Mike,
I have about half of the 1600 edition, which is in about twelve volumes. Each volume if about 300 pages. The main Drake account and the Cavendish account are in Volume 8 of this particular series, and this volume contains thirty accounts or articles. There can be several articles related to one voyage. For example, in addition to the main Pretty account of the Cavendish circumnavigation, there are three associated articles: (1) a set of detailed notes "concerning latitudes, soundings, lying of the lands, distances of places, variations of the compass, and other notable observations, diligently taken by M. Thomas Fuller of Ipswich (2) A letter from Cavendish to the Lord Chamberlain immediately after his return (3) "Certaine notes or references taken out of a large map of China brought home by M. Thomas Candish 1588".
Even this copy of Hakluyt's work is incomplete. The original contained a series of marginal notes for most of the accounts, and these are not reproduced in most of the modern reproductions. These notes can be very important. For example, in the 1589 version of the Drake account, where the main text discusses the options for returning home considered by Drake when he left Mexico, it lists only two options, to retrace his steps through the Magellan Strait or to head west to the Moluccas and then home round South Africa. However, the marginal note reads "A purpose in Sir Francis to returne by the Northwest Passage." This is in direct contradiction to the main text. As these marginal notes were written as summaries of the main text, it means that the main text originally must have said that Drake intended to search for and return by the Northwest Passage. It must have been then changed, probably at the instigation of Lord Walsingham, Hakluyt's boss, to remove all references to the North West Passage, so that Spain was not aware that Drake had gone looking for it (and mistakenly believed he had found it). In his rush to issue the account Hakluyt forgot to remove the original marginal note. When he published his next edition in 1600, Hakluyt made few changes, and none to this this section of the account, but he took the opportunity to remove the tell-tale marginal note. This small detail provides a solid clue that it was Drake's intention to search for the North West Passage, and indeed explains why he went north from Mexico, rather than south west and west, which is what he would have done had his intention really been to head for the Moluccas. You are right in saying that the devil is in the detail, and unless you look at the originals (or facsimile copies of the originals) of both the 1589 and 1600 versions of Hakluyt's account of Drake's voyage, you would miss this important clue. The same is true of other Hakluyt accounts, including that of the Cavendish voyage.
Being English (or at least Mancunian) you might be familiar with the Fawlty Towers TV series, and remember the one about the Germans staying at the hotel, with Basil saying "Don't mention the War. I did once but I think I got away with it." I can just imagine Hakluyt saying to his colleagues "Don't mention the North West Passage. I did once, but I think I got away with it!"
I know that a facsimile of the original 1589 edition of Hakluyt is on line, and so probably is the 1600 version. I will look up the URLs and post them for you, if you wish.
Mariner
I have about half of the 1600 edition, which is in about twelve volumes. Each volume if about 300 pages. The main Drake account and the Cavendish account are in Volume 8 of this particular series, and this volume contains thirty accounts or articles. There can be several articles related to one voyage. For example, in addition to the main Pretty account of the Cavendish circumnavigation, there are three associated articles: (1) a set of detailed notes "concerning latitudes, soundings, lying of the lands, distances of places, variations of the compass, and other notable observations, diligently taken by M. Thomas Fuller of Ipswich (2) A letter from Cavendish to the Lord Chamberlain immediately after his return (3) "Certaine notes or references taken out of a large map of China brought home by M. Thomas Candish 1588".
Even this copy of Hakluyt's work is incomplete. The original contained a series of marginal notes for most of the accounts, and these are not reproduced in most of the modern reproductions. These notes can be very important. For example, in the 1589 version of the Drake account, where the main text discusses the options for returning home considered by Drake when he left Mexico, it lists only two options, to retrace his steps through the Magellan Strait or to head west to the Moluccas and then home round South Africa. However, the marginal note reads "A purpose in Sir Francis to returne by the Northwest Passage." This is in direct contradiction to the main text. As these marginal notes were written as summaries of the main text, it means that the main text originally must have said that Drake intended to search for and return by the Northwest Passage. It must have been then changed, probably at the instigation of Lord Walsingham, Hakluyt's boss, to remove all references to the North West Passage, so that Spain was not aware that Drake had gone looking for it (and mistakenly believed he had found it). In his rush to issue the account Hakluyt forgot to remove the original marginal note. When he published his next edition in 1600, Hakluyt made few changes, and none to this this section of the account, but he took the opportunity to remove the tell-tale marginal note. This small detail provides a solid clue that it was Drake's intention to search for the North West Passage, and indeed explains why he went north from Mexico, rather than south west and west, which is what he would have done had his intention really been to head for the Moluccas. You are right in saying that the devil is in the detail, and unless you look at the originals (or facsimile copies of the originals) of both the 1589 and 1600 versions of Hakluyt's account of Drake's voyage, you would miss this important clue. The same is true of other Hakluyt accounts, including that of the Cavendish voyage.
Being English (or at least Mancunian) you might be familiar with the Fawlty Towers TV series, and remember the one about the Germans staying at the hotel, with Basil saying "Don't mention the War. I did once but I think I got away with it." I can just imagine Hakluyt saying to his colleagues "Don't mention the North West Passage. I did once, but I think I got away with it!"
I know that a facsimile of the original 1589 edition of Hakluyt is on line, and so probably is the 1600 version. I will look up the URLs and post them for you, if you wish.
Mariner
). 
the thread and are using it to investigate Drake 's 8 missing guns somewhere around the Celebes. So have you any input on this one??
