University of Virginia Library

ii

It has long been known that Richardson left a revised copy of Pamela to his family, which, it has been generally assumed, was somehow lost. The biography of Richardson in the Universal Magazine for February, 1786 (LXXVIII, 74), regrets that "the new edition, in which much was altered, and the whole new-modelled, has never been given to the public." In almost the same words John Nichols had expressed his regrets, adding that much is omitted in the "improved edition" and that only the fact that there was an edition unsold prevented its publication

during Richardson's lifetime.[15] In the mid-1780's Mme. de Genlis was shown by Edward Bridgen, the husband of Richardson's daughter Martha, "un manuscrit du roman de Paméla, avec des corrections à la marge des propres mains de Richardson." Bridgen wanted her to translate it into French, "littéralement"; she felt she would have had to make many changes, and offered to have the translation done, but Bridgen refused.[16]

This revision was the subject of considerable correspondence between Martha Bridgen and her unmarried sister, Anne Richardson, in 1784.[17] On June 28 Anne wrote approvingly of a proposal by Bridgen to have it published, but believed that "farther corrections" by Martha "wou'd be necessary and make it infinitely more perfect." She mentioned especially a "conversation at the farmer's" on Pamela's journey from Bedfordshire to Lincolnshire, which, to the best of her memory, she "thot. was not an improvement, as the stile is different from the rest of the two first vols." In answer, Martha on July 7 expressed her intention of going over them, "but, should I be prevented, I will request that the four Volumes may be destroyed." On July 10 Anne agreed "that unless they cou'd be re-revised" it would be better to destroy them; "they are still too imperfect for publication as having received my Father's last hand." She also mentioned that she had had for "some years" "the 4 vols: of Pamela, as altered," which Martha had lent her and which she did not return, since Martha "had another copy." On July 20 Martha asked for Anne's four volumes, "as I am now too poorly to bear the fatigue of perusing it in the blotted & rough state in which our dear father left it, tho' I prize those Volumes which have received corrections from his own hand most highly. Perhaps I might make some further corrections in my own copy when I come to read it, which I should submit afterwards to your inspection. I know there are many scenes that I could have wished had been entirely omitted; but that I should think taking too great a liberty, & altering the original plan too much; therefore all I should attempt would be to alter some particular phrases, &c: at least this is my idea at present. I own I should be grieved to have the corrected copy

destroyed, whether any use was made of it, or not, in our lifetime. Its having 'received my Father's last hand,' renders it precious; tho', at the same time, I earnestly wish he had been more liberal of his corrections." On July 31 Anne promised to try to send her copy: "The farther altering some triffling things wd. make it more perfect, tho' I think still it is not enough perfect to be published as having recd. our dear Father's last hand. — The alterations are not always improvements, tho' often so."

On February 13, 1785, Martha Bridgen died. On April 12, 1792, Anne wrote to her niece Mrs. Moodie, daughter of Sarah Richardson Crowther: "As to the Pamela's, God only knows whether I shall have time or ability to go through them, and my handwriting is so bad, and even worse than ever, that I question whether if I am able to go through with the task, it will be of use." She expects no profits from any revisions of her father's works: "I remember that any recompence to the family was refused many years ago, when Mr. Bridgen proposed it; I have lately been told that my Father had promised to give them to the booksellers; and I always wished that m[y] dear Sister Bridgen, whose abilities were far beyond [mine, might] have consented to give them finished and re-corr[ected. As] I am very sure that my family wi[ll] never be able to obtain anything hereafter, I do not scruple to give them up now; and have only to wish that I was more capable than I am of doing Justice to them."

It appears from this that Martha, who was considered to be the literary daughter, did not get around to re-revising Pamela. Nevertheless Anne did finally permit her father's revision, with or without further corrections by herself, to appear. On October 11, 1801, she wrote to Mrs. Moodie: "I had a letter the 22d of last month from my dear Nephew Sam1. [Crowther] with two setts of Pamela, the new edition, with my dear Father's last corrections. I am going over them very carefully, to correct errors of printing &c." And there is a London edition of Pamela in four volumes dated 1801, prefaced by a note:

The title-page describes the edition as "A New Edition, Being the Fourteenth, with Numerous Corrections and Alterations." The only two copies we have located are in the British Museum and the University of California at Los Angeles Library.

The text literally does have "Numerous Corrections and Alterations," and it is impossible to imagine anyone except Richardson who would have taken such great pains. In many instances Richardson's A Collection of the Moral and Instructive Sentiments, Maxims, Cautions, and Reflexions, Contained in the Histories of Pamela, Clarissa, and Sir Charles Grandison, published in 1755, agrees more closely in phraseology with the 1801 text than with the earlier texts and occasionally contains sentiments which are found only in the 1801 text.[18] It is possible that some of the minor changes are Anne's, but there is nothing in the 1801 text which seems unlike Richardson himself: many of the revisions are of the kind he had made in earlier editions; several added or rewritten scenes, including that at the farmer's to which Anne objected, are in the style of Sir Charles Grandison and appear to be beyond the abilities of Anne or even Martha. We do not see that there can be any doubt that the 1801 edition was printed from Richardson's revised copy, possibly with slight alterations by his daughter Anne.

Anne Richardson had written Mrs. Moodie on October 11, 1801, that she was going over the new edition of Pamela "very carefully, to correct errors of printing &c." She died in 1803. In 1810 almost the same group of booksellers brought out another edition of Pamela in four volumes, the "fifteenth." The only copy we have found is in the New York Public Library. Volumes I and II vary from the 1801 text in over 300 verbal readings, not counting the correction of several obvious misprints in the 1801 edition and a few changes which we have judged to be misprints in the 1810 text. The great majority of these variations are the alteration of "said" to another word or the omission of "said he" (or a similar phrase) or of "so." In one instance the mention of attendants is cut, and in another that of "silk" (1801,

II, 25, 303; 1810, II, 23, 291). These changes are in line with Richardson's practice in the 1801 text. There are other changes which are at least due to careful reading and judicious correction. Most striking is the change of Pamela's reference (incorrect in all previous editions) from "Thursday the 20th day of my imprisonment" to "the 28th" (12mo, II, 25; 8vo, I, 397; 1801, I, 316; 1810, I, 302). A number of other readings, some of them like the octavo of 1742 and others new, seem to be improvements on the 1801 text. A list would be too lengthy for this article, but we will be glad to give further information to anyone with a technical interest in the text of Pamela.

It is hard to imagine why a compositor, copy-reader, or bookseller would have bothered with all the "said's," or why anyone but Richardson's daughter would have gone to so much trouble. The probability, then, appears to be that the 1810 edition was printed from a copy of the 1801 corrected by Anne Richardson. It is not impossible that she consulted the copy in her father's hand, but none of the changes are beyond her own abilities.

The date of the revision published in 1801 is uncertain. As early as November 17, 1742, a few months after the publication of the revised octavo edition, Richardson had written William Warburton that he was collecting "ye Observations and Castigations of several of my kind Friends in order, if the Piece should happen to come to a future Edition . . ., that it might be benefitted by their Remarks and that I might leave a corrected Copy for the Press" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 89). But Richardson was constantly asking his friends and acquaintances to suggest corrections for his works.

There is a more definite reference in a letter of October 5, 1753, to Lady Bradshaigh — Richardson proposes to "give Pamela my last Correction, if my Life be spared; that, as a Piece of Writing only, she may not appear, for her Situation, unworthy of her Younger Sisters." In a letter begun sometime before October 28 and finished on November 27 Lady Bradshaigh offered to read Pamela again after Richardson's "last correction"; looking over it some time ago she had noticed "several things that I have a notion you will think proper to alter" — she mentions especially the low style of the first letters. On December 8 Richardson expressed his hope that she would point out faults, though he defended the low style as proper to Pamela in her humble state. In a letter begun on December 23 and finished on January 14, 1754, Lady Bradshaigh promised that "when I want a piece of work I shall write my marginal notes, in an old edition of Pamela that I have by me." (Forster MS XI, foll. 31, 43, 49, 62)

Earlier in 1753, on June 2, Richardson had written to Johannes Stinstra that he intended "to give my good Pamela, my last Hand. I find I shall correct it much; but shall have a particular Regard to preserve ye Simplicity of the Character." On May 23, 1754, Stinstra asked what had come of the intention and Richardson answered on June 28, "I shall retouch Pamela, as I have Opportunity; having gone a good way in it." In Edward Bridgen's will, an undated codicil directs that "the Copy of Pamela corrected by Mr. R: 1758 8 vol: be sent to Mrs: Anne Richardson soon after my death."[19] From this it appears that the final revision was somehow dated 1758. Richardson had probably been working at it off and on since 1753, and may well have continued to "correct" the revision until his death in 1761.

Judging by Anne's and Martha's letters, in 1784 there must have been two copies of the revision, one corrected in Richardson's own hand (which Martha had) and the other a cleaner copy (which Anne planned to return to Martha). The revisions are often far too extensive to have been written in the margin of a printed volume, but Richardson had used interleaved copies before,[20] and the copy in his hand (a very illegible hand by the 1750's) may have been a copy of the octavo of 1742 with marginalia and interleaving. Martha and Anne write as if each of the two copies was in four volumes; if they were, Bridgen in his will either meant to write "8vo:" or he was using the word "Copy" loosely to refer to the two copies.