A Brave Vessel: The True Tale of the Castaways Who Rescued Jamestown and Inspired Shakespeare'sThe Tempest (30 page)

NOTES

ANC
Ancient Planters. “A Breife Declaration of the Plantation of Virginia During the First Twelve Yeares.” In
Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia 1619-1658/59
, edited by H. R. McIlwaine. Richmond, VA: Colonial Press, 1915.

ARD
William Shakespeare.
The Tempest.
The Arden Shakespeare. Edited by Virginia Mason Vaughan and Alden T. Vaughan. London: Thomson Learning, 1999.

BER
Nathaniel Butler.
The Historye of the Bermudaes or Summer Islands
. Edited by J. Henry Lefroy. London: Hakluyt Society, 1882.

DIS
Silvester Jourdain.
A Discovery of the Barmudas, Otherwise Called the Ile of Divels
. London: Roger Barnes, 1610.

EST
Virginia Company of London
. A True Declaration of the Estate of the Colonie in Virginia
. London: William Barret, 1610.

FIR
Philip L. Barbour, ed.
The Jamestown Voyages Under the First Charter 1606-1609
. 2 vols. London: Cambridge University Press for the Hakluyt Society, 1969.

GEN
Alexander Brown, ed.
The Genesis of the United States
. 2 vols. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1890.

HIS
William Strachey.
The Historie of Travaile into Virginia Britannia
. Edited by R. H. Major. London: Hakluyt Society, 1849.

NAR
Edward Wright Haile, ed.
Jamestown Narratives: Eyewitness Accounts of the Virginia Colony, The First Decade: 1607-1617
. Champlain, VA: Roundhouse, 1998.

NEW
David B. Quinn, ed.
New American World: A Documentary History of North America to 1612
. 5 vols. New York: Arno Press, 1979.

PIL
Samuel Purchas, ed.
Purchas His Pilgrimes
. 4 vols. London: Henrie Fetherstone, 1625.

REL
Mark Nicholls. “George Percy’s ‘Trewe Relacyon’: A Primary Source for the Jamestown Settlement.”
Virginia Magazine of History and Biography
113, no. 3 (2005): 212-75.

SMI
John Smith.
The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580-1631)
. Edited by Philip L. Barbour. 3 vols. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986.

TRU
Virginia Company of London
. A True and Sincere Declaration of the Purpose and Ends of the Plantation Begun in Virginia
. London: J. Stepneth, 1610.

VOY
Louis B. Wright, ed.
A Voyage to Virginia in 1609, Two Narratives: Strachey’s “True Reportory” and Jourdain’s “Discovery of the Bermudas.”
Charlottesville: Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities by the University Press of Virginia, 1964.

 

In
A Brave Vessel
I have modernized spelling, punctuation, and capitalization in quotations, with the exception of those from Shakespeare that follow the latest Arden editions. Citations of original works are followed by parenthetical references to the same material in recent documentary editions. Publications that do not have numbered pages are cited with supplied page numbers in brackets.

In the seventeenth century, Britain had not yet recalibrated the flawed “old-style” calendar, and to maintain the integrity of the original documents I have retained those dates. Therefore, every date cited is ten days behind the modern one. The only element of the old-style system that I have modernized is the date on which the year began (in seventeenth-century Britain the year began on March 25, but I have pushed the date back to the modern January 1). By 1609, Spain and the Netherlands had switched to the modern calendar, and so documents from those countries already carry new-style dates. To minimize confusion, those new-style dates are not cited in the text, and passages from those documents are silently placed at the appropriate points within the old-style timeline. Brown in
GEN
altered the dates of British documents to new style, and I have silently brought those dates back into sync with the old-style dates written on the originals.

Strachey in
HIS
copied without attribution long passages from the works of John Smith, and Smith himself appropriated passages written by other chroniclers. I have attempted to attribute quotations from the works of Strachey and Smith to the people who originally made them.

“Thou hast howled”: 1.2.296,
ARD
, 170. Strachey’s biography: Culliford,
Strachey
, 4-5, 22-38, 47-55, 57-60, 67; Sanders,
Family
, 10-27; Dorman,
Purse
, 3:251- 57;
NAR
, 62-63;
GEN
, 2:1024; Wood, “Strachey”; Sheehan, “Strachey.”
Sejanus
publication: Stationers’ Company,
Registers
, 3:201. “Nothing violent,” “swift lightning,” “ruinous blasts”: Jonson,
Sejanus
[11]. “My old companion”: Foster,
Elegy
, 288. Trip to Turkey, “one Strachey”: Culliford,
Strachey
, 61-96 (quotation: 93).

“Vaunt-courier,” “hurricano”: 3.2.2, 3.2.5, Shakespeare,
King Lear
(Arden, 2001), 263. Ashe, “Strachey,” 509-11, proposes that Shakespeare used Strachey’s sonnet in
King Lear
. Scholars continue to debate the question because it is uncertain whether Shakespeare’s play came before or after the May 1605 publication of his main source, the earlier anonymous play
King Leir
. Knowles, “
King Leir
,” 12-35, makes a compelling case that Shakespeare was inspired by the published version rather than an earlier direct knowledge of the play, and I have proceeded on that basis. Also considering the question are Foster,
Elegy
, 287 (accepts Shakespeare’s use of Strachey); Taylor, “Source” (argues the playwright used additional post-May 1605 texts); Greenblatt, “King Lear” (notes general agreement on a post-May 1605 date for
King Lear
); Muir in Shakespeare,
King Lear
(Arden, 1972), xx-xxi (argues Shakespeare was first and Strachey copied
King Lear
); Kermode, “King Lear,” 1297-98 (agrees that Strachey copied Shakespeare but says the evidence is not strong); Wells in Shakespeare,
King Lear
(Oxford), 14 (argues that the resemblance between the sonnet and the play is coincidental).

Origin of “hurricane”: Emanuel,
Divine
, 18. Strachey familiar with Willes: Culliford,
Strachey
, 167-71. Strachey quotes Willes:
PIL
, 4:1738-41, (
NAR
, 391-92, 395, 396, 398, 400-401). “In time when”: Willes,
Travayle
, 434 (verso), 435 (verso). “When we came in”: Hakluyt,
Navigations
, 3:493.

Namontack overview: Vaughan,
Transatlantic
, 45-51, 276-78. While no document states that Strachey saw Namontack in London, Strachey’s interest in Virginia and Namontack’s notoriety make it likely that he did. Wahunsenacawh, Powhatan, and Tsenacomoco:
HIS
, 29, 47, 48 (
NAR
, 598, 613-14). I follow Rountree,
Pocahontas, Powhatan
, when spelling Powhatan words. Tsenacomoco population: Fausz, “Powhatan.” “Trusty servant”:
SMI
, 1:216. Namontack’s first encounters:
SMI
, 1:63, 67, 91, 216, 240, 2:187, 290. Namontack’s 1608 trip abroad:
NAR
, 451;
SMI
, 1:236-37, 2:183-84. “This Newport brought”:
FIR
, 1:163 (in translation). Powhatan hairstyles, “some have chains,” “I found not”:
NAR
, 122-23. “Had gone naked”: Crashaw,
Sermon
[39]. Plague symptoms and care: Aberth,
Brink
, 111, 118, 121-22. Epidemic dates: Bradbrook,
Shakespeare
, 207, 250.

“My good friend,” “I dare boldly”: Culliford,
Strachey
, 93. Countess of Bedford’s patronage of Donne: Lawson,
Shadows
, 74, 86-111; Thomson, “Donne,” 329-40; Stubbs,
Donne
, 221-24, 240-47, 300-306. “My Lady Bedford,” “the best lady”: Stubbs,
Donne
, 224, 241. No document states that Strachey visited the countess, but he surely did if she was the recipient of his Bermuda letter to the “Excellent Lady.” See chapter eight notes below. Publicity drive unprecedented: Skura, “Discourse,” 55; Linebaugh and Rediker,
Hydra
, 15; Fitzmaurice,
Humanism
, 63-64, and “Solution,” 43-44, 47. “They have collected”:
FIR,
2:256. Virginia Company’s early success: Fausz, “Blood,” 29. “News here”:
FIR
, 1:247. Donne’s Virginia inquiry: Culliford,
Strachey
, 101; Lawson,
Shadows
, 107; Cooper, “Donne.” Donne’s earlier expeditions: Stubbs,
Donne
, 47-79. Matthew Scrivener appointed Jamestown secretary: Culliford,
Strachey
, 102-3.

Strachey’s acquisition of two shares Virginia Company stock: Culliford,
Strachey
, 101-2;
NAR
, 63. While Culliford proposes Strachey purchased shares, his agreement to travel abroad would have entitled him to a single share, and his elevated social status would have brought him additional value. Thus, he probably acquired them simply by signing on. Stock terms: Johnson,
Nova
[26]-[30] (
NEW
, 245-46). Present-day value: Officer, “Purchasing Power.” Appearance of certificate: Quinn, “Pious,” 553. Strachey kept a journal: Culliford,
Strachey
, 123, 185; Wright and Freund in Strachey,
Historie of Travell
(1953), xv.

Newport’s January 1609 return to England:
FIR
, 1:246-47;
SMI
, 1:127. “The kind reception” and Namontack’s return to England:
NAR
, 450-51. If Namontack rode home on the
Sea Venture
in May 1609, then he surely came to England with Newport on the only known voyage from Virginia in the winter of 1608 to 1609. The question of whether Namontack and Machumps were aboard the
Sea Venture
has long been a subject of inquiry, most comprehensively by Vaughan in
Transatlantic
. Two widely cited accounts place Namontack on the ship: John Smith in his 1624
General Historie
in
SMI
, 2:350, claims Machumps murdered Namontack on Bermuda, and Purchas in 1625 referred to the alleged murder in
PIL
, 4:1771 (probably echoing Smith). Undermining Smith and Purchas (neither of whom were on the
Sea Venture
) is the fact that the Powhatans were not mentioned by anyone who was on board, most notably Strachey, who includes no Powhatan in a list of five people who died on Bermuda in
PIL
, 4:1746 (
NAR
, 413). What seems to be additional evidence against their claim is that in later writings Strachey mentions both Namontack (in a prevoyage context) and Machumps without stating that he had sailed with them. Smith was known to publish hearsay as fact, and the fifteen-year gap between the Bermuda sojourn and his claim suggests he may have been doing so in this case. Smith’s macabre report seems more like an English cartoon of Powhatan behavior than a true account. Likewise, it seems unlikely that the English would not have punished Machumps if (as Smith alleges) he told them of the murder after his return to Virginia.

Despite the above evidence, an overlooked third record by a contemporary Dutch writer makes it clear that Namontack and Machumps were indeed on the
Sea Venture
and that the English did indeed believe that Machumps murdered Namontack on Bermuda. The passage appears in Dutch in Van Meteren’s posthumous 1614 edition of
Historie der Neder-landscher
, portions of which Parker translates in
Van Meteren’s
. In a passage on 66-67, 71, Van Meteren relays information provided by Gates in 1610 (whether directly from Gates or through an intermediary is unclear): “During all this time they lost only four men, of whom one was a
casicke,
or son of a king in Virginia who had been in England and who had been killed by an Indian, his own servant.” Linebaugh and Rediker note this account in
Hydra
, 12, 356, without elaborating on its significance to this debate.

An additional overlooked clue further strengthens the case that Powhatans sailed on the
Sea Venture
. Strachey in
PIL
, 4:1741-47 (
NAR
, 400, 416), states that two canoes were in use on Bermuda. Though the English castaways built a small boat of European design on the island, as noted by Strachey in
PIL
, 4:1740 (
NAR
, 397), and Jourdain in
DIS
, 12-13 (
VOY
, 110), shipwrecked Englishmen whose labor was at a premium would surely not have experimented with the construction of dugout canoes of New World design. A pair of stranded Powhatans, however, with ample time, fire, and lumber and a pressing need to fish would almost certainly have done so. Thus, Strachey’s mention of canoes on Bermuda constitutes significant circumstantial evidence that Powhatans were present.

Newport’s presence on the
Sea Venture
also enhances the likelihood that Namontack was on board. Namontack guided Newport in Virginia, and Newport chaperoned Namontack on his first trip to England. Newport was at the helm of the ship that probably carried Namontack abroad a second time; it is likely the Powhatan envoy would have returned home with the same captain.

There are two post-
Sea Venture
references to Namontack, but neither indicates that he was living at the time. Strachey, in his one comment about him, in
HIS
, 131 (
NAR
, 687), notes that mines discovered by Namontack in 1608 were named for him. The other allusion is in a May 1614 account of a conversation between colonist Hamor and Wahunsenacawh in Hamor’s
Discourse
, 38 (
NAR
, 831) (the same exchange is recounted in
SMI
, 2:248). The Powhatan leader told Hamor that he had sent Namontack into England (for a second time) and that many ships had returned without him. Hamor revealed nothing about Namontack’s disappearance, undoubtedly for tactical reasons. The exchange suggests that when Machumps returned to Virginia without his companion he told Wahunsenacawh that Namontack had stayed behind in England.