TRANSACTIONS OF THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS
DECEMBER MEETING, 1930
A Stated Meeting of the Society was held at the invitation of the President, at No. 44 Brimmer Street, Boston, on Thursday, December 18, 1930, at three o’clock, the President, Samuel Eliot Morison, in the chair.
The Records of the last Stated Meeting were approved.
The Corresponding Secretary announced the death of George Wigglesworth, a Resident Member, on November 26, 1930.
Mr. Matt Bushnell Jones, of Boston, and Mr. James Duncan Phillips, of Boston, were elected Resident Members.
Mr. George Lyman Kittredge read the following paper:
A HARVARD SALUTATORY ORATION OF 1662
Some time ago our President handed me a little manuscript volume and asked me to identify some of the poetical quotations therein and, in general, to make a report upon the contents. It is the commonplace book of Elnathan Chauncy (A. B. Harvard 1661, A. M. 1664), one of President Chauncy’s sons. Elnathan Chauncy, of whom there is a sketch in Sibley’s Harvard Graduates (ii. 80–81), died in Barbados in 1684, leaving a widow but no children. The volume bears marks of subsequent ownership by Israel Chauncy (A. B. Harvard 1724), who was the son of Isaac Chauncy (A. B. Harvard 1693; minister of Hadley) and a grandnephew of Elnathan. From him it probably went to another descendant of President Chauncy, Nathaniel Chauncy (A. B. Yale 1702) of Durham, Connecticut; for it descended to Nathaniel’s great-grandson, Professor William Chauncey Fowler (A. B. Yale 1816), and is now owned by his grandchildren and heirs. The Society is indebted to Mrs. William W. Fowler, of Durham, Connecticut, for the loan of the manuscript, and permission to print extracts from it.
Everything in the book, except for a few scribbles of no account, appears to be in Elnathan’s small and neat writing, which is available in autograph in two inscriptions
Omn[ia] dum reputat tra[ctata]
tempora vitæ,
Vel malé vel temere vel nihil
agit homo. Elnath: Chauncy
and
- Elnathan
- Chauncy
- Elnathan
- Chauncy:
- Ejus liber:
- anno: dom:
- 1661: oct: 5.
Some extracts “Out of Arthur Warwickes meditations”
The first leaf is badly mutilated, but the verso
[ ] tear bedewed eyes
[ ] herse attende these obsequyes.
Silvanus Walderne.
[Ana]gram: All wailes under sun.
[Yo]u Muses d[ar]linges aid me wth your crys,
Come help me sing thes mourneful elegys,
Which wailing dictates sorrow doth endite,
[W]hich sad Minervaes beadsman weepes to write.
[ h]ere mans woful mAp Lamenting see
[ ]d here ye worLds epitomy,
[Learni]ngs abridgment Whose disactrous fate
[Our] expectation checks, deAles, hope ye mate,
[All g]reeve; all waile, all thIs our earthly glory,
[It] flowers yn fades thus Life is transitory,
Vnconquerd death terrorS affrighting king,
Strikes up aloud alar Vm horrors sting
Will serve ye 2d course the N Looke about
And once at Last Lets finD this meaning out
Let showers of teares cōE from Minervaes eyes
Deep mouthed quiristers Roare out your crys
Endeered muses Nephew S ayd your mother
Raise up your notes Lament yoVr silent brother.
Neere shall those brests be dra[w]ne by such another.
We observe that Walderne’s name is anagrammatized to “All wailes under sun” and that this anagram is worked into a medial acrostic. The letters that make the acrostic are set off by vertical lines in the manuscript.
and bleeding eyes
obsequys
[Henry Dun]st[er]
[Anagram:]he runnes tried.
[Come] ye parnassus nymphs and help to sound,
[The] dittys sad wth wch our harts abound,
[And a]lso turne your pleasant eulogys,
[Into] ye most hart breaking elegys.
[A t]ragedy How sad is this,
[A] troph-E yt portends no blisse:
ye fairest flow’[r] our garlond ’mong,
is fader q-Vite, to dust is gon.
My muse now mour-N wth tears bespren
Dunster is re-Nt from sight of men
Ye fame of H-Emy Neer shall rust
although he i-S now turnd to dust
[N]o presiden-T in learning’s bin
excelling Dunste-R Learned men
from earth to sk-I es he takes his rode
a way wher-E in few ’fore him trode
but he was try’D or ere he went
at last wth tryall he was spent
Now vertue’s dead and quite
of all but noysome wormes anoyd
wch shewes us like a buble-glasse
fraile earthy men must soone h:
The first page of the manuscript (the same that contains Chauncy’s signatures) seems to show him laboring with his muse in the composition of these verses on Dunster. There we find:
Although he is Now turnd to dur[ ]
ye fame of Henry neer sh[all ]
It shew’s us like a buble glasse
Fraile earthy man must soone h: passe.
Although appears to be a correction for an original What though. Henry Dunster is written above a cancelled word or words (illegible), and Dunster is cancelled; earthy is substituted for a cancelled sinful. The reading dur (which must be for durt) is queer; we expect dust. It is reasonably safe to regard the two elegies as Elnathan Chauncy’s own work. Such an ascription is confirmed by the fact that the tribute to Dunster embodies two lines adapted from a couplet which occurs among Chauncy’s extracts from Spenser.
Compare
[And al]so turne your pleasant eulogys,
[Into] ye most heart breaking elegys
with Spenser, The Teares of the Muses, vv. 371–372:
Chauncy’s Spenserian quotations, which run to more than a score of pages, cover almost all of Spenser’s poems except The Faerie Queene;
Yee dainty Nymphes that in the blessed brook
doth bathe you
forsake your watry bowres and hither looke
at my request;
And eke you virgins that on Parnasse dwell
whence floweth Helicon the learned well
Helpe me to blaze
Her worthy praise,
wch in her sex doth all excell.
But freindly fa[r]ys met wth many graces
And Lightfoot Nymphs can chase the lingring night
wth heydegiues
while sisters nine wch dwell on parnasse hight
doe make ym musicke for yr more delight
And pan himselfe to kisse yr christal faces;
will pipe and dance while Phœbe shineth bright
such pierlesse pleasures haue wee in these places.
Calme was the day and through the trembling aire
Sweet breathing Zephyrus did softly play
A gentle spirit that Lightly did delay
Hot Titans beames wch then did glister faire.
A flocke of Nimphes I chaūced to espy
all louely daughters of the floud yrby
That Like the twinnes of Joue they seemed in sight
wch decke the bauldricke of ye heavens bright.
Spenser’s elegiac strains, however, appealed with equal force to Elnathan Chauncy, as was to be expected at a time when poetical obituary tributes were so much in fashion both here and in the mother country.
My muse is hoarse and weary of his
Winter is come that blowes the bitter blast
and after winter dreery death doth hast.
The woodes wr heard to waile full many a sithe
and all yr birds with silence to complaine
the feildes with faded flowers did seeme to mourne
and all yr flockes from feeding to refraine.
the running waters wept for thy returne
and all yr fish wth languor did lament.
Chauncy’s quotations from other authors likewise testify, in the main, to his keen and intelligent interest in belles lettres. Of Herrick’s “Gather ye rosebuds while ye may” he copies three-quarters, and the whole of “A willow garland thou didst send.” Similarly un-Puritanical is “A song of Mark Anthony,” by Cleveland, which he also copies entire, appending the same poet’s parody or indecorously satirical counterpart, which begins “Wn as ye night-raven sung Plutoe’s mattins.”
But when the heart’s attorney once is mute,
The client breaks, as desperate in his suit.
He owes the quotation to Robert Allot’s England’s Parnassus. The groups of flores are usually headed by a more or less exact note of the source: as, — “some recollections out of Argalus and Parthenia”; “Some Collection out of Natures Paradox sive Iphigenes”; “Some recollections out of Winter nights vision”; “Collections out of Godfrey de Bulloigne”; “some collections out of ye character of a London diurnal”; “Some recollections out of Barclay his Argenis”; “some collections out of Psyche or Loves Mystery”; “collections out of Mr Purchas his theatre of flying insects”; “Some Collections out of Englands Pernassus”; “collect: out of ye worldly pollicy.” A few of the flores have eluded my attempts at identification, but in most cases the heading is definite enough to indicate the source. Thus, of the works just noted, “Argalus and Parthenia” is Francis Quarles’s romance in verse (1628 or 1629), the plot of which is taken from Sidney’s Arcadia; “Nature’s Paradox” is a translation of the celebrated prose romance “Iphigène” by Jean Pierre Camus, Bishop of Belley, — “Nature’s Paradox: or, The Innocent Impostor. A pleasant Polonian History, originally intituled Iphigenes. Englished by Major Wright”
Other works which our young Puritan had read and admired were: Bacon’s “Advancement of Learning”; “A Preface, or rather A Briefe Apologie of Poetrie, and of the Author and Translator of this Poeme” prefixed to Sir John Harington’s “Orlando Furioso in English Heroical Verse” (1591; 2d ed., 1607); “The Arraignement of the Whole Creature, at the Barre of Religion, Reason, and Experience” (1631), anonymous, but known to be by Stephen Jerome; John Bulwer’s “Anthropometamorphosis: Man Transform’d: or, The Artificiall Changling Historically presented. By J. B.” (1653), a learned and very curious treatise on costume;
Epigrammatic quips and pretty or fanciful conceits always attracted Elnathan, especially when they involved a paradox.
shee teacheth smiles to weep and teares to smile
By this ye feather’d Belman of ye night
sent forth his midnight sum̄ons, to invite
All eyes to slumber.
when grizly night her iron carre had driven
from her dark mansion house that hidden Lyes
In plutoes Kingdome to ye top of heav’n
and wth black cloake of cloudes muffling ye skys
wth sable wings shut up all wakeful eyes.
The sand Like minutes, fly away so fast
that yeeres are out ere wee thinke months are past.
Her Lips cast forth a chaine of sugred wordes.
The rude Chaos of prysbutery.
A periwigged phrase.
Oppositions highest tides roare in my way.
They like Hellish graduates have com̄enct in yc highest degree of sin.
a man may as soone fill a quart pot wth vertue, as a rational mind wth wealth.
an impudent censurer is the torture monger of wit.
A gamester is fortunes vassaile, temptations Anvile, or an outlandish text wch may be soone translated into cheaters English.
A begging scoller is an artificial vagabond.
A Huntsman is a lievetenant of dogs and foe to harvest.
A witch is the divels hostess, he takes housroome and diet of her and yet she payes the reckoning.
A gorgeous specimen of the florid style is extracted from R. Mason’s preface to John Bulwer’s curiously learned treatise on costume: Anthropometamorphosis or The Artificial Changeling (1653):
Your curious diligence lookes not only into civil societys, but prying also unto ye ruder crouds and silvestrous heards of mankind peeping into every latibulum and solitary bush, to devellope ye effect and incongruous results of ye phantastical projects of (ye now little better yn ye ꝑfecter sort of ape called man) it became my just wonder, to find the magistery of ye creation in ye crucible of his owne folly so calcined into a trifle.
Elnathan Chauncy is described in the bond which his widow gave as administratrix on May 22, 1684, as “late of Boston Physician.”
Of Helmontian lore a single specimen must suffice:
The material nature does uncessantly by Its secret Magnetisme, sucke downe formes from ye brest of ye supior orbs and greedily thirst after ye favour and benigne influence
Vaughan’s philosophy may be illustrated by three or four of Chauncy’s extracts:
ye soule consistes of two portions inferior and superior the superior is masculine and æternal. ye inferior fœminine and mortal. . . . Marriage is a com̄ent on life, a meer Hieroglyphick, or outward representation of our inward vital composition. For life is noth: but ye union of male and female principles.
I speake not here of ye symbolical exterior descent from ye prototypical-planets to ye created sphaeres, and ynce in noctem corporis: but I speake of that most secret and silent laps of ye spirit ꝑ formarum naturalium seriem.
the philosophers stone is a sperme yt nature hers: drawes out of ye elements wthout ye help of art.
Vaughan engaged in a furious literary and scientific (or philosophical) quarrel with Dr. Henry More, the celebrated Cambridge Platonist. He answered some of More’s strictures by publishing a vituperative tract picturesquely entitled “The Man-Mouse Taken in a Trap, and tortur’d to death for gnawing the Margins of Eugenius Philalethes” (1650). Chauncy selects therefrom a longish list of smart sayings, which manifestly amused him, and which perhaps he thought he might find convenient some day in the composition of a diatribe of his own. I give a few samples of his extracted gems, observing, by the way, that others are not quite quotable.
I have put his hog-noddle in pickle, and here I present to ye world a peice of sound non sense.
Could thy alma mater teach ye noth: but anticks
he is a heated nodle, a mome a mimicke, an ape a meere animal a snaile a philosophical hog, a nip-crust, a pick-pocket, a niggard, tom foole wth a devils head and homes:
I will pick your bones and afterwards bestow you on Cambridge for a fooles anatomy.
from a very dry mouse thou art become a drowned ra[t]
There is also a long series of excerpts from the philosophico-theological works of the once famous Scot, John Weemse (or Weemes) of Lathlocker, credited by Chauncy to his “Observations natural and mora[l],”
Several of the books excerpted by Chauncy were in John Harvard’s library: viz., Jerome’s “Arraignement of the Whole Creature,” Bacon’s “Advancement of Learning,” the 1610 edition of “A Mirrour for Magistrates,” Warwick’s “Spare Minutes” (fourth edition, 1635), and Weemse’s “Portraiture.”
There are also many pages of sermon notes. These were written in where the commonplace material — the flores plucked from various authors — had left blank pages or parts of pages. At the head of the first sermon occurs a date with an ascription: “By Mr Benjamin Blackmā March. 20 69/70.” This is the Blakeman (or Blackman) who graduated at Harvard in 1663. The text is “prov. 18. 14. a spirit of a man &c.”
May. 15. 70. |
By Mr Blackmā: |
Rom. 7. 9. |
It is interesting to observe that the earlier of the two sermon dates (March 20, 1669–70) is only four days later than that on which the townsmen of Stratford, Connecticut, were directed by vote of the town to “endeavour the obtaining” of Blakeman to teach their school, and that on the twentieth of December following he was made freeman.
Besides the notes from Blakeman’s sermons there is a long discourse on Faith, which I suppose is Chauncy’s own. As nearly as I can make out, the order of this sermon is pp. 180–215, 218–220, 222–224, 232–234, 133–138, 141–151, 154–156. But it seems to begin in the middle, with “17” (i.e. “seventeenthly”), and “18” is on p. 184. At all events, the sermon on Faith does not connect with Mr. Blakeman’s second sermon, which breaks off abruptly on p. 132. The first words on p. 133 follow directly in sense the last words on p. 234.
The manuscript contains also the bare outline of a fourth sermon. The text is “2. Sam. 24. 10. now I beseech take away ye Iniquity of thy servant for I have done very foolishly.”
The Latin Salutatory Oration is so great a curiosity that it must needs be printed in full.
Mother Academy has had a miscarriage in the birth of Masters and has brought forth no Masters for this year. . . . As to candidates for the First Degree, we have presented to you six, according to the number of the jars filled with water at the wedding at Cana in Galilee, from whom some hope has shown itself that by the miraculous power of Christ good and cheering wine will sometime be drawn.
Elnathan Chauncy died in 1684. Accordingly we must find, before 1684, a year in which there were but six A.B.’s and no A.M.’s. Thus our choice is restricted to 1662
The authorship of the oration must remain a mystery. Elnathan Chauncy himself is ruled out, since the oration is in his handwriting and since there are errors in the copy that prove that it is not autograph.
My friends, our Fathers were not half so wise
As we our selves, who see with younger eyes;
They sel our land to english man, who teach
Our nation all so fast to pray and preach.
Of all our countrey they enjoy the best,
And quickly they intend to have the rest.
However, I doubt if any undergraduate is to be credited with our salutatory address.
I reproduce the oration as exactly as may be, retaining the scribe’s capitals and his sometimes eccentric punctuation. Brackets, as heretofore, indicate words or letters lost by wear and tear or by the fading of the ink. In the foot-notes I supply what I can in the way of identifying the author’s biblical and classical references and allusions.
* * * * *
Honorandi et ter illustres viri, penes quos jus et imperium est, quibus salus populi, summa lex est:
Reverendi Ecclesiastæ et Oeconomi Mysteriorū Dei,
Viri Mæ[ce]nates Benignissimi qui mercaturam aut mi[lit]iam exercetis, qui in cumulandis beneficiis [l]argi et effusi, utinam cū fœnore gratiarum et salutum vicem vobis rependere valeamus.
Denique vos Hospites pientiss:i viri desideriorum
Audivimus quid factum sit Regnante Rehoboa[m] quando sacerdotes et Levitæ Israëlitici sua liquerunt suburbana prædia et possessiones et alii [ex] tribubus Israëlis, qui stabili sententiâ in animum induxerunt se Deum Israelis ex[qui]situros; qui migrarunt Hierosolymas, ill m[u]niverunt et corroborarunt regnum Judæ:
Vt dicamus igitur vobis, appositè ad rem, oh præclari advenæ, quod Boaz olim illi quæ exiit ex aviis servatoris, Dominus remuneretur,
Dicamus cum psalte Regio aud[ite] mansueti, et collætamini, magnificate J[eh]ovam nobiscum et extollamus nomen ejus pa[r]iter,
Oh si omnes sancti conjunctim valeant assequi et compr[ehen]dere
Oh si de Monte Sionis diceretur quod in vallem subsiderit, et depressa sit, vallem autem non Lachrymarum; sed vallem Berakah, quæ nomen sortita est tam á benedictione Dei in Israelem quàm ab Israelis ad Deum Benedicentem reciprocâ benedictione,
Sed fortè dicat aliquis de statu Reipub. quod libris saepe voluminosis appingi et subscribi assolet, multa desiderantur vel non-nulla desiderantur.
Hoc liberè profitemur neque tamen despondemus amnios;
sed quia multa desiderantur, multa importune et ardenter
Adhuc sacra capita cœlum volvitur;
Non omnium dierum sol occidit.
Durate igitur et rebus vosmet servate secundis.
Et Dicet Ecclesia Christi (date verbo veniam) vasallis Antichristi; ut vitis in Anthologia capro,
i. e. Rode cape[r] [v]item tamen hin[c] cū stabis ad aras
In tua quo[d] spargi cornua possit erit.
Bono animo esto, dixit Gubernatori meticuloso imperator Magnanimus, intempesto cœlo mare procellosum trajecturus, bono animo esto Cæsarem vehis et fortunam Cæsaris
Ridete circumlatrantes impetu fracto
Sed quo feror? oratio forte longius provecta est quam res et ratio proposita postulat.
Sed neq; omnia exspectate nova, habemus multa nomina urbium et oppidorum veteris Angliæ, sed nomina tantum; et vitioru nomina non pauca, utinam tantum nomina; sed vereor ne quod quorundam sermone jactatū est pro comperto á vobis habeatur, ut dicatis de novo orbe quod sit mundus alter et idem;
Hactenus spes nos aluit, sed spe non saginatur venter, Magister artis ingeniiq;
Neque nova expectetis licet Athenienses simus, et ut est humana natura sumus novitatis avidi[.]
Sed ut summam rationū vobis exhibeamus de Candidatis bonarū artium in hisce comitiis: Abortum fecit mater Academia in pa[r]tu magistrorū, neque in lucem protulit magistros hujus anni; aut quod suspicor; p[as]tores doctores rurales per sal turn inaugurati magisterium fastidiosè prætereun[t] et nullo in numero habent, ne sint retrogradi, et in inferiorem conditionem dilabantur, poro ἀδάπανον et εὔωνον σοφ[ί]αν (ut scité vocat Plutarchus)
Depromamus si placet et desistemus, vos vero viri amplissimi qui a[d r]em literariam animū habetis propens[um]
Mr. Fulmer Mood read the following paper:
NOTES ON JOHN JOSSELYN, GENT.
I
John Josselyn (ca. 1608–1675) was the second son of Sir Thomas Josselyn, Kt., of Torrell’s Hall, Willingdale-Doe, Essex, and his second wife, Theodora Cooke Bere, daughter of a Kentish house.
Although he seems to have relished life in the plantations, he never intended to make a permanent home in the new country, and he commends himself, in the closing passage in his second book, for having “in part made good the French proverb, Travail where thou canst, but dye where thou oughtest, that is, in thine own Countrey.” Josselyn
II
It is the word “rarity” that offers the master key to the interpretation of Josselyn’s writings. His two volumes were collections of rarities, and as such they made a strong appeal to their seventeenth-century readers. To the men of that day this word was as fashionable as the word “complex” has lately been with us. Now a “rarity,” according to the New English Dictionary, is pertinently defined thus: “an unusual or exceptional character, especially in respect of excellence . . . a rare or uncommon thing, or occurrence.” The interest of the seventeenth century in such things was but one phase of the rising tide of curiosity about scientific matters. It is conventionally correct to point out that Bacon had led the way, that in England a group of gentlemen interested in experimental and natural philosophy had begun to meet in London by 1645, and that by 1662 their efforts and interests had brought about the chartering of the Royal Society. The fact is sometimes overlooked that the discovery of the New World, with its myriads of new plants, animals, and other natural phenomena, had proved to be a powerful stimulant to scientific curiosity and a powerful solvent of antiquated scientific notions. As the English commercial empire widened, so, too, did the field of observation lying open to the student of nature. New conquests for English mercantilism afforded fresh opportunities for English collectors. Let a single example suffice. To the London merchant princes of the day, Jamaica was richly valued as the potential source of vast fortunes in sugar and other tropical produce. But to Sir Hans Sloane, who visited it in 1687, the island was worthy of close study by reason of the hundreds of new species of plants that it yielded. Sloane brought back a rich collection of specimens, and then prepared a lengthy catalogue of his findings.
When Josselyn sailed for New England the second time,
As discoveries of interest to science were made close at home or in remote quarters of the globe, it came to be thought desirable by certain far-seeing men that these new facts should be published, in order that such stocks of fresh knowledge should be made available for the benefit of other thinkers and observers. To that end the Royal Society, in 1665, established an organ of publication, the Philosophical Transactions, which should give “some Accompt of the Present Undertakings, Studies, and Labours of the Ingenious in many considerable parts of the World.” Its columns, under the editorship of Henry Oldenburg, gladly laid new learning before its readers, and the journal was in a flourishing condition when Josselyn returned to London in 1671. Its pages were filled with accounts of new discoveries in many departments of science, and it carried reviews of books and articles of a scientific character. Typical of many others are the following:
- Mineral Observations touching the mines of Cornwall and Devon. (March 25, 1671.)
- A further account of the Stellar Fish, formerly described by Mr. Winthrop in New England. (August 14, 1671.)
- A review of Simon Paul’s book on Scandinavian Simples. (October 22, 1671.)
- An account of a mineral balsam found in a wine in Italy. (January, 1672.)
- An account of a Description of the East-Indian coasts, Malabar, Coromandel, Ceylon. . . . From the Dutch. (February 19, 1672. The reviewer pays special attention to the plants, commerce, and rarities of these Eastern countries.)
- A review of “The American Physitian; or a Treatise of Roots, Plants, Trees, Shrubs, Fruits, Herbs, &c. growing in the English Plantations in America; whereunto is annexed a Discourse of the Cacao-nut-Tree and the use of its Fruit.” (May 20, 1672. Of this the reviewer writes that “though the Author of the Tract only promises in his title to give an account of vegetables, which is of good use, forasmuch as it may make a part of the Universal History of Nature, now more than ever laboured after by the generous Philosophers of this Age,” he really does more, for he tells of the coral rocks of Jamaica, gives descriptions of the sea star-fish and of alligators, and relates an easy way of making salt in Jamaica.)
- An account of the currents and of the tides about the Orcades. (November 17, 1673.)
Josselyn, who had employed much of his time in the collection of precisely this kind of information, was doubtless well aware of its utility. He had reached London on December 1, 1671,
cast . . . into this form: 1. Birds. 2. Beasts. 3. Fishes. 4. Serpents and Insects. 5. Plants, of these, 1. such Plants as are common with us, 2. of such Plants as are proper to the country, 3. of such Plants as are proper to the Country and have no name known to us, 4. of such Plants as have sprung up since the English Planted and kept Cattle there, 5. of such Garden Herbs (amongst us) as do thrive and of such as do not. 6. Of Stones. Minerals, Metals, and Earths.
Recognition of his work was not tardy in coming to the traveller now turned author. On July 15, 1672, Number 85 of the Philosophical Transactions was published with a notice on the title-page calling the attention of the reader to four items in its pages as of especial interest: an account of a group of curiosities; a set of questions by Isaac Newton treating of his theories of color and light; a description of a satisfactory method of preparing certain substances for physical use; and a review of Josselyn’s Rarities. It was probably Henry Oldenburg who was responsible for singling out these items for comment, and it was probably his pen which drafted the favorable review of Josselyn’s book which followed.
Thus New England, too, furnished her share of rarities to grace the London booksellers’ stalls, and Josselyn played his modest part in introducing her novelties to European readers. He, of course, was not the first to do this, and, indeed, even the use of the key word in his title was not wholly original. Two years earlier there had come to Oldenburg a communication in reply to one of his own sent out to John Winthrop of Connecticut. In the course of his letter, Winthrop wrote: “I know not, whether I may recommend some of the productions of this Wilderness as rarities or novelties, but they are such as the place affords.”
Just as the theological controversies of New England, if they are to be understood in their final historical meaning, must be related to the contemporaneous controversies in Protestant Europe, so Josselyn’s modest study of the new regions across the Atlantic served to produce a book which yields up its ultimate historical significance only when it is placed against the background of contemporary European scientific thought. Josselyn’s first book, then, is, in effect, an answering voice from out New England to that summons to scientific observation uttered to his countrymen by Bacon a half century earlier.
III
To explain why Josselyn’s second book fell in so well with the temper of the times is no less easy than to account for the success of his first. Consider for a moment its lengthy title:
An Account of Two Voyages to New-England. Wherein you have the setting out of a Ship, with the charges; The prices of all necessaries for furnishing a Planter and his Family at his first coming; A Description of the Countrey, Natives and Creatures, with their Merchantil and Physical use; The Government of the Countrey as it is now possessed by the English, &c. A large Chronological Table of the most remarkable passages, from the first discovering of the Continent of America, to the year 1673.
So sprawling a title indicates that not one mark is to be shot at, but several. Here is plainly an appeal to the scientific public that appreciated his first production. Here, too, is good store of information about the Puritan settlements oversea. Here is a racy style spiced now and again with the broad humor that doubtless more than one of his Restoration readers enjoyed. Josselyn thus shot his arrows at a broad target, whether by design or no; but if by design, then our author had his reward, for in 1675 his book came from the press in a second edition.
It is a bounteous feast that Josselyn provides for his reader, and one may sample it here or there according to one’s humor. It is not always skilfully served up, for Josselyn’s was no practised pen, and its arts, such as they were, will be passed by in favor of other matters. First, to what extent is Josselyn’s book a work of hostile propaganda directed against the Massachusetts Bay Colony? Secondly, if not that, what influence, if any, was behind him as a moving force?
That the Two Voyages is openly scornful of the Massachusetts settlers is apparent from even a hasty reading. This dislike crops out in more than one place. But that it is, all things considered, primarily devoted to discredit the Puritan colony with the English public is a proposition that can be shown to be false. Let us examine the passages from which emerges Josselyn’s distaste, taking pains, however, to make a distinction between those that note Puritan habits and social customs which he disapproved as a Cavalier gentleman, and those in which he rebuked the men of Massachusetts because of their illegal or unjust political actions. Josselyn’s judgments are thus based either on personal prejudice or on his own understanding of law and chartered right.
The total effect of those passages which are founded upon his personal prejudices is clear enough.
Yet Josselyn did not single out the Puritans to receive all his rebukes. Pointedly, though with moderation, he could complain of other defects in the Maine settlers. Did they not now and again neglect work, did they not tipple overmuch, spend too many hours at table, or roam about the countryside, gun in hand, when it would have been better for themselves had they tended their crops more carefully? By such observations, indeed, Josselyn appears as something of a Puritan himself, since he, too, reproached the sluggardly and the “droanish” with the waste of precious time.
There are certain other passages in the Two Voyages which reflect on the Bay Colony.
A second important circumstance which tends to show that Josselyn did not set out to write a work primarily tendentious is to be found in the structure of the Two Voyages.
Josselyn has here composed, in brief, a rudimentary sociological description of New England. The physiography and scenery, the Indians and their way of life, the produce of the land, the English settlers, their distribution and their frames of government: all find a place in his pages. Now and again he finds room for some information of a historical character, and to augment the store of this sort of knowledge he appends a chronological table at the close of his book, wherein are listed important names, dates, and events. Thus the Two Voyages is primarily a work of information for English readers who seek a general handbook on New England, and not a work of propaganda directed against Massachusetts Bay. If he reproaches the settlers of that locality, he does so in passing, and he has not shaped the structure of his book with that as his main purpose. If this be a work of hostile propaganda, then most certainly it is a sly and subtle one.
How did Josselyn come to know so much about the legal rights of the heirs of Mason and Gorges? Doubtless he heard much on that question while he was with his brother Henry in Maine, where it was the great political problem of the day. Probably he learned more when he returned to London and came in contact with the younger Ferdinando Gorges, who was in the metropolis at this very time. Such strictures as he passed upon the political activities and usurpations of the Bay Colony leaders arose from his sympathy with his brother and his brother’s principals.
In 1676, at which time Josselyn’s book had been twice published, Edward Randolph was sent out to correct wayward Massachusetts, and Josselyn (if he yet lived) must have rejoiced with Gorges’ grandson in the thought that affairs were now, perhaps, about to be settled more to their liking. Did the book contribute to bring about this mission? It is impossible to affirm as much. Charles II was very tardy in sending out his commissioner, but for years he had had the matter in mind. Josselyn’s book would certainly not operate to weaken such an intention, though whether it worked to stiffen it is quite another matter, since in those days not popular opinion but royal conviction and a sense of royal expediency were the springs of policy.
That Josselyn’s picture of an oversea community which was worth controlling in the Crown’s interest because it was worth taxing in the king’s name did not sink unnoticed into obscurity, is vouched for by one neglected circumstance. This is a third publication with which he must be credited, though it has seldom been connected with his name. This item consists of a reprint of Josselyn’s description of the form of government in vogue in Massachusetts Bay excerpted from the Two Voyages, four folio leaves bound together with a map of New England from the hand of John Seller, Hydrographer to the King. In these pages his English readers found an account of Independency in action across the Atlantic. Unfortunately, though not fatally, the date when this item was published has not been fixed. It is variously given as 1680
IV
Thus not only the current interest in natural philosophy, but also the contemporary concern for the right ordering of the king’s dominions oversea help to explain the timeliness of Josselyn’s books and their utility to the men of that day. Copies of both of them, it may be pointed out, found their way into the library of useful reference works then being gathered by authority at the Plantation Office in London.
The right relation of New England to the Crown was a matter that had been responsible for much strenuous thinking on the part of royal officials before Josselyn’s time. Indeed, the nature of this connection was being discussed frequently at the very time when he was publishing his writings. The New England problem, taken in its entirety, was a tangled skein of yarn. Men who were conscious of the defects of the mercantilist system as it actually operated gave much thought to it. The London merchants, who longed for the day when stiff-necked colonies would be forced to abide by the canons of mercantilism; proprietors like Mason and Gorges; members of the Privy Council; and the king himself, all of them had turned the problem over in their minds. Their consideration of this issue and Josselyn’s publications were occurring at the same time. Consider this schedule of items, which makes it clear how frequently New England affairs obtruded themselves upon the responsible leaders in the short space of five years:
1669–70, January. |
Gorges petitions the King in Council. |
1670–1, March 5. |
Gorges petitions the King in Council again. |
1671, April 27. |
Gorges petitions the King in Council a third time. |
1671, April 27. |
Mason petitions the King in Council. |
1671, July 24. |
Mason petitions the King in Council a second time. |
1671, November 13. |
Mason proposes to exchange the province for a commercial privilege. |
1671, December 11. |
Mason’s memorial on the value of New Hampshire. |
1673–4, March 20. |
Gorges, Mason, and the Earl of Stirling jointly petition the King and Council. |
1674, May 20? |
William Dyer of New England petitions the King and Council to purchase the rights of Mason and Gorges. |
1674, December 2. |
Mason drafts a memorial on the New England provinces. |
1674, December 25. |
Gorges to the King and Council. |
The submission of such documents to the royal officers, however, does not complete the series. The King and Council, on their part, were not indifferent to the issue. Among some of the Council meetings held to discuss one or more phases of the issue were these: January 26, May 9, and May 11, 1670; June 16, June 21, June 26, July 12, July 24, August 3, August 12, September 19, November 13, 1671; January 22, February 6, February 13, April 30, May 10, 1672; then the war with the Dutch interfered.
In sum, then, Josselyn’s writings appealed to two sets of readers: to the scientists of the age, and to certain contemporary group’s with political and economic interests at stake, who were eager to be informed of what was going on in the New England settlements, For both classes of readers his contributions had a freshness of appeal, and a timeliness which go far to explain their moderate popularity.