than one killed, and 22 wounded, who all escaped [_i. e._
recovered], God be thanked.
“We arranged our departure, and the seven men, of whom five were
wounded, took an island canoe, and with seven prisoners that we gave
them,—four women and three men,—returned to their [own] country full of
gladness, wondering at our strength: and we thereupon made sail for
Spain, with 222 captive slaves, and reached the port of Cadiz on the 15
day of October, 1498, where we were well received and sold our slaves.”
Varnhagen, in his discussion of Vespucci’s voyages, presented arguments
to show that the Bermudas were the group of islands thus occupied by a
warlike and cannibal people, whom he supposed to have been soon
afterwards exterminated by slavers, before the discovery of these
islands by Bermudez about the year 1522, when they were uninhabited.
Bancroft and Fiske inclined to the same view. It seems to me more
probable, however, that the Bermudas, distant fully six hundred miles
from any other land, had never been peopled until they were found by
Europeans. The extreme isolation and comparatively small extent of the
Bermuda group, far out in the sea, would make it practically impossible
for the savages, with any means of navigation that they possessed, to
pass back and forth in frequent war expeditions.
Instead, I believe that the islands visited by Vespucci on the return
voyage were the northern part of the Bahama group. Without going so far
from the coast and its inlets as to incur much danger of storms, or to
completely lose the course and the reckoning in cloudy weather, canoe
expeditions from the Bahamas could come frequently, as the narrative
says, to attack the Indians in the region of Pamlico Sound. These
Indians, too, sometimes pursuing their enemies homeward, might learn the
situation of their islands, and would thus be able to pilot the way for
Vespucci’s ships. According to this view, they sailed south from Pamlico
Sound to the Bahamas. The direction of east-northeast, given in the
narrative, must be a mistake, being applicable instead for the course
taken from the Bahamas to Spain. The larger islands of this very
extensive group had many inhabitants when discovered by Columbus; but
they were afterward wholly depopulated by the unspeakable cruelties of
slave-traders.
The journal and letters of Columbus show that the native people of the
Bahamas suffered much from the attacks of the man-eating Caribs, whom
they greatly feared but often doubtless bravely repelled. We have also
evidence from Vespucci that the Caribs advanced much farther north for
war and rapine, boldly navigating the sea in their great canoes, to
Pamlico Sound. Whether they had a permanent settlement on the
northwestern islands of the Bahama group, can probably never be known;
but I believe that either they or the more peaceable Bahama islanders
there were attacked, defeated, and many of them captured and sold into
slavery, by this Spanish expedition.
This discussion or explanation, though not directly relating to the
discovery of the Mississippi river, seems to me needful to set forth my
reasons for thinking that Vespucci’s narrative of his first voyage is a
true account, excepting mistakes of his memory or writing or of later
copying.