his work. No person was more capable of giving an exact account of that
singular event than Alcaforado, as he was one of those who assisted in
making the second discovery. His work was first published in Portuguese
by Don Francisco Manoel, and was afterwards published in French at Paris
in 1671[3]. From this French edition the following account is extracted,
because the original Portuguese has not come to our knowledge, neither
can we say when that was printed; but as the anonymous French translator
remarked, that "Don Francisco _keeps_ the original MS. with great care,"
it may be concluded, that the Portuguese impression did not long precede
the French translation. The French translator acknowledges that he has
altered the style, which was extremely florid and poetical, and has
expunged several useless and tedious digressions, etymologies,
reflections, and comparisons; but declares that he has strictly presented,
the truth and substance of the history, so as not to vary from it in the
least, or to omit the smallest material circumstance.

It is remarkable that there is no mention whatever in any of the English
histories of Machin, Macham, or Marcham, the supposed author of this
discovery; so that Hakluyt was beholden to Antonio Galvano for the
imperfect account he gives of that transaction[4]. By the following
abstract the complete history becomes our own, and we shall be no longer
strangers to an event which has for several ages, rendered an Englishman
famous in foreign countries, while wholly unknown in his own. It must not,
however, be omitted to observe, that some objections may be stated
against the authenticity of this history, on account of certain
circumstances which do not quadrate with the time assigned for Machin's
voyage by the author. From these it is obvious, either that the relation
given by Alcaforado is not genuine, or that it has been interpolated. How
far this objection may be admitted, without prejudice to the authority of
the whole story, must be left to the judgment of our readers; we shall