The Mayflower and Her Log; July 15, 1620-May 6, 1621 — Volume 5Ames, Azel
History
The Mayflower and Her Log; July 15, 1620-May 6, 1621 — Volume 5
Ames, Azel
Massachusetts -- History -- New Plymouth, 1620-1691; Mayflower (Ship); Pilgrims (New Plymouth Colony)
It is significant that eight out of nine of the male "servants"
should have died in the first four months. It was impossible that scurvy
should not have been prevalent with both passengers and crew.
CHAPTER VIII
THE MAY-FLOWER'S LADING
Beside her human freight of one hundred and thirty or more passengers and
crew, the lading of the MAY-FLOWER when she sailed from Plymouth
(England), September 6/16, 1620, was considerable and various. If
clearing at a custom-house of to-day her manifest would excite no little
interest and surprise. Taking no account of the ship's stores and
supplies (necessarily large, like her crew, when bound upon such a
voyage, when every possible need till her return to her home port must be
provided for before sailing), the colonists' goods and chattels were
many, their provisions bulky, their ordnance, arms, and stores (in the
hold) heavy, and their trading-stock fairly ample. Much of the cargo
originally stowed in the SPEEDWELL, a part, as we know, of her company,
and a few of her crew were transferred to the MAY-FLOWER at Plymouth, and
there can be no doubt that the ship was both crowded and overladen.
It is altogether probable that the crowded condition of her spar and main
decks caused the supply of live-stock taken--whether for consumption upon
the voyage or for the planters' needs on shore--to be very limited as to
both number and variety. It has been matter of surprise to many that no
cattle (not even milch-cows) were taken, but if--as is not unlikely--it
was at first proposed to take a cow or two (when both ships were to go
and larger space was available), this intent was undoubtedly abandoned at
Plymouth, England, when it became evident that there would be dearth of
room even for passengers, none whatever for cattle or their fodder (a
large and prohibitive quantity of the latter being required for so long a
voyage), and that the lateness of the season and its probable hardships
would endanger the lives of the animals if taken. So far as appears the
only domestic live-stock aboard the MAY-FLOWER consisted of goats, swine,
poultry, and dogs. It is quite possible that some few sheep, rabbits, and
poultry for immediate consumption (these requiring but little forage) may
have been shipped, this being customary then as now. It is also probable
that some household pets--cats and caged singing-birds, the latter always
numerous in both England and Holland--were carried on board by their
owners, though no direct evidence of the fact is found. There is ample
proof that goats, swine, poultry, and dogs were landed with the colonists
at New Plymouth, and it is equally certain that they had at first neither
cattle, horses, nor sheep. Of course the she-goats were their sole
reliance for milk for some time, whether afloat or ashore, and goat's
flesh and pork their only possibilities in the way of fresh meat for many
months, save poultry (and game after landing), though we may be sure, in
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account