No More Learning

251 (#273) ############################################

Evelyn's Life of Mrs Godolphin 251
Lady Sylvius, to whom Evelyn afterwards addressed his Life
of Mrs Godolphin, introduced Margaret Blagge to Evelyn. She
was married privately to Sidney Godolphin (afterwards earl of
Godolphin), at the Temple church, on 16 May 1675; on which
Evelyn remarks, 'Her not acquainting me with this particular
of a good while after, occasioned a friendly quarrel between us. '
On 3 September 1678, she gave birth to a son, and she died of
puerperal fever on the 9th of September following. Evelyn's
expression of his grief occupies some space in the diary; but he
adds, 'It is not here that I pretend to give her character, having
design to consecrate her worthy life to posterity. ' Her husband
was so completely overcome by his grief at her loss that the entire
care of the funeral was committed to Evelyn? The two men who
loved her best looked over and sorted her papers, and they were
astonished 'to see what she had written, her youth considered. '
We have great cause to be grateful for the Life of Mrs
Godolphin, a book which, written with fidelity and charm, presents
to us a portrait of a woman who lived for those around her, and,
while always seeking heavenly guidance in her difficult position at
court, was never austere, but moved in her proper sphere with an
air of bright cheerfulness seasoned with witty speech. Her life,
however, was a great trial, and, when, at last, she was allowed to
take leave of the king and queen, her biographer tells us
the moment she sett foote in the coach her eyes sparkled with joy . . . the
roses of her cheeks were soe fresh and her countenance soe gay as if with the
rest of her perfections she had caryed all the beautyes as well as all the virtue
of the court away with her too. As she left the presence chamber a whisper
went round the circle-'the court had never such a starre in all its hemi-
sphere.
Evelyn was a good husband and a fond father, and the most
pathetic portions of the diary are devoted to the troubles which
came upon him owing to the early deaths of many of his children.
His widow thus testified in her will to her husband's devotion
to her:
•
His care of my education was such as might become a father, a lover, a
friend and a husband, for instruction, tenderness, affection and fidelity to
the last moment of his life; which obligation I mention with a gratitude to
his memory, ever dear to me; and I must not omit to own the sense of my
parent's care and goodness in placing me in such worthy hands.
1 Lady Sunderland, a woman of a different type, wrote to her favourite correspondent
Henry Sidney: «Mr Godolphin, I believe, will best like your saying nothing to him on
that subject, for dare swear there neither is, nor will be, any such thing as his
marriage. ' Diary of Henry Sidney, ed. Blencowe, R. W. , vol. I, p. 209.
>


## p. 252 (#274) ############################################

252 Memoir and Letter Writers
The publication of Evelyn's diary only increased the fame
of the writer, and added a fuller portraiture of one who was well
known before the new material appeared. On the other hand,
the fame of Pepys had so far escaped recognition at the time
of the publication of his diary that it was an entirely new man
who was now presented to public notice. The enthralling interest
of the diary has had the effect of urging lovers of Pepys to obtain
further information respecting him, with the result that we have
come to know much more respecting his life-history, and this know-
ledge has added greatly to our appreciation of the importance of the
author. The reputation of Samuel Pepys had much changed at
various times. When he died, his great qualities were generally
recognised, although he was half forgotten as years rolled by; but
it is to the credit of the admiralty that his name has always been
honoured there. Thus, his reputation remained the property of
an intelligent few until the end of the first quarter of the nine-
teenth century, when readers were startled by the appearance
of a work in which the inner life of the diarist is portrayed in a
manner absolutely unique and without either precedent or parallel.
Confessions have frequently been made in writing; but their
authors wrote them for the public eye, and their disclosures are
made in such a manner as to attract the reader's sympathy. This
was not so with Pepys's diary, for there can be no doubt that its
pages were never intended to be seen by other eyes than those of
the writer. Everyone read and was entertained. A new man was
added to the circle of our intimate friends a man whose con-
fessions are ever fresh and can never tire. Can we be surprised
that, for a time, little was thought of Pepys outside the diary?
With a revived public interest in the history of the navy came
the rediscovery of Pepys's great work at the admiralty.
Samuel Pepys went into the navy office without any knowledge
of any particular ships or of the navy as a whole; and yet, in
a few years, according to high authority, he had become the right
hand of the Navy,' and not only understood more of administration
than all the other officers (some of them brilliantly successful
admirals) put together, but, in spite of opposition, was able to
carry on the work of his office with no small success. Pepys was
a historical character of mark, for he figured in all the most
important scenes that occurred during his official life. He acted
with vigour during the Dutch war; and, when the Dutch fleet was
in the Medway, in 1667, he was among the few who, during a time
of national humiliation, deserved credit for their conduct. His
1
.
>
1
.


## p. 253 (#275) ############################################

Pepys's Early Life
253
name, too, stands out among those who performed their duty
during the terrible times of the plague and the fire of London.
He suffered during the reign of terror caused by the action of the
promoters of the trials of persons supposed to be involved in
the so-called popish plot. He was committed to the Tower in
May 1679; but, when brought before the privy council to answer
charges against him, he covered his influential enemies with con-
fusion, and his defence was so complete that he was ordered to be
set free without a trial. His last great work, as secretary of the
admiralty, was to reform the navy, which had been brought into a
dangerous state by an incompetent commission.
Samuel Pepys was born on 23 February 1632/3, probably in
London, since he tells us that, as a small boy, he went to school
with his bow and arrows across the fields to Kingsland. Later,
it is fair to suppose that his kinsman and patron through life,
Sir Edward Montagu, first earl of Sandwich, the 'My lord' of the
diary, sent him to school, first to Huntingdon grammar school,
then to St Paul's school, and, afterwards, to the university of
Cambridge. We may take it for certain that John Pepys never
had sufficient money for the satisfactory education of his son.
Samuel seems to have done fairly well at St Paul's, and he always
retained an affection for the school. At Cambridge, he was first
entered at Trinity hall; but, subsequently, he was transferred to
Magdalene college, of which, in after life, he became one of the
best friends? In 1655, he married Elizabeth St Michel, a pretty
girl, the daughter of an impecunious Frenchman and his English
wife. Mr and Mrs Pepys were a young and inexperienced couple,
the bridegroom being twenty-two years old and the bride only
fifteen? . The newly-married pair went to live at Sir Edward
Montagu's London house, and Pepys seems to have acted as a
sort of steward or factotum to‘My lord. ' On 26 March 1658,
Pepys underwent an operation for the stone, which was removed;
and, afterwards, he kept the anniversary of the operation as a
festival. In the same year, he became clerk (at a salary of £50)
to George Downing (who gave his name to Downing street).
1 See Purnell, E. K. , History of Magdalene College, Cambridge, chap. IX.
In connection with the date of this marriage, there is a most incomprehensible
confusion. Both Pepys and his wife believed that they were married on 10 October,
and they kept that day as the anniversary of the wedding. The register, however, gives
the date of the marriage as December 1. In the absence of further information on this
curious point, it seems that the only possible explanation is that a religious ceremony
of some sort was performed on 10 October 1655, just before the banns were published,
And that the civil marriage took place, as above stated, on 1 December.


## p. 254 (#276) ############################################

2 54
Memoir and Letter Writers
The diary opens on 1 January 1660, when Pepys was no longer
living at Sir Edward Montagu's, but in Axe yard, Westminster
(which stood on part of the site of the present India office), in a
very humble way of life, his family consisting of himself, his wife and
one servant named Jane. During the frosty weather, they have
not a coal in the house, and Samuel is forced to dine at his father's,
or to make himself as comfortable as he can in the garret. That
the larder is not very plentifully supplied is seen by the fact that,
on 1 February, he and his wife dine on pease pudding-a very
different meal from most of those recorded in the diary; but a
great change soon occurred in Pepys's condition. He had every
reason for welcoming the restoration, as it was through the change
of government that he obtained a comfortable income. This was
the turning-point of his career, when he became a prosperous
man.
Through Montagu's influence, he was appointed secretary to
the two generals of the fleet (Monck and Montagu). On 30 March
1660, Montagu and his party went on board the 'Naseby,' the ship
in which he had sailed to the Sound, Pepys accompanying him,
in the previous year. Things went slowly as well as surely; so
the ships remained in the neighbourhood of Deal, and it was not
until 3 May that Montagu received the king's declaration, and
a letter to the two generals. He dictated to Pepys the words in
which he wished the vote of the fleet in favour of the king to be
couched. The captains all came on board the 'Naseby,' and Pepys
read the letter and declaration to them; and, while they were
discoursing on the subject, he pretended to be drawing up the
form of vote, which Montagu had already settled. When the
resolution was read, it passed at once; and the seamen cried 'God
bless King Charles,' a cry that was echoed by the whole fleet.
About the middle of May, the English fleet was off the Dutch
coast, and, on the 22nd, the dukes of York and Gloucester came
on board the 'Naseby. Pepys took the opportunity to bespeak
the favour of the former, and was overjoyed when the duke called
him 'Pepys. ' This was the beginning of their long friendship.
Again through Montagu's influence, Pepys was appointed clerk
of the privy seal (which, for a time, turned out to be a very
profitable appointment) as well as clerk of the acts. Montagu
told Pepys: We must have a little patience, and we will rise
together; in the meantime I will do you all the good jobs I can'
(2 June 1660). Pepys's salary was fixed at £350 a year; at this
time, however, fixed salaries bore little relation to actual income,


## p. 255 (#277) ############################################

Pepys's Progress
255
9
which was largely obtained from fees. At the opening of the diary,
Pepys was only worth £40 and, at one time, found it difficult to
pay his rent; but, by June 1667, he had accumulated £6900.
Besides his salary, he had the advantage of a house in the navy
office, Seething lane, which he found very comfortable after the
little home at Westminster. The diary contains many particulars
of the new apartments, and of those belonging to his colleagues.
He lived here during all the time the diary was being written,
and he did not leave until he obtained the more important post
of secretary of the admiralty. One of the most interesting pas-
sages in the diary relates to the great speech he made at the bar
of the House of Commons on 5 March 1667-8. A storm of in-
dignation had been stirred up against the navy office, and this
storm burst in parliament when some members demanded that
officers should be put out of their places. The whole labour of
defence fell upon Pepys, and he presented his case with such
success, in a speech which occupied more than three hours in
delivery, that the House received it as a satisfactory defence, and
his fellow-officers, who were unable to assist him, were naturally
overjoyed at the result. The orator was congratulated on every
side, and the flattery he received is set down in the diary in all
good faith. Sir William Coventry addressed Pepys the next day
with the words 'Good morrow Mr Pepys that must be Speaker
of the Parliament House,' and the solicitor-general protested that
he spoke the best of any man in England. No report of this
important speech is known, and The Commons Journals merely
contain a statement that the principal officers of the navy appeared
at the bar, Pepys's name not being mentioned.
This was his first great public achievement; but he had
previously (1665) shown what grit was in him. One of the most
unsatisfactory divisions of the naval accounts related to the
pursers. He was early interested in the victualling department,
out of which he afterwards made much money; and, on 12 Sep-
tember 1662, we find him trying 'to understand the method of
making Purser's accounts, which is very needful for me, and very
hard. ' On 22 November 1665, he was pleased to have it demon-
strated that a Purser without professed cheating is a professed
loser twice as much as he gets. ' Pepys received his appointment
of surveyor general to the victualling office chiefly through the
influence of Sir William Coventry; and, on 1 January 1665/6, he
addressed a letter and New Yeares Guift' on the subject of the
pursers to his distinguished friend. He relates, in the diary, how


## p. 256 (#278) ############################################

256
Memoir and Letter Writers
he wrote the letter, and how Sir William praised his work to the
duke of York.
Pepys's habit of sitting up late reading and writing by candle-
light began to tell upon his eyesight, and, in January 1663/4, he
found that his sight failed him for the first time. On 5 October 1664,
he consulted the celebrated Edmund Cocker as to the glass which
would best suit his eyes at night; but the weakness of the eyes con-
tinued to trouble him, and he proposed to get some green spectacles.
How the eyesight became weaker, so that the diary had to be
discontinued, we all know to our great cost. On 16 May 1669,
Pepys drew up a rough copy of a petition to the duke of York for
leave of absence for three or four months. A few days after this
entry, the duke took him to the king, who expressed his great regret
for the cause of his trouble and gave him the leave he desired. On
31 May 1669, Pepys made his last entry; and the diary ends with
these words of deep and subdued feeling:
And thus ends all that I doubt I shall ever be able to do with my own eyes
in the keeping of my Journal. I being not able to do it any longer, having
done now so long as to undo my eyes almost every time that I take a pen in
my hand; and therefore whatever comes of it I must forbear. . . . And so I
betake myself to that course, which is almost as much as to see myself go into
my grave; for which, and all the discomforts that will accompany my being
blind, the good God prepare me! S. P.
We know that Pepys did not become blind, and that he lived for
over thirty-three years after the closing of the diary; but, having
closed the manuscript, he does not appear to have had the courage
to continue his record
The life of Pepys after the finish of the diary must be told in
brief, although it forms a most important period of his career.
He took advantage of his leave of absence to make a tour with
his wife in France and Holland, which seems to have done him
permanent good; but it was fatal to Mrs Pepys, who died shortly
after their return home on 10 November 1669, at the early age of
twenty-nine. Pepys suffered greatly from the death of his wife, to
whom he was beyond doubt deeply attached. He returned to the
navy office, but only for a short space of time; for, at the end of the
year 1672, he was appointed secretary of the admiralty, the duke
of York being suspended and king Charles taking over the office
of lord high admiral with the help of a commission. When Pepys
entered upon the office of greater honour, he, no doubt, annexed
to the admiralty much of the work he had previously done at the
navy office, and the latter did not regain the power which it had


## p. 257 (#279) ############################################

Pepys and the Popish Plot
257
possessed when under Pepys's superintendence. He made great
improvements in the personnel and business of the office; and,
during six years, he exercised a wise authority, causing officers to
be smart and constant to their duty.
Disaster came suddenly, without fault on Pepys's part, and
his career was closed for a time. In 1678, the popish plot was
invented, and the death of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey drove the
public mad with alarm, while unprincipled men took the oppor-
tunity of compromising their enemies in order to bring about
their condemnation on false issues. Pepys had enemies who
sought to sacrifice him by means, chiefly, of the fictitious evidence
of a miscreant named John Scott (calling himself colonel Scott).
He was first attacked through his clerk Samuel Atkins; but, when
the latter was brought to trial, in December 1678, as an accessory
in the supposed murder of Godfrey, he was able to prove an alibi.
Then, his enemies opened fire upon Pepys himself; and, on 22 May,
he and Sir Anthony Deane, his fellow member of parliament for
Harwich, were sent to the Tower on a baseless charge. Pepys,
with his usual thoroughness, set to work to obtain evidence against
Scott and sent agents to the continent and to the plantations in
North America, who returned with a large number of certified
documents proving the untrustworthiness of Scott's evidence and
his general dishonesty. These, when presented to the privy council,
were sufficient to allow the prisoners to be relieved of their bail
and set free on 12 February 1679/80. Scott refused to acknow-
ledge the truth of his original deposition, and John James,
previously a butler in Pepys's service, confessed, on his death-bed
in 1680, that he had trumped up the whole story relating to his
former master's change of religion at the instigation of William
Harbord, member of parliament for Thetford, one of the diarist's
most malignant enemies.
Pepys was now out of office, and remained unemployed for
some time, although he retained the confidence of the king. He
was sent to Tangier with lord Dartmouth, in 1683, and wrote a
diary of his proceedings during his stay there, which gives an
interesting picture of the condition of the place and a vivid
account of its maladministration. In 1684, he was again appointed
secretary to the admiralty, when the greatest undertaking of his
life was begun. The navy had been brought to a most serious
condition of decay by the neglect of an incompetent commission.
When he took office, he determined to reform the administration
and to supply the country with a sufficient number of thoroughly
17
E. L. VIII.
CH. X


## p. 258 (#280) ############################################

258
Memoir and Letter Writers
.
sound ships, and this intention he carried out with triumphant
success. Then came the revolution, and the man who had not
spared any pains in his endeavour to place the country in a proper
condition of national defence was sent by the new government to
the Gatehouse in Westminster as an enemy to the state. After a
time, he was released by the help of stalwart friends, and he now
entered into a period of honourable retirement, in which all his old
friends and his pupils and followers gathered round him, so that,
for the rest of his life, he was considered and treated as 'the Nestor
of the Navy,' his advice always being respectfully received. He
wrote his Memoires of the Navy (1690), which book contains full
particulars of the great work he had done, and kept up his general
interest in intellectual pursuits, for some years holding social
gatherings of fellows of the Royal Society at his home on Saturday
evenings. In 1700, he removed from York buildings (Buckingham
street) to what Evelyn calls his 'Paradisian Clapham. ' Here, he
lived with his old clerk and friend William Hewer; but his in-
firmities kept him constantly in the house. On 26 May 1703, he
breathed his last in the presence of the learned George Hickes,
the non-juring dean of Worcester, who bears witness to the big-
mindedness of the man, his patience under suffering and the fervent
piety of his end. He died full of honour—a recognition thoroughly
deserved by his public conduct through life; but he was shabbily
treated by the men in power. The last two Stewart kings were
many thousands of pounds—£28,007. 28. 11dn, to be exact-in his
debt, and the new government did not see that they were called to
help him in recovering it. They might, however, have considered
how much the country was indebted to him for a strong navy, and
remembered that most of the money owing to him had been spent
upon the state.
Pepys's diary is so various in its interest that it is not easy in a
few words to indicate where its chief distinction lies. The absolute
sincerity and transparent truth of the narrative naturally explains
much, but the vitality of the man and his intense interest in the
pageant of life supplies the motive power. Important events gain
by the strength of their presentment, and trivialities delight us
by the way in which they are narrated. Here is not only a
picture of the life and manners of the time, but, also, the
dissection of the heart of a man, and the exposure suggests a
psychological problem difficult of solution. We naturally ask how
it came to pass that the writer of the diary arrived at a perfection
of style suitable to the character of what he had to relate. Is it


## p. 259 (#281) ############################################

Secret of the Charm of Pepys's Diary 259
possible that he had previously practised the writing of a journal ?
We see the man grow in knowledge and power as the diary pro-
ceeds; but the narrative is equally good at the beginning and at
the end. Pepys apparently made notes on slips of paper and then
elaborated them without any unnecessary delay. It is remarkable
that there should be few or no corrections in the written manuscript.
He wrote in secret, and, when he unguardedly (at the time of his
detention in the Tower) told Sir William Coventry that he kept a
diary, he was immediately afterwards sorry for his indiscretion.
It is also matter for wonder that he should have trusted a binder
with the precious book. Was the binder brought into the house to
bind the pages under the writer's eye?
J
The brilliancy of the narrative and the intimacy of the
confessions so thoroughly charm the reader that, in many cases,
he overlooks the fact that, although Pepys was devoted to pleasure,
he was not absorbed by it, but always kept in view the main
object of his life—the perfection of the English navy. Pepys was
not a man of letters in the same way that Evelyn was one. When
the latter was interested in a subject, he wanted to write upon it,
and not only wanted to, but did write, as is shown by the list of
his works in our bibliography. This was not the case with Pepys.
Early in his official life, he proposed to write a history of the navy,
and collected materials for the purpose; but, although he talked
about the project, he never got at all forward with it. His
Memoires of the Navy was prepared under an urgent desire to
present his apologia, and was only a chapter in the great work
that had long been projected. This little book contains a
thoroughly effective statement of his case; but it is not lively
reading or a work of any literary merit. The question, therefore,
arises why the diary is different, and why it is remarkable as a
literary effort.
The entries are all made with care, and there is no hurry about
any of them; but we must remember that they were written fresh
í from the heart, and many hard judgments passed on colleagues
were the result of temporary indignation. He was himself careful,
tidy and methodical, and he was impatient of untidiness and
improvidence in those around him. His wife often irritated him
by her carelessness and want of method; but his poor sister,
Paulina Pepys, comes off as badly as anyone in the diary. She did
not receive much kindness from her brother and sister-in-law,
although Pepys did his best to find her a husband, and, when
the search was followed by success, gave her a handsome
17-2


## p. 260 (#282) ############################################

260
Memoir and Letter Writers
dowry? The pages of the diary are full of particulars respecting
Pepys's various servants, and their part in constant musical per-
formances. It is necessary to bear in mind that most of these
servants were more properly companions or maids of Mrs Pepys.
Pepys's system of vows and the excuses made for not carrying
them out are very singular and amusing. He feared the waste
of time that would arise from a too frequent attendance at the
theatre, and from his tendency to drink. The fines which he levied
upon himself had some influence in weaning him from bad habits.
It does not appear that he neglected his work, even when taking
pleasure; for, although the working day was often irregular in
arrangement, the work was done either early in the morning or late
at night, to make up for occasional long sittings after the midday
meal. The diary contains a mine of information respecting theatres
and music; there is much about the buying of his books and
book-cases, but it should be borne in mind that the larger portion
of the Pepysian library now preserved at Magdalene college,
Cambridge, was purchased after the conclusion of the diary.
It has been said that Pepys knew Evelyn a great deal better
than we know that stately gentleman, but that we know Pepys a
hundred times better than Evelyn did. In illustration of this
dictum, two passages from Pepys's diary come to mind. On
10 September 1665, he joined a party at Greenwich, where
Sir John Minnes and Evelyn were the life of the company and
full of mirth. Among other humours, Evelyn repeated some verses
introducing the various acceptations of may and can,' which made
all present nearly die of laughing. This is certainly a fresh side
of his character. On the following 5th of November, Pepys visited
Evelyn at Deptford, when the latter read to the former extracts
from an essay he had in hand, also a part of a play or two of his
making, and some short poems. 'In fine a most excellent person
he is and must be allowed a little for a little conceitedness but he
may well be so, being a man so much above others. ' So Pepys
helps us to know Evelyn better and love him none the less; while,
as for Pepys himself, we certainly know him better than Evelyn
knew him, though we readily accept Evelyn's noble tribute to his
merits. His frailties he has himself recorded; but, even were there
no other evidence on the subject than is to be found in the diary
itself, it would show him to have been a patriot and a true and
steadfast friend.
6
a
1 Her descendants--the family of Pepys Cockerell—are now the representatives of
Samuel Pepys.


## p. 261 (#283) ############################################

Memoirs of Gramont
261
II. OTHER WRITERS OF MEMOIRS AND LETTERS
A.
The anonymous Mémoires de la Vie du Comte de Gramont,
published for the first time at Cologne in 1713, is universally
acknowledged to be a masterpiece of French literature; in fact,
Voltaire went so far as to say that the author was the first to
discover the essential genius of the French language. Yet this
book was written by an Englishman, and it deals chiefly with the
English court of Charles II. It was carelessly translated into
English by Abel Boyer (a French Huguenot who settled in England
and wrote histories of king William III and queen Anne) and
published in the year after that of the appearance of the original
work. This translation was touched up by Sir Walter Scott and
has generally been used in the various editions of the English
version. No first-rate writer has been at the pains of retranslating
it and making it a masterpiece of English prose.
Some of the
blunders made by the original translator have been continued
without correction, and have given considerable trouble? The
names of persons mentioned in the original French are often
wrong, as 'Stwart' for Stewart and 'Hubert' for Hobart, and so
forth; but, in the English translation, they are usually given with
an initial followed by a line; this allowed of the publication, at
the price of twopence, of a needed Key to the Memoirs? .
The author was Anthony Hamilton, third son of Sir George
Hamilton and grandson of the earl of Abercorn. At the end of
the first chapter of his book, he wrote 'To himself we owe these
Memoirs since I only hold the pen. ' Report told how Gramont
dictated his Memoirs to Hamilton in the year 1701 and sold the
manuscript to a publisher for fifteen hundred livres. When
Fontenelle, then censor of the press, saw the manuscript, he is said
to have refused to license the publication, on account of the scanda-
lous conduct of the hero in cheating at cards which is described
in the third chapter. There is little authority for this report, and
Gramont is only known as a brilliant talker and not as an author.
1 Thus, Elizabeth Davenport, the actress who took the part of Roxolana in Davenant's
ege of Rhodes, has been confused with Anne Marshall, who was Roxana in Lee's
Rival Queens. In the original French, we find the statement 'Le rôle de Roxelane, dans
une pièce nouvelle'; but this is incorrectly translated by Boyer : 'particularly the part
of Roxana in the Rival Queens. '
In the modern editions, Mademoiselle is translated as Miss; but even Boyer knew
better than this, and always printed Mrs. We know what Evelyn says of the term
"Miss,' and it certainly should not be attached to the names of maids of honour.


## p. 262 (#284) ############################################

262
Memoir and Letter Writers
The book is divided into eleven unequal chapters, of which the
first five are short and relate only to continental adventures.
This portion closes with the chevalier Gramont's banishment from
the French court owing to his persistent attentions to Mlle La
Motte Houdancourt, one of Louis XIV's mistresses. This escapade
brought him to England, and chapters VI to XI are devoted to the
doings of the English court. Hamilton knew nothing of Gramont's
adventures abroad, and this portion has all the marks of having
been taken down from Gramont's dictation. The English portion
of the book is quite different in mode of treatment, and, here,
Gramont does not relate his own adventures as before.
In some
scenes he does not even appear, and Hamilton evidently wrote
from his own intimate knowledge about subjects and persons
unlikely to be known so well to Gramont, as a foreigner.
It is most improbable that Hamilton should have handed over
his manuscript, upon which he must have spent much time and
labour, to be disposed of by Gramont as his own. Moreover,
Hamilton waited for six years after Gramont's death in 1707,
and then issued the work at Cologne instead of at Paris. No
doubt, although many of the actors in the scandalous scenes
related were dead, some influential persons still lived, who would
use all their influence to prevent the publication. In 1713, how-
ever, Hamilton was sixty-seven years of age; and, if he wished to
see his beloved book in print, he had to find a publisher with as
little delay as possible.
The question as to the truthfulness of the details related by
Hamilton is one of the greatest importance. In reply to Lord
Hailes's remark that the chronology of the Memoirs is not
exact, Horace Walpole exclaimed, “What has that book to do
with chronology ? ' Hallam, likewise, was of opinion that the
Memoirs 'scarcely challenge a place as historical. ' It must be
admitted that Hamilton produced a book which is too much a
work of art to be entirely trustworthy, and the subject matter
is often arranged for effect, which would scarcely have been
allowed if strict accuracy had been the main object.
1 The king and queen with their court made two visits to Tunbridge Wells, one in
1663 and the other in 1666, but the author confuses the incidents and makes the two
visits into one. There was good excuse for this in the length of time that had elapsed
since the visits were made when the author wrote his book. Several of the adventures
described are also recounted by Pepys and, in these cases, we are able to attach a date.
Peter Cunningham (appendix to The Story of Nell Gwyn, 1852, p. 188) set himself to
give some indications of the chronology of the Memoirs; but, unfortunately, he made
a mistake in the date of Gramont's marriage with la belle Hamilton, sister of the
author of the book.
8


## p. 263 (#285) ############################################

Hamilton and Gramont
263
Anthony Hamilton became an intimate friend of Gramont
immediately after his arrival in England; but he never mentions
himself in his book. Moreover, he purposely confuses the cir-
cumstances and date of Gramont's marriage with his sister,
Elizabeth Hamilton, which actually took place in December 16631
There is evidence that the chevalier de Gramont and his wife
left London for France in November 1664, and took up their per-
manent residence there. They appear to have made frequent visits
to the English court in succeeding years; but their settlement in
France in itself proves that the later portion of the book, some of
the incidents in which seem to have occurred in the year 1669,
must have been written by Hamilton without help from Gramont.
Therefore, the following passage from the last chapter can hardly
be considered to be written in good faith:
We profess to insert nothing in these Memoirs but what we have from the
mouth of him whose actions we transmit to posterity.
The subject of these Memoirs was an ill-formed man-it was
said that he had the face of an ape—and his character was
thoroughly worthless. He does not appear to have possessed
even the most elementary feelings of honour, as he is proved to
have been a cheat. Doubtless, his attentions had compromised
,
mistress Hamilton, or her brothers would not have been anxious
for the marriage, as the lady had had many more eligible suitors.
It may be said that Hamilton has performed a feat in making so
showy and profligate a man passable as the hero of his book; but
even he is not able to speak highly of Gramont as a husband.
1 This well known story is told in a letter from Lord Melfort to Richard Hamilton
(written about twenty-seven years after the marriage). Gramont, being suddenly
recalled to France, was on the point of returning without mistress Hamilton (to whom
he had made violent love), and had got as far as Dover, when he was overtaken by the
lady's two brothers—George and Anthony. They at once put this question to him
Chevalier de Gramont, n'avez-vous rien oublié à Londres? ' To which, the chevalier
replied, "Pardonnez-moi, messieurs, j'ai oublié d'épouser votre sąur. ' He then returned
to London and the marriage was solemnised.
On 22 December in that year, Pepys noted: “This day I hear for certain that
Lady Castlemaine is turned Popish. ' In illustration of this entry, Lord Braybrooke
printed an extract from a letter of the count d'Estrades to Louis XIV-in which he
wrote that the marriage of chevalier de Gramont and the conversion of Madame de
Castlemaine were published on the same day. This fact would never be gathered from
the statement in the Memoirs, that Gramont was recalled to France by his sister, the
marchioness de Saint-Chaumont, who told him that the king had given him leave to
retum. When he arrived, be found that it was all a mistake. His brother, marshal de
Gramont, had orders from the king for him to go back again without appearing at court.
Sir William Musgrave fixed the date of the occurrences recorded in the Memoirs
from 1663 to 1665; but Cunningham fixes the longer period of May 1662 to October
1669, supposing, as we have already seen, that Gramont remained in England until
the end of the book.
>


## p. 264 (#286) ############################################

264
Memoir and Letter Writers
The author certainly had ever before his eyes the great aim of
putting his sister in a prominent position, and wiping out of exist-
ence any discreditable rumours respecting her. In this he has
succeeded, and she stands out as the one woman in the book
of whom nothing ill can be said. Many of the women described
in the Memoirs, such as Castlemaine and Shrewsbury, probably
deserved every ill word that could be said of them; but we may
hope that some, at least, of the others were less vicious than they
are painted; for Hamilton was one of those authors who will not
lose a point that adds to his picture to save a reputation, and no
scandal was likely to be scrutinised too keenly by him in order to
prove
it untruthful. We have seen that at least one pure woman
-Evelyn's friend Mrs Godolphin-lived for a time in a court which
was a hotbed of corruption; but even she, because she was not
like other ladies, is treated with contempt in: these Memoirs? .
It is not necessary to analyse the contents of so well known a
book as the Gramont Memoirs. They will always be consulted
with interest, for they turn a searchlight upon the inner history
of a period, which, indeed, owes the bad reputation it bears largely
to their revelations.
The Memoirs of Sir John Reresby are the work of an accom-
plished man who united in himself the qualities of a courtier and
those of a country squire. The book contains a pleasing record of
the chief events, some of them of very great importance, which
came under his notice, as well as of other matters founded on the
mere gossip of court circles. The author writes with distinction,
and the reader cannot well follow his adventures without a feeling
of esteem and sympathy, although it must be confessed that he was
somewhat of a self-seeker-indeed, he has been styled 'a cautious
time-serving politician. ' To those who read his pleasant narrative
with interest, this must, however, appear a hard saying. He lived
in a difficult period, and, although he was whole-heartedly loyal to
Charles II, he does not appear to have approved of the next
sovereign, and his protestant feelings prevented him from being
troubled with much regret when the revolution was completed; so
that he had not any difficulty in deciding to swear allegiance to
William III.
a
1 Miss Hobart is made to say 'Alas! poor Mrs Blague! I saw her go away about
this time twelve month in a coach with such lean horses that I cannot believe she
is half way to her miserable little castle' (chap. IX).
In the Dictionary of National Biography.


## p. 265 (#287) ############################################

Reresby's Memoirs and Travels
265
Reresby had really small reason for gratitude to Charles II,
since, although the king was glad to enjoy his agreeable conversa-
tion, and to make use of him generally, all that the courtier
obtained from his long attendance at court was
an appointment to be high sheriff of his county, to which his rank alone
entitled him, the government of a city that had no garrison, and the command
of a fort, which never appears to have been built1.
Reresby was only 55 years of age when he died in 1689; and it was
not until 1734 that his Memoirs were first published, the manu-
script having, in the interval, passed through several hands. The
book was popular, and several editions of it? were called for;
among which, that of 1813 for the first time printed the author's
Travels, while that of 1875 printed some of his letters, together
with passages of the diary previously omitted. It is well that the
diary and the travels—both of them short works-should be united,
as, together, they form a connected whole, and the chronology of
Reresby's life is thus completed. The scheme of his writings has a
certain likeness to that of Evelyn's diary. The same circumstances
in the history of the country caused these two men to begin their
lives with the experience of foreign travel. Reresby, like Evelyn,
felt that to live at home was worse than banishment, and begins
his journeyings with these words:
I left England in that unhappy time when honesty was reputed a crime,
religion superstition, loyalty treason; when subjects were governors, servants
masters, and no gentleman assured of anything he possessed; the least
jealousy of disaffection to the late erected commonwealth being offence
sufficient to endanger the forfeiture of his estate, the only laws in force being
those of the sword.
He took his departure in 1654, and made an extensive tour
through Europe. His descriptions of France, Italy, Germany and
the Netherlands are valuable, and contain much information of in-
terest as to the state of these countries in the seventeenth century.
Reresby spent some time at Saumur (in Anjou), where there was a
protestant university. Here, he was able to study the French
language, which he found the great resort of my countrymen to
Paris prevented me from doing satisfactorily there. ' After staying
again in Paris, which he considered the finest city of Europe (not
excepting London), he returned to England, in May 1658, after
four years' absence.
He opens his memoirs with a notice of the death of Cromwell,
which, he thought, paved the way for the return of the king. This
1 Retrospective Review, vol. vin, p. 346.
2 As to these and other editions, see bibliography.


## p. 266 (#288) ############################################

266
Memoir and Letter Writers
was on 23 September 1658, and, in October of the same year, he
was back in Paris, where he made himself known to the queen
mother, who kept her court at the Palais Royal. He was well
received and became very friendly with the charming princess
Henrietta (then fifteen years of age), who was the queen's only
child living with her. In 1660, hopes arose of the restoration of
Charles II, and we are told that now there was a greater resort
to the Palais Royal than to the French court. On 2 August,
Reresby returned to England, and he took with him a particular
recommendation of the queen mother to the king. On 10 August
1669, the queen died, and Reresby describes her as a great
princess and my very good mistress. ' It is interesting to learn
'
that, at one time, he was attracted by la belle Hamilton, and
there was a chance of his marrying her, although she was a
catholic; but, after he had seen mistress Frances Browne (to
whom he was married in 1665), he had no inclination for any other
choice. He had probably a fortunate escape; but, on the other
hand, one feels that, as Lady Reresby, Elizabeth Hamilton would
have had a happier life than she was fated to live as the partner of
Philibert de Gramont.
Reresby was not a man of letters; but there is a distinction
about his writings, which give us pleasure from their liveliness and
freshness, indicating the insight and impartiality of a man of the
world. By a careful selection of subjects, he manages to furnish
a good idea of the period from the restoration to the revolution.
He allots much space to his notes on the popish plot, which shows
his appreciation of the dangers to be apprehended from the rapid
progress of the supposed design, although we see that he was early
convinced of the villainy of Oates'.
The author carefully narrates the transactions which preceded
the revolution; but he saw little of the new régime, for he died on
12 May 1689.
B.
6
Among the memoir- and letter-writers of this period should,
also, be mentioned Sir Richard Bulstrode, though, born in 1630, he
1 He relates an interesting meeting with James II, after the arch-conspirator was
convicted of perjury. It was proved that he was at St Omer the 24th of April 1678
when he swore he was at the White Horse tavern in the Strand, where Pickering,
Groves, and other Jesuits signed the death of King Charles the second. ' Reresby was
told by James that it was fortunate for him that Oates was ignorant of the place of
meeting, for it actually took place in the duke of York's rooms at St James's. The
king added 'that Oates being thus convicted, the popish plot was now dead'; to which
Reresby answered that it had long been dead, and now it would be buried.


## p. 267 (#289) ############################################

Sir Richard Bulstrode. Henry Sidney 267
6
survived till 1711, when he is stated to have died ‘not of old age. '
He served in arms in the civil war, and, as agent and envoy at the
court of Brussels, under Charles II and James II, whom he followed
to St Germain. His prose-writings, all of which were published
posthumously, include, besides Original Letters written to the
Earl of Arlington, in 1674, which narrate the principal events in
the Low Countries and the adjoining parts of France in that year,
Memoirs and Reflections upon the Reign and Government of
King Charles the 1st and King Charles the 2d, besides a Life of
James II, stated to have been printed at Rome shortly after the
author's death. The earlier of these works, which announces
itself as 'a vindication of the characters of both Charles I and
Charles II from Fanatical Aspersions,' displays judgment and
insight, as well as loyalty. If Charles I is designated 'the best of
kings,' while of Oliver Cromwell it is asserted that there was
certainly never a more wicked man,' the former is shown to have
erred in not depending on his own judgment, and the latter is
credited not only with self-reliance, but with 'prodigious Address. '
The memoir of Charles II is badly constructed, and, after a long
account of the popish plot agitation, ends with a series of diplo-
matic letters of secondary importance.
The Diary of Henry Sidney (afterwards earl of Romney and
lord-lieutenant of Ireland), which extends from June 1679 to
January 1682, during which period the writer held the post of
ambassador at the Hague and had in his hand the threads of
much important negotiation, public and private, with William III
of Orange, possesses no literary qualities; but interspersed with it
are a number of letters to and from Sidney which add considerably
to its general interest. Foremost among these are the sprightly
communications, partly in a very necessary cipher, of the countess
of Sunderland, with whom, though her husband's doings and
prospects are among her most frequent themes, he was on the
very friendliest of terms. They also include letters from the
dowager countess, a charming old lady whom, in her younger days,
Waller had celebrated as Sacharissa, and from Sir William Temple
1 See the edition by Blencowe, R. W. , 2 vols. 1843. The Sydney Papers: Letters
and Memorials of State (from the reign of queen Mary to that of Charles II), ed. Collins,
A. , 2 vols. 1746, consist only to a small extent of letters so late as those of lord Lisle and
Algernon Sidney. Those written by the latter from abroad (under the commonwealth,
he was ambassador to Denmark and Sweden) are full of interest, especially his letters
from Rome in 1660/1, in one of which he gives, in the style of the time, a series of
characters of cardinals, identified by numerals corresponding to those in a previous
letter.


## p. 268 (#290) ############################################

268
Memoir and Letter Writers
and others? The author of Gramont's Memoirs is severe on the
difference between Henry Sidney's gifts of intellect and of 'figure';
but, both he and his favourite correspondent played an important
part in drawing closer the relations which resulted in seating
William of Orange on the English throne; and she deserves a
place among the letter-writers of her age, if only for her graphic
vignettes of Whitehall and the doings of 'that jade' (in cipher),
the double-faced duchess of Portsmouth.
Lady Warwick, the wife of the fourth earl (Charles, who died
in 1673), represents, among the 'good women’ of the restoration
age, the puritan type proper, though, at the same time, she had
a very distinct individuality of her own. Lady Mary Boyle was
a daughter of the first, sometimes called the great,' earl of
Cork, and sister of Robert Boyle the natural philosopher and
Roger Boyle lord Broghill (earl of Orrery). Her father's ambitious
nature had been much vexed by her secret match with an 'insig-
nificant younger son'; but the death of his elder brother made
Charles Rich heir to the earldom of Warwick, to which he suc-
ceeded in 1659, twenty years after his marriage, so that she
became a peeress like six out of her seven sisters. Much of her
married life was spent at Little Leighs park in Essex ('delicious
Leez,'as her brother Robert called it, in his dedication to her of his
treatise entitled Seraphic Love, written in 1648). She came from
a family accustomed both to think and to write; the religious
frame of mind which she maintained during the whole of her
later life was, no doubt, largely due to the hospitality extended
by her father-in-law (the parliamentary general) to most of the
puritan ministers in England, and she ascribes her conversion to
a devout life partly to the counsels of one of them, Anthony
Walker, partly to archbishop Ussher's preaching against plays, of
which she ‘saw not two' after her marriage? Her husband seems
to have been a warm-hearted man, much attached to his wife and
children (on the death of his only son, he sent forth loud cries of
grief, though declaring that ‘his chief sorrow was that the trouble
would kill his wife, who was more to him than a hundred sons'), but
very passionate, and addicted to the habit of cursing and swearing,
1 As to Sir William Temple, see post, chap. xv. Concerning Dorothy Sidney, see
Cartwright, Julia, Sacharissa: some Account of Dorothy Sidney, Countess of Sunderland
her Family and Friends, 1693. Other correspondents of her brother Henry were her
son the celebrated Robert earl of Sunderland (minister in succession under three
kings), Halifax and Lawrence Hyde (earl of Rochester), and there is a letter, in the
grand style, from William Penn.
2 Autobiography, p. 22.


## p. 269 (#291) ############################################

Diary of the Countess of Warwick 269
6
very often at his wife. Altogether, his treatment of her seems,
notwithstanding his affection, to have been wanting in kindness.
Her consciousness that she did not remonstrate with him
about his sins with sufficient faithfulness' was one of the great
troubles of her life; a house, she felt, should be 'perfumed
with prayers, not profaned by oaths. ' As to herself, solemn
thoughts were never far from her: in the midst of a 'great
show' in the banqueting-house at Whitehall, a blast of trumpets
aroused in her the thought, “What if the trump of God should
now sound,' with a remembrance of the 'glory' of which, in the
days of the late king, she had been a witness in the very place
whence he was to go forth to his death? Other passages in her
Diary show that religious feeling, at times, overcame her with
mystic force; in a prayer after an outburst with her husband, her
'soul did but breathe after God’; on another page, she records
how she had 'all that day great pleasure in thinking upon those
happy hours she enjoyed with God in the morning. '
Lady Warwick's Diary reaches from July 1666 to April 1672;
a further portion, extending to 1677, is now lost, though it existed
about the close of the eighteenth century. The whole of it was
accessible to Anthony Walker, who preached a long biographical
sermon at her funeral at Felsted, and published it later under the
title Eépnka Eópnka. The Virtuous Woman Found, her Loss
Bewailed and Character Exemplified (1686). It was annotated
by lady Warwick's own domestic chaplain Thomas Woodroffe, who
resided with her till the time of her death (1678). Besides this
Diary, she composed, in the course of three days in February
1671, a short autobiography, to which she subsequently made a
few additions bringing down the memoir to 16748. She also left
behind her a series of Occasional Meditations—the fruit of her
solitary hours in the 'Wilderness' at Leighs park, or in her chamber
there or at Chelsea. “Meditation,' says Walker, 'was her master-
piece’: and her 'short returns to God,' as she calls her hours of
pious thought, were to her the luminous points in her life. But,
1 It is significant of the quality of her puritanism that, to the end of her life, she
never failed to keep 30 January as a solemn fast.
? Author of A true Account of the Author of a Book called Elkwy Baoilikh (1692).
Walker was John Gauden's curate at Bocking, and they were both int tes in the house
of lady Warwick's father-in-law, to whom, as well as to his son, Walker was chaplain.
3 It was edited by Croker, T. Crofton, for the Percy Society in 1848. The Diary
and Occasional Meditations, together with some simple Rules for a Holy Life in a letter
written to George Earl Berkeley were published in 1847. The whole of this material is
utilised with much skill in Miss Charlotte Fell Smith's Mary Rich, Countess of Warwick
(1625—1678): her Family and Friends (1901).
6


## p. 270 (#292) ############################################

270
Memoir and Letter Writers
a
from an early date, she was also in the habit of expressing her
thoughts in the form of apophthegms intended to have an effect
upon others, and formulating what might be called witty religious
sayings, with which she fell into the habit of winding up her discourse.
They were something in the manner of the Pensées of Pascal and
similar collections, chiefly by French writers, with none of which
she can have been acquainted when she set about this style of
composition; moreover, Miss Fell Smith has discovered that the
example actually followed by lady Warwick was the Occasional
Meditations of bishop Joseph Hall, of which a third edition appeared
in 1633. Altogether, her epigrammatic thoughts number nearly two
centuries (182), being unevenly distributed over the years in which
they were set down (1663–78). "The true measure of loving God
is loving him without measure' is one of them; another (scarcely
original): “Why are we so fond of that life which begins with a cry
and ends with a groan ? Many are suggested by the experiences
-even the trivial incidents—of every day life: ‘upon feeding the
poor at the gate'; ‘upon children playing,' and then quarrelling,
‘in the streets'; 'upon my looking in a looking-glass in the morning
to dress myself'; 'upon my taking a great deal of pains to make a
fire'; others arise out of events of deep personal interest, such as
her husband's death, and her own impending farewell to her loved
country home. But all are characterised by the combination of
spiritual depth and literary ingenuity which was her note.
Though the Memoirs of Lady Fanshawe remained unpublished
in full till 1829/30, they challenge comparison both as to the
interest of their matter and as to the high spirit informing them,
and also as to clearness and vivacity of style, with any memoirs of
the age to which they belong—including, as has been justly said,
even those of Mrs Hutchinson. Unlike Lucy Apsley, Ann Harrison
was, according to her own account, 'a hoyting girl in her youth,'
though we may well believe her asseveration that she was 'never
immodest but skipping. Her mother's death awakened the serious
side of her nature, which, henceforth, in the great crises of her life,
showed itself forth in words of almost impassioned prayer-ordi-
narily, however, in deeds rather than in words. The first sixteen
years of her married life (from 1644) were a period of incessant
struggle and sacrifice, through which she passed with unfailing and,
at times, heroic courage. Sacrifice for the sake of the royal cause
might have been called the badge of her husband's as well as of
her father's family, which were closely connected with one another;
she reckoned their revenues 'engaged and sequestered for the


## p. 271 (#293) ############################################

Memoirs of Lady Fanshawe 271
6
crown in the time of the late rebellion' at near eighty thousand
pounds a year. Nothing could be more stirring than the personal
courage which she displayed by her husband's side—as when she
crept to his side on deck, disguised in a cabin-boy's 'thrum-cap
and tarred coat, while their ship was facing the approach of a
Turk's man of war'; or when, night after night, she stood beneath
his prison window on the bowling green at Whitehall. Nor could
any devotion have surpassed that which she showed to him during
his long absences in the king's service—including the perpetration
of a most ingenious forgery of a pass to Calais for herself and
her children. All these things she tells in a style of delightful
directness and freshness; and the interest of the narrative (which
is diversified by one or two thrilling ghost stories) only slackens
(as is common in biographies) when prosperous times at last came
to her husband and herself with the restoration. It was, to be
sure, a modified prosperity, owing to the king's way of keeping his
promises (of which she says very little) and to Clarendon's real or
supposed malice (of which she says a good deal). After serving as
ambassador in both Portugal and Spain, concerning which country
his lady has many favourable particulars to relate, Sir Richard
Fanshawe died at Madrid, shortly after receiving his recall (1666);
his widow had to bring his body to England and there live for
the survivors among her many children, as she had lived for him
whose story she set down for the benefit of his heir
In this great distress I had no remedy but patience. . . . Neither did these
circumstances following prevail to mend my condition; much less found I
that compassion I expected upon the view of myself, that had lost at once my
husband and fortune in him, with my son of but twelve months old in my
arms, four daughters, the eldest but thirteen years of age, with the body of
my dear husband daily in my sight for near six months together, and a dis-
tressed family, all to be by me in honour and honesty provided for; and to
add to my afflictions, neither person sent to conduct me, neither pass or ship
or money to carry me a thousand miles, but some few letters of compliment
from the chief ministers bidding God help me as they do to beggars-and
they might have added 'they had nothing for me,' with great truth. But
God did hear and see and help me, and brought my soul out of trouble. . . .
6
1 The circumstances of Sir Richard Fanshawe’s recall from Spain are discussed
at length in the voluminous and valuable notes to the edition of the Memoirs of Ann
Lady Fanshawe published in 1907 by a descendant. Lady Fanshawe was offered
a very large sum of money if she would remain in Spain and become a catholio. -
Sir Richard Fanshawe, it may be noted, was a man of strong literary tastes, to some
extent inherited. In 1647, he printed a translation of Guarini's Pastor Fido (which,
thirty years later, Elkanah Settle adapted for the stage, apparently without acknow.
ledgment); in 1652, translations from Horace; and, in 1655, a version of the Lusiads
of Camoëns, composed in Yorkshire during an interval of rest. His last publication
was a Latin translation, entitled La Fida Pastora, of Fletcher's Faithfull Shepheardesse.


## p. 272 (#294) ############################################

272
Memoir and Letter Writers -
a
The Letters of Rachel Lady Russell, the devoted widow, as she
had been the faithful wife, of William lord Russell, virtually begin
with the death of her husband (of whose last paper, delivered to
the sheriffs on the scaffold, a letter to king Charles II vindicates
the genuineness) and with that of her only son, Wriothesley duke
of Bedford. She survived him and her daughter the duchess of
Rutland (who died a few months later) for twelve years, retaining
to the last the clearness of mind and serenity of spirit which are
characteristic of all her writing. Through all her troubles, she
preserved a keen interest in public affairs, as well as in the
extensive business of her private estate. Her chief correspond-
ents were divines, more especially her father's chaplain and her
own tutor John Fitzwilliam, whom she consulted on all subjects,
together with Burnet and Tillotson; but she was also in frequent
correspondence with leading statesmen and ladies of high rank.
Her tone throughout is that of a self-possession at the same time
devout and reasonable, to which the even calm of her style
corresponds. She is not, however, without moments of wrath as
well as of tenderness—the former being, on occasion, directed
against the archfoe of civil and religious liberty both within and
beyond his dominions-Louis XIV. She died in 1723, in her
eighty-seventh year. Her Letters were first published in 1773.