University of Virginia Library

i

The first edition of Pamela (dated 1741) was published by Charles Rivington and John Osborn on November 6, 1740, the second on February 14, 1741.[1] The latter had been announced in the Daily Post and the Daily Gazetteer as early as January 27. Aaron Hill had heard of it by January 6.[2] On December 22 Richardson had asked Hill's daughters for suggestions and corrections, and around this date he evidently told Hill that the style needed polishing.[3] He had also sent Hill a letter which an anonymous gentleman had written to Rivington on November 15, commenting in a friendly and complimentary way on the book, but making many suggestions for improvements.[4] The simplicity of the style had also called forth some adverse comment:

"The Language is not altogether unexceptionable, but in several Places sinks below the Idea we are constrained to form of the Heroine who is supposed to write it."[5] But the author of the letter "To my worthy Friend, the Editor of PAMELA," printed at the beginning of the first edition of the novel (and also in the Weekly Miscellany for October 11, 1740), had demanded "Pamela as Pamela wrote it; in her own Words" — "in her neat Country Apparel"; and Hill also, for similar reasons, objected on December 29 to polishing. "I don't indeed pretend," Hill adds, "to have consider'd with a critical Exactness, whether twere an absolute Impossibility, by shortening here and there a Single Word or two, to draw perhaps the Energy a little, (very little) closer — without offering Profanation to ye native Sweetness of the Phrase, and Sentiment. But what a trite and insignificant Refinement, That! amidst a Mass of such unprecedented Beauties!" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 37).

Nevertheless Richardson did polish considerably for the second edition. There are 841 changes, and the vast majority of them are designed to elevate or correct the language. The past tense of "run" is changed from "run" to "ran" (often — Richardson hardly ever caught all his errors or changed them consistently), the past participle of "break" from "broke" to "broken," that of "write" from "wrote" to "written." The objective case of "who" becomes "whom"; "I sat out" becomes "I set out," while an intransitive "setting" becomes "sitting"; "you was" becomes "you were." In one place "look'd as silly" becomes "look'd . . . as sillily," only to be changed back to "silly" in the 1801 text (12mo, I, 67; 1801, I, 66), when Richardson's knowledge of grammar had advanced still further. Contractions are expanded, "infinitely" becomes "greatly" or is omitted, "said" frequently becomes "added," "says I" or "thinks I" becomes "said" or "thought," "my old Lady" becomes "my late Lady." Originally Pamela was "watched, and such-like, very narrowly," now she is "watched very narrowly"; Pamela would still rather "rot" than accept Mr. B.'s proposals, but it is "in a Dungeon" rather than "in a Dunghil" (12mo, I, 14, 16, 252). The style becomes less colorful when Mr. B. kisses Pamela "with frightful Eagerness" rather than "as if he would have eaten me" and when she tells Mrs. Jervis "all that had passed" rather than "every bit and crumb of the Matter" (12mo, I, 18, 22). In one place a misprint creeps in, "Coachyard" for "Court-yard," which is followed in all of the later

duodecimo editions, though corrected in the octavo and in the 1801 (12mo, I, 111; 8vo, I, 140; 1801, I, 107).

Most of the suggestions of the anonymous gentleman are not followed: Mr. B. does not become a baronet, though the objectionable word "'Squire" is frequently changed to "Gentleman" or "Mr. B." (and still more often changed in the eighth duodecimo and 1801 editions); but a long discussion in Volume III on Mr. B.'s accepting a baronetcy is probably an answer to the anonymous gentleman. Pamela's sufferings from Lady Davers are not shortened, nor does she show more spirit with that lady. Mr. B. still spans Pamela's waist with his hands (12mo, II, 216), as he continues to do throughout all editions, though, according to the anonymous gentleman, that "Expression is enough to ruin a Nation of Women" by tight-lacing. The word "naughty" generally stays, though it is occasionally changed to "wicked." Pamela does not discharge Mrs. Jewkes (this also is justified in Volume III). Pamela's superstitions about marriage on Thursday remain (12mo, II, 149). But "Curchee" is always changed to "Curt'sy" or some similar spelling, and "voluntierly" becomes "voluntarily." Pamela no longer drops down on her knees in a corner to bless God after her wedding (12mo, II, 177), and she no longer calls her husband "Master" through timidity (12mo, II, 197) — Richardson adopts almost the exact wording suggested by the anonymous gentleman, as he does also when he changes "my dear lordly Master" to "my dear Lord and Master" (12mo, II, 305). "Foolish thing that I am" was not altered — indeed it persists into the 1801 edition (12mo, II, 305; 1801, II, 238). But he does change two passages which, in the anonymous gentleman's opinion, were susceptible to interpretations as doubles entendres.[6]

Aaron Hill on January 6 had opposed any changes at all, and had specifically opposed raising the style, giving Mr. B. a title, altering the scene with Lady Davers, dismissing Mrs. Jewkes, or changing the passage on Pamela's waist, the word "naughty," the phrase "foolish thing that I am," or the so-called doubles entendres. The only objection he had supported was that to the excessive prayers and appeals to the Deity — a "little Contraction" in these, he thought, might help to draw in minds "fashionably Averse to the Subject," to their own benefit (Forster MS XIII, 2, foll. 36-39, and Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 39). Though this concession was retracted in Hill's letter of January 15,[7]

Richardson considerably abridged Pamela's piety — 85 mentions of God were either cut or altered by changing the word "God" to "Heaven."

Hill had mingled his advice with effusive praise and with some sarcastic remarks on the rash anonymous gentleman, and Richardson inserted his reply with several other letters of praise from him as an Introduction to the second edition.[8] It was this Introduction which was parodied in Shamela Andrews and attacked and ridiculed in Pamela Censured (London, 1741, pp. 15-19) and which called forth other uncomplimentary comments on Richardson's transparent puffery. One reverend gentleman wrote to John Osborn in February, 1741: ". . . you were bewitched to Print that bad stuff in the Introduction. . . . He [the writer of the letters] is too full of himself, and too gross in his Praises of the Author. . . . He [the author] wou'd do well to alter it, and make it shorter, besides, a Gentleman who seems to have intended well and honestly, is very ungratefully used, and it has given Offence" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 46).

The third edition appeared on March 12, 1741. It had 59 changes, none of them of much moment, but several of such a nature as to make it seem likely that they are by Richardson: "you was" to "you were," "let you and I" to "let you and me," "says" to "said," "broke" to "broken," "wrote" to "written," "run" to "ran." Two are certainly misprints, which were carried on into all subsequent duodecimos and the octavo: "desiring to interpose" for "desiring me to interpose" and "all my Scruples" for "all his Scruples" (12mo, II, 52, 126; 8vo, II, 25, 115). The first phrase was dropped and the second misprint corrected in the 1801 edition (II, 20, 86).

The fourth edition, published on May 5, 1741, had 48 changes. 14 of them were in the Introduction, where Hill's remarks about the anonymous gentleman were considerably softened. On April 21 Hill

had reluctantly given Richardson permission to substitute "unguarded" for "silly" as applied to Mr. Williams, in deference to the objections of certain clergymen (a change made in this edition) and to make other alterations in his letters in deference to the "sordid taste" of the age (Barbauld, I, 72-73). Earlier, on April 13, Hill had written that he had unwillingly made a few corrections on the proof of Richardson's "beautiful work," as Richardson had repeatedly urged ("a word, here and there") and would go on if Richardson insisted (Barbauld, I, 68-69). The few real changes in the text may, therefore, have been Hill's. The change of "lac'd Head, and Handkerchief" to "lac'd Cambrick Handkerchief" (12mo, II, 117) is almost certainly a deliberate change, as are "run" to "ran," "thinks" to "thought," and "how kind and how good he behav'd" to "how kindly he behav'd" (12mo, II, 24). Several of the others may well be misprints.

The second major revision was that for the fifth edition, published on September 22, 1741. There are 950 changes, 45 of them retrenching redundancies and excessive praises in the introductory letters. Some of the other changes may have been suggested by Dr. Newton or Aaron Hill.[9]

Most of the changes in the fifth edition are changes of phrasing, rather than grammatical changes or changes of single words, as in the second edition, the octavo, and the eighth duodecimo: "I must he and him him now; for he has lost his Dignity with me" to "May-be, I he and him him, too much: But it is his own Fault, if I do. For why did he lose all his Dignity with me?" (12mo, I, 17); "a Condition so much superior to what I could do for her" to "could raise her to" (12mo, II, 122); "as far as one Holiday will go; for that I can get Leave for" to "Leave to make, on such an Occasion" (12mo, I, 39). When Mr. B. looks through a keyhole and spys Pamela stretched out in one of her fits, the fifth edition adds that she was on her face (12mo, I, 31) — possibly to avoid what Pamela Censured (p. 31) called "a Posture that must naturally excite Passions of Desire" which could not be contemplated except "by one in his grand Climacteric without ever wishing to see one in the same Situation." The anonymous author of this pamphlet attacked Pamela for indecency and for its immoral tendency, but this appears to be the only objection which Richardson tried to obviate before his final revision. One nice touch is added when Pamela is trying her hand at hard work by scouring a pewter plate: "I see

I could do't by Degrees; tho' I blister'd my Hand in two Places" becomes "It only blister'd my Hand in two Places" (12mo, I, 94). Richardson had evidently gone over his book carefully.

There are two added passages of some length, on Pamela's reading (12mo, I, 143) and her proposed correspondence with Miss Darnford (12mo, II, 333). Pamela's verses on leaving Bedfordshire (12mo, I, 112-114) and the "Preface by the Editor" are extensively revised. And there are the usual grammatical changes: "without" (conj.) to "except," "who" to "whom," "broke" to "broken," "run" to "ran," "learns me" to "teaches me."

On October 23, 1741, a French translation of Pamela was published in London. According to the preface (I, [x]), "Cette Traduction a été faite avec la participation de l'Auteur, qui a eu la bonté de nous fournir un petit Nombre d'Additions & de Corrections. Et comme on aime à connoitre le Caractére de ceux dont il est fait mention dans un Livre qu'on lit, l'Auteur a bien voulu nous communiquer les Portraits de quelques personnes dont il parle dans cette Histoire. Ces Portraits n'ont point été inserez [sic] dans les cinq Editions qu'on a faites de l'Original, parce que l'Auteur s'en est avisé trop tard." This translation had been advertised in the Daily Post as "in the Press" as early as March 27, 1741, and is based not on the fifth edition but on the earlier ones. It does not have the additions on Pamela's reading and her correspondence with Miss Darnford. Indeed it seems to be based on the second edition — "une coëfure & un moucheoir" is previous to the "Cambrick Handkerchief" of the fourth edition (II, 138; 12mo, II, 117), and the French does not follow the third edition's misprint "my Scruples" (II, 148; 12mo, II, 126). In a few passages, however, it resembles the fifth edition: it adopts a change in the order of listing the various articles of clothing which Mr. B. gave Pamela (I, 14; 12mo, I, 12); the banks of the pond, "guilty" in the fourth and "perilous" in the fifth, are "dangereux" in the French (I, 173; 12mo, I, 231). "Il me laissa monter dans ma chambre" is like the fifth edition's "left me to go up to my Closet" rather than "I went up to my Closet" (II, 91-2; 12mo, II, 78). Pamela's parting verses, given not where they belong in other editions but later, are a very free translation, but seem more like the revised version. In many places where the French is like the fifth edition, the exigencies of French grammar probably forced a similar change. The translator substituted other words freely for "said" so that he often has a reading like the fifth or like the octavo, but he also has "écriai" or "reprit" where the fifth retains "said," so that these probably mean nothing. There are five to ten other passages where the

French resembles the fifth edition and the octavo in ways which grammar probably does not account for, but all are minor and might be coincidental. There must really have been a "petit Nombre" of additions and corrections.

The most striking addition, indeed the only very striking one, is the passage describing some fine ladies who come to see Pamela (I, 67-72) ("les Portraits de quelques personnes"). Aside from several variations of "said" and from one new paragraph break (II, 259), it is the only thing in the French translation which resembles the octavo and not the fifth edition. It may well have been written before the fifth was published and not adopted because it would have meant too great a change in pagination.

This passage is also the most considerable change in the octavo, which was advertised as just published in the Daily Post of May 8, 1742. It was called the sixth edition and was issued with the third edition of Volumes III and IV, first published on December 7, 1741. In a letter to William Warburton of November 17, 1742, Richardson says that it "has received a good many Alterations from the former" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 89). But these alterations are fewer in number (633) than those in the fifth edition, and only five of them are important: the fine ladies passage, the omission of the introductory letters and substitution of a detailed table of contents,[10] the omission of the conclusion (part of which was made superfluous by Volumes III and IV), a change in timing made necessary by the discovery that in the earlier editions two dates had overlapped (8vo, II, 233; 12mo, II, 222), and the inclusion in Volume I of several papers which had been in Volume II so that the break between the volumes occurs at a more crucial moment — Pamela's leaving the Lincolnshire house.

Most of the other changes are of a single word: "kissed" to "saluted," "said" to "added," "replied," etc. (there are a great many of these), "durst" to "dared," "tho'" to "altho'," "naughty" to "wicked," "on" to "upon," "in" to "into."

Grammatical changes continue: the past tense of "bid" is "bad" not "bid"; "where" becomes "whither," "there" "thither," "broke" "broken," "you was" "you were." Many unnecessary adjectives ("poor," "great," "all") are cut.

The changes of the octavo were not followed in the sixth, seventh, and eighth duodecimo editions. It is perhaps not surprising that the more extensive ones were not, since they would have meant re-pagination, but it is hard to see why Richardson, who was his own printer and was meticulous where his own works were concerned, did not take the trouble to correct at least the grammatical mistakes he had discovered while preparing the octavo edition. Perhaps his work on Clarissa decreased his interest in Pamela for a while, or perhaps he had lost the copy on which he had marked his changes. When he came to revise for the edition published in 1801, however, he did use the octavo as a basis. The text of the octavo is usually regarded as the standard text of Pamela. Though its importance as a revision has been somewhat exaggerated, probably because of its splendid format and because the dropping of the introductory letters and the addition of the fine ladies passage have been known to scholars for some time, its use for the revision shows that Richardson did regard it as the best text available.

The duodecimo edition of Pamela published in October, 1746, was also called the sixth edition. It had 26 changes from the fifth edition, and most of these are insignificant — 9 are changes of "farther" to "further." But even here the change of "it was me" to "it was I" (12mo, I, 234) was probably Richardson's, as well as the omission of the final "it" in "thou hast a Memory . . . that nothing escapes it" (12mo, II, 15) and of the "-ing" on "singing" in "My Master has just now been making me play upon the Spinnet, and singing to it" (12mo, II, 154). The first of these changes is not adopted in the 1801 edition, the second passage is reworded, and the third change is adopted (I, 256, 307; II, 112). One entry is changed from Wednesday to Thursday (12mo, II, 354), probably by oversight, since the next entry is also Thursday.

The evidence about the publication of the seventh duodecimo edition is almost impossible to reconcile. A note in the Bodleian (MS. Don. c. 66, pp. 18-19) listing amounts Rivington owes Richardson shows that 300 copies of the duodecimo Pamela, Volumes I and II, were delivered to Rivington between December 3, 1746, and June 3, 1749; 144 more copies of these volumes (whether in octavo or duodecimo is not stated) were delivered up to January 18, 1753. On September 19, 1753, Richardson wrote to Mrs. Chapone that he had

to send her a second-hand set of Pamela, "for the Fire I was afflicted with last Year, consumed all the First & Second Vols. that were left in my Hands of the last Impression. But to make some Amends, they will be in the largest Edition; and with Cuts." (Forster MS XII, 2, fol. 89). Since he is sending her a copy in octavo "to make some Amends," he must have intended sending a duodecimo — that is, the sixth edition of 1746. But an advertisement in the back of Volume IV of Sir Charles Grandison, published in November, 1753, advertises Pamela in octavo and "in Four Volumes 12 mo. The Sixth Edition." Pamela in duodecimo is advertised in the Public Advertiser for March 19, 1754. This may refer to the sixth or to the seventh edition in duodecimo — Sale has discovered no advertisement of the seventh and its date of publication is uncertain. But the height of confusion is reached in Richardson's letter to Stinstra of November 26, 1755: "I have actually retouched Pamela: But there being a Number of the 3d and 4th Volumes of that Work in hand, more than of the 1st and 2d. I only printed as many of the two latter, as would make perfect Setts; and was therefore obliged to keep the two former as they were."[11] Since Stinstra is asking about Richardson's elaborate revision (the one ultimately published in 1801), it is hard to believe that Richardson is referring to the seventh duodecimo edition, with its few minor changes, as "retouched." The wording implies that Richardson had some Volumes I and II of the edition in question, though fewer than of Volumes III and IV. An unrecorded octavo seems out of the question, since the 1742 octavo was reissued as late as 1772. One possible explanation, somewhat less improbable than others that suggest themselves, is that Richardson discovered some unburned copies of the 1746 duodecimo, reissued them with some of his Volumes III and IV, and printed the seventh duodecimo edition to issue with the rest of the Volumes III and IV on hand (the "seventh" edition was published with the "fifth" of Volumes III and IV — a third issue of the second), and was deliberately obscure in his letter to Stinstra because his revision had bogged down or he was unsure what he was going to do with it.

This seventh duodecimo edition is dated 1754 and has only 35 changes from the sixth duodecimo, over half of them of "farther" to "further," "ingrateful" to "ungrateful," or "an" (before "h") to "a." None of them can be said to be certainly by Richardson, though a

"broken" for "broke" and an "if she please" for "if she pleases" sound like him. The readings of the seventh duodecimo are followed in the eighth.

This edition (dated 1762) appeared three and a half months after Richardson's death, on October 28, 1761. Early in March, 1761, one of Richardson's daughters had written to Lady Bradshaigh: ". . . the four Vols. of Pamela being almost out of Print, and a new Edition called for, and being delighted to hear, that your Ladiship has remarked upon that Piece and Clarissa, he [Papa] directs me to express his earnest Wishes, that you will favour him with the Perusal of your Observations, with Liberty to add to new ones of his own such of your Ladiship's, as may make ye future Edition more perfect than otherwise it can be. The Employment will be, my Papa says, a great Amusement to him."[12] On March 13 Lady Bradshaigh wrote that she was sending the volumes so that Richardson could look over "what I have scroled in the Margin of your two Histories."[13]

It is likely that the proposed "future Edition" was the one which appeared as the "eighth," and the nature of the revisions in this edition supports this view. There are 251 changes, 27 of them in the introductory letters (the praises are further toned down and considerable cuts are made) and 19 in the conclusion (there are two large cuts, one of them of material which Volumes III and IV had long ago made superfluous).

The other changes are slight but follow a definite pattern; most of them deal with matters of propriety: gold trimming on clothes becomes silver (12mo, I, 82; II, 351); attendant servants are no longer mentioned (12mo, II, 354, 359). Mr. B. calls his steward Longman rather than Mr. Longman. Young ladies are no longer addressed or referred to as "Miss" alone. The word "Spouse" generally becomes "Master" or "Mr. B.," and more "'Squires" are removed. In the scene between Pamela and her former fellow-servants, their names are no longer enumerated (12mo, II, 345-346). The words "may-hap" and "Maiden" are fairly consistently changed. The elimination of superfluous elegance and the new words of address especially sound like

Lady Bradshaigh.[14] If they are the result of her comments, they are Richardson's last literary activity.

This does not mean, however, that some of the changes in the eighth duodecimo edition were not written earlier. Some of them are identical with changes in the 1801 edition. This may not always prove that Richardson used one revision to revise the other — "may-hap" and "Spouse," for instance, are also eliminated in the 1801 edition, but not always in the same way. If Richardson felt that such words were objectionable, the same result could easily have been obtained without comparison of the two revisions.

"Bite" could have become "Trick" (1801, I, 65; 12mo, I, 66) and "take a Dinner" "dine" (1801, II, 285; 12mo, II, 355) in both texts without any comparison, but the number of such similarities, as well as a few where the similarity would be an unlikely coincidence ("when" for "while" [1801, II, 234; 12mo, II, 301] and "chose that Name" for "chose that" [1801, II, 290; 12mo, II, 362]), makes it seem likely that there was some influence of one on the other, though variations in other passages make it certain that one was not used as a basis for the other.

A probable explanation would be that Richardson began to mark changes for a new duodecimo edition in the margin of the seventh while he was working on the more extensive revision, and at the same time used them in that revision, but that at the very end of his life he made further changes in the margin for a new duodecimo edition which were never incorporated in the revision published in 1801.