H o ■ A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OP SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY ENGLISH BIOGRAPHICAL WRITING Gerald A. Craven A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 1971 proved by Doctoral Committee Advisor © 1971 Gerald Allen Craven ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PLEASE NOTE: Some Pages have indistinct print. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS il ABSTRACT In order to understand and properly judge seventeenth- century English Biography, it is necessary to know, insofar as possible, what the various biographers .were attempting to accomplish within what they understood to be the limitations of the genre. The purpose of this study is to examine their reasons for writing, their biographical methodology, and their various concepts of life-writing as a branch of literature. The dissertation is divided into two parts; the first section deals with biographical sketches, the second with book-length biographies. Each section examines the goals, the concepts of form, and the methodology of representative writers so that their successes and failures can be assessed by applicable standards. Only works written by one man about the life of another are considered; autobiographies, diaries, and mémoires do not fall within the scope of this s tudy. The conclusion points out that modern readers who condemn seventeenth-century English biographers, as many do, for failure to give the appearance of objectively reporting the lives and personalities of their subjects are applying standards of biographical writing which developed later. Such censure interferes with perceiving the real accomplishments of these writers by approaching their work with pre-conceived definitions of form which they would not have understood. Ill For John J. Gross iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 PART I: SHORT BIOGRAPHY........................................................................ 21 1. The Historians ........................................................................ 22 2. The Biographical Dictionaries....................................... 42 PART II: LONG BIOGRAPHY........................................................................ 65 1. General Trends ........................................................................ 66 2. Biography of Political Figures .................................. 69 3. Intimate Biography ............................................................... 88 4. Izaak Walton ............................................................................. 104 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 115 FOOTNOTES............................................................................................................ 126 BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 INTRODUCTION Z Modern readers of seventeenth-century English biography are generally disappointed by its characteristic sketchiness and irrelevancies. This response is natural enough consider­ ing that most twentieth-century readers make stringent demands upon the genre. "Pure biography," states a recent literary handbook, "centers its whole attention on the character and career of its subject." This view is amplified in the hand­ book’s extended definition of biography: It must be a history, but an accurate history; one which paints not only one aspect of the man but all important aspects. It must be the life of a ’par- . ticular’ man focused clearly on that man with more casual reference to the background of the social and political institutions of his time. It must present the facts accurately and must make some effort to interpret these facts in such a way as to present character and habits of mind. It must avoid panegyric and the didactic as the man himself might avoid the plague. But, on the other hand, it must emphasize personality. And this personality must be the central thesis of the book. If the biographer looks at the times, it must be only with the purpose of presenting a well-constructed and unified impression of the personality of his subject; if he introduces letters and anecdotes (as he surely will) it will be only such anecdotes and letters as reflect this central con­ ception of personality.! Since seventeenth-century biographies consistently violate various of these dictums, it is easy to dismiss their efforts as failures. Such a judgment, however, not only unfairly applies standards that developed later,2 but also prevents the examination of their accomplishments and failures in methodology from the point of view of the standards of the age In which the biographies were written. 3 A description of biography which would encompass seventeenth-century biographical writing would necessarily be much less restrictive than a description based on modern biographies. In order to be inclusive, a brief definition of the genre as it appeared in the seventeenth century must be very broad: biography had for one of Its principal goals the description of something about the career or personality, or both, of its subject. Such a brief description, however, can tell nothing of the other important goals of any particular biography, nor can it indicate the extent to which a bio­ grapher illuminates the life and character of the person about whom he is writing. In order to understand and properly judge seventeenth- century biography, it is necessary to know, insofar as possible, what the various biographers were attempting to accomplish within what they understood to be the limitations of the genre. Thus it is important to examine their reasons for writing, their biographical methodology, and their various concepts of life-writing as a branch of literature. It was during the seventeenth century that the concept of biography as a separate branch of English literature first emerged. Before 1600 no significant biographical work had been published in English.3 By the end of the century this situation had changed radically: men of literary talent, 4 such as Izaak Walton, John Aubrey, and Abraham Cowley, had written biographies of lasting merit, and men of lesser artis­ tic abilities, such as Samuel Clarke, David Lloyd, and William Winstanley, had published numerous biographical collections. Also, much biographical writing appeared In the contemporary histories of the period. One of the most striking aspects of this body of bio­ graphical writing is the apparent inefficiency with which the various writers approached the task of recording the im­ portant facts of their subject's life and character. For one thing, most of the portraits appear inadequate: we are presented with sketchy factual information and insufficient individualizing detail. Also, much that is seemingly irrele­ vant Is included, such as moral pronouncements and political propoganda. In part, this condition of biographical method­ ology is due to the fact that the form was new; there were few models for the biographer to use as a pattern for his work, and English writers were beginning for the first time to grapple with some of the problems inherent in the form. How much can ethically be revealed of a man's private life? When facts are not available, how much conjecture is allowed? Should a man's personal letters and journals be made public? Should minor details about his life be included? Is the life of a man who is not a saint, a king, or a stateman worth recording? And how should a biographer approach his task: 5 as artist or as historian? Indicative that biographical writing was new on the English literary scene is the fact that the word biography itself was not used in its modern sense until 1683.^ The lack of an English tradition in biographical writing meant that writers were more free to be innovative and to use their own biographical methods to better achieve their particular ends, which were not always in harmony with presenting a believable flesh-and-blood portrait to their readers. John Aubrey often sought to be entertaining rather than accurate; Thomas Fuller and Samuel Clarke found bio­ graphical writing both financially profitable and useful as a vehicle for instructing the reader in moral lessons, often at the expense of biographical accuracy; Lord Clarendon and Bishop Burnet included much polemical writing in their por­ traits of political figures. This is not to say that such biographers did not seek to record accurately their impres­ sions of the lives and personalities of their subjects, but it is important to recognize that presenting a literary por­ trait was often only one of their goals, and frequently this purpose was not of central importance. Seventeenth-century English writers produced much biographical writing, but only that which is typical or influential, that which aspires to literary merit need be examined.5 The most important forms of biographical writing 6 of the period--those which give most biographical information-- have traditionally been divided into two categories: long, or book-length biographies, such as Bacon’s account of Henry VII, and short biographies, such as those found in biographical collections.6 This division is convenient but can be somewhat misleading. The uninitiated reader might assume that because a biographical work is long it might contain more information about and a better portrait of the subject than would one of the short biographies. In some cases this assumption would be true, but often