The Mayflower and Her Log; July 15, 1620-May 6, 1621 — Complete — Reading Companion
Edition facts
For The Mayflower and Her Log; July 15, 1620-May 6, 1621 — Complete — Reading Companion, the stored edition analysis reports 96,740 words, 7 hr 1 min estimated reading time, and 14 detected text sections.
The text analysis averages about 23.8 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.
Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Pilgrims (New Plymouth Colony),” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.
Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.
How this score is calculated
- Description quality20 pts
- Title & short description10 pts
- Source metadata20 pts
- Text length15 pts
- Chapters / structure15 pts
- EPUB file integrity20 pts
Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.
Read the Text
ncognito of Bradford’s “Mourt’s Relation” (whose existence even has often been denied by Pilgrim writers), was none other than the “ship’s-merchant,” or “purser” of the MAY-FLOWER,--hitherto unknown as one of her officers, and historically wholly unidentified.
(k) The general description of; and many particulars concerning, the MAY-FLOWER herself; her accommodations (especially as to her cabins), her crew, etc., hitherto unknown.
(1) The demonstration of the fact that the witnesses to the nuncupative will of William Mullens were two of the MAY-FLOWER’S crew (one being possibly the ship’s surgeon), thus furnishing the names of two more of the ship’s company, and the only names--except those of her chief officers--ever ascertained.
(m) The indication of the strong probability that the entire company of the Merchant Adventurers signed, on the one part, the charter-party of the MAY-FLOWER.
(n) An (approximate) list of the ages of the MAY-FLOWER’S passengers and the respective occupations of the adults.
(o) The demonstration of the fact that no less than five of the Merchant Adventurers cast in their lots and lives with the Plymouth Pilgrims as colonists.
(p) The indication of the strong probability that Thomas Goffe, Esquire, one of the Merchant Adventurers, owned the “MAY-FLOWER” when she was chartered for the Pilgrim voyage,--as also on her voyages to New England in 1629 and 1630.
(q) The demonstration of the fact that the Master of the MAY-FLOWER was Thomas Jones, and that there was an intrigue with Master Jones to land the Pilgrims at some point north of the 41st parallel of north latitude, the other parties to which were, not the Dutch, as heretofore claimed, but none other than Sir Ferdinando Gorges and the Earl of Warwick, chiefs of the “Council for New England,” in furtherance of a successful scheme of Gorges to steal the Pilgrim colony from the London Virginia Company, for the more “northern Plantations” of the conspirators.
(r) The demonstration of the fact that a second attempt at stealing the colony--by which John Pierce, one of the Adventurers, endeavored to possess himself of the demesne and rights of the colonists, and to make them his tenants--was defeated only by the intervention of the “Council” and the Crown, the matter being finally settled by compromise and the transfer of the patent by Pierce (hitherto questioned) to the colony.
(s) The demonstration of the actual relations of the Merchant Adventurers and the Pilgrim colonists--their respective bodies being associated as but two partners in an equal copartnership, the interests of the respective partners being (probably) held upon differing bases--contrary to the commonly published and accepted view.
(t) The demonstration of the fact that the MAY-FLOWER--contrary to the popular impression--did not enter Plymouth harbor, as a “lone vessel,” slowly “feeling her way” by chart and lead-line, but was undoubtedly piloted to her anchorage--previously “sounded” for her--by the Pilgrim shallop, which doubtless accompanied her from Cape Cod harbor, on both her efforts to make this haven, under her own sails.
(u) The indication of the strong probability that Thomas English was helmsman of the MAY-FLOWER’S shallop (and so savior of her sovereign company, at the entrance of Plymouth harbor on the stormy night of the landing on Clarke’s Island), and that hence to him the salvation of the Pilgrim colony is probably due; and
(v) Many facts not hitherto published, or generally known, as to the antecedents, relationships, etc., of individual Pilgrims of both the Leyden and the English contingents, and of certain of the Merchant Adventurers.
For convenience’ sake, both the Old Style and the New Style dates of many events are annexed to their mention, and double-dating is followed throughout the narrative journal or “Log” of the Pilgrim ship.
As the Gregorian and other corrections of the calendar are now generally well understood, and have been so often stated in detail in print, it is thought sufficient to note here their concrete results as affecting dates occurring in Pilgrim and later literature.
From 1582 to 1700 the difference between O.S. and N.S. was ten (10) days (the leap-year being passed in 1600). From 1700 to 1800 it was eleven (11) days, because 1700 in O.S. was leap-year. From 1800 to 1900 the difference is twelve (12) days, and from 1900 to 2000 it will be thirteen (13) days. All the Dutch dates were New Style, while English dates were yet of the Old Style.
There are three editions of Bradford’s “History of Plimoth Plantation” referred to herein; each duly specified, as occasion requires. (There is, beside, a magnificent edition in photo-facsimile.) They are:--
(a) The original manuscript itself, now in possession of the State of Massachusetts, having been returned from England in 1897, called herein “orig. MS.”
Azel Ames, a physician and member of the Pilgrim Society, approaches the Mayflower's story with the precision of a historical detective. Rather than retell the familiar narrative of the Plymouth colony, he focuses on the vessel itself—its tonnage, its probable dimensions, its crew, and the logistics of the crossing. The book's subtitle, Chiefly from Original Sources, signals his method: Ames pores over seventeenth-century letters, colonial records, and ship manifests to extract every verifiable detail about the voyage from July 15, 1620, to May 6, 1621.
His tone is that of a corrective scholar. He notes, for instance, that the ship's name was often spelled May-flower in contemporary documents, and he insists on precise dates, using dual year notation (e.g., May 19/June 3, 1617) to account for the Julian calendar then in use. The result is a work that reads less like a narrative history and more like a brief for a court of evidence—each assertion backed by a citation, each passenger's biography weighed against conflicting records.
The Ship as a Character
Ames treats the Mayflower not as a symbol but as a material object with a known history. He devotes chapters to its probable construction, its cargo capacity, and its armament. He estimates its length at about 90 feet on the keel and its tonnage at 180, drawing on comparisons with other merchant vessels of the period. The ship's log, he argues, would have recorded daily positions, but no such document survives; Ames reconstructs the likely course from Plymouth to Cape Cod using wind patterns and the testimony of later voyages.
He also addresses the question of where the passengers lived during the crossing. Contrary to popular images of cramped steerage, Ames suggests that the 'tween deck space—about 5 feet high—was partitioned into cabins for families, with the single men and crew berthed forward. He cites the inventory of the ship's fittings, including 'a shallop' (a small boat) stowed in pieces, to argue that the Pilgrims brought substantial gear for settlement.
Passengers Under Scrutiny
Ames's treatment of the passengers is notably unsentimental. He cross-examines the traditional passenger list, questioning the identity of several individuals. For example, he doubts that Thomas Cushman, who later became a prominent Plymouth elder, was the son of Robert Cushman's second wife, citing a will that suggests a different Thomas. He also dissects the character of Christopher Martin, the ship's governor during the voyage, calling him 'self-sufficient, somewhat arrogant, and decidedly contentious' based on a letter from Robert Cushman and Martin's disputes with church authorities.
His analysis of Robert Cushman is particularly sharp. Ames notes that Cushman's letter from Dartmouth in August 1620 reveals a man suffering from 'dyspepsia and deeply wounded feelings' after being passed over for leadership. Yet Ames credits Cushman as 'second to none in his service to the Pilgrims,' balancing personal failings against historical contributions. This willingness to judge character from fragmentary evidence gives the book a forensic quality.
The Merchant Adventurers and Their Money
Ames devotes considerable space to the financial arrangements that made the voyage possible. The Merchant Adventurers, a group of London investors, provided capital in exchange for shares in the colony's profits. Ames traces the negotiations through surviving letters and contracts, showing how the division of shares—one share per £10 invested—led to tensions between the Leyden congregation and the English investors.
He highlights the role of Thomas Weston, the Adventurers' agent, whose 'sharp practice' (in Ames's phrase) nearly scuttled the enterprise. Weston's insistence on including non-Separatist colonists, the so-called 'Strangers,' created a divided company from the start. Ames quotes Bradford's complaint that the Adventurers 'sold' the Pilgrims into a 'kind of slavery' with onerous contract terms. The financial details—how much each passenger paid, what goods they brought, how debts were to be repaid—are laid out with the care of an accountant.
The Voyage Itself: Logs and Gaps
The book's title promises a log, but Ames is honest about what is missing. No contemporary log of the Mayflower's crossing survives; the only known record is William Bradford's later summary in Of Plymouth Plantation. Ames therefore pieces together the voyage from indirect evidence: the ship's departure from Plymouth on September 6/16, 1620; the 66-day passage; the sighting of Cape Cod on November 9/19; and the failed attempt to sail south to the Hudson River.
He speculates about the ship's daily progress using the known speeds of similar vessels—averaging about 2 knots—and the prevailing westerlies. He also notes the absence of any mention of storms in Bradford's account, suggesting that the crossing, while long, was not especially violent. The most dramatic incident, the grounding of the shallop on Cape Cod, is treated as a logistical problem rather than a narrative set piece. Ames's method is to fill gaps with probabilities, clearly marking where inference begins.
Ames's book is best read as a companion to primary sources like Bradford's history and Mourt's Relation. It does not replace them but rather interrogates them, asking what they leave out. Readers interested in the daily mechanics of the voyage—how the ship was steered, how food was rationed, how disputes were settled—will find answers here, though always hedged with the caution that the evidence is thin. For those who prefer their history unqualified, this may frustrate; for those who enjoy watching a scholar work, it is a model of disciplined inference.
It’s strange how a ship’s old passenger list can feel so intimate—those cramped, querulous souls Ames unearths. I found myself thinking of another quiet companion, the way Half a Century — Reading Notes holds its own weathered marginalia of a life. Both feel less like records and more like faint voices, asking only that we sit with them awhile. The past, I’ve learned, prefers a gentle listener. My own handwriting, too, is fading—but the memory of these pages stays.
There are no reviews for this eBook.
What did you think of this book?
Answer a few questions and save a private reflection on this device.