Abstract
THIS book may be divided into three parts: Captain Oliver's introduction and notes, Robert Drury's journal, and a description of the island by the Abbé Rochon. In the first part Captain Oliver tries to prove that the journal is more or less fictitious. At the beginning of the introduction he gives the names of—as he himself says—the best authorities in France, all of whom believe the journal to be true; also a letter which leads him to say that the book was credited in the middle of the eighteenth century. After having quoted these authorities in favour of the truthfulness of the journal, Captain Oliver proceeds to give his own ideas on the subject, which are that the book was written by Defoe from Drury's story, and a great deal of the matter taken out of French books—namely, Francois Cauche, 1658, and Hacourt, 1661. He then goes on to say that the original journal had a French map, and he regards that also as evidence against Drury. Drury acknowledges himself to have almost forgotten the language and manners of his own country, and, as he was but fourteen years of age when he left, we may take it for granted that he did not know how to draw a map. What then could be more natural, when he had his journal edited, than to take the best map then published, which happened to be a French one, and give it with his journal?
Madagascar; or, Robert Drury's Journal.
Edited by Captain P. Oliver. (London: Fisher Unwin, 1890.)
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
L., H. [Book Reviews]. Nature 42, 637 (1890). https://doi.org/10.1038/042637a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/042637a0