Xerox University Microfilms
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 74- 17,816 WHEATCRAFT, Norman Dean, 1942- FRANCIS COVENTRY'S POMPEY THE LITTLE: AN HISTORICAL, TEXTUAL, AND CRITICAL STUDY, The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1974 Language and Literature, modern University Microfilms, A XEROX Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. FRANCIS COVENTRY’ S PCMPEY THE LITTLE: AN HISTORICAL, TEXTUAL, AND CRITICAL STUDY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Norman Dean Wheatcraft, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1974 Reading Committee: Approved by Edward P. J. Corbett Betty Sutton John B, Gabel (p P. 1^. Oh Adviser/ Department oi’^English PREFACE I have always been a connoisseur of prefaces, especially those by people I know or admire. I guess I am nosey, but I like to see whom they thank for helping them through one of the most difficult periods in anyone's life. And I like those prefaces best which do the job of giving thanks with grace, wit, and sincerity. My own giving of thanks may not be witty or particularly graceful, but it is heartfelt. First, my thanks to libraries and librarians; The staff of the rare book collection at the University of Chicago; Nada M, Westlake and David Kagen, rare book curators at the University of Pennsylvania; and most of all to the helpful staff at The Ohio State University Library, particularly Robert Tibbits and the late Robert Schragg of the rare book room and Mrs. Goldslager and îûss Gatliff of inter-library loan. Without the help of these people, I would never have been able to assemble Francis Coventry's works and rare related documents for examination. To the Graduate School of The Ohio State University I express gratitude for the Dissertation Year Fellowship on which I began this project. My special thanks goes to the two advisers of this thesis, Professors William A. Gibson, with whom I began this project, and Edward P. J. Corbett, with whom I completed it. Their careful, -ii- iii critical reading, their encouragement, and their willingly-shared learning have been most welcome. I am also indebted to Professor John B. Gabel for his special help with the textual side of this essay, and I am most grateful to him and to Professor Betty Button for their careful reading of and helpful commentary on the several drafts of this dissertation. Although not my adviser. Professor Ruth W. Hughey expressed an interest in ray work which helped me through this project; she has also been an inspiration to me. Curtis Smith and his wife Susan have helped me in ways they will.never know, but particularly they ran to the xerox machine for me and kept tabs on my manuscript while I ran around the world. To them my thanks. Another dear friend also deserves ray appreciation. Frances Clements not only first suggested Coventry’s work to me as a possible subject for a doctoral dissertation, but she also kindly established some facts of Coventry's biography for me during a trip to England. And finally ray thanks to my family for their faith and hope that I would complete this project and for their charity in ex pressing these to me. To them and to Ralph I dedicate this dissertation. Columbus, Ohio— N.D.W. VITA July 4, 19^2, , . Born - Canton, Ohio 1964.............. B.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1964-1966........ Teaching Assistant, Department of English, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1966.............. M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio I966 -I969 ........ Teaching Associate, Department of English, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1969 -I97 O ........ Dissertation Fellow, The Graduate School, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 197 0-I97 I........ Lecturer, Department of English, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 197 1-I97 3........ Lecturer in English and American Literature, University of Maryland, Far East Division, Tokyo and Misawa, Japan; Kunsan, South Korea; Kadena, Okinawa; Taipei, Taiwan; Saigon, South Viet Nam; Ubon and Utapao, Thailand FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English and American Literature Eighteenth-Century English Literature. Professors William A. Gibson and Edward P. J, Corbett -IV- TA3LE OF CONTENTS PREFACE...................................................... ii VITA........................................... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................... v Chapter I. THE BACKGROUND....................................... 1 The Contemporary Reception of Pompey the Little Coventry's Life and Minor Works Pompey's Literary Heritage II» THE PRINTING HISTORY OF POMPEY THE LITTLE AND THE PROBLEM OF ESTABLISHING A COPY-TEXT OF THE NOVEL. 70 III. A SUMMARY AND EVALUATION OF. THE MAJOR REVISIONS IN POMPEY THE LITTLE............................... 85 IV. A CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF POMPEY THE LITTLE......... 12? APPENDIX A........................................................ 148 B........................................................ 152 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................. I56 -V- CHAPTER I The Background: The Contemporary Reception of Pompey the Little; Coventry's Life and Minor Works; Pompey's Literary Heritage On February 12, 1751. the Daily Advertiser carried a notice of the publication of The History of Pompey the Little; or, the Life and Adven tures of a Lap-dog.^ Published anonymously, the novel was the work of Francis Coventry, a clergyman who was also at the time a student at Magdalene College, Cambridge. Pompey was well-received. In 1751 alone, there were three editions. Horace Walpole thought enough of the work to inquire of Thomas Gray concerning its authorship. Gray responded that "Pompey is the hasty production of Mr Coventry (cousin of him you knew), a young clergyman: I found it out by three characters, which once made 2 a part of a comedy that he showed me of his writing." Further, John Nichols' Literary Anecdotes records part of a letter from William Boyers ^The notice reads: This Day is publish'd. In one neat Pocket Volume, Price 3s. bound, adorn'd with a Portrait of the Hero, The History of Pompey the Little: or, The Life and Adventures of a Lap-Dog Printed for M. Cooper, in Pater-noster-Row. Viewed on film from the University of Chicago Library. 2 Letter of 3 March, 1751. in Horace Walpole's Correspondence, ed. W. S. Lewis (New Haven: Yale University Pre s s , 1948), XIV, 48. The cousin referred to is Henry Coventry, a friend of Gray at Cambridge and author of Philemon to Hydaspes for which Francis Coventry wrote an introduction in 1753. - 1- 2 to Philip Morant, an antiquarian, which reads; "You do me much honour in ascribing • Pompey the Little' to me. I am obliged to you; and shall 3 be glad never to be suspected of a worse." Mr. Boyers was not the only contemporary openly to admit enjoying Pompey, nor was Mr. Morant the only one to attribute the work incorrect ly. In a post-script to a letter of May 1, 1751» Lady Henrietta Lux- borough mentioned the novel, which she had evidently enjoyed greatly, to the then ailing William Shenstone: "I fancy Pompey the Little may have served to amuse your sick-chamber!"^ In a later letter (May 27, 1751)» she again writes Shenstone, who had not read the book and had obviously requested it of her, that "I would send you Pompey the Little, if I had it; but the Gentleman who lent it me, borrowed it of another Gentleman, to >riiom it was to be returned on a day named. It is enter taining enough for such a trifle. Fielding, you know, cannot write without humor. One Lady Bradshaigh also enjoyed the novel. In a letter to Samuel Richardson early in 1752 she wrote: "I was late desired, by a friend, to read the small volume, called Pompey the Little, and I began it with out hoping for much entertainment, but was agreeably surprised; for, in my humble opinion, it is both well designed and well executed."^ John ^(London; Nichols, Son, and Bentley, 1812), II, 202-203.