| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |
The Capital and the Bay: Narratives of Washington and the Chesapeake Bay Region, ca. 1600-1925
The Calvert parers, Vol. IIITHE CALVERT PAPERS.
Page 1 { page image }
During the year 1894 the Maryland Historical Society acquired, from a most unexpected source, several documents which constitute a very valuable addition to the collection of Calvert Papers already in the Society's possession. These papers were procured for the Society chiefly through the agency of Mr. Mendes Cohen, Chairman of the Library Committee, and the story of their acquisition, with a brief synopsis of their contents, is told by him as follows in a note which he prepared at the request of the Committee on Publication:--
"It was in May, 1894, that I received a letter from Mr. John Roland Phillips, dated Lincoln, Nebraska, advising me that he had in his possession several old and rare documents relating to the earliest settlement of Maryland, which he would be glad to dispose of.
"A correspondence ensued which developed the fact that the papers came to Mr. Phillips' possession from his father who died in 1887.
"The elder Phillips was the author of a work entitled, 'Memoirs of the Civil War in Wales and the Marches, 1642--1649, by John Roland Phillips of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law, in two volumes, London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1874.' This we have on our shelves.
Page 2 { page image }
"In the preparation of this work the author collected a considerable mass of papers bearing on the subject of his investigations, among which these appear to have been preserved because of their particularly interesting character. Whence the papers were obtained by his father the present Mr. Phillips does not know. They were, at my request, sent to us for examination, and their value as genuine originals being readily recognized by our experts, they were purchased by the Society and form a most interesting series, illustrating transactions immediately preceding the embarkation at London, the events of the voyage over and the occurrences of the short interval between the arrival in Maryland and the despatch of the ship 'Ark' on its return to London.
"The papers embrace--
Page 3 { page image }
Page 4 { page image }
full sheet, to the letter described as No. 5, and details business transactions.
Page 5 { page image }
"Calvert goes on to express regret that he should have 'been the steward of what you have received so little' and continues stating that he himself has fared as badly. This concluded the series.
"The recovery of these papers is even more remarkable than that of other Calvert Papers obtained by the Society a few years since; and in connection with the latter the historian of Maryland is enabled to have before him a narrative of events immediately preceding the departure of the Colonists, the instructions of the Proprietary to them, the record of the voyage over with its attending incidents, the landing in Maryland of the Colonists, their hospitable reception by the natives, the location of the site for a settlement, and the conditions for trade then prevailing, all authenticated in such a way as can rarely happen with documents of so much interest which have been for more than two hundred and fifty years without the care of an official guardian."
In the following publication are contained all of the papers enumerated in Mr. Cohen's note, except those designated by him as Nos. 4 and 9. These are merely communications made in the ordinary course of business, and are without special historic value.
In the articles of co-partnership between Leonard Calvert, Esq., and Sir Richard Lechford (No. 1), it appears that the
Page 6 { page image }
former was interested to the extent of three-fourths in the joint venture. The papers numbered 2 and 3 are sufficiently explained in Mr. Cohen's note, and require no further comment. No. 6 is printed as being practically a postscript to No. 5 and a part thereof. It is valuable chiefly for the reason that not only the signature but the entire paper is in Leonard Calvert's own handwriting.
The letter from Sir Richard Lechford to Leonard Calvert (No. 8), dated July 24, 1634, is included in this publication as containing an interesting and contemporary story of the hardships and difficulties to which members of the Roman Catholic communion were at that time subjected.
The most important paper, and the most interesting, from a historic point of view, among those received from Mr. Phillips, is the one numbered 7, and headed "A briefe relation of the voyage vnto Maryland," evidently the narrative of the voyage which was referred to in the letter from Leonard Calvert to his partner in business, dated the 30th of May, 1634, and apparently enclosed therewith.
This narrative, written in English, is a practical duplicate of the "Relatio Itineris in Marylandiam," known as Father White's Narrative, the Latin text of which, together with an English translation edited by Rev. Dr. Dalrymple, was published by the Society in 1874 as Fund Publication, No. 7.1
[Note 1: 1 A translation had previously been made in 1847 by the late Nathan C. Brooks, LL. D., a former member of the MaryLand Historical Society, which was subsequently published in Peter Force's collection of Historical Tracts, Vol. IV, No. 12.]
The acquisition of the English version has naturally led to an enquiry as to which version, the English or the Latin, is to be regarded as the original, and to whom is the authorship to be ascribed.
Page 7 { page image }
The English version is evidently an original letter, and not a translation from the Latin. It differs in some respects from the Latin narrative, but the two accounts are substantially the same.
In the preface to the Society's publication already referred to, it is stated that about the year 1832, Father William McSherry, S. J., discovered in the archives of the "Domus Professa" of the Society in Rome, the originals of the MSS. named on the title page, copies of which he placed in the Library of Georgetown College, D. C., and a second copy of which was presented to this Society in 1844, the year of its organization. The Society's copy of this valuable narrative disappeared in some unexplained way, from its library, and when reference was made to the Georgetown copy, it was found that a portion of that also was lacking.
On page 43 of the Society's publication, it is noted that there is no subscription to the extracts made by Father William McSherry, but that it was certain that the letter was written from the colony in the latter part of April, 1634, as the concluding paragraph contains the words, Uno tantum mense hic fuimus (we have been here only one month).
In view of the absence of positive proof, the Committee on Publication thought it desirable to ascertain, if possible, upon what evidence the authorship of the narrative had been ascribed to Father White, and to that end corresponded with Revd. Father Thomas Hughes, S. J., who is engaged in preparing a history of the Jesuit Missions in America, and with whom the Committee was placed in correspondence through the courtesy of His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons.
The Committee concludes from Father Hughes' notes1 that the only version of the Relatio which he has found among the
2
[Note 1: 1 See Appendix A, p. 49.]
Page 8 { page image }
archives of the Society of Jesus, is a copy, which he attributes to the third or fourth decade of the present century, and it is not unlikely that from this copy Father McSherry's MS., made in 1832, was taken. There seems to be no authentic certification that Father White was the author of the Relatio. Leonard Calvert in his letter enclosing the English version, says only that it was written by "a most honest and discreet gentleman."
We are thrown, therefore, so far as proof is concerned, upon internal evidence and probability.
As Father White was the senior priest or superior of those who accompanied the Maryland colonists, the presumption is strong that any report made to the ecclesiastical superiors of the mission, would be made, if not by his hand, at least by his authority. And it is not unlikely that he would make two reports, one in Latin to his superiors at Rome, and one in English to those persons in England who had authority, whether ecclesiastical or civil, over the colony.
Expressions in the Latin text clearly indicate that that narrative was addressed to an ecclesiastical superior; e. g. when speaking of the pine-apple,1 the writer says, "Optabam me nucem unam Paternitati vestroe cum hisce litteris tradere potuisse in manus."
[Note 1: 1 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 27.]
The English version contains, equally with the Latin, a number of expressions that would indicate that its author was an ecclesiastic. For instance, speaking of the landing at Heron's Island (to which the name of St. Clement's was given), the narrative tells (p. 39), "in this place on our b: Ladies day in lent we first offered, erected a crosse, and with devotion tooke solemne possession of the Country."
Page 9 { page image }
And again, speaking of the Indian houses of which possession had been obtained, the writer says (p. 43), "In one of these houses we now doe celebrate, haveing it dressed a little better then by the Indians, till we get a better, which shall be shortly as may be."
In the first reference to the celebration of the Mass, the account is somewhat fuller in the Latin version,1 and in mentioning the Indian house which had been assigned to the writer and his associates ("Mihi et Sociis"),2 the words are added, "Illam primum Marylandiæ sacellum dixeris."
[Note 1: 1 Fund Publication, No. 7, pp. 32--3.]
[Note 2: 2 Ibid., p. 39.]
The divergences or discrepancies between the Latin and the English text, are neither important nor numerous. In some particulars one will be found a little fuller in expression, and in others more condensed. In the Latin text the religious expressions, such as pious acknowledgments of divine protection, are more frequent than in the other, but that would be natural if, as has been suggested, it were written by a clergyman to his ecclesiastical superior, while the other was prepared for the information of the Lord Proprietary and founder of the colony, or the business correspondent and partner of the Governor.
It is to be noted, too, that the English narrative is much more full than the Latin text in the account given of the nature of the soil, the character of the products, etc., particulars which would naturally be dwelt upon in an account intended for the Lord Proprietary or others pecuniarily interested in the success of the colony.
The two accounts, if not written by the same hand, were evidently drawn from the same source or narrative, and a
Page 10 { page image }
not unreasonable theory would be that there was kept during the voyage, for the use of the Governor and the Lord Proprietary, a careful official journal of events, and that from this journal both these letters were framed by Father White, who would not unlikely be himself the writer of the journal; and that in preparing his letters he expanded or condensed the narrative as seemed appropriate for the purposes for which they were respectively intended. Upon this theory each version would have equal claim to be regarded as an original, with this advantage of the English text, that in it we have the original manuscript, whereas the other is only known to us through copies. Some of the discrepancies as to numbers, distances, Indian names, and the like, are no doubt due to errors of the copyists of the Latin text.
Governor Calvert mentions the author of the narrative merely as being a "most honest and discreet gentleman."1 Lest this description should be thought somewhat different from what would be naturally used in designating an ecclesiastic, it may be worth while to note that in ancient use the word "discreet" was often employed to express dignity, and the term "discreet person" was especially applied to ecclesiastics in reference to their character as counsellors and confidential advisers. (Oxford Dictionary, ad locum.)
[Note 1: 1 P. 23.]
The conclusion seems to be warranted that both texts may be reasonably ascribed to Father White, and that in the particulars wherein they differ, the English version is entitled to the greater weight as being an original manuscript.
Many of the discrepancies between the two versions are too insignificant to be worthy of mention, but some few noted below may be considered as justifying comment. The comparison is made with the Latin text as printed in Fund Publication, No. 7.
Page 11 { page image }
The name of the solemn fast (Solemne jejunium) for the observance of which the Turkish pirates had gone home, is left blank in the Latin text, the MS. being apparently defective.1 The name as supplied by the English version (p. 29, where it is called a "great feast"), is "Tamisom."2
[Note 1: 1 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 18.]
[Note 2: 2 In Father Hughes' notes, Appendix B (p. 57), it is given as Jsom;--the last two syllables only of the word contained in the English text.]
There are apparently wide discrepancies in the prices named for provisions at the Barbadoes (p. 32),3 but these may be partly due to the different currencies in which they are expressed.
[Note 3: 3 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 23.]
The statement of the Latin text4 that some English interpreters had been made away with by the cannibal inhabitants of Matalina, while the English text gives enterprisers, (p. 37), is evidently due to an error of the copyist of the Latin text.
[Note 4: 4 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 28.]
The difference in statement in respect to the display of signals or ensigns demanded by the savages, as described in the English text (p. 37), and in the translation of the Latin text,5 is due to an obvious error in translation.
[Note 5: 5 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 28.]
The English version gives the distance of the settlement at St. Mary's as half a mile from the river bank (p. 41, cf. p. 21). Dr. Dalrymple's translation says,6 "about a mile," but this is a very free, or else too classical a rendering; the Latin text has it "mille passus," closely corresponding, according to modern usage, with the distance as stated in the English version.7
[Note 6: 6 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 36.]
[Note 7: 7 In classic Latin "mille passus" would be properly taken as equivalent to "a mile;" but at the date of this letter a distance of "a thousand (English) paces" was evidently meant, or 2500 feet. A half-mile contains 2640 feet. "The pace of a single step (the military pace) is estimated at 21/2 feet. The Ancient Roman pace, considered as the thousandth part of a mile, was 5 Roman feet." (Century Dictionary, ad locum.)]
Page 12 { page image }
The name spelled "Patuxan" in the English version (p. 44), (now familiar as "Patuxent"), appears in the Latin as Barcluxem or Barchuxem,1 probably an error of the copyist for Barduxem, which corresponds in sound sufficiently with the word as spelled in the English text.
[Note 1: 1 Appendix B, p. 58, and Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 41.]
In the appendix to Dr. Dalrymple's translation, there is a list2 of doubtful readings of the text which he had followed. Revd. Father Hughes, to whose courtesy reference has already been made, kindly compared each of these with the Latin text to which he had access, and has furnished the Society with the corrections thence derived. He also sent a list of the Jesuit Missionaries stationed in Maryland during different years, from 1634 to 1648, together with some interesting memoranda concerning them. Notes furnished by Father Hughes are, by his permission, printed as appendices to this publication.
[Note 2: 2 Fund Publication, No. 7, p. 101 et seq.]
In printing the papers contained in this Publication, it has been sought to preserve the exact spelling of the originals, and adequately to represent abbreviations. One abbreviation, of frequent occurrence, representing the syllables "per," "pre," "pro," etc., it has been found impossible to reproduce in type, so the character "?" has been adopted as its representative.
C. C. H.
Information about SGML version of this document.
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |