Sidestep: The Argentinian Giant
Chartered in 1602 and granted a monopoly over trade with the East Indies by the Dutch government, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) maintained its stranglehold by controlling the two known sailing routes from Europe to the East. Without its permission, no Dutch ship could pass through the Strait of Magellan nor around the Cape of Good Hope. Isaac Le Maire (1558–1624), a wealthy merchant and one of the largest stockholders of the VOC, became disenchanted with the company’s power, for he wanted the opportunity to explore and discover new countries himself and to reap the profits from any resulting commerce. In 1610, he formed a new firm, the Australian Company, which was chartered by the government to engage in trade with China, Japan, northeastern Asia, New Holland (Australia), and South Pacific islands. Reports from Sir Francis Drake’s circumnavigation (1577–1580) had suggested a possible new route around South America, which would avoid trespassing on the rights of the VOC. To pursue the idea, Le Maire joined with experienced navigator Willem Corneliszoon Schouten to mount their own expedition, raising most of the needed capital from wealthy businessmen of Hoorn, a city in northern Holland.
Le Maire’s son Jacques was put in charge; Schouten was given the role of expedition navigator. The two-ship venture (Eendracht and Hoorn) departed from Texel, North Holland, on June 14, 1615. They stopped on the west coast of Africa to pick up a load of lemons to help prevent scurvy, then sailed across the Atlantic and spent a month of rest and repair in Port Desire, (Puerto Deseado) on the Patagonian coast of South America. While there, the Hoorn was lost in a fire, and its crew and everything worth salvaging were transferred to the Eendracht.
Port Desire was a refuge along the Deseado River and was named by the English circumnavigator Thomas Cavendish for his ship. This keyed illustration below shows details of the area (north is at the bottom):
C, D: Islands full of birds and sea lions E, F: Where they repaired the ships and where the Hoorn burned G: Where they found good drinking water to carry back to the ship H: Where they found the burial site of a giant, whose bones measured between ten and eleven feet long I, K: How they obtained meat from the sea lions L: Where they saw many beasts resembling deer but with longer necks and legs (guanacos) on the mountains M: Where they saw a great number of ostrich like birds (nandous) N: A marvelous, natural upright stone formation, that seen from a distance, resembles a man’s foot
Now this illustration must be fake because people say it is as no giants skeletons existed. Yet all the other stuff would be incorrect too, right? Well, N above, the split rock is shown below and was found on Google Earth.
Below is the rock named N. Exactly as illustrated in 1615 (410 years ago!) Yet we found it on Google Earth and a website.
And here, is that rock H with the skeleton street view on Google.
The lithograph is reasonably detailed and it doesn't make a big deal about the giant skeleton, it simply lists it as one of the things they found while they were temporarily stranded there. The lithograph mentions both the rock pillar and the rock where the skeleton was found. And on Google Earth, you can find both, both accurate, both real. Why would they lie about the giant skeletons buried under a rock pile? 1616 when the same gentlemen, Jacob Le Maire and Willem Schouten, made a short visit to the Tongan islands to trade with them, they didn't mention any giants as they didn't see any there because there weren't any. If they were into 'tall tales' they'd have seen giants or giant skeletons on every continent... they didn't!
It is a strange land down there. Not far away from the Port Desire are the remains of an ancient forest, remnants of it can still be seen.... as stone.
So while some stories about giants seem hard to prove; being many hundreds of years ago, this one has some hard circumstantial evidence and accuracy to back it up. The map is very accurate and therefore highly plausible as to what they found as why include a fake story in an otherwise 100% accurate picture? Sure, some stories of tall skeletons around the. world will be tall tales, based on someone else's true report, but many feel genuine and this one above has the most accuracy in its description of everything, without any fake labouring on about a tall skeletons. The comment about it almost seems secondary to the discovery of that harbourt. Did they find a giant skeleton? 100% yes. It's hidden or re-buried somewhere, maybe one day it will resurface?
Comments