A NARRATIVE AND MORE
Twenty years after Sir Humphrey Gilbert, with Hakluyt as his publicity man, aroused interest in Norumbega but failed to effect its settlement, two young men from the neighborhood of Wetheringsett, Suffolk, and one or two from Bristol, made successful voyages to tha part of the American coast. This of course did not come about by chance, for Wetheringsett and Bristol were places where Master Richard Hakluyt held offices which gave him opportunity to be in personal touch with the young men who took and lead in these voyages -- Bartholomew Gosnold, John Brereton, Robert Salterne, and probably John Angell. Therefore, a study of Brereton's book, called on the title page A Briefe and true Relation of the Discoverie of the north part of Virginia; being a most pleasant, fruitfull and commodious soile, begins with the confident expedctation that Richard Hakluyt will be found guiding through the press this latest addition to the narratives of American voyages.
In 1600, Hakluyt had completed and published the Third and Last Volume of the Voyages, Navigations, Traffiques, and Discoveries of the English Nation ... Collected by Richard Hakluyt Preacher. His interest in the publication of geographical works did not then abate, however, as he immediately gave his attention to the printing of two translations, one from the Italian and anothe from the Portuguese. Then, in 1602, came Bartholomew Gosnold's notable contribution to the series of English voyages. Obviously Hakluyt would have felt his life's labors on the principas voyages of the English nation unfinished and incomplete, if he had not been able to persuade his favorite printer at the time, George Bishop of London, to bring out a small volume of Gosnold's success in finding a place suitable for English settlement in the northern part of Virginia.
This work appeared in the book-stalls late in October, 1602, about three months after Gosnold's return to England. It did not bear in any part of it the signature, the imprimatur so to speak, of Richard Hakluyt. Yet, as has already been noted by George Bruner Parks in his life of Hakluyt, it seems likely, if not certain, that Hakluyt was responsible for the editing and publishing of Brereton's book.
The first of the appended documents printed immediately after Brereton's narrative -- a note on the voyage of Samuel Mace -- furnishes an excellent illustration of the method to be used in reaching such a conclusion. The reader should first compare attentively the following two passeges.
A. [Title: A briefe Note of the sending another barke this present yeere 1602, by the honorable knight, Sir Walter Ralegh, for the searching out of his Colonie in Virginia.]
Samuel Mace of Weymouth, a very sufficient Mariner, an honest sober man, who had beene in Virginia twise befoe, was imployed thither by Sir Walter Ralegh, to finde those people which were left there in the yeere 1587. To those succour he hath sent five severall times at his owne charges. Their owne profit elsewhere; others returning with frivolous allegations. At this last time, to avoid all excuse, he bought a barke, and hired all the company for wages by the moneth: who departing from Weymouth in March last 1602, fell fortie leagues to the Wouthwestward of Hatarask, in thirtie-foure degrees or thereabout; and having there spent a moneth; when that the extremitie of weather and loose of some principall ground-tackle [anchor and mooring tackle], forced and feared them from searching the port of Hatarask, to which they were sent ...
B. [Title: The third voyage made by a ship sent in the yeere 1586, to the reliefe of the Colony planted in Virginia, at the sole charges of Sir Walter Ralegh.]
In the yeere of our Lord 1586 Sir Walter Ralegh at his owne charge prepared a ship of an hundred tunne, fraighted with all maner of things in most plentifull maner, for the supply and eliefe of his Colony then remaining in Virginia ...
Immediately after the departing of our English Colony out of this paradise of the world, the ship abovementioned sent and set forth at the charges of Sir Walter Ralegh and his direction, arrived at Hatorask; who after some time spent in seeking our Colony up in the countrey, and not finding them, returned with all the aforesayd provision into England.
Most readers will agree that the selections read as though they were taken from a single account, by the same hand, of Ralegh's attempts to find his lost colony. As a matter of fact, the second is a sample of Hakluyt's style, chosen for comparison with the first, written by an unknown hand and appended to Brereton's Relation. Here, therefore, is the first clear indication that Hakluyt was the editor of the appended documents, since the earlier paragraph may reasonably be taken as a note written by Hakluyt in his editorial capacity.
The next step is to review briefly by title the other appended documents. This is the more necessary because Brereton's work is generally so difficult of access in its complete, second-edition state that few historians have studied it.
The first edition, which is somewhat easier of access, comprised Brereton's narrative and list of commodities (pages 3 to 13, inclusive), the note on Mace's voyage (just discussed), and (pages 15 to 24) the Treatise by Captain Edward Hayes (analyzed in Chapter VII).
The second edition, which reprinted all that was in the first, contained twenty-four additional pages.
Pages 25 to 36 contain a document entitled Inducements to the liking of the voyage intended towards Virginia in 40. and 42. degrees latitude, written 1585. by M. Richard Hakluyt the elder, sometime student of the Middle Temple. This document, ostensibly written by the Rev. Richard Hakluyt's older cousin, a lawyer, who started him on his geographical career, is not to be convused with the one printed among the writings of the Hakluyts with the same title, except that the latitudes for the intended voyage are given in the latter as between 34º and 36º, instead of between 40º and 42º. The relationship between the two versions of the Inducements is obscure, but it would seem that someone -- who else could it have been except the Reverend Richard hakluyt -- revamped the elder Hakluyt's article to make it applicable to Bartholomew Gosnold's voyage, and appropriate for inclusion with Brereton's Relation.
Pages 37 and 38 have A Briefe note of the corne, fowles, fruits and beasts of the Inland of Florida on the backside of Virginia. According to the sub-title this was taken from the 44th chapter of the discovery of the said country, begun by Fernando de Soto, Governor ofCuba, in the year of our Lord 1539.
Pages 39 and 40 have A Note of such commodities as are found in florida next adjoining unto the South part of Virginia. The words next adjoining unto the South part of are underlined (italicized), and the title adds that this was "taken out of the description of the said countrey, written by Monsieur Rene Laudonniere, who inhabited there two Sommers and one winter.
Pages 41 to 45 have A briefe extract of the merchantable commodities found in the South part of Virginia, ann. 1585 and 1586, with explanation: "Gathered out of the learned works of master Thomas Herriot, which was there remaining the space of eleven moneths." This is an epitome of material that Richard Hakluyt had printed in his Principal Navigations.
Pages 46 to 48 contain the last of the appended documents. The title, as long as the text is brief, reads as follows: Certaine briefe testimonies touching sundry rich mines of Gold, Silver, and Copper, in part found and in part constantly heard of, in North Florida, and the inland of Maine of Virginia, and other countreys there unto the North part neere adjoining, gathered out of the works, all (one excepted) estant in print, of such as were personall travellers in those countries. This document is full of citations from the English Voyages (the three-volume Principal Navigations ... of 1598-1600), giving in each case the page from which the remarks are taken. It is noteworthy that these paragraphs were written in the first person singular. They bear the characteristic book and page references which set Hakluyt apart from most of the writers of his day.
It would be difficult to find a grooup of citations and notes which give better expression to Hakluyt's mind in these matters than the seven assembled for inclusion with Brereton's Relation. Indeed, it may be stated unequivocally that the group, including, as it does, information about Florida, was motivated by Hakluyt's interests rather than by a desire specifically to illuminate a voyage "to the North Part of Virginia."
The evidence of Hakluyt's hand in the preparation of Brereton's Relation as it appeared in its expanded second edition may be summed up as follows:
The first and last of the notes appended show characteristics that may be taken as evidence that Hakluyt himself wrote them. (These are the note on Mace's voyage and the "griefe testimonies" at the end of the volume.)
The Treatise by Captain Edward Hayes, apart from other considerations set forth in earlier chapters of this study, was written by the man from whom Hakluyt obtained an account of Sir Humphrey Gilbert's expedidition for inclusion in his Principal Navigations.
The document called Inducements, by the elder Hakluyt, in one version or the other, was almost certainly inherited by Hakluyt after his cousin's death in 1591.
The extracts from the account of de Soto's "Inland of Florida" explorations (extending to the Mississippi), were to be found only in a Portugese work, of which Hakluyt had a copy, perhaps the only one in England; it is mentioned in parentheses in the second paragraph of the last item appended (the briefe testimonies) in a phrase reading "to be seene in print in the hands of Master Richard Hakluyt." The editor, if he be Hakluyt, is saying: "the only place where you can consult it is in my home." Hakluyt in any case finally translated this Portugese work on de Soto, publishing it in 1609.
The Laudonnière work cited was Hakluyt's own special discovery. He had found the manuscript in France, and it was published there in 1586 at his expense. The next year Hakluyt made a translation of it into English, which was first published in London in 1587, and then incorporated into his Principall Navigations (1589).
The work on Virginia by "Herriot" (Hariot), Ralegh's observer sent over to report on the land, had been published in 1588. Hakluyt reprinted it, too, in his Voyages (both Principall and Principal Navigations, of 1589 and 1598-1600 respectively).
In addition, the editorial touches, here and there throughout the appended documents, particularly the glosses or parenthetic asides obviously added by the editor to the documents before him, also shed light on the personality of the man who prepared this work for the press. These may be listed as follows:
In Brereton's list of commodities the editor has added in the second edition, "Iris Florentina, whereof apothecaries make sweet balles." To Brereton's mention of "clay, red & white", has been added the clause, "which may prove good Terra Sigillata" -- an astringent clay then esteemed as a medicine.
After Laudonnière's mention of the "the tree called Esquine" there is a parenthesis, "which I take to be the Sassafras." Here a voice of authority such as Hakluyt's is speaking. A few paragraphs late the same extract says "there are mines of Copper", to which is added, "which I think to be Gold."
Among the extracts supposedly from Hariot occurs this remark about a certain kind of root: "Monardes calleth them Beades, or Pater nostri of Sancta Helena, and master Brereton Ground Nuts." The last five words are obviously not in Hariot (the latest edition of which was hakluyt's, in 1600), and so were added by an editor familiar with Brereton's narrative.
In the last of the added documents, the "briefe testimonies", there are several striking personal remarks: "This place in mine opinion cannot be farre from the great river that falleth into the Southwest part of the bay of Chesepioc [Chesapeake]." -- "The large description and chart of which voyage ... being intercepted afterward by the English at sea, we have in London to be shewed to such as shall have occasion to make use of the same." -- "I could give large information of the rich copper mine ... whereof I may selfe have seene above an hundred pieces of copper, and have shweed some part thereof to divers knightes of qualitie, ... but I reserve a furthere relation heereof to the more convenient time and place."
The sum of the matter is that if the unnamed editor of Brereton's Relation was not Richard Hakluyt, then Richard Hakluyt must have found or developed an alter ego indistinguishable from himself in learning, interests, or authoritative utterance. Hakluyt might have educated his disciple, Bartholomew Gosnold, to the point where Bartholomew could think, quote and write like his master -- in other words, Gosnold might himself have edited Brereton's Relation. But there is no hint elsewhere that Gosnold ever functioned as a profound student of the Voyages. There remains only the conviction, therefore, that Hakluyt himself edited and published the little book that is know as Brereton's Relation.
"A deere friend", says the opening paragraph of the Relation, requested Brereton to write out his narrative, and "emboldened" him to dedicate it to Sir Walter Ralegh. Again, circumstantial but significant evidence points to Richard Hakluyt as the man who did this persuading. It was quite a character for Hakluyt to secure a voyager's narrative for publication. His long-range motive would be the justification of his belief, expressed to Queen Elizabeth in his Discourse on the Western Planting of 1584, that Norumbega was a suitable place for English settlement. The immediate occasion of the publication, however, was undoubtedly furnished by Ralegh's hasty attempt to confiscate the cargo brought back, together with the need of having a smooth and persuasive propaganda document for the benefit of the merchants of Bristol, who, as Pring's narrative reported, were being urged to finance and send out another voyage to the region visited by Gosnold.
If there were any suggestion that the book was limited in intent to the enlightment and encouragement of Bristol merchants, the name of young Robert Salterne occurs as the "deere friend" who brought about the writing of the Relation. The many weeks at sea undoubtedly brought together in close companionship the ordained clergyman. Brereton and the young man who was later to enter the ministry. But the broad scope of the book as a whole, with its seven appended documents assembled to support and to illuminate the central narrative, leaves little doubt that Richard Hakluyt himself was the "deere friend" in question.
Whatever part Bartholomew Gosnold may have had in the publication of Brereton's Relation must remain as a matter of conjecture. However, Brereton's silence in regard to the geographical aspects of Gosnold's approach to Martha's Vineyard probably betray Gosnold's hand in censorship. A summary of these silences is repeated for emphasis and to serve as a clue to the circumstances surrounding the publication of the book. They are silences which can be detected only by those familiar with the physical features of the Cape Cod region. The original readers of Breretono's narrative were not and for that matter many modern students of the voyage are not, in possession of the information which would enable them to realize that Brereton was misleading them by a clear case of suppressio veri -- suggesting what is false by keeping hidden what is true. Here are three examples:
1. Nantucket Sound was seen by Brereton, together with Gosnold and others, from a hill on Cape Cod. This is geographical fact that cannot be gainsaid. Brereton mentioned islands "lying almost round about" the Cape; but he did not anywhere say that these islands enclosed a great sound, approximately the size of the great bay described by Verrazzano.
2. Breeton reported: "From this place [i.e., the wouthern part of Cape Cod Bay], we sailed round about this headland, almost all the points of the compass, the shore very bolde; but as no coast is free of dangers, so I am persuaded, this is as free as any." No one not familiar with these waters could possibly guess from this sentence that Gosnold passed over or around the most dangerous shoals on the coast of New England. Every other voyages of the period who sailed down this coast, and lived to leave a record of his experiences, gave a lurid description of the shoals. Why did Brereton (and Archer) omit mention of them?
3. South of Cape Cod, Gosnold and his companions must have observed at close quarters the imposing island which he named Martha's Vineyard -- an island containing about 100 square miles, and prominent because of its high hills. Why did Brereton (and Archer as well) give the impression that this island was only four miles in compas, about one square mile in area? Why did he fail to tell about the great sound, now called Vineyard Sound, lying between the north shore of this island and the Elizabeth Islands?
The only logical conclusion to be drawn from the fact of this and other omissins (which in Archer's narrative have left indications that they were deletions) is that the narrators purposely withheld information from the public that would be usful to others who might want to find again Gosnold's Martha's Vineyard. Other and graver reasons quite possibly existed, involving other nations. It is idle today to attempt to specify the reasons. A number of significant omissions of detail still confuse the reader: that they were intentional there can be little doubt.
In that connection, it is interesting to observe that Brereton's narrative was written in conformity with the revised day-by-day account of Gabriel Archer. This can be taken as rather certain evidence that Archer's narrative had been prepared for publication in 1602, suffering deletions in the process, but had finally been rejected in favor of the rhetorically superior propaganda produced by the Rev. Mr. Brereton.
Archer astonishing bit of silence lies in the absence of any satisfactory information either in Brereton's narrative or in Archer's about the purposes of the voyage and its destinatin, except that Archer is passing mentioned a "purposed place" and later on reported that the Concord cassed a point (at one side of the opening) whose latitude was 41º 40', whic is of course, the precise latitude given by Verrazzano for the entrance of his great bay.
Brereton's silence on the objectives of the voyage may be compared with the opening paragraph of Pring's narrative of his voyage of 1603, as printed by Samuel Purchas:
Upon many probable and reasonable inducements, used unto sundry of the chiefest Merchants of Bristoll, by Master Richard Hakluyt Prebendary of Saint Augustines the Cathedrall Church of the said Citie, after divers meetings and due consultation they resolved to set forth a Voyage for the father Discoverie of the North part of Virginia.
Neither Brereton nor Archer chose to give any such informatin about the inception of Gosnold's voyage of 1602. Instead, a Treatise by Sir Humphrey Gilbert's man, Captain Edwaard hayes, is offered in explanation of the voyage.
In conclusion, the present author would spin a gossamer tale as a literary "introduction" to Brereton's Relation, trusting his readers will understand how unsubstantial are some of the threads used in the weaving.
He assumes that when Sir Robert Cecil received Sir Walter Ralegh's letter demanding the confiscation of the cargo supposed to be Gilbert's, Cecil communicated with the Lord Admiral about settling the dispute in the Admiralty Court, or otherwise amicably. Then, in view of the importance of the voyage geographically, he called in his geographical adviser, Richard Hakluyt.
The arthor assumes then that Hakluyt sought a converence with his friend Sir Walter and explained to him tactfully that the noble knight's permission had in fact been obtained, not by Gilbert or even by Bartholomew Gosnold, who had led the expedition, but by the old mariner, Captain Edward Hayes, who had delegated the leadership of the expedition to Gosnold. And at this first conference, or at a subsequent one, Hakluyt proposed that an account of the voyage be published which would redound to Sir Walter's credit. hakluyt would make bold to write for it a note on Ralegh's earnest efforts to find and succour his lost Colonies. Captain Edward Hayes; Treatise, to be published with a story of the voyage, would make reference -- as indeed it did -- to Virginia "lately planted in part by the Colonies sent thither by the honourable knight, Sir Walter Ralegh." Furthermore, and this was the most important of all, the Rev. John Brereton, a gentleman of the voyage, would be asked to write a Relation of it, which with the noble Knight's kind approval would be dedicated to him, with the fact plainly stated on the title-page of the projected work that Sir Walter Ralegh had given his permission for the voyage. Thus, the Queen, and all of England, would know that the holder of the Queen's Patend to Virginia was continuing his efforts to bring about the plantation of America, that it might someday become an English Nation.
These proposals were welcomed by Ralegh, as he sorely needed something of the sort to restore confidence in his colonizing plans. Perhaps, and this is not essential, Bartholomew Gosnold was brought in to complete the arrangements about the sassafrass -- amicable arrangements, so that there would be no cloying of the market, as it was put.
In return for all this, Sir Walter Ralegh was asked graciously to give his permission to the merchants of Bristol to send out another voyage to the northern part of Virginia (the part visited by Gosnold) to obtain a further and large supply of sassafras. To this end, Richard Hkluyt brought to Sir Walter his young friends, Robert Salterne and John Angell of Bristokl, as representatives of the Bristol merchants.
In consequence of this, and it was a great deal, Brereton's Relation was duly published. One may be certain that a goodly number of copies of it went to the merchants of Bristol, to assure them that a profit was to be made by sending two more vessels to the northern part of Virginia.
