SOURCE: Samuel Richardson, in a preface to Aesop's Fables, 1740, edited by Samuel Richardson, Garland Publishing, Inc., 1975, pp. i-xiv.

[In the following excerpt, reprinted in 1975, Richardson discusses the reasons for editing Aesop that motivated Roger L 'Estrange and S. Croxall and Richardson himself especially in regard to the modification of the moral.]

When there are so many editions of Æsop's fables, it will be expected, that some reasons should be given for the appearance of a new one; and we shall be as brief on this head, as the nature of the thing will admit. Of all the English editions, we shall consider only two as worthy of notice; to wit, that of the celebrated Sir Roger L 'Estrange, and that which appears under the name of S. Croxal, subscribed to the dedication. And when we have given an account of what each says for his own performance, it will be our turn to offer some things to the reader with regard to our present undertaking.

When first I put pen to paper upon this design, says Sir Roger, I had in my eye only the common school book, as it stands in the Cambridge and Oxford editions of it, under the title of Æsopi Phrygis Fabulae; una cum nonnullis variorum auctorum fabulis adjectis: propounding to myself, at that time, to follow the very course and series of that collection; and, in one word, to try what might be done by making the best of the whole, and adapting proper and useful doctrines to the several parts of it, toward the turning of an excellent Latin manual of morals and good counsels, into a tolerable English one. But, upon jumbling matters and thoughts together, and laying one thing by another, the very state and condition of the case before me, together with the nature and the reason of the thing, gave me to understand, that this way of proceeding would never answer my end: insomuch that, upon this consideration, I consulted other versions of the same fables, and made my best of the choice. Some that were twice or thrice over, and only the self-same thing in other words; these I struck out, and made one specimen serve for the rest. To say nothing of here and there a trivial, or a loose conceit in the medley, more than this; that such as they are, I was under some sort of obligation to take them in for company; and in short, good, bad and indifferent, one with another, to the number, in the total, of 383 fables. To these I have likewise subjoined a considerable addition of other select Apologues, out of the most celebrated authors that are extant upon that subject, towards the finishing of the work.

And a little farther,

This Rhapsody of Fables, says he, is a book universally read, and taught in all our schools; but almost at such a rate as we teach Pyes and Parrots, that pronounce the words without so much as guessing at the meaning of them: or, to take it another way, the boys break their teeth upon the shells, without ever coming near the kernel. They learn fables by lessons, and the moral is the least part of our care in a child's institution: so that take both together, and the one is stark nonsense, without the application of the other; beside that, the doctrine itself, as we have it, even at the best, falls infinitely short of the vigour and spirit of the fable. To supply this defect now, we have had several English paraphrases and essays upon Esop, and divers of the followers, both in prose and verse. The latter have perchance ventured a little too far from the precise scope of the author upon the privilege of a poetical licence: and for the other of antient date, the morals are so insipid and flat, and the style and diction of the fables so coarse and uncouth, that they are rather dangerous than profitable, as to the purpose they were principally intended for; and likely to do forty times more mischief by the one, than good by the other. An emblem without a key to it, is no more than a Tale of a Tub; and that tale sillily told too, is but one folly grafted upon another. Children are to be taught, in the first place, what they ought to do: 2dly, the manner of doing it: And, in the third place, they are to be inured by the force of instruction and good example, to the love and practice of doing their duty; whereas, on the contrary, one step out of the way in the institution, is enough to poison the peace and the reputation of a whole life. Whether I have in this attempt, adds Sir Roger, contributed or not, to the improvement of these fables, either in the wording, or the meaning of them, the book must stand or fall to itself: but this I shall adventure to pronounce upon the whole matter, that the text is English, and the morals, in some sort, accommodate to the allegory; which could hardly be said of all the translations or reflections before mentioned, which have served, in truth, (or at least some of them) rather to teach us what we should not do, than what we should. So that, in the publishing of these papers, I have done my best to obviate a common inconvenience, or, to speak plainly, the mortal error of pretending to erect a building upon a false foundation: leaving the whole world to take the same freedom with me, that I have done with others.

Thus far Sir Roger L 'Estrange. Now we come to what the other gentleman has to say for himself, or rather, as he has managed the matter, what he has to say against Sir Roger, the depreciating of whose work, seems to be the cornerstone of his own building.

Nothing of this nature, says he, has been done since L'Estrange's time worth mentioning; and we had nothing before, but what… was so insipid and flat in the moral, and so coarse and uncouth in the style and diction, that they were rather dangerous than profitable, as to the purpose for which they were principally intended; and likely to do forty times more harm than good. I shall therefore only observe to my reader the insufficiency of L 'Estranged own performance, as to the purpose for which he professes to have principally intended it; with some other circumstances, which will help to excuse, if not justify, what I have enterprized upon the same subject.

Now this purpose for which he principally intended his book, as in his preface he spends a great many words to inform us, was for the use and instruction of children; who being, as it were, a mere rasa tabula, or blank paper, are ready indifferently for any opinions, good or bad, taking all upon credit; and that it is in the power of the first comer, to write saint or devil upon them, which he pleases. This being truly and certainly the case, what devils, nay, what poor devils, would L'Estrange make of those children, who should be so unfortunate as to read his book, and imbibe his pernicious principles! Principles coined and suited to promote the growth, and serve the ends, of popery and arbitrary power. Though we had never been told he was a pensioner to a Popish prince, and that he himself professed the same unaccountable religion, yet his reflections upon Aesop would discover it to us: In every political touch, he shews himself to be the tool and hireling of the Popish faction: since even a slave, without some mercenary view, would not bring arguments to justify slavery, nor endeavour to establish arbitrary power upon the basis of right reason. What sort of children therefore are the Blank Paper, upon which such morality as this ought to be written? Not the children of Britain, I hope; for they are born with free blood in their veins, and suck in liberty with their very milk. This they should be taught to love and cherish above all things, and, upon occasion, to defend and vindicate it; as it is the glory of their country, the greatest blessing of their lives, and the peculiar happy privilege, in which they excel all the world besides. Let therefore L 'Estrange, with his slavish doctrine, be banished to the barren deserts of Arabia, to the nurseries of Turkey, Persia, and Morocco, where all footsteps of liberty have long since been worn out, and the minds of the people, by a narrow way of thinking, contrasted and inured to fear poverty and miserable servitude. Let the children of Italy, France, Spain, and the rest of the Popish countries, continue this tedious declaimer, furnish him with blank paper for principles, of which free-born Britons are not capable. The earlier such notions are instilled into such minds as theirs indeed, the better it will be for them, as it will keep them from thinking of any other than the abject, servile condition to which they are born. But let the minds of our British youth be for ever educated and improved in that spirit of truth and liberty, for the support of which their ancestors have often bravely exhausted so much blood and treasure.

Thus we see the chief quarrel of the worthy gentleman is against the Politicks of Sir Roger; and we heartily join with him on this head. Sir Roger was certainly listed in a bad cause as to politicks, and his reflections have many of them a pernicious tendency. But the time in which he wrote, within view, in a manner, of the civil wars so lately concluded, and the anarchy introduced by them, to so great an extreme of one side, was so naturally productive of an extreme on the other, that many very great men of that time fell into the same error with Sir Roger: and perhaps a charitable mind, duly reflecting upon this, and not intent upon partial or selfish views, would have found something to have said, if not in excuse, yet in extenuation, of the fault.

The Doctor, for such I am told the gentleman is, proceeds to strengthen his own cause, by further observing,

That L'Estrange (as he every where calls the deceased knight) made not fair reflections upon the fables in political points: that Æsop, though a slave, was a lover of liberty, and gives not one hint to favour L'Estrange's insinuations: But that, on the contrary, he takes all occasions to recommend a love for liberty, and an abhorrence of tyranny, and all arbitrary proceedings: that L'Estrange (again!) notoriously perverts both the sense and meaning of several fables, particularly when any political instruction (for this is still the burden of the Doctor's song) is couched in the application;

and then gives an example in Sir Roger's fable of the "Dog and the Wolf"; and further objects against the Knight,

that he has swelled his work, which was designed for the use of children, to a voluminous bulk; and by that means raised it to an exorbitant price, so as to make it unsuitable to the hand or pocket of the generality of children.

And here follows a very extraordinary conclusion of the Doctor, which we shall give verbatim:

If I were, says the good man, to put constructions upon the ways of Providence, I should fancy this prolixity of his was ordered as a preservative against his noxious principles; for however his book may have been used by Men, I dare say, few Children have been conversant with it.

So that we see, at last, all the terrible apprehensions of the mischiefs of Sir Roger's book, are merely the effects of the good Doctor's imagination, which, it is generally said, has run away with his judgment in more instances than the present.

If this then be the case, we presume to hope, that, even in the good Doctor's opinion, there will not be any necessity to banish poor L'Estrange to the barren deserts of Arabia, to the nurseries of Turkey, Persia, and Morocco; nor that he should be confined to the children of Italy, France, Spain, and the rest of the Popish countries; but, for the sake of the excellent sense contained in his other reflections, where politicks are not concerned; for the sake of the benefit which the English tongue has received from his masterly hand; for the sake of that fine humour, apposite language, accurate and lively manner, which will always render Sir Roger delightful, and which this severe Critick has in some places so wretchedly endeavoured to imitate: for all these sakes, I say, let him remain among us still, since our author thinks he can do no harm to Children, and Men may be supposed guarded by years and experience; and the rather, if it be only to shew the difference between a fine original, and a bungling imitation; and that no prating Jays may strut about in the beautiful plumage of the Peacock.

The Doctor proceeds, and fixes a stigma on the second Volume of Sir Roger's Fables, and, in the main, I join with him in it; for, as a Book of Fables, it is truly unworthy of that celebrated hand; and for that reason we have made very little use of it in our present edition; though we cannot but apprehend, that he was put upon it rather by the importunity of booksellers, encouraged by the success of the first volume, than by his own choice or judgment: and, after all, some allowance ought to be made for his circumstances, and his years, being, as he tells us, on the wrong side of fourscore when he wrote it.

It is but just to transcribe the concluding paragraph of the Doctor's preface.

Whether, says he, I have mended the faults I find with him, in this, or any other respect, I, must leave to the judgment of the reader: professing (according to the principle on which the following applications are built) that I am a lover of liberty and truth; an enemy to tyranny, either in Church or State; and one who detests party-animosities, and factious divisions, as much as I wish the peace and prosperity of my country.

We greatly applaud this pompous declaration of the good Gentleman's principles: but though we might observe, that he has strained the natural import of some of the Fables, near as much one way, as Sir Roger has done the other, and may be censured for giving too frequently into political reflections, which had, on all occasions, if the book be meant for Children, better be avoided, where the moral will bear a more general and inoffensive turn; yet we shall only observe, that had this gentleman, who clothes himself in the skin of the departed knight, and, at first fight, makes so formidable an appearance in it, lived in the days of Sir Roger, and had Sir Roger lived in his, it is not impossible that the sentiments of both might have changed.

What I mean, is, the Restoration of Monarchy under King Charles II, made these now exploded doctrines as much the fashion then, as the glorious Revolution under King William III has made the Doctor's principles the fashion now. And for aught that appears from the moderation of the Doctor's principles, if we may judge of a Man's temper by his disposition, as shewn in several instances of his preface, had the Doctor lived when Sir Roger did, he might have been the L'Estrange of the one Court; as L'Estrange, had he been in the Doctor's place, might have taken orders, and become Chaplain in the other. If the living Gentleman reflects, as he ought, upon the little mercy he has shewn to the dead, he will not think this too severe. And the comparison will appear the less invidious, to any one who considers, that Sir Roger suffered for his principles, bad as they were: and the Doctor, we hope, for the sake of the publick, as well as for his own sake, will never be called upon to such trials.

We have thus set the pretensions of the two gentlemen in a proper light: it remains for us, now to say something of our own undertaking.

The usefulness and benefit of such a work to children is allowed on all hands; and therefore we shall not insist upon a topick, which has been so much laboured by the gentlemen who have gone before us.

We have seen, that the only objections which a scrutinizing adversary, who had it in view to supplant the Knight, and thrust himself into his place, can find against him, are the political part, and the bulk and price of the performance: as to the rest, on comparing the works, we find a very great disparity between them: we therefore were assured, that we should do an acceptable service, if we could give the exceptionable reflections a more general and useful turn; and if we could reduce the work to such a size as should be fit for the hands and pockets for which it was principally designed; and at the same time preserve to Sir Roger the principal graces and beauties for which he is so justly admired: and this only, though we found afterwards, on a closer review, a necessity of going further, was our first intention.

We were the rather prevailed upon to take this liberty with Sir Roger, because he ingenuously declares, in what we have quoted from his preface, 'That he was under some sort of obligation to take into his medley, as he modestly calls it, here and there a trivial or a loose conceit, for company.' An obligation imposed upon him, we presume, by his unhappy circumstances (and which hardly those could excuse), in order to add to the bulk of his book, which he first published in folio.

This, with other proper alterations, &c. where the sense and poignance of the fable and reflections would best bear it, we thought would give us the opportunity of answering the objection about the bulk and price. And on looking closer into the subject, we found sufficient reason to justify our opinion.

Thus then, instead of banishing Sir Roger to the deserts of Arabia, we confess that it was our intention, everywhere, except in his political reflections, to keep that celebrated writer close in our eye: And in some places we have accordingly contented ourselves with the inferior glory of having only abridged him, where we could not, with equal beauty and propriety, give words and sentences different from his own; rather choosing to acknowledge our obligations to so great a master, than to arrogate to ourselves the praises due to another.

We have not, however, spared any of those conceits, as Sir Roger calls them, which we imagined capable only of a trivial, or liable to a loose construction. We have also presumed to alter, and put a stronger point to several of the fables themselves, which we thought capable of more forcible morals. And instead of the political reflections, we have every where substituted such as we hope will be found more general and instructive. For we think it in no wise excusable to inflame children's minds with distinctions, which they will imbibe fast enough from the attachments of parents, &c. and the warmth of their own imaginations. But nevertheless, we must add, that wherever the fable compelled, as we may say, a political turn, we have, in our reflections upon it, always given that preference to the principles of LIBERTY, which we hope will for ever be the distinguishing characteristic of a Briton.

If thus we have banished from Sir Roger all that his most partial enemy could except against him; and have preserved all that has gained him the approbation of the best judges: If we have avoided the faults of both gentlemen (and we think we could point out, if we were put upon it, where the one has been faulty as well as the other; and a thousand instances wherein he has infinitely fallen short of the author he aims to supplant): why should we not presume, that there may be room for this performance, which we now present to the publick? To whose judgment we therefore submit it; and are willing to stand or fall by its determination.