Smith, Florence. “Character and Influence.” In Mary Astell, pp. 160-66. New York: Columbia University Press, 1916.

[In the following excerpt from her book-length study of Astell, Smith summarizes the views expressed in Astell's works and how they influenced later women writers.]

Although Mary Astell's chief interest was in the education of women, the variety of subjects she discussed and the different groups of people she knew show a catholic taste. Her interests lay, however, more in speculative writing than in pure literature. She had read widely in political and religious controversy and had a fair acquaintance with current philosophy. The “great Mr. Locke” she knew and respected, however much she might refuse to accept his opinions. She had dared to oppose Swift, Steele, and Defoe, but she commented only on their political writings and activities, as their best literary work was not done until she had ceased to write. Politically she differed from Milton, whom she regarded as “a better poet than divine or politician”; yet his blank verse moved her. In general it is the controversial that attracts her attention, especially when her opposition is aroused as by Dryden's The Hind and the Panther and Prior and Montagu's Hind and Panther Transversed.¹

Perhaps as an inheritance from Vives, perhaps from her own observation as to their bad effects, she was opposed to romances and plays for women, and she had read with interest Jeremy Collier's attack on the stage, “a very Learned and Ingenious tract writ against this growing evil.” From an educational standpoint, also, she had followed the controversy as to ancient and modern learning, where she ranged herself with the moderns.

In her estimate of writers of her own sex, her judgment is over-balanced by her pride in them as women. She compliments Madam Dacier and Madam Scudéry, forgetting, in her zeal, her opposition to plays and romances. The Matchless Orinda receives her unqualified approval, as showing what a woman can do if she makes the effort, and Lady Mary Montagu is praised for her masculine intelligence. It is curious that Mary Astell leaves unnoticed such a writer as Anne Schurman, whose pamphlets were then available in an English translation, and whose point of view and general attitude toward life was so closely allied to her own.

It is difficult to give a general criticism of the style of Mary Astell; the first pamphlets differ from the later ones; the political, from the religious. In the early writings, the style, always smooth and rounded becomes eloquent in its sincerity when expressing deep religious feeling. There is a regular rhythm, a recurring rise and fall in its periodicity and sonorousness, often reminiscent of Milton's time. The Reflections on Marriage, a pamphlet of the middle period, is simpler, more ejaculatory, with clear-cut statements and balanced structure. In its concluding passages it too rises into swelling cadences. The later pamphlets are more involved, although in The Christian Religion, Mary Astell returns somewhat to the emotional style of her earlier pamphlets. In the ironic she is most successful. Keen and trenchant from the first, her work later becomes hard and bitter. It is too heavy for wit, although the turns of expression are sometimes very happy, as, “A Woman may put on the whole armour of God without degenerating into a masculine temper.”² There is an attractive use of figures, commonplace often, but given a new turn by their placing. “Nothing is so lovely,” she writes, “as a Life that's all of a Piece the same even Thread running through it from beginning to end.”³

Mary Astell's style of presentation and her choice of subject matter show several traits of her character, her religious sentiment, her deep love for the church, her intensity of feeling drawn out by any opposition to either church or state, and the isolation of viewpoint that comes to a pioneer. Most of her biographers have emphasized the austerity of her nature. In this she is often misjudged. The character of her later years is the one that has come down to us, with its oddities and austerities accentuated by the pens of satirists. Lady Arabella Stuart has given much the same portrait, when, hardened by opposition and disappointment and by the misunderstanding and the lack of sympathy of her associates, Mary Astell withdrew into herself. A more attractive picture is the one she presents in the preface to Letters Concerning the Love of God, where with a mother's tenderness she is brooding over the waywardness of the women about her, before repulses and discouragements have narrowed her sympathies. Her reticence and her womanly fear that the purpose of her letters to Dr. Norris should be misunderstood are far different from the caustic statements of An Enquiry after Wit.

Mary Astell's independence of thought and action has given to her the credit of being the “first English suffragette,” a title that can in no way be applied to her in the usual meaning of the term. She had no conception of woman as a factor in politics except through the use of intrigue, of which she entirely disapproved. In fact her belief in the reigning sovereign was such that she would give but limited opportunity for men in political affairs. It was not until her latest pamphlet, Christian Religion, in 1705 that she touched upon the question. She says:

Your Ladiship it's like will wonder why I say so much in a matter wherein women are supposed to be unconcerned. My reason is because the Divines who write Letters and Explain Principles to Ladies insist upon the rest, and because a little practice of the world will convince us, that Ladies are as grand Politicians and every whit as Intriguing as any Patriot of the Good-old-cause. Perhaps because the gentleness of their temper makes them fitter to insinuate and gain proselytes, or that being less suspected they may be apter to get and to convey Intelligence and are therefore made the tools of crafty and designing demagogues. This made me think it not improper to take Notice in this Matter. That if Ladies will needs be Politicians, they may not build upon a rotten and Unchristian Foundation. A Foundation destructive of all government in general, leaving no sort of settled quiet any longer than till a party can be formed strong enough to overthrow it. How busie looks and grand concern about that Bill and t'other Promotion, how whispers and cabals, eternal disputes and restless solicitations, with all the equipage of Modern Politicians, become the Ladies, I have not skill to determine. But if there be anything rediculous in it, I had rather leave the observation to the Men as being both more proper for their Wit and more agreeable to their Inclination.⁴

A few pages farther on she writes more moderately, with a little prophecy of the future: “the sphere alloted to us women, who are subjects, allows us no room to serve our country either with our Counsel or our Lives. We have no Authority to Preach vertue or to Punish vice, as we have not the Guilt of Establishing Iniquity by Law, neither can we execute Judgment and Justice. And since we are not allow'd a share in the Honourable offices in the commonwealth, we ought to be ashamed and scorn to drudge in the mean trades of Faction and Sedition.”⁵

It may not be entirely unfair to lay claim to Mary Astell, with [George] Ballard, as the first defender of “the rights and privileges of her sex,” and there is often excuse for much of her caustic satire because of the attitude of the period toward women. Under the existing social conditions, the position of woman in relation to men not of her family brought with it something of a problem in her own life as well as in the lives of those around her. Mary Astell had no patience with the theory of Platonic friendship, which by this time had degenerated into coarse love. She had, however, corresponded widely with men interested in church affairs, and she confesses that she found it a help at times to ask a man's advice upon business or religious problems, but that social conditions made natural relations of friendship between men and women practically impossible.⁶ She was too independent to let fear of criticism shut her off entirely from society, and her home was open to her friends of either sex.

Mary Astell belongs more to this century than to her own, and would find to-day the support she lacked in her own time. Yet, even then, she did not stand alone. She was the spokeswoman of a body of women interested in the social and educational ideas of the day not in the dilettante fashion of the Femmes Savantes or their English imitators, but with an attempt to grasp problems and to change conditions that pointed to the modern attitude of sociologists. How much her ideas influenced the next generation it is impossible to state, since it is dangerous to attempt to trace streams of influence when the influence is not that of an individual, but of the developing thought of an age. Lady Masham and Elizabeth Elstob sought education for girls, but neither saw so fully as did Mary Astell its bearing on life. That the women of the next generation were indebted to her in some measure Lady Mary Montagu shows clearly. Sarah Chapone, the mother-in-law of Hester Chapone, had Mary Astell's pamphlets in her library and was interested in their contents. Catherine Talbot, Mrs. Delaney, who, as Mrs. Pendarves, was the friend and benefactor of Elizabeth Elstob and the Chapones may have formed a connecting link between the work of Mary Astell and that of the Blue-stockings, but no one until Mary Wollstonecraft so caught the modern sprit. Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu, it is true, wanted to establish a “college” for girls, but the general attitude of the Blue-stockings toward education was that of Mrs. Barbauld, who, in spite of her own experience in securing an education, refused to take charge of the proposed school, because she believed herself unfitted to teach music, dancing, and embroidery, the accomplishments of a lady, which could be acquired better under the paternal roof.

Interesting as such a relation would be, there seems no proof that Mary Astell's writings had any direct influence on Mary Wollstonecraft. Suffice it to say that both were laboring to bring in a new era for women: the one, a sincere, earnest daughter of the church, sought education, freedom of reason and, where needful, economic independence for women, who thus might have an opportunity to know and to practice righteousness. Mary Astell's idea of freedom was the breaking away from convention only as it hampered the development of the religious ideal. To Mary Wollstonecraft freedom had a far different meaning. A liberal in religion and the product of a hundred years more of thought, she was unhampered by tradition as Mary Astell was not. Her views were based upon personal experience and upon personal wrongs. She asked for more than the prevention of unhappy marriages; she asked for opportunities in education and in labor equal to those of men. Such ideas were merely a carrying out to its logical conclusions of Mary Astell's desire for economic independence.

Mary Astell's originality in thought lies not wholly, as has been seen, in her plan for the education of women. Lettice Falkland had hinted at economic independence; Mary Astell definitely asked for it. Although both had in mind only gentlewomen, this was an advance when even gentlemen had not learned to work. The Essay in Defence of the Female Sex suggests that English women should take up sedentary occupations as the Dutch women had done, thus leaving men free to fight. The discussion had only begun. In The Gentleman's Magazine of 1739 appeared a letter entitled “A new Method for making Women as useful and as capable of maintaining themselves as the Men are: and consequently preventing their becoming old Maids or taking ill courses. By a Lady,” and succeeding issues continued the discussion. It is Mary Astell's presentation of the economic position of women in society and her attempt to show the relation between woman's education and her economic position in marriage that calls attention to her to-day. In this attempt lies her value at present when the grave questions of the vocational education and the political enfranchisement of women are bound up closely with the problems of the economic relation between women's education and marriage, and when Mary Astell's desire for the education of women, carried out beyond the reach of her wildest vision, seems to be finding its fulfillment in women's search for her highest freedom.

Notes

1. An Enquiry after Wit, p. 73.

2. Christian Religion, p. 103.

3. Ibid., p. 116.

4. Christian Religion, pp. 176-178.

5. Ibid., p. 323.

6. Ibid., pp. 219-220.

Bibliography

I. A Serious Proposal To the Ladies For the Advancement of their true and greatest interest. By a Lover of her Sex. London. Printed for R. Wilkins at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1694. [British Museum copy with corrections in Mary Astell's hand, and on the fly leaf, “For the Honourable Md Mountagu from her Ladiships Most humble servant, M. A.] Licensed July 16th, 1694.

A Serious Proposal To the Ladies For the Advancement of their true and greatest interest. By a Lover of her Sex. The Second Edition Corrected. London. Printed for R. Wilkin. At the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1695.

The Third edition Corrected. 1696.

A Serious Proposal To the Ladies Part II. Wherein a Method is off'd for the Improvement of their Minds. London. Printed for Richard Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1697.

[The Dedication is changed from one to Ladies in General to a special one “To her Royal Highness The Princess Anne of Denmark.”]

A Serious Proposal To the Ladies for the Advance-ment of their True and Greatest Interest. In two Parts. By a Lover of her Sex. The Fourth Edition. London. Printed for Richard Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1697.

A Serious Proposal to the Ladies For the Advancement of their True and Greatest Interest. Part I. By a Lover of her Sex. The Fourth Edition. London. Printed by J. R. and R. Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard.

[Bound with above] A Serious Proposal to the Ladies wherein a Method is offer'd for the Improvement of their Minds. London. Printed for Richard Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1697.

II. Letters Concerning the Love of God Between the Author of the Proposal to the Ladies and Mr. John Norris, wherein his Discourse shewing That it ought to be entire and exclusive of all other Loves, is further cleared and justified. Published by J. Norris, M. A., Rector of Bemerton near Sarum. London. Printed for Samuel Manship at the Ship near the Royal Exchange in Cornhill, and Richard Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1695. Imprimatur. October 7, 1694. C. Alston.

[The first edition is dedicated as follows:

To the Truly Honourable Lady The Lady Catherine Jones in due Acknowledgment of her Merits, and in Testimony of that Just and therefore very Great and Unfeigned Veneration which is paid to her Ladiships vertues. These Letters Are most Humbly Dedicated and Presented.

The Book Contains: The Preface. To the Reader. Letter to M. Astell. Reply from M. Astell. Postscript. Letters between M. Astell and J. Norris.]

The second edition, corrected by the authors, with some few things added. 1705.

III. Some Reflections upon Marriage Occasion'd by the Duke & Dutchess of Mazarine's Case which is also considered. London. Printed for John Nutt, near Stationers Hall. 1700.

[Contents: 1. Advertisement. 2. Reflections.]

Reflections upon Marriage. The Third Edition. To which is added a Preface in answer to some Objections.

London. Printed for R. Wilkin, at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1706.

[Contents: 1. Preface. 2. New Preface by Reflector. 3. Reflections.]

Some Reflections upon Marriage with additions. The Fourth Edition. London. Printed for William Parker at the King's Head in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1730.

IV. Moderation truly Stated; or a Review of a Late Pamphlet entitl'd Moderation a Vertue with a Prefactory Discourse to Dr. D'Aveanant concerning His late Essays on Peace and War.

London. Printed by J. L. for Rich. Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard. 1704.

V. A Fair Way with the Dissenters and their Patrons. Not writ by Mr. L———y, or any other Furious Jacobite whether Clergyman or Layman, but by a very Moderate Person and Dutiful Subject to the Queen. London, Printed by E. P. for R. Wilkin at the King's Head, in St. Paul's Church-yard, 1704.

[Contents: 1. Fair Way with Dissenters. 2. Postscript concerning “Moderation Still a Virtue.”]

VI. An Impartial Enquiry into the Causes of Rebellion and Civil War in this Kingdom. In an examination of Dr. Kennett's Sermon Jan. 31, 1703-4 and vindication of the Royal Martyr. London. Printed by E. P. for R. Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard, 1704.

VII. The Christian Religion as Profess'd by a Daughter of the Church of England London. Printed by S. H. for R. Wilkin at the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1705.

Third Edition. 1730 (?) Cf. Ballard Ms. 41:132.

[The third edition of Christian Religion is advertised in the Reflections on Marriage, ed. of 1730.]

VIII. Bart'lemy Fair or an Enquiry after Wit in which due Respect is had to a Letter Concerning Enthusiasm. To my Lord X X X. By Mr. Wotton.

London. Printed for R. Wilkin. At the King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1709.

An Enquiry after Wit Wherein the Trifling Arguing and Impious Raillery Of the Late Earl of Shaftsbury In his letter concerning Enthusiasm and other Profane Writers, are fully answered, and justly exposed. The Second Edition. Printed by John Baleman at the Hat and Star in St. Paul's Church-Yard. 1722.

[Contents: 1. Preface. 2. Essay. Ballard XLI: 132.

Letter from Rawlins to Ballard dated 1742-3. “Mrs. Astell's works are lately reprinted from Wm. Parkes at ye King's Head in St. Paul's Church Yard—to wit Reflexions on Marriage … edition with additions. Serious Proposal to ye Ladies, 4th Edition. The Xtian Religion as profess'd by a Dgh 3rd edit.”]

Pamphlet Attributed to Mary Astell

An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex in which are inserted the characters of A Pedant. A Squire. A Beau. A Vertuoso. A Poetaster. A City-critick. C. In a Letter to a Lady written by a Lady. London. Printed for A. Roper and E. Wilkinson at the Black Boy and R. Clavel at the Peacock in Fleet Street, 1696.

[In the British Museum copy after “written by a Lady are penciled the words ‘Mrs. Drake.’”]

[Contents: 1. Dedication to Princess Anne of Denmark. 2. Preface. 3. Drake's poem. 4. Essay.]

An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. Second edition, 1696.

[Advertisement in The Post Boy, No. 181, from Thursday July 2 to Thursday, July 4, 1696.]

An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. In which are inserted the characters of a Pedant, a Squire, a Beau, a Virtuoso, a Poetaster, a City-Critick. C. In a Letter to a Lady written by a Lady.

The Third edition with additions. London. Printed by M. A. Roper at the Black Boy and R. Cavel at the Peacock in Fleet-street, 1697.

[Contents: 1. Dedication to Princess Anne of Denmark. 2. Preface. 3. Poem by J. Drake. 4. Letter from J. Drake. 5. The Lady's Answer. 6. Essay.]

An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. In a Letter to a Lady written by a Lady. The Fourth Edition. Corrected. London. Printed by S. Butler, next Bernard's Inn in Holborn. MDCCXXI.

[Contents: As in third edition.]

An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. Interspersed with Reflections upon Love and Taste. Written for the Honour of the Fair Sex by a Lady. In what will all Men's Ostentation end?

London. Printed for C. Hitch in Paternoster Row and R. Akenhead, jun., at the Globe opposite the Bridge-End Coffee House, Newcastle.

[Welford makes the mistake of considering this the original edition expanded in 1697 (3rd. ed.) This is obviously incorrect as references to Pope's Essay on Criticism and to other writers show this to be a later working over of the original. (Welford. Men of Mark. Vol. I., p. 124.)]