The Naming Conventions of 18th Century Novels

The Naming of Characters in Defoe, Richardson, and Fielding
Author(s): I. P. Watt
Source: The Review of English Studies, Vol. 25, No. 100 (Oct., 1949), pp. 322-338
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/511480
Accessed: 03-12-2015 22:06 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Review of English Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 38.125.197.2 on Thu, 03 Dec 2015 22:06:45 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE NAMING OF CHARACTERS IN DEFOE,
RICHARDSON, AND FIELDING
By I. P. WATT
His [Walter Shandy's] opinion, in this matter,was, That there was a strange
kind of magick bias, which good or bad names, as he called them, irresistibly
impressed upon our charactersand conduct.
TristramShandy, i. 19.
I
HE novelist-followingtheconvention
ofcomedy
notedbyAristotle'-
usually inventsthe names, as well as the actions,of his characters.
In most fictionuntil the eighteenthcenturythe names used were quite
different fromthose used in real life; theywere 'characteristic',artificial
and conventionaldesignationssuited to the half-generalizedtypes that
figurein romanceand pastoral. It was only in the later developmentsof
fiction-the professedlynon-fictional'true histories',biographies,and
memoirs-that the names used could possiblybe mistakenforthoseofreal
people.
Defoe, of course,is in the lattertradition.The names of his heroesand
heroinesall sound real; even the apparentexception,Roxana, is explained
as an alias.z But thoughrealistic,theyare rarelythe true,full,permanent
names, ratifiedby baptismand legal record,to whichwe are accustomed.
Thus Captain Bob Singleton has no baptismal name; Colonel Jacque,
having no surname,goes by his nickname,and a mock rank; and Moll
Flanders is knownto us by a cantingpseudonym. Robinson Crusoe is
the onlyone ofDefoe's maincharacterswho is givena fullname and main-
tainsit.
Defoe is especiallycasual about naminghis secondarycharacters. He
rarelygives them complete names, and usually refersto them by some
ad hocdescriptionof theirstatusor role-'the Quaker','the honestDutch
merchant',&c. This practicesets a special toneto his treatment of human
relationshipsin the novels. In Moll Flanders,forexample,the seduceris
described only as 'the elder brother'; the firsthusband, the younger
brother,is onlygiven a christianname, and thatlong afterhis firstintro-
duction,in the courseof casual conversation;and Moll Flandersherselfis
known at this time only by the name of 'Betty', the generic name for
I 'In comedy ... the poet firstconstructsthe plot on the lines of probability,and then
insertscharacteristicnames.... But tragediansstill keep to real [i.e. historical]names'
(Poetics,trans. Butcher,9).
2 The Fortunate Mistress, ed. G. A. Aitkin (London, 1902), i. 200.
NAMING OF CHARACTERS IN DEFOE AND OTHERS 323
maidservants.' It is clearthatneitherMoll Flanders,nor hercreator,feels
any need to go much beyond the banal outlinesof a newspaperstory-
'Orphan ServantGirl Seduced by Young Heir and Cast Offon Younger
Brother'. They do notbelievethatthe detailsof personalrelationshipsare
inherentlyinterestingor important;they are much too self-centredand
pragmaticto wish to explorethose aspects of the personalitiesof the indi-
viduals on theirpath which do not affectthempersonally.
This attitudetowardspeople is the rule in Defoe. Apartfromthe 'I' of
his autobiographicalnarratives, all Defoe's charactersare treatedas strictly
secondary; and, almost without exception,theylack the most elementary
of
requirement completeness, a full name. Even Crusoe's Man Fridayand
Roxana's Amy, vivid as they are, do not transcendtheir role as loyal
servantsof the protagonists;and, just as they have no independentlife,
so theyare limitedin theirpresentationto the impliedpatronageof being
designated by a christianname only. The truthof this generalization
about Defoe's attitudeto the names and personalitiesof his secondary
characters is confirmedby the main apparent exception; in Captain
SingletonWilliam Waltersdoes get a completename, but he also tends to
overshadowthe titularhero.
Defoe's practicein the namingof his characterscannot,of course, be
attributedentirelyto his severelyfunctionalview of personalrelationships,
althoughthis is perhaps the key to his isolatedpositionamong novelists.
His economyin the use of names is also appropriateto the genrewhichhe
practised,and to the societywhich he described. Feigned reticenceabout
the names of characterswas traditionalin Defoe's formalmodels-secret
histories,memoirs,and criminalbiographies;and anonymity is a condition
of lifeforthose who, like Moll Flanders and Roxana, inhabitthe under-
world. There, real names are rarelyknown,and even more rarelycom-
mittedto writing. The business of life can be carried on much more
conveniently by aliases,or anycasual means of identification.Such condi-
tions of human intercoursenecessarilyaffectthe charactersof those con-
cerned; deprivedof a completeand consistentname the denizens of this
world are also preventedfrom having the consistentsocial personality
whichsuch a namesymbolizes.Thus Roxana's pseudonymsareconvenient
tagsforherrolein different social contexts;hertruebeingis characterized,
not by her name,but by the factthatshe has manynames,whichmustbe
kept secret from all those with whom she might otherwisebe able to
achieve a stable personal relationship. Eventuallythe need to maintain
her incognitoforcesher to hide in terrorfromher own daughter.
I have to thankProfessorJohnButt foradvice on this and many otherpoints: and I
should like to takethis opportunityof acknowledgingthe generousassistance of Miss G.
Lloyd Thomas, Mr. M. J. C. Hodgart, Dr. R. W. Chapman, and ProfessorsA. D.
McKillop, W. M. Sale, G. Tillotson, J. A. Work, and L. B. Wright.
324 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
Defoe's reticenceabout names has a further,and even more general,
relationto the usage of his day. For membersof the lower classes a full
name was not yet an essentialattribute;theyrarelyused surnamesand
sometimesdid not even have one. This is shown by the seventeenth-
centurypractice of arranginglists of names alphabeticallyby christian
name;' and by the frequencyof the entry'... ignoticognominis' in parish
registers.zTo-day, surnames are essentialto the legal man, the citizen
filler-of-forms, but even as late as the the
earlyeighteenthcentury official
legal and politicalmachinery tended to ignoreall thosewho were without
a minimumof propertyand status. Consequently,ruralvagrantsand the
growingurban proletariat-all those beneath the requirementsof wills,
apprenticeship-deeds, and marriage-licences-didnot need anythingmore
than a name by repute. Even formarriage-licences-andtheiruse was by
no means universal-parties were not officially requiredto delivertheir
truechristianand surnamesuntilthe MarriageAct of 1753.3
Personal names derive their sanctionfromthe ceremoniesof religion
and law, ceremoniesfromwhich Defoe's characters,like the classes to
whichtheybelonged,are habitualabstainers. The Churchforbadepeople
to use any name otherthan thatsanctifiedat baptism;4but Defoe's main
charactersare oftenforcedto do so, eitherfor concealment,5or because
they do not know theirbaptismalnames.6 Marriage,the next legal and
religiousceremonyaffecting names, is also minimizedin Defoe's novels.
We are not told any of the new surnamesthatMoll Flanders presumably
acquired in the course of her fivemarriages,althougha properattention
to such nicetieswould have sparedherfromthe incestuousmarriageto her
half-brother.
For manyreasons,then,Defoe's charactersdo not have, or cannotuse,
the labels whichin our societysymbolizethe individual'sstablesocial role.
Deprived of social recognitionand condemnedto an anonymousexistence
in whichno permanenthumanattachmentsare possible,theyare unfitted
for,or perhapseven unawareof,the kind of social relationshipwhichhas
become the traditionalsubject-matterof the novel.
But as the centuryadvanced modernpracticein the matterof names
graduallyestablisheditself. Legal recordsshow an increasingrigidityof
documentation,influencedin part by the MarriageAct of 1753. At the
C. L. L'Estrange Ewen, History of Surnames of the British Isles (London,
I93I),
p. 388.
2 See Preface,Registersand Publicationsof theHarleian Society(London, 1877), i. ix.
3 Ewen, op. cit., pp. 219, 388, 4o0.
4 E. G. Withycombe, OxfordDictionaryof English ChristianNames (Oxford,
I945),
p. xxiv.
5 e.g. Roxana, Moll Flanders.
6 ColonelJacque, ed. G. A. Aitkin(London, I902), i. z; Captain Singleton('Everyman
Edition', London, I9o6), p. 2.
same time modes of address-'Mr.', 'Mrs.', 'Master', and 'Miss'-were
beginningto assume their modern meanings,' and the use of kinship
appellations, which stress the group status, rather than the personal
uniqueness, of the individual,was becoming unfashionable.2These are
minoraspectsof a largersocial process-the rise of modernindividualism
-of whichthe developmentof the novel-formis the chiefliteraryexpres-
sion; thenovelistsof themid-centurywerelikelyto be moreattentivethan
Defoe in the naming, and at the same time to the portrayal,of their
characters.
In christeningtheir beloved daughter,John and Elizabeth Andrews

disregardedthe traditionof piety which was embodied in their own
christiannames and that of theirauthor. The name 'Pamela' was con-
tained neitherin the Bible nor in the Calendar of Saints.
It was also extremelyrarein real life. The Richardsonianpronunciation
-evidenced in theversesPamela makes3-moved the acceptedstressfrom
Pamela to Pamela. Richardson4and Fielding5both commenton the rarity
ofthename,and thechangeofaccentoccupiedAaronHill, Mrs. Barbauld,6
and, at much greaterlength,the pages of Notes and Queries.7
It has been generallyassumed that the name comes from Sidney's
Arcadia,8and a passage fromthesecond partofPamela showsthatRichard-
son assumed both the heroine'sand the reader'sknowledgeof Musidorus
as the name of Pamela's lover.9 We can certainlyassume thatRichardson
See O.E.D. and Myra Reynolds,The LearnedLady in England(Boston, 1920), p. 76, fn.
2 See William Shenstone, 'Essays on Men, Manners, and Things', Works (London,
1764), ii. 156. Letter XXXI.
4 'Pamela-did you say?-A queer sort of Name! I've heard of it somewhere! Is it a
Christianor a Pagan Name?' [Pamela (Ist ed., Part II, London, 1741), iii. 316].
s '... a verystrangename, Pamela or Pamela: some pronounced it one way and some
the other' (foseph Andrews,Bk. IV, ch. 12).
6 Correspondence of Samuel Richardson(London, 1804), i. lxxviii.
7 2nd Ser. ix. 305, 394; 5th Ser. x. 88, 234; 9th Ser. xii. 141, 330 ....
8 e.g. by Charlotte Yonge, History of ChristianNames (London, 1863), ii. 485; Paul
Dottin, Samuel Richardson(Paris, 1931), pp. 59, 72; E. Poetzsche, Samuel Richardsons
Belesenheit(Kiel, 1904), p. 41.
9 Pamela relatesthatat a masquerade 'a PresbyterianParson came up, and bid me look
aftermy Musidorus-so I doubted not by this, it must be one who knew my name to be
Pamela' (Pt. II, Letter LVI). The Arcadia was certainlywell knownin the period-it was
reprintedtwice in 1725 and again in 1739. It was admired by several of Richardson's
friends,including Sarah Fielding, Mrs. Delany, and Aaron Hill. [See S. Fielding, Lives
ofCleopatraand Octavia, cit.A. D. McKillop, 'The Personal RelationsbetweenRichardson
and Fielding', M.P. xxviii (I93I), 433; Autobiography and Correspondence of Mrs Delany,
ed. S. C. Woolsey (Boston, 1882), p. 258; D. Brewster,Aaron Hill (New York, 1915),
p. 19o.] Further strong evidence is contained in W. M. Sale's forthcomingstudy of
Richardson's printing-house,where, mainly by comparing types and ornaments,it is
established that Richardson printed at least a part of the Arcadia as his share of the
1724/5edition of Sidney's works.
326 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
knew that his heroine's name suggested 'vaine amatorious romance',
ratherthan the pedestrianpiety of the Andrews household. The only
strictlyrealistic interpretationof Pamela's name, therefore,is social
pretentiousness on the partof the parents-as Fielding' was quick to point
out by giving Shamela's mothera triple stringof fashionablenames-
HenriettaMaria Honora-which givethe lie to herprofessionsofhumility.
The more importantexplanationof this departurefromrealismis that
Richardson,despite his frequentassertionsof superiority,continuesthe
traditionof romance,especiallyin his treatmentof women,whose literary
interestsand personal ideals were still, as he knew, influencedby the
patternsof romanticlove, even in the matterof names.2
Stereotypedchristiannames fromthe pastoraland heroicromanceshad
been verygenerallyadopted, especiallyas a courtship-convention, by the
polite societyof the seventeenthcentury. Their use was graduallyex-
tended fromamorous intriguesand gallantverses to the most blameless
conversationaland epistolaryintercourse,even amongstthe most rigidly
moraland puritangroups.3 The conventionappealed primarilyto women,
partlybecause it suggestedthe social patternsassociatedwithcourtlylove,
in whichthe lady played a flatteringlydominantrole. Such were the roles
of the heroinesin romances,and it was naturalthatmanywomenreaders
should projecttheirown aspirations-too oftenthwartedby their actual
subordinateposition in society-upon the names of these heroines.
Whatever the explanation,it is certain that the novel-readinggirls
satirizedin eighteenth-century comedyyearn to be re-christenedby the
name of a romanceheroine. One of the earliest,Biddy Tipkins, in The
Tender Husband (1705), is most eloquent on the subject:
How oftenMadam,mustI desireyouto layasidethatfamiliar name,Cousin
Biddy? I neverhearitwithoutblushing-didyou evermeetwitha heroinein
thoseidleromancesas youcall 'em,thatwas termedBiddy?... No, theheroine
has alwayssomething softand engagingin hername,something thatgivesus
a notionofthesweetnessofherbeautyandbehaviour, a namethatglidesthrough
halfa dozen tendersyllables,as Elisamonda,Clidamira,Deidamira,thatruns
upon vowels offthe tongue. . . . 'Tis strangerudenessthosefamiliarnames they
give us....4
Novel heroinesthemselvesusuallybore such names, and one of them,
' The attributionof Shamela to
Fielding is discussed, and furtherstrengthened,by
C. B. Woods in his article 'Fielding and the Authorshipof Shamela', P.Q. xxxv (1946),
248-72.
2 Dottin writes that in Pamela and Clarissa, Richardson used names 'suffisamment
romanesques pour impressionnerle genre de lecteur qu'il s'agissait d'atteindre'(op. cit.,

p. 72).
3 See the correspondenceof Mrs. Rowe, Mrs. Delany, and Philip Doddridge.
4 Act II, Sc. i.
Penelope Aubin's Lucinda, is also mostarticulateabout her good fortune;
she confessesthat
I was wonderfully
pleased thatmy Motherhad happenedto give me the
Name ofLucinda:it soundedin mythoughts Poetickand Romantick ... by it
I losttheFavourofan Aunt,whoit is supposedwouldhaveleftme all she was
worthhad my Motherconsentedto have me namedDorothyaftermyAunt's
Name. Alas! I was so foolishthatI lamentednotforthis,and I wouldnotfor
twicetheFortunehavebeen calledby so vulgara Name.'
The primarydiagnosticof such names is the ending in '-a' or '-ia';
CharlotteYonge notesthatin the eighteenthcentury'no heroinewould be
deemed worthyof figuringin a narrativewithoutthis flourishat the end
of her name'.2 Both Richardsonand Fieldingfollowthis convention;but
theirselectionof names withinthe categoryrevealsimportantand charac-
teristicdifferencesof attitude. Fielding's last two heroines,Sophia and
Amelia, bear by farthe commonestnames withinthe category,forboth
names had been popularized by the Brunswickdynasty.2This suggests
thattheircreator'sacquiescence in the romancetraditionwas formaland
unenthusiastic. The names that Richardson chose for his firsttwo
heroines,on the otherhand, althoughnottoo outrageousto be acceptedas
real, were rare and distinctively
romantic.
Richardsonwas certainlyaware of the importanceof book titles,3and
also of the value girlslike Biddy Tipkins attachedto the possessionof a
romanticname. But as a moralisthe could not endorse such attitudes.
Indeed he goes out of his way to criticize The TenderHusband, which
Pamela sees in London. Despite her admirationforSteele, she is 'forced
to disapproveof everycharacterin it, and the views of everyone'.4We
may surmise an especial objection to the scene where the gallant and
experiencedClerimontadvancesthe name 'Pamela' as a bait to trapBiddy
Tipkins. He knowsher aversionto her own name, and his flattering pre-
tence that her real name is 'Pamela' wins her rapturousaside-'I could
hear him ever'.5 It is unlikelyto be only a coincidencethat Richardson
should singleout foradversecommenta play whichrevealed,not onlythe
romancelineage of his heroine'sname, but its greatappeal to the novel-
readinggirlsof his day. It is more likelyto be an unconsciousattemptto
coverup the secretof his success,a success whichallowed him the luxury
of superciliouscontemptfor poor Biddy's longings. He had discovered
how to satisfythem withinthe limitsof the strictestmorality;the cere-
I A Collectionof Entertaining Historiesand Novels (London, 1739), i. 165.
2 Historyof ChristianNames, i. 485-6.
3 See his Correspondence,i. 2Iz-2.
4
Pt. 2, Letter LIV.
s Act II, Sc. i.
328 R.E.S.,VOL. 25, 1949(NO. 100,OCT.)
moniesoflawandbaptismhavefitted hisheroinefora triumph as dazzling
as anyin romance.
For Pamela,of course,is romancewith a difference. The central
character is notonlyPamela,thearcadianheroine,all simpleinnocence
and artlessbeauty;sheis alsothepoorMiss Andrews whohas herwayto
makein theworld. The love themeis suggested by herchristian name,
but it is givena realisticsettingby a surnamewhichinvolvesherin the
worldof family, material, and religiousobligations.The conflict of the
two roles-Pamela againstMiss Andrews-isthe essenceof the novel;
and therebyRichardson initiatesthe new development of fictionin the
eighteenth century, whichsetstheromantic or aspirationalsideofperson-
alityagainsta realistically presented background ofdomestic environment
and external necessity.
Richardson, characteristically,allowshis heroineto manipulateboth
rolesto her advantage.Sometimes, as the helplessMiss Andrews,she
staystoendurehercruelfateinMr. B.'s household, becausesheis resolved
'notto return backandbe a cloguponherdearparents'.'Butthepoverty
and servitude of Miss Andrewsis notallowedto limitPamela'spastoral
freedom fromnecessity:
BreadandwaterI canliveuponanywhere withcontent. WaterI shallget
anywhere; and if I can'tget bread I will like
live, a birdin winter,uponhips
andhaws,andatothertimesuponpignuts, potatoesandturnips.2
Herindependence fromtheobligations ofherstatus,thoughnotenough
to removehercompletely fromthetoils,is quitesufficient to baffle
Mr. B.,
accustomed as he is to thepropersubordination ofthepoor,andsurprised
by suchan inappropriate 'romantic turnforvirtue'.3He ascribesitto her
readinghabits-'thegirl'sheadis turnedbyromances andsuchidlestuff',4
he complains, onlyto discover thatherfather's headis 'turnedwiththem'3
too. Finallyhe is forcedto acceptPamelaAndrewsas a completeperson,
and renounces hisearliercertainty thathe couldmake'Pamelachangeher
name,without eitherActofParliament, or wedlock,andbe SallyGodwin
theSecond'.s
Richardson has endowedhis heroinemorerichlythanMr. B. forthis
struggle.It is difficult to attribute a fullandcomplexpersonality to a mere
cipher,and, consequently, he remainsa lay figurein a 'secrethistory',
withno morereality in thenovelthanhe had originally as thesubjectofa
pieceofwhispered gossipaboutthelocalsquire.
The choiceoftheletter'B' wasparticularly disastrous. As soonas 'Mr.
Pt. I, Letter I.
2
Pt. I, Letter XXVIII. See also XXX, XXXII.
3 Pt. I, Letter XXXI.
Pt. I, LetterXXVI. s Pt. I, Letter XXXI, Journal,'Thursday'.
B.' became 'Squire Booby' in Shamela,Richardson'sbluffwas called. He
had alreadyconfessedin the Introductionto the second editionofPamela
that'an anonymousgentleman'had pressedhim to 'avoid the Idea apt to
be join'd withthe word "Squire", by stylinghim "Sir Jamesor Sir John
&c".' But he had rejectedthesuggestion,proclaiminga loftydisregardfor
'double entendres'and refusingto 'see how Greatness,fromTitles, can
add Likeness,or Power,to the Passions'. Later, in thePrefaceto Part II,
he returnedto the theme,and justifiedthe retentionof 'Mr. B.' by the
'Necessity, for obvious Reasons, to vary and disguise, some Facts and
Circumstances,and also the Names of Persons,Places, &c'.
There were,no doubt,several'obvious reasons'whyRichardsondid not
inventa name for Mr. B., althoughhe had inventeda full one for his
heroine. He could justifyhimselfby the strongtraditionagainstnaming
thenobilityand gentryin writing,'and it is probablethathe wishedto turn
the conventionto account by retaining,whetherjustifiedor not, the sug-
gestiveand saleable aura of a true scandal of high life. Dr. Johnson-no
credulousreader-thoughtthat 'a writerdoes not feigna name of which
he only gives the initialletter',zand Richardsoncertainlywished to give
such an impression. But thereare other reasons why Mr. B. remainsa
cipher. Richardson's interestwas focused upon the heroine, and any
increase in the realityof her antagonistwould have underminedthe
credibilityof her interpretation of the story; a more convincingMr. B.,
validated by a completename, would have revealedthe factthat names,
and lack of names,are a part of the legerdemainwhichallows Pamela her
triumph.
This was one of the lessons enforcedin Shamela. Everyone,as an
epigramin the LondonMagazine forJune 1741 pointedout,
Admir'dPamela,tillShamelashown,
Appear'din everyColour-but herown:'
The mere substitutionof the names 'Shamela' and 'Mr. Booby' for
'Pamela' and 'Mr. B.' in an otherwiseunalteredPamela would have forced
the readerto interpretRichardson'swhole storyin the lightof Fielding's
ironicexposure.
It is possible that in choosing the name Richardsonwas himselfun-
consciouslyawareof the ambiguitiesof Pamela's characterand motivation.
Mrs. Barbauld pointed out4 that the followinglines fromPope's Epistle
toMiss Blount,withtheWorksof VoitureprovidesomethinglikeFielding's
interpretation of Pamela:
See H. T. Buckle, Historyof Civilisationin England (London, 1858), i. 238, fn.
2 Lives of the EnglishPoets, ed. G. B. Hill (Oxford, 190o5),iii. 381.
3 Cit. A. D. McKillop, Samuel Richardson(Chapel Hill, 1936), p. 74.
4 Correspondence of Samuel Richardson,i. lxvi.
330 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
The Gods,to cursePamelawithherprayers,
Gave thegiltcoachand dappledFlandersmares,
The shiningrobes,richjewels,bedsofstate,
And,to completeherbliss,a foolformate.'
The connotationsof her name, then, seem to carrythe same varied
possibilitiesof interpretationas are suggestedby her actions-possibilities
ranging from Sidney's pastoral princess to Pope's designing arriviste.
This ambiguity-a commonplaceof criticismboth then and later-is, of
course,closelyrelatedto the phenomenalsuccess of the novel itself,which
accommodateditselfto the tastes of all types of readers,fromlearned
clericsto the Biddy Tipkinses of the day. Richardson'sachievementcan
be appraisedin termsoftheskillwithwhichhe made thepublic forgetthat
'Pamela' was a romancename and forced it to thinkof its bearer as a
problematicbut convincinglyreal person.
'Clarissa', too, is a romancename, and in his greatestnovel Richardson
makes us forgetit even more completely.It is the name of Huon's sister
in Huon ofBordeaux,and it had been used in a 1737 romancewhose title
may have attractedRichardson-The History of Clorana, the beautiful
Arcadian,or VirtueRewarded.2It is used, as a typicalromancename, by
Pope in The Rape of theLock,3and, in the form'Claricia', by Scuderyin
Clelia.4 The name had also become debased to some extentand was used
as a conventionalname forthe nymphsof the town; it occurs with this
sense in the Tatler,sand in Robert Dodsley's 1748 CollectionofPoemsby
Several Hands.6
But 'Clarissa' has otherconnotations.It was used forpatheticheroines
of stories in the Female Tatler7and the UniversalSpectator,8and the
ClarissaofYoung's NightThoughts dies in givingbirthtotherakeLorenzo's
child.9 It also has a moreremotereligiousflavour,well suitedto Richard-
son's chaste bride of Christ,fromthe Clarisse,an orderof nuns founded
by Santa Chiara, and stillflourishing in the eighteenthcentury.The root
derivation, from is
clarus, equally suited to his paragonof virtue.
The name,then,combinesan emphaticromanceancestrywithmingled
overtonesof fashionablegallantry,religiousabnegation,and the pathos of
an earlyand tragicdeath. It thus has the same complex and apparently
1
11.49-52. It was first
publishedin 1712.
2 Cit. BrianW. Downs,SamuelRichardson (London,1928),p. 159.
3 Canto III, 11. 127-30 (1714 ed.).
* See Helen Sard Hughes, 'Characterisationin Clarissa Harlowe [sic]', J.E.G.P. xiii
(I914),said
II5. for instance Chloe and
s 'I Clarissa are two eminenttoasts. A Gentleman (who
keeps his greyhoundand gun, and one could thinkmightknow better) told me he sup-
posed theywere Papishes, fortheirnames were not English' (18 June 1709).
6 ii. 224-7. 7 8 Aug. 1709.
S8 Oct. 1729. 9 Night,v, 11.586-8.
contradictory appropriatenessas thatof his firstheroine. But beforecon-
sidering this appropriatenessmore fully,the effectof its use, standing
alone, in the title,requirescomment.
Richardson knew that his heroine's christianname sounded like an
amatorynomde guerre. Lovelace reportsand commentson the following
conversationwithMiss Rawlins:
. . You heardme call hermyClarissa.
-I did,butthoughtit to be a feignedorlove-name, said Miss Rawlins.
I wonderwhatis Miss Rawlinslove-name, Jack. Most ofthefairromancers
havein theirearlywomanhoodchosenlove-names.No parsonevergavemore
realnamesthanI havegivenfictitious ones. And to verygood purpose:many
a sweetdearhas answeredme a letterforthesakeofowninga namewhichher
godmother nevergaveher.'
Richardson,then,was fullyaware of the lure of romanticlove-names,
and of how a seducer could use them to suggestthe attractionsof love
in vacuo, removedfromthe inhibitingcontextof parson or godmother.
Yet he gave his chasteheroinesuch a name,and made it standalone on his
title-page.
In his own life Richardson continued the puritan traditionwhich
opposed the use of christiannames even betweenhusband and wife.2 In
Clarissa itselfhe moralizes on the subject, presentingthe fall of Sally
Martin as implicitin her indulgencein this matter:
. . She knewthe Christian, as well as surname, of everyprettyfellowwho
frequented publicplaces; and affectedto speakof themby theirformer.3
Using christiannames was a verbal flauntingof promiscuousintimacy,
but the titlesof his firsttwo novels implysuch an intimacy.
This, of course, was a fairlycommon conventionfor novel-titles.Sir
Charles Grandisonmakes the general contrastclear-the use of a single,
christianname forwomen,but of a full name formen, is part of a tacit
discriminationbetween the sexes which is traditionalin the novel, and
which is reflectedin the traditionalnovel-title.AgainstJosephAndrews,
TomJones,Sir CharlesGrandison,TristramShandy,RoderickRandom,we
can set Pamela, Clarissa,Amelia,Evelina,Emma. The use of the christian
name only for eponymousheroinessuggeststhatwhereasthe novel-hero
is traditionallyaccorded a complete social being combiningboth public
and privatefunctions,the novel-heroineis definedmerelyas an object for
Clarissa ('Everyman Edition', London, 1932), iii, Letter V.

2 See William Gouge's popular Of DomesticalDuties (1622), cit. L. B. Wright,Middle
Class Culture in Elizabethan England (Chapel Hill, 1935), p. 222. Richardson's own
practicecan be seen in his correspondenceand in the usage of the charactersof whom he
approves in the novels-both of a Victorianformality.
3 'Conclusion supposed to be writtenby Mr. Belford', iv. 537.
332 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
arousing,and eventuallyreciprocating, the passion of romanticlove. She
is herselfwithoutany complete or stable social personalityuntil male
generosityhas endowed her with the essentialattributeof a surname,a
surnamewhose acquisitionis assumedto be her main purposein life,and
whose ceremonialratification in marriagethereforeends her story.
Clarissa,or The Historyofa YoungLady, belies the expectationaroused
by its title'sacquiescencein this tradition.Clarissa's greatnesslies in her
rejectionof any such limitationof her freedom,and Richardson'ssuccess
in transcendingthe traditionaltreatmentof the novel-heroineis shownby
the way thathis masterpieceis veryoftenspokenof,not as Clarissa,but as
'Clarissa Harlowe'.'
Her familyname persists,obstinately,and the backgroundwhich it
invokesis mobilizedas an essentialpartof her tragicdilemma;the varied
possibilitiessuggestedby her christianname are all subject to the limita-
tions of her social and familyenvironment.She is only free to act, to
realize her destiny,by escapingfromthe safe,but infinitely restrictedrole
of being Miss Harlowe: and it is because she has eventuallysecured this
freedomthat she can be degradedby a lover whose desirefor Clarissa is
poisoned by his hatred forall the Harlowes-'Harlowe! How that hated
name sticksin my throat-but I shall give her for it the name of love
[i.e. Lovelace].'z His plan to abase in her the name of Harlowe, before
raising her up to the name of Lovelace, destroysthem both: and this
because, contraryto his-and the novel-reader's-expectation,Clarissa's
aim in lifeis much morethanthe acquisitionof a new surname.
An essentialelementin the greaterdramaticintensityof Richardson's
second novel is the factthat Robert Lovelace, unlikeMr. B., has a com-
pletename,and one whichseemsto be intricately relatedto the complexity
of his relationshipwith Clarissa.
Popular memoryhas confusedthe names Lovelace and Lothario; the
formername remainsin France as a type of the dashing rake, although
Lothariohas replacedit in thissense in England.3 This suggestsa general
tendencyto overlooksome aspectsof Richardson'sLovelace whichare too
bestial to be described by the character-typerake, and, forgetting the
brutal climax of his career,to stresshis similarityto Lothario in Rowe's
The Fair Penitent.
Johnsonthoughtthat 'the characterof Lothario seems to have been
The practice ruffledSaintsbury's academic calm. He wrote, in the preface to the
'Everyman Edition', 'Clarissa, which (for some inexplicable reason) illiteratepeople will
call Clarissa Harlowe'. But the tendencywas strongerthan he knew; underneath his
initials, in the bibliography,we can read 'Clarissa Harlowe, 1748'. The first,and most
later editions use 'The History of Miss Clarissa Harlowe' as the headline.
2 i, Letter XXXI.
3 See D.N.B., Lovelace, Richard.
expanded into thatof Lovelace', althoughhe foundthatonly Richardson
had produced the correct'moral effect'of losing'the hero in the villain'.'
Richardsonhimself,as in theparallelcase ofPamela and TheFair Penitent,
went out of his way to bringforwardthe analogy,onlyto rejectit scorn-
fully. 'Calista', he makesBelfordcomment,aftera comparisonofthe story
with The Fair Penitent,is 'a luscious, desiringwench'.z But some of the
unconsciousassociationsof the names of Richardson'sprotagonistsseem
to reinforce theparallelwhichRichardsonwishedto exclude. For Lovelace
has a pleasant-sounding name,thatof a famouscavalierfamily,3 as well as
thatof the rakein Vanbrugh'sRelapse,underthe form'Loveless'; and the
overtoneof 'love-less' can suggestunrequitedpassion, as well as hard-
heartedness.In both of Clarissa Harlowe's names,on the otherhand, we
can perhaps detect suggestionsof sexual guilt. 'Clarissa' is very like
'Calista', whose name had become a byword of femininefrailty;4 and
'Harlowe' is the closestpropername to 'harlot'.
Freud has givenmanyexamplesof the reappearanceof repressedwords
and ideas in disguisedforms,and shownhow theyare especiallyproneto
affectour memoryof proper names.5 The literaryhistorian-perhaps
fortunately-rarely knowsenoughabout an authorto followhim intothis
private and unconscious world,and the path of such inquiriesis strewn
with examplesof scholarlyabsurdityarisingfromthe elaborationof far-
fetched coincidences. In this case, however,we know enough about
Richardsonto be able to amplifythe presentsuggestion.His treatment of
Sally Godwin in Pamela, and of Sally Martin,PollyHorton, and Mrs. Sin-
clairin Clarissa,thefactthatboththesenovelsrequirethetacitassumption
that the passions of his heroinesare aroused by rakes,togetherwith his
own interestin fallenwomen and in the 'Magdalen Charity'6-all these
suggest an obsessional interestin criminal sexuality,an incompletely
masteredstrivingfor the kind of experiencethat 'Mr. B.' and Lovelace
represent.It is likelythatRichardsonhad a deep unconsciousinvestment
in his hero'ssadisticattemptsto violateClarissa,and thatit was thisidenti-
ficationwhich allowed Lovelace to emergeas a more attractivecharacter
than his bestial role warrants. When Richardsondiscovered,beforethe
publicationof the last volumesof Clarissa,thatLovelace was stillpopular
I Lives, ed. cit., ii. 67. 2 iv, Letter LII.
3 The last holderof the title,Nevil, Lord Lovelace, was 'a man of letters,a friendto the
muses, and highlyfashionedaccording to the breedingof those days' [S. Jenyns,Works
(London, 1790), i, 40o,fn.]. He died in 1736 (D.N.B.).
4 See Pope, Moral Essays, ii, 'Of the Charactersof Women', 28-31.
s An acceptance of the unconscious connotationsof names is not, of course, restricted
to the psycho-analyticschool; theycan be explained,forexample, in termsof eighteenth-
centuryassociationism,or of the linguisticprinciple of unconscious analogy established
in Hermann Paul's Prinzipien(188o).
6
See Brewster,Aaron Hill, p. 263, and Richardson's Correspondence, i. clv, v. 97.
334 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
withhis readers,he revisedhis treatment to makeit moresevere,and made
his abhorrenceexplicitin footnotes.I But althoughRichardson'suncon-
scious identification
withhis hero's purpose was balked of overtsatisfac-
tion,it was not whollyrepressed.We can stillfindtracesof it in thenames
he chose forhis protagonists;the pleasantovertonesof the name Robert
Lovelace suggest a more favourablebias towards him than Richardson
could openlyreveal,and in the hidden associationsof his heroine'sname
he seems,unconsciously,to have accomplishedhis otherwisethwartedaim
of degradation.
There is no space here to supplementthis suggestionwith a more
detailedanalysis; it is onlya highlytentativeattemptto illustratehow the
complexityof Richardson'sattitudeto his charactersis reflectedin thevery
varied associationsof theirnames.
This wealth of implicationcan be discoveredeven in his last and, by
generalconsent,most tedious work. Sir Charles Grandison'sname com-
bines the flourishof rank, a non-biblicalchristianname3 with a royal
flavour,and a surnamewhichhappilycombinesthesuggestionofgrandeur
with a flatteringderivationfromthe Irish peerage,of which Richardson
was certainlyaware.4 In his lastnovel Richardsonwas in thecalmerwaters
of self-adulation,and certainlyhe could not have chosen an aristocratic
name more similarto his own. But even in the name of the perfectman
we can detecta trainof thoughtwhich suggestsRichardson'ssuppressed
admirationof rakery. The most famousbearer of the name 'Grandison'
was Barbara,Duchess of Cleveland,mistressof Charles II: it is possible
thatthecollocationCharles-Grandisonmayhaveoriginatedin Richardson's
mind throughtheirhistoricassociation.
III
Fielding was afarlesssubjectivenovelist
thanRichardson,and thenames
of his charactersdo not show the complex,over-determined associations
x See Correspondence,i. lxxxix. Belford's caveat against the coupling of Calista and
Clarissa occurs in the last volume.
2 See Kenneth Burke, The
PhilosophyofLiteraryForm (Baton Rouge, 1941), pp. 25-6,
66, for comparable examples. In a more detailed study it might also be necessary to
reconsiderthe possible model for Lovelace. Both Wharton and Lord Euston have been
suggested as the prototypesof Lovelace, and of Young's Lorenzo, also associated with a
Clarissa; and Johnson,in hintingat a definitemodel for Lorenzo, also introduces the
names of Lovelace and Calista, in the 'Life of Young'.
3 There was a growingprejudice againstbiblical names, more especiallyOld Testament
names like Richardson's own. See Edward Mangin, An Essay on LightReading (London,
1808), pp. 107-8.
4 The second Viscount is mentioned several times in the lettersof Sir Thomas Rowe,
which Richardsonowned, edited,and printed[Dottin,Revue anglo-amdricaine, vii (I929),
55-9]. The contemporarybearerof the titlewas an acquaintance of Richardson's friends,.
the Delanys (Lettersof Mrs. Delany, To Mrs. Dewes, 2 Nov. 1751).
thatwe have been discussing. He came to the novel fromquite different
traditions-fromthe classics, comedy,and satire. Hence his characters,
especiallyhis secondaryones but also his firsttwo heroes,tendto have the
traditional'characteristicnames' of comedy, reflectingFielding's pre-
occupationwith'not men but manners'.
Fielding makesJosephAndrewsexplainhis name in a letterto Pamela
recountinghis glorious resistanceto the overturesof his mistress.' His
surname shows him rivalling his sister's illustriouschastity,and his
christianname supportshis pretensionsby recallingthe storyof Potiphar's
wife. Of theothercharactersinJosephAndrews,'few... are endowedwith
English surnames-none outside the Adams, Andrews, and Wilson
families'.z
These few realisticnames form a strongcontrastwith the facetious
names given to low and comic characters. In each succeeding novel
Fielding decreasedthe proportionof characterswhose names alone were
enoughto show thattheywere seen entirelyfroma comic or satiricpoint
of view. For the majorityof names which 'had a more modem Termina-
tion',3Fielding may have been indebtedto the list of subscribersto the
1724 folio editionof GilbertBurnet'sHistoryof his Own Time,which he
is knownto have owned. The list includes: Thomas Jones,H. Partridge,
several Westerns,William James, Atkinson,Bennett,Booth, Edwards,
Harrison,Millar,Matthews,and Trent.4 This maybe a merecoincidence,
as Cross believes,5but the inclusivenessof the listsuggestsratherstrongly
thatFieldinghad recourseto a randommethodof selection,much as later
writershave used directories.
It is in any case certainthat these realisticnames in Fielding are very
commonplace,and do not seek particularity.The name 'Tom Jones',for
example,symbolizesthe high degreeof generalitywhich Fieldingsought.
As a foundling,theherobears thechristiannameofhis godfather, Thomas
Allworthy,and the surnameof his putativemother,JennyJones.6 The
result,thoughexplainedin termsof the practiceof his day,is a compound
of two of the commonestnames in the language.7
Fieldingthoughtofthename 'Tom' as typicallyunheroic. He discussed
it in a Championpaper on the superstitions about names:
The firstI shallmentionis Thomas. It is, I believe,pretty thatthere
certain,
'Joseph Andrews,Bk. I, ch. Io.
2 W. L. Cross, Historyof Henry Fielding(New Haven, I918), i. 342.
3 The anonymousauthor of the 1751 Essay Upon the New Species of Writing founded
by Mr. Fieldingnoted the differencebetween them and names that 'bore some reference
to the character'(p. I8).
4 N. & Q., 26 Nov. 1898, p. 426. s Cross,op. cit.i. 343.
6 TomJones,Bk. I, ch. 6, and Bk. II, ch. 2.
7 See Withycombe, op. cit.,p. xxii.
336 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
hathbeenformerly someveryremarkable sillyfellowofthisappellation,
whence
withno greathonour.WitnessTom Fool,Tom Dingle,
thisnameis transferred
CousinTom, SillyTom, and the applicationof it to themostinsignificant
of
birds,namely,a Tom-Tit.'
As thoughto emphasizeits low associations,therewere two somewhat
scandalouscontemporary bearersofthename 'Tom Jones',whomFielding
had some reason to know about. In a well-knownpamphletissued by
Curll, Causes of Divorce,2one JohnDormer, Esq., cited 'Tom Jones,his
footman',who 'derivedhis birthfromthe dregsof the populace' and had
'dared to commit the vilest acts of lewdness with his master's wife'.
AnotherThomas Joneswas a well-knownhighwayman,and had his life
reprintedfromAlexander Smith's Historiesof Highwaymen, in Captain
Charles Johnson'sGeneralHistoryof theLives and Adventures of themost
Famous Highwaymen,Murderers,Street-Robbers &c... , immediately
afterthe lifeof JonathanWild.3
It is not likely,however,that these two individualstypifyFielding's
dominant attitudetowards the name 'Tom Jones'. It was much too
generalizedforthat. It is used in a 1743 pamphletas a type name for a
soldier,4and therewere severalothermore reputablebearersof the name
in Fielding's day.s It was almostcertainlyselectedby Fielding-whether
fromthe Burnetlist of subscribersor not-because it was freefromthe
'strangekindof magickbias' of most names and belongedto the class of
'neutralnames' of which Mr. Shandy,giving'Tom', 'Jack',and 'Dick' as
examples,affirmed:
thattherehad been as manyknavesand fools,at least,as wiseand good men,
sincetheworldbegan,who had indifferently bornethem;-so that,likeequal
forcesactingagainsteachotherin contrary he thought
directions, theymutually
destroyed each other'seffects.6
Fielding's Tom Jones is emphaticallyno hero of romance, but an
7 June 174o. He had alreadyshown this attitudein Tom Thumb. On the otherhand,
Thomas Heartfree,in JonathanWild, is a good man.
2 Attributedin Curll's best mannerto the Archbishopof Canterbury. It went through
several editions,and is included in 'Leonora's Library' (Spectator,12 Apr. 1711) under
the headingFielding'sTrial. The volume's firstsubjectwas the case of Fielding's bigamous
relative'Beau Fielding'. This, and Fielding's own interestin marriagelaws (see Covent
GardenJournal,68), may have led him to read the work. The quotation is fromthe 1735
title-page.
3 Ist ed. 1734: his main offence,like that of the footmanand of Fielding's hero, was
sexual-he was hanged for robbingand raping a farmer'swife.
4 A True Dialogue betweenThomasJonesa Trooper... and JohnSmitha Serjeant ...
printedforB. C. in Paternoster-Row,1743.
s e.g. the Chaplain of St. Saviour's, Southwark(1727-62), and the secretaryof 'The
Most Honourable and Loyal Society of Ancient Britons'. (See 1717 pamphlet, The Rise
and Progressof the . . . Society of AncientBritons,in B.M. Cat.)
6 TristramShandy, Bk. I, ch. 19.
exemplarof thegrowingmale who 'bad as he is, mustserveforthe heroof
this story'.' His authorviewed the developmentof 'littleTommy' in the
detached lightof intellectualcomedy,and he must have been surprised
when the public, trainedon the vicariousidentification that Richardson
had done so much to foster,began to considerTom Jonesas a patternof
conductwithwhich Fielding as a personmust necessarilybe associated.2
The name alone should have made clear,if Fielding'sstatedintentionsfor
thecomicproseepic werenotenough,thatno uncriticalvicariousidentifica-
tion of any kind was intended.3
In his last novel Fieldingtookone ofthe commonestpolitenamesofthe
day forhis title. The name 'Amelia' barelyfulfilsthe definitionof novel-
heroinesgivenby PollyHoneycombe'snurse-'women withhardchristian
names', and certainlydoes nothave such an immediateromance-connota-
tion as 'Pamela' and 'Clarissa' do. It is in facta compromisebetweenthe
traditionaltype of heroine's name and the requirementsof Fielding's
sombretheme. He could not symbolizehis real subjectin the title,forto
have called a novel 'Mrs. Booth' would have outragedthe expectationsof
the readingpublic with its 'barbarous genealogy'.4 Fielding went a long
way in his struggleagainst the conventionalromanticdefinitionof the
heroine; but the novel had to wait until Euge'nieGrandet and Anna
Kareninafortitleswhere the inclusionof the heroine'ssurnameemphati-
callyassertsthesocial and familysettingas an essentialelementof thestory,
and untilMadame Bovaryfora titlewhichproclaimsthatits subjectis the
fateof a woman aftermarriage.5
There is one set of associationsin the names of the hero and heroineof
Amelia which may reflectFielding's re-appraisementof Richardson. In
Shamela and JosephAndrews,Mr. B. is called 'Booby', and the implied
judgementis just in the lightof prevailingaristocraticstandards. But in
Amelia,Fieldingno longercondoneslapses frommale chastity;he demon-
stratesthe suffering which the double standardinflictson the wife. The
name 'Booth' can be seen as anotherpossible filling-outof Richardson's
'Mr. B.'-a hiddenatonementfor'Booby'. This possibilityis givenslight
support by Austin Dobson's statementthat 'in some later editions of
Pamela, an endeavour has been made to neutralize this outrage (i.e.
'Mr. Booby' for 'Mr. B.' in Shamela by revealing 'Mr. B.' as 'Mr.
I Tom Jones,Bk. III, ch. 2.
See Correspondenceof Richardson,iv. z28o-, and F. T. Blanchard, Fielding the
Novelist(New Haven, 1926), pp. 28-70.
3 Old England, 16 Dec. 1749, hopes that whores 'will hardlyforthe futurebe so very
fond of calling theirPensioners by the name of TomJones,nor the Fribbles theirHarlots
by that of Sophia' (cit. Blanchard, op. cit., p. 42).
4 Biddy Tipkins's phrase in The TenderHusband, II. i.
s There are many exceptions to these generalizations: e.g. Fanny Hill (1745), Mrs.
Armytage(1836).
4690.100 22
338 R.E.S., VOL. 25, 1949 (NO. 100, OCT.)
Boothby'.I Since no such edition(and it was in any case a modem edition
of which Dobson spoke)2has been found,we can onlybe certainthatthe
sequence 'B.-Booby-Booth' has led at least one studentof Richardson
to amplifythe serieswith'Boothby'. But it is at least possible thatField-
ing's selectionof the name Booth was an unconsciousreparationfor his
previous parody of Richardson'speccant lover. This view is supported
by the parallel euphonic progressionof the names of the heroines-
'Pamela'-'Shamela'-'Amelia'--a progressionwhichwas evidentlynoted
by an anonymousparodistwho completedit by announcingforpublica-
tion, shortlyafterthe appearanceof Amelia,'Shamelia, a Novel'.3
Despite the shiftin emphasisshownin Amelia,withits much-increased
proportionofrealisticnames,themaincontrastbetweentheuse ofpersonal
names by Richardsonand Fielding remainsunchanged. Richardsonhas
no theoreticalbias towardsthe representative.His vicariousparticipation
in the private and often unconscious complexitiesof personal life is
reflectedin thenameshe uses,nameswhichsuggesttheuniqueindividuality
of his main characters,and round which clusterall kindsof complexand
yet obscurelyrelevantassociations. Fielding, on the other hand, avoids
suggesting,even in their names, that his charactersare unique human
beings. Even his protagonistshave conspicuouslycommonnames,and the
degree of theirindividualizationis furtherreduced by their settingin a
social frameworkwhereotherpeople have only incompleteor 'character-
istic' names. The realityof Tom Jones,for example, is limitedby his
dealingswithBlifiland Allworthy, and takeson someoftheincompleteness
of a foster-brother who has no christianname,and a godfatherwho is only
the embodimentof 'all' that his creatorconsidered'worthy'. Fielding's
use of names is thereforein agreementwith the assertionsof his critical
writing:that his interestas a novelistlies in those aspects of character
which are representative of all mankind.
x Dobson, Samuel Richardson(London, 1902), p. 43, fn. 2.
2 Reported by Aleyn Lyell Reade, 'Richardson's Pamela: her Original', N.
& Q.,
27 June 1908, p. 503.
3 See Cross, op. cit., ii. 335. The work has not survived.

The Naming Conventions of 18th Century Novels

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Naming Conventions of 18th Century Novels

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Naming of Characters in Defoe, Richardson, and Fielding

In christeningtheir beloved daughter,John and Elizabeth Andrews

romanesques pour impressionnerle genre de lecteur qu'il s'agissait d'atteindre'(op. cit.,

Clarissa ('Everyman Edition', London, 1932), iii, Letter V.

3 See D.N.B., Lovelace, Richard.

You might also like