Appended at the end of the volume is another chapter which I attribute to Cushman. A long exposition of “Reasons and considerations touching the lawfulness of removing out of England into the parts of America,” signed R.C., is a thinly veiled promotional tract organized like a sermon, which cites Scripture to justify the plantation and to persuade others to follow.
Among the prefatory letters is one containing “Certain useful advertisements ...” and signed I.R.. We are told that this letter of advice concerning man’s proper relation with God and with his fellow men was “... written by a discreet friend unto the planters in New England, at their first setting sail from Southampton.”[4] This “unfeigned well-willer” is most likely John Robinson, pastor of the expatriate Separatist congregation in Leyden, and hence understandably solicitous for the welfare of the Pilgrims, and also in a position to proffer such counsel. The letter may have been appended to this book especially to serve as a model of morality for those “Strangers” who might hopefully be induced to emigrate and join the party at Plymouth.
Five “relations” constitute the major portion of the book, and none of these is signed. The first and longest, on “The proceedings of the plantation ...,” begins with the departure from Plymouth, England, and recounts events of the next six months, including the voyage, the signing of the “compact,” the several “discoveries,” the choice of a site and the building there, as well as early contacts with the Indians, culminating in the signing of a peace treaty with Massasoit. A second deals with “A journey to Pokanoket ...” and describes further friendly dealings with the Wampanoag Indians. The next treats “A voyage ... to the Kingdom of Nauset, to seek a boy that had lost himself in the woods....” An account of “A journey to Nemasket ...” shows how the Pilgrims sought to defend their Indian allies against the hostile Narragansets, and “A relation of our voyage to the Massachusets ...” describes the expansion of trade relations to the north.
According to the dedicatory letter, these vivid reports were “... writ by the several actors themselves, after their plain and rude manner.” It is almost certain that the principal author was Edward Winslow, although it is generally believed that William Bradford also had a hand in the effort. Both of these men were among the few who were prominent in the affairs of the plantation, and they two are the only ones of the first party who obviously enjoyed writing. Winslow’s Good News from New England (London, 1624), continued the narrative of the plantation from the time when this volume left off, and is markedly similar in style. In his Good News ..., Winslow mentions descriptions of aspects of Indian culture which were prepared by “... myself and others, in former letters, (which came to the press against my will and knowledge) ...”; I know of no publication other than Mourt’s Relation to which this could refer. Bradford’s manuscript history Of Plymouth Plantation (first published in Boston, 1856) has become the principal source on the Pilgrim experience, although he could hardly be said to claim priority when he “... first began these scribbled writings (which was about the year 1630 and so pieced up at times of leisure afterward).” His treatment of the first year at Plymouth is a curious combination, consisting largely of passages identical with those in Mourt’s Relation, together with discursive classical allusions and philosophic ruminations. Bradford’s style generally tends to be more analytic than descriptive, and the specificity of detail which makes this text such a rich source material for the historian and ethnographer rarely occurs elsewhere in Bradford’s work. It is entirely within the realm of possibility that he may have incorporated in his manuscript the work of others as it had appeared in Mourt’s Relation; he freely adopted material from other sources.
The ensuing “Letter sent from New England ... setting forth ... the worth of that plantation ...,” follows the five narrative relations closely in style, and is signed by E.W.. It is almost certainly Winslow who here sounds vaguely like a twentieth-century Florida real estate agent when he describes the first Thanksgiving as indicating the richness of the land: “I never in my life remember a more seasonable year than we have here enjoyed and if we have once but kine, horses, and sheep, I make no question but men might live as contented here as in any part of the world.” He also includes some very specific suggestions concerning the practical needs of those who might choose to come.
And what was Mourt’s contribution to the book which has been linked with his name by historians, librarians, and bibliographers since Prince[5] first invented the convenient title, Mourt’s Relation, as a substitute for the cumbersome original? A brief foreword, or introduction, “To the reader,” is all that we must credit to the signer, one G. Mourt. It may have been he who was responsible for bringing to press this collection of papers, “... hoping of a cheerful proceeding, both of adventurers and planters.” He explicitly denied authorship of the narratives: “These relations coming to my hand from my both known and faithful friends, on whose writings I do much rely, I thought it not amiss to make them more general....” But scholars still do not know who he was!
It is suggested that he had at some time been associated with the authors of the relations, whom he called “my both known and faithful friends.” It is also suggested that he had long hoped to emigrate to the New World, “... as myself then much desired, and shortly hope to effect, if the Lord will, the putting to of my shoulder in this hopeful business.” These criteria clearly apply to Robert Cushman, who, as we have seen, was a person who might appropriately have introduced such a book.
The specifications also apply to another member of the Leyden congregation who was active in negotiating with the “merchant adventurers” until he did sail to Plymouth, on the first ship bound for the plantation after the book was printed. If no more than the initials had been given in the signature to the introduction—as was the case in every other portion of the volume—there would be little hesitation to identify the author as George Morton.
As it is, however, one must attempt to account for the discrepancy in name if he suggests that it may have been Morton who wrote it. It is easy to suggest that the use of “Mourt” for “Morton” could have been merely another of the many misprints in the book. At least as plausible, however, is the suggestion that it may have been a pseudonym. It is not difficult to imagine why there might have been some attempt to conceal the fact if Morton had been intimately involved in the preparation and promulgation of the book. A printer might have been reluctant to “publish” a document written by Separatists unless it carried an introduction by an apparently disinterested party. In a period of strict royal control of the press in England, William Brewster of the Leyden congregation had already incurred the wrath of King James by printing an outspoken opposition tract, Perth Assembly (Leyden, 1619), so that any writings by his friends and associates might logically also be suspect. Furthermore, the fact that Mourt’s Relation is essentially a promotional effort is clearly implied in the phrasing of the original title, describing the “safe arrival” of the “English planters,” and “their joyful building of, and comfortable planting themselves in the now well defended town of New Plymouth.” In such an effort to excite more prospective settlers, it would have been sound public relations to minimize the degree of identification between the plantation and the “Saints,” who were popularly scorned as heretics and criminals.
Another possibility must be mentioned. I am only half-joking when I suggest that at least this portion of Mourt’s Relation may actually have been written by someone named G. Mourt, of whom we know nothing else. One of the delights of historical research is the fact that one always raises more questions than he can answer. The mystery remains.