I have been reading Brett Hilder’s Book, “The Voyage of Torres”. It’s a really interesting book. Hilder is a sailor and historian. In the 70’s, he wrote a university thesis and published a book on the side – this is the book. Hilder collected all the information on the Torres/Prado y Tovar voyage through the Torres Strait to try to best figure out the exact path that Torres took. Hilder used nautical charts and visual descriptions to find the path. He actually went out and sailed the route.

I have done something similar – but from my lounge chair using google satellite. I too, have found Torres to go through between Prince of Wales Island and Cape York. But the timing of the passage is a bit different than Hilder’s – I have Torres approaching further from the east.

Honestly, I don’t think either of our paths (Hilder or mine) perfectly fit the description given by Tovar. I have a problem locating the Island of Dogs, whereas Hilder has a problem (which he admits) with Isla de la Cantarides not having any water or natives to run for non-existent hills, and Hilder’s path also has a problem because there is not a big enough time window for Torres to stay 8 days.

Anyway – there is evidence that on arrival to Manila, Tovar sent FIVE charts of ‘landing places’ back to Spain, and that these five charts were received. However, there has only ever been FOUR charts found. One is Espiritu Santo (Vanuatu), the other three are ports on the south coast of New Guinea. But one chart is missing.

So what is the missing, fifth chart of?

Well, I have Torres anchored in the passage on Isla de la Cantarides for 8 days. The two large islands he is anchoring between are Prince of Wales Island and Cape York. Isla de la Cantarides could be any island in this area that has water, hills and people. It could be Cape York itself. If Torres and Tovar were there for 8 days, they probably did a chart of the area. This may be the missing chart. If we had the chart we would know where he landed.

Isn’t it funny then – that James Cook should go through this same passage? If you read Cook’s journal and also other journals such as Banks’, they seem extraordinarily confident they are passing through the passage between New Guinea and New Holland. However, they are passing through a passage between Prince of Wales Island and Cape York. This is clear from their descriptions. Cook climbs up a hill on Possession Island to get a view of the strait. He must be looking into the strait towards the south west and into the Gulf of Carpentaria – not directly to the west where his view would be obstructed by Prince of Wales Island. This is supposed to be uncharted territory. It does not make sense for Cook to be celebrating that he has safely passed through until he is somewhere on the south coast of New Guinea in an identifiable location.

I think the reason Cook is so confident of being in a through passage is that he has Tovar/Torres’ chart of the strait. Cook actually follows Torres’s path for almost a week afterwards to confirm with sighting of Cape False.

Alexander Dalrymple ended up with a stack of old documents raided in the British occupation of Manila, the five charts would be there if Tovar left copies in Manila. Four of the charts went on to collectors, the one of the passage was used by Cook then conveniently ‘lost’.

Why is the British claim (via Cook) executed from “Possession Island”, and not Cape York on the mainland? (Personally, I don’t think Cook did any possession ceremonies, and the admiralty figured them all out retrospectively when he got back to England, because things got so complicated) Maybe it’s because – the British have the fifth chart. And the fifth chart shows that Torres has already landed on Cape York and stayed 8 days. Maybe it even says Tovar and Torres claimed possession of Isla de la Cantarides/Cape York. That means, Cook would not be the first – which is a good reason to suppress that particular chart.