Summary
This volume presents the original French manuscript of Jacques Cartier's 1534 voyage to Canada, which the editors H. Michelant and A. Ramé argue is the authentic, primitive version written by Cartier himself or a crew member. They contrast it with three later 16th-century translations—Ramusio's Italian, Hakluyt's English, and a French version by Raphaël du Petit-Val—none of which match the original. The manuscript, found in the Fontette collection (no. 5, portefeuille LVII), is dated approximately 1533-35 based on handwriting analysis, and its language reveals a semi-literate sailor's hand, using Breton provincial expressions and nautical terms, with errors that later translators introduced. The editors demonstrate Cartier's authorship through subtle textual clues: he names an island "saincte Katherine" (a captain's prerogative), uses modest phrases like "j'estime" and "je presume," and avoids self-aggrandizement. The work thus provides the foundational source for understanding Cartier's first encounter with Canada, stripped of later editorial embellishments.
Key concepts
- Primitive version — The original French manuscript of Cartier's 1534 voyage, written by an unlettered sailor, which served as the basis for all later translations.
- Fontette collection (portefeuille LVII) — The archival source of the manuscript, cataloged as "Voyage de Jacques Cartier, 1544," though the editors date it to 1533-35 based on handwriting.
- Raphaël du Petit-Val translation — A 1598 French edition of Cartier's first voyage, translated from an unknown source, differing from both Ramusio's and Hakluyt's versions.
- Breton provincial language — The manuscript's use of regional French from the Saint-Malo area, including nautical terms and grammatical errors typical of mariners.
- Hakluyt version — An English translation of Cartier's first voyage, one of three distinct 16th-century versions, differing from the Italian and French editions.
- Ramusio version — An Italian translation of Cartier's first voyage, part of the three known early editions that the original manuscript supersedes.
From the book
Le dixiesme jour dudit moys de Juign entrames dedans ledit hable de
Le lendemain, dozeiesme, nous persumes oultre lesdites isles; et à la
Le XIIIe jour nous retournasmes o nos dites barques à bort pour faire
Popular questions readers ask
- If you were explaining to a peer why the lack of an original French account for Cartier's first voyage is a significant historical problem, how would you articulate the core challenge it presents to understanding this pivotal event?
- The text notes three differing versions of Cartier's first voyage—Italian, English, and a "second-hand" French one. Beyond mere translation errors, what fundamental reasons might explain why these accounts "differ equally," and how would a historian approach reconciling such discrepancies to establish a reliable narrative?
- Considering the stylistic and attribution distinctions made between the first voyage's "second-hand" account and the second voyage's "inexperienced hand" relation, what does this tell us about the process of documenting exploration in the 16th century, and how might it influence our trust in such historical records?
- M. d'Avezac lamented French "indifference" to promoting their discoveries. What broader historical implications or missed opportunities might this national attitude have had for France's influence and understanding of its own early colonial efforts, especially when compared to nations that did publish their findings?
- Imagine the "unknown" third account of Cartier's first voyage (by Raphaël...) was discovered today. From a historian's perspective, what unique value or critical insights might this *missing* original document offer that the known Italian and English translations likely cannot, and why would its discovery be so impactful?