Produced by Meredith Bach, Jane Hyland, and the OnlineDistributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. (Thisfile was produced from images generously made availableby The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries.)
ROXANA
_I was rich, beautiful, and agreeable, and not yet old_
PAGE 244]
The Cripplegate Edition
THE WORKS OF DANIEL DEFOE
THE FORTUNATE MISTRESSOR A HISTORY OF THE LIFE OF MADEMOISELLE DE BELEAUKNOWN BY THE NAME OF THE LADY ROXANA
NEW YORK . . _MCMVIII_GEORGE D. SPROUL
_Copyright, 1904, by_ THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
UNIVERSITY PRESS . JOHN WILSON AND SON, CAMBRIDGE, U.S.A.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
ROXANA _Frontispiece_
THE BREWER AND HIS MEN _Page_ 12
THE JEWELLER IS ABOUT TO LEAVE FOR VERSAILLES 74
THE VISIT OF THE PRINCE 90
THE DUTCH MERCHANT CALLS ON ROXANA. 286
THE AMOUR DRAWS TO AN END 302
ROXANA'S DAUGHTER AND THE QUAKER 479
ROXANA IS CONFRONTED WITH HER DAUGHTER 534
INTRODUCTION
In March, 1724, was published the narrative in which Defoe came, perhapseven nearer than in _Moll Flanders_, to writing what we to-day call anovel, namely: _The Fortunate Mistress; or, a History of the Life andVast Variety of Fortunes of Mademoiselle de' Belau; afterwards calledthe Countess of Wintelsheim, in Germany. Being the Person known by thename of the Lady Roxana, in the Time of King Charles II_. No secondedition appeared till after Defoe's death, which occurred in 1731. Thenfor some years, various editions of _The Fortunate Mistress_ came out.Because Defoe had not indicated the end of his chief characters soclearly as he usually did in his stories, several of these latereditions carried on the history of the heroine. Probably none of thecontinuations was by Defoe himself, though the one in the edition of1745 has been attributed to him. For this reason, and because it hassome literary merit, it is included in the present edition.
That this continuation was not by Defoe is attested in various ways. Inthe first place, it tells the history of Roxana down to her death inJuly, 1742, a date which Defoe would not have been likely to fix, forhe died himself in April, 1731. Moreover, the statement that she wassixty-four when she died, does not agree with the statement at thebeginning of Defoe's narrative that she was ten years old in 1683. Shemust have been born in 1673, and consequently would have been sixty-ninein 1742. This discrepancy, however, ceases to be important when weconsider the general confusion of dates in the part of the bookcertainly by Defoe. The title-page announces that his heroine was "knownby the name of the Lady Roxana, in the Time of King Charles II." Shemust have been known by this name when she was a child of eleven ortwelve, then, for she was ten when her parents fled to England "about1683," and Charles II. died in February, 1685. Moreover, she was notmarried till she was fifteen; she lived eight years with her husband;and then she was mistress successively to the friendly jeweller, thePrince, and the Dutch merchant. Yet after this career, she returned toLondon in time to become a noted toast among Charles II.'s courtiers andto entertain at her house that monarch and the Duke of Monmouth.
A stronger argument for different authorship is the difference in stylebetween the continuation of _Roxana_ and the earlier narrative. In thecontinuation Defoe's best-known mannerisms are lacking, as two instanceswill show. Critics have often called attention to the fact that_fright_, instead of _frighten_, was a favourite word of Defoe. Now_frighten_, and not _fright_, is the verb used in the continuation.Furthermore, I have pointed out in a previous introduction[1] that Defoewas fond of making his characters _smile_, to show either kindliness orshrewd penetration. They do not _smile_ in the continuation.
There are other differences between the original story of _The FortunateMistress_ and the continuation of 1745. The former is better narrativethan the latter; it moves quicker; it is more real. And yet there is amanifest attempt in the continuation to imitate the manner and thesubstance of the story proper. There is a dialogue, for example, betweenRoxana and the Quakeress, modelled on the dialogues which Defoe was sofond of. Again, there is a fairly successful attempt to copy Defoe'scircumstantiality; there is an amount of detail in the continuationwhich makes it more graphic than much of the fiction which has beengiven to the world. And finally, in understanding and reproducing thecharacters of Roxana and Amy, the anonymous author has done remarkablywell. The character of Roxana's daughter is less true to Defoe'sconception; the girl, as he drew her, was actuated more by naturalaffection in seeking her mother, and less by interest. The character ofthe Dutch merchant, likewise, has not changed for the better in thecontinuation. He has developed a vindictiveness which, in our formermeetings with him, seemed foreign to his nature.
I have said that in _The Fortunate Mistress_ Defoe has come nearer thanusual to writing what we to-day call a novel; the reason is that he hashad more success than usual in making his characters real. Though manyof them are still wooden--lifeless types, rather than individuals--yetthe Prince, the Quakeress, and the Dutch merchant occasionally wake tolife; so rather more does the unfortunate daughter; and more yet, Amyand Roxana. With the exception of Moll Flanders, these last two are morevitalised than any personages Defoe invented. In this pair, furthermore,Defoe seems to have been interested in bringing out the contrast betweencharacters. The servant, Amy, thrown with another mistress, might havebeen a totally different woman. The vulgarity of a servant she wouldhave retained under any circumstances, as she did even when promotedfrom being the maid to being the companion of Roxana; but it wasunreasoning devotion to her mistress, combined with weakness ofcharacter, which led Amy to be vicious.
Roxana, for her part, had to the full the independence, the initiative,which her woman was without,--or rather was without when acting forherself; for when acting in the interests of her mistress, Amy was adifferent creature. Like all of Defoe's principal characters, Roxana iseminently practical, cold-blooded and selfish. After the first pang atparting with her five children, she seldom thinks of them except asencumbrances; she will provide for them as decently as she can withoutpersonal inconvenience, but even a slight sacrifice for the sake of oneof them is too much for her. Towards all the men with whom she hasdealings, and towards the friendly Quakeress of the Minories, too, sheshows a calculating reticence which is most unfeminine. The continuatorof our story endowed the heroine with wholly characteristic selfishnesswhen he made her, on hearing of Amy's death, feel less sorrow for themiserable fate of her friend, than for her own loss of an adviser.
And yet Roxana is capable of fine feeling, as is proved by those tearsof joy for the happy change in her fortunes, which bring about thatrealistic love scene between her and the Prince in regard to thesupposed paint on her cheeks. Again, when shipwreck threatens her andAmy, her emotion and repentance are due as much to the thought that shehas degraded Amy to her own level as to thoughts of her more flagrantsins. That she is capable of feeling gratitude, she shows in hergenerosity to the Quakeress. And in her rage and remorse, on suspectingthat her daughter has been murdered, and in her emotion several timeson seeing her children, Roxana shows herself a true woman. In short,though for the most part monumentally selfish, she is yet saved frombeing impossible by several displays of noble emotion. One of thesurprises, to a student of Defoe, is that this thick-skinned, mercantilewriter, the vulgarest of all our great men of letters in the earlyeighteenth century, seems to have known a woman's heart better tha
n aman's. At least he has succeeded in making two or three of his womencharacters more alive than any of his men. It is another surprise thatin writing of women, Defoe often seems ahead of his age. In the argumentbetween Roxana and her Dutch merchant about a woman's independence,Roxana talks like a character in a "problem" play or novel of our ownday. This, perhaps, is not to Defoe's credit, but it is to his creditthat he has said elsewhere:[2] "A woman well-bred and well-taught,furnished with the ... accomplishments of knowledge and behaviour, is acreature without comparison; her society is the emblem of sublimeenjoyments; ... and the man that has such a one to his portion, hasnothing to do but to rejoice in her, and be thankful." After readingthese words, one cannot but regret that Defoe did not try to createheroines more virtuous than Moll Flanders and Roxana.
It is not only in drawing his characters that Defoe, in _The FortunateMistress_, comes nearer than usual to producing a novel. This narrativeof his is