[In the following essay, Hazlett analyzes the changing style and structure of various editions of the Resolves publishing during Felltham's lifetime, noting how the work moves from short, personal resolutions to longer, more persuasive essays.]

Between 1623 (when the book was entered in the Stationer's Register) and 1709 there appeared twelve distinguishable editions or issues of Owen Felltham's Resolves: Divine, Moral, Political.¹ Four of these are of special interest: the undated and rare first edition, containing one hundred resolves; the second edition of 1628, in which a second century was added; the third edition (1628-29), in which the order of the two centuries was reversed, and so remained; and the “Eighth Impression” of 1661, into which Felltham incorporated a complete revision of his earliest pieces. Felltham's discontent with his first century, suggested by the reversal of the order of the essays in the third edition, is explicitly stated in the edition of 1661. In an anonymous preface, written in the third person, but so circumstantial as to suggest that Felltham himself is its author, this explanation is given:

… all seem'd to pass currant, and did arise to several Impressions: yet, being written when he was but Eighteen, they [the earliest resolves] appear'd to him, to have too many young weaknesses … though not for the Honesty, yet in the Composure of them.²

As a result, he gave these original pieces “new Frame and various Composition, by altering many, leaving out some, and adding of others new.”³

Although these progressive stages in the development of the Resolves have been noticed before,⁴ no comparative study of their form has been published.⁵ Yet such a study is of interest to the student of the early essay, for it uncovers, in one of the most popular collections of short prose pieces in the seventeenth century, a change from brief, formalized, essentially personal pieces to richer essays, individualized in their structure, and clearly designed to persuade.

I

The fundamental characteristics of the early resolves are simplicity in form and style, brevity, fixed structure, and a marked personal quality. These characteristics are not, of course, unique in Felltham. They appear in other works in the genre. For example, they are to be found in one of the best known of such works, Bishop Hall's Meditations and Vows, Divine and Moral: “I see naturall bodies forsake their owne place and condition, for the preservation of the whole; but of all other creatures, Man; and of all other Men, Christians, have the least interest in themselves. I will live, as given to others, lent only to my selfe.”⁶ The formula here exemplified is characteristic of many of the vows and resolutions of the period. The piece consists of two elements: the “meditation,” as Hall calls it, and the “vow” or “resolution.” The first element introduces, either immediately or after some development, a moral idea. Many of Hall's pieces begin with a generalization about nature or man. From this the moral is developed, sometimes paradoxically, as in the above example, sometimes metaphorically, sometimes literally. The vow which follows is based on the moral and embodies the author's determination to act consistently with it. Because it results from and follows the meditation, the vow climaxes the piece and, because of its intimate relationship to the author, tends to make the moral idea particular and personal.

Felltham's early resolves are ordinarily longer than the example from Hall, but they follow the same general pattern. Unlike Hall, Felltham usually begins the meditation with a moral proposition, which, by setting and limiting the topic, points toward the ultimate vow: “The will for the deed, is oft with God accepted: and hee that is a thankefull Debtor, restores a benefit.”⁷ The proposition is followed by an expansion, or development, which pursues and enriches the original thought and which frequently leads into the resolution by expounding the idea in personal terms: “Many benefits, nay, all I possesse, O Lord, from thee I know I have received: requite them I cannot, returne them I may not, and to rest ingratefull were a sin inexcusable.”⁸ This example illustrates the personal application of the idea. A thankful debtor will return a favor. All favors, or benefits, however, are received from God, and none can be returned or requited. But God accepts the will for the deed. Therefore, one would seem to have the two choices of desiring or not desiring to requite God's gifts. But, since ingratitude to God is a sin, there is really no choice. It is formally significant that Felltham expands these statements personally. It is he who has received benefits from God; it is he who can neither return nor requite them; and it is he who would commit “sin inexcusable” if he were to be ungrateful. In this way the author's “I” prepares for the resolution: “Since then I cannot retaliate thy love, or retribute thy favours: yet, Lord, will I owe them with a desire to pay.”⁹

As one might expect, there are variations from this standard form. The proposition is developed differently in different essays. More often than not it is partitioned, each part being given a slight development:

Three things are there which aggravate a miserie, and make an evill seeme greater then indeed it is. Inexpectation, Unacquaintance, want of Preparation. Inexpectation, when a mishap comes suddenly, and unlooked for: it distracteth the mind, and scares both the faculties and affections from their due consultation of remedy: … Unacquaintance. Familiaritie takes away feare, when matters not usuall prove inductions to terror. … Thirdly, want of preparation. When the Enemie besiegeth a Citie, not prepared for Warre, there is small hope of evasion, none at all to conquer, none to overcome.¹⁰

In a few resolves Felltham begins with a resolution and permits the abstract elements to develop with it: “I will in all losses, looke both to what I have lost, and to what I have left. To what I have lost, that if it may be, and be good, I may recover it: if not, that I may know what I have forgone.”¹¹ With very few exceptions, however, the variations occur within the formulary framework, and most of the pieces seem to build up to the author's resolution.

It is coherent with the other characteristics of these earliest resolves that, compared with the later ones, they should be stylistically spare.¹² Their dominant syntactic characteristic is shortness of period and absence of subordinate elements. Perhaps as a result of the violent transitions, a single idea is frequently stated in several ways. Often it is expressed abstractly and repeated in one or more metaphors: “[The reader of idle books is] conscious of a double iniurie; they being in effect, like that sinne of brutish Adulterie. For if one reades, two are catched: he that angles in these waters, is sure to strike the Torpedo, that instead of being his food, confounds him.”¹³ Intellectual pretentiousness is absent from the early resolves. They contain none of the voluminous quotation of Latin and Greek authors so frequent in seventeenth-century prose; anecdotes and metaphors are usually drawn from homely subjects:

The first time the Fox saw the Lion, he feared him as death: the second, he feared him, but not so much: the third time he grew more bold, and passed by him without quaking. … How much more hard is the winter to the Grashopper, then the Pismire, who before, having stor'd her Garner, is now able to withstand a famine?¹⁴

Such comparative stylistic simplicity throws into relief the essential characteristic of the form: building through a meditation to a climactic personal resolution.

In the later editions of the Resolves Felltham exhibits a strong zeal for public improvement. Even in the earlier editions one cannot ignore his statement that resolutions were necessary for his age: “If ever Resolutions were needfull, I think they bee in this Age of loosenesse wherein 'twere some Unhappinesse to be good, did not the consciousnesse of her own worth, set Vertue firme, against all dis-hartnings.”¹⁵ Nor can we cast aside his hope that the publication of the Resolves might improve some readers: “… if in them thou find'st a line may mend thee; I shall thinke I have divulged it to purpose.”¹⁶ Yet the earlier resolves are not primarily designed to sway the reader. Felltham thought of them as being private and personal. He wrote them, he says, for his own use: “What I aime at in it, I confesse, hath most respect to my selfe; that I might out of my own Schoole take a lesson, which should serve mee for my whole Pilgrimage; and if I should wander from these rests, that my owne Items might set me in heavens direct way againe.”¹⁷ The reader may “Reade all, and use [his] mindes libertie; how much [his] suffrage falls, I weigh not.”¹⁸ Felltham conceived his resolves to be as personal in their function as they are in their tone. They are moral guides by which the author can right himself, if necessary. As such, they are nearly devoid of devices to persuade others. The author's attitude toward his audience is casual and careless, for his own use of his pieces is all he desires, and his own valuation of them is all he respects. If they persuade, it is not by conscious employment of cogent argument or by adornment of style. Their unique rhetorical appeal is closely associated with that of the testimonial, an appeal from the author. Felltham depends on his statement of the idea to reveal its goodness, and on his vow to persuade the reader to follow it. If the earliest pieces are ineffectual rhetorically, we must remember that this was of little importance to Felltham. Their initial popularity was perhaps more due to their embodiment of the popular stoicism and liberal Anglicanism of the age than to their persuasive power.

II

The most striking changes in the second century and in the revisions first published in 1661 are increased length, a tendency to develop structure from the subject matter rather than to follow a formula, removal of emphasis from the personal element, and substitution of other rhetorical appeals. Metaphors, anecdotes, formal arguments, and the authority of classical quotations and citations are far more numerous in the later resolves. Felltham seems to have acquired over the years greater interest in persuading the reader. As a result, he dropped his cavalier attitude and attempted, by the appeals of metaphor and logic, to move his audience to accept and act on his moral views.

The later resolves are much longer than the earlier. The pieces in the second century are, on the average, about three times as long as their predecessors. The revised essays of 1661 are much longer than those in either earlier group. Often they extend to two thousand words. This increase in length is symptomatic of development away from the formula. There are two interrelated aspects of this change. In the first place, the meditative portions are so expanded as to become dominant. In the second place, the resolution undergoes important modifications in proportion and placement. The additions to the meditative or expository portions of the resolves account for most of the increased length. Not only did Felltham expand the material he devoted to his original idea, adding refinements of various sorts, but he also introduced new concepts. The following is a typical example of expansion:

1623

Who will thinke That a slight wound, which gives a sudden inlet to Death? But should wee grant this errour, yet these of all other, I observe the most dangerous, both for their frequencie and secrecie, the one increasing them to a large heape, the other so covering them, as we see not how they wrong us.

The raine that falls in smallest drops, moistens the earth, makes it mire, slimy, and durty: whereas a hard showre, that descends violently, washes away, but soakes not in. Even the smallest letters are more hurtfull to the sight, then those that are written with a text pen.¹⁹

1661

They [venial sins] are Natures kisses that betray us to Incontinence. They are the sparkles and the Rednesse of that Wine which oft intice to Drunkenesse. Therefore take now which side you please, with all these considerations where is the offence that justly we can count little? That Gale that blows me to a wrack among the Rocks, be it never so gentle is to me the same with a Tempest, and certainly in some respects more dangerous. All will labour to withstand a storm, but danger unsuspected is not car'd for. There be far more deaths contracted out of the unperceiv'd irregularities of dyet, than by open and apparent surfeits. If they be lesse in quality, they are more in number; and their multitude equals them, to the others greatnesse. Nolite contemnere venialia quia minima sunt, sed timete quia plura; Despise not venial sins, because they are small: but rather regard them because they are many, was St. Augustines Counsel of old. The Aggregation of Atomes, made at first the Worlds huge Masse. And the Aggregation of drops did drown it when it was made. Who will think that wound small, that gives a sodain Inlet, if not to death, to disease? If great Sins be killing, the small ones take us Prisoners, and then we are at the mercy of the Enemy. Like the Ashes from the Mount Vesuvius, though singly small and nothing; yet in conjoyned quantities they embarren all the fields about it; the grasse though the smallest of plants yet numerously increasing, it covers all the face of the Earth: the mizling rain makes fouler way, than the violence of a right down showre.²⁰

These passages, although they do not give a complete account of the revision of the resolve, contain the bulk of the parallel materials. In preparing his revision Felltham did not merely accept or reject his earlier material. Two of the parallel similitudes are rewritten in the later version. The metaphor of the wound is enriched by the addition of the phrase “to disease.” The metaphor of the rain, originally dull and belabored, is compressed to a quick and striking image. The ineffectual figure of the letters is dropped. The most significant change in the passage, however, is the addition of metaphors. In place of the three similitudes of the earlier version, the later one has at least ten. Each of them, by pointing out some apt and striking aspect of nature or human existence, emphasizes the central idea that venial sins are dangerous. This contrast between the brevity of the earlier version and the richness of metaphor in the later reveals Felltham's changed concept of the nature and function of the resolve. A writer of a poetical turn of mind, reminding himself of certain moral truths and asserting his intention to follow them, may permit himself one or two metaphors. For his own use he would not invent ten. If, however, he hopes to persuade his audience, one of the most effectual means at his disposal, particularly if the audience is of “the middle sort,”²¹ is the vivid representation of his ideas in a series of striking and apt similitudes. This is the heart of the rhetoric of the late pieces and the essence of the change in Felltham's concept of their nature and function.

Along with the expansion of the expository or meditative portions of the original resolves comes marked modification of the resolution itself. In some of the new pieces (for example, “Of Puritans” and “Of the Uses of Pleasure”), there is no resolution whatsoever. Even where it is present, however, there are modifications. In many pieces it has ceased to be terminal and has been mingled with the other elements throughout. Often it has been compressed from its original length. In the following passage the resolution is shortened from seventy-five to twenty-five words and is simplified and pointed up by the discard of the qualifying “If I write aught …”:

1623

I will write none, lest I hurt them that come after me. I will reade none, lest I augment his mulct that is gone before mee: neither write, nor reade, lest I prove a foe to my selfe. A lame hand is better then a lewd pen: while I live, I sinne too much; let me not continue longer in wickednesse, then life. If I write aught, it shall bee both on a good subiect and from a deliberate pen; for a foolish sentence drop't upon paper, sets folly on a Hill, and is a monument to make infamie eternall.²²

1661

I will not write, lest I hurt my selfe, and posterity. I will not read lest I hurt my self and predecessors: They that dye of the pestilence are not lesse infectious laid forth, than when they are alive. The body of that wickednesse shewes poyson, which continues working longer then life, and when all the sense is gone. A foolish Sentence dropt upon paper setts folly on a Hill, and is a monument to make Infamy eternall.²³

Finally, even where an actual compression of the vow does not occur, the almost invariable expansion of the meditation results in much the same effect. These omissions and modifications of the resolution amount to a disappearance of the original formula. When the resolution ceases to be the climax and focal point, much of the unique personal quality of the resolve disappears, and its persuasive power no longer stems almost exclusively from the testimonial.

In place of the formula appears a type of structure which springs from the subject matter and in which the rhetorical appeal is derived from the cogency of the argument, the authority of learned quotation and citation, the vigor and aptness of the examples, and the piling-up of vivid conceits. These later pieces may be loosely categorized as either discursive or methodical in structure. In those of the former type, the ideas follow one another in an informal way, developing by suggestion from one to the other. In the latter, the development consists of a partitioning of the subject or a reasoned arrangement of the arguments. The former, to use a simple criterion, are hard, the latter easy, to outline. Both kinds of essays are different from the earlier ones, and in both the essential difference is that Felltham has moved from a private literary form to one which, employing a wider range of materials and devices, strives to persuade an audience.

The essay “Of Puritans” illustrates the first kind of structure.²⁴ It defines a puritan, and attacks certain aspects of his character. There are many, Felltham says, who are called “puritans,” yet few who will accept the name. This is because it is a name of infamy, so new and so unidentified with a single doctrine as to be vague in its meaning. By one definition it may be taken to imply a kind of superiority of one man over another. Many wish to be this kind of puritan, but none are so. Further definitions follow, and they are in turn followed by attacks on the sourness, melancholy, and pride of puritans. Throughout the essay the ideas twist and turn in a series of tortuous transitions. The important characteristic is that the ordering of these ideas develops from the subject matter and that the literary devices are aimed at persuading the reader to detest puritans.

The 1661 version of the piece on idle books is an example of the methodical structure.²⁵ Felltham divides such books into five kinds and expands each in a lengthy paragraph. Simple books are ridiculous and therefore the least dangerous. Wanton and lascivious books are “the purulent and spurcitious exhalations of a corrupted mind, stained with the unseasonableness of the flesh.” They are not, however, as bad as scandalous books, which corrupt the whole of society and, at their worst, “abuse the dead.” Next in order are heretical books, whose authors “byass Gods Truths, and descend and bow them to [their] corrupted benefit.” But worst of all are profane books. If “the heretic misunderstands Religion, the profane doth scorn it.” These five paragraphs make up nearly the whole of the essay. It is important, not only that Felltham has partitioned his subject, but that he has arranged the parts according to the increasing viciousness of the kinds of books, a principle inherent in the subject itself and one which, by rising to a climax of evil, attempts to move the reader to fear and loathe such books.

The essay “Of the Use of Pleasure” is a somewhat more subtle example of the methodical structure.²⁶ Since this piece is argumentative rather than expository, its structure and rhetorical force grow from the proofs. The proposition is that men should indulge in pleasures so long as they are moderate and controlled. The argument is that what God wishes man to do should be done and that God wishes man to indulge in innocent pleasures. The crux of this syllogism is, of course, the minor premise. As an Anglican, Felltham supports it. The burden of his argument, therefore, rests in demonstrating that the minor premise is true. Felltham uses four proofs to make his case. The first pair is derived from biblical evidence, the second pair from nature. Ecclesiastes 11:9 is the central text for the two arguments from Scripture.²⁷ The problem is to determine whether the text is to be taken literally, as Felltham believes, or ironically, as the opponents of pleasure believe. To support his interpretation, Felltham argues, first, that this passage is consistent with others in the same book and, second, that the book as a whole is literal. The second pair of arguments is derived from nature. God would never have “instincted the appetition” of pleasure in man if he had not intended that it be used. And he would never have created the multitudinous varieties of delight and “complacency” in the world if he had not wished men to enjoy them. The carefully balanced organization is characteristic of the subtle rhetorical appeal of many of the later essays. The first argument is related to the second and the third to the fourth by the fact that each pair deals with the same topic. Yet the first and third arguments are alike in that they deal with limited and particular aspects of their topics, while the second and fourth deal with broad and generalized aspects. Each argument supports and is supported by two of the others, each giving and gaining logical and rhetorical strength by these relations.

These examples of Felltham's later writing illustrate the changes in his concept of the structure and function of the resolve. Whereas the early resolve was typically a brief, personal, formalized piece, made up of relatively constant elements in fixed positions, the later pieces are lengthy, individualized in their structure, comparatively impersonal in their tone, and designed to persuade the reader. Only with difficulty can they be formally differentiated from essays such as Bacon's latest or those of Cowley.

The marked increase in the number of metaphors has already been noted. The periods in the later versions seem to be somewhat longer and the transitions somewhat smoother. Numerous anecdotes are introduced. The authority and testimony of other writers serves as another kind of persuasive device for Felltham and gives us further proof of his changed concept. Most of these developments are illustrated in the following parallel passages:

1623

Lest then, I make my death seem more terrible to me, than indeed it is, I will first daily expect it: that when it comes, I may not be to seeke to entertaine it: if not with ioy, as being but flesh: yet without sorrow, as having a soule.²⁸

1661

Lest, then, I make my death seem more terrible to me, then indeed it is, I will first dayly expect it. It were madness, to think, I should never arrive at that, to which I am every minute going. If an Enemy, that I cannot resist, shall threaten that within such a space, he will assault and plunder me, but will not tell me the precise time; shall I not every hour look for him; It was Plato's opinion, That the wise mans life, was a meditation of death. And to expect it, is a stupidity; since the world hath nothing that is like a Reprieve. The Philosopher will tell us, as well as the Divine; that, Omne Humanum Genus, quodcunque est, quodcunque erit, morti damnatum est. All Humanity that either is, or shall be, once shall dye. And surely then, he is but dead already, that does not look for death. A Glasse though it be brittle, (if safely kept) may last long. But Man preserv'd declines. His Childhood, Youth, Virility, and Age, they are but several stages posting him to death. He may flourish till about fifty, and may dye any day before: But after that, he languishes like an October Fly, till at last he weakly wither to his grave.²⁹

There is no value to be gained from cataloguing Felltham's numerous quotations. They are drawn, for the most part, from Scripture and the classics and are in no way remarkable. Felltham cannot compete, either in erudition or in painstaking care, with Burton or even Richard Whitlock. What is significant about the quotations is that they do not appear in the early resolves, just as they are absent from Hall's Meditations and Vows, and that their addition supplies not only literary adornment but the weight of argument from authority.

It is generally concluded by historians describing the course of the essay and other brief prose forms in the seventeenth century that there was a growing tendency for writers to retain the genre names for such pieces and, at the same time, to modify their original characteristics. In the essay our view of this tendency is obscured by the presence of the diverse Baconian and Montaignian traditions. Yet it is well known that Bacon's essays shifted to some extent from the early aphoristic form to longer pieces, which “carry in solution, as it were, more modifying matter that gives color to the thought and greater ease and coherence to the style.”³⁰ The brief, precise Overburian character, described as “jewel-like” by one of its admirers, was supplanted by the pamphlet character, which was much longer, more topical, and less literary.³¹ And when, in the mid-century, Richard Whitlock chose to write “Observations,” he composed under this name pieces which include all the elements of the vow, the injunction, the resolve, the meditation, and the prayer, as well as the observation.³² As the century wore on, the genre names for short prose works were applied to pieces which were less restricted and less formalized than their predecessors.

There is little doubt that Felltham's Resolves supply added and particularly vivid evidence to support this general view. By 1661 Felltham had come to think of them as being closely akin to essays. It is true that they retained vestiges of the components of the earlier pieces. They were more personalized than Bacon's Essays, they contained the far-fetched metaphysical conceits which were always characteristic of Felltham's style, and some of them retained the resolution. But over the years Felltham had modified his working definition of the structure of the resolve. It had become a less mechanical, less formalized kind of writing, providing him with more freedom to expound his beliefs and explore the recesses of his fancy. And its aim had shifted radically. Whereas the resolves seem originally to have been private jottings, at least avowedly for Felltham's own use, they became essays, attempting by many devices to persuade the reader to hold certain beliefs and follow certain lines of conduct. The unique fact in the development of Felltham's Resolves, however, is not that they became essays at last but that they started as resolves. No similar collection of pieces in the century exhibits such a marked shift. Is it possible that this radical change in a book as popular as the Resolves had some effect on the work of other authors?

Notes

1. For a detailed bibliography see M. D. Cornu, “A Biography and Bibliography of Owen Felltham with Some Notes on His Poems and Letters” (Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1928).

   The Resolves do not appear to have been published between 1709 and 1806. The nineteenth century, however, saw at least one edition of each version. In 1806 James Cumming published an edition based on the text of the eighth edition, but revised and bowdlerized (Resolves, Divine, Moral, and Political of Owen Felltham … Revised and Amended [London: J. Hatchard, 1806]). Cumming's edition reappeared in 1820. I have not seen The Beauties of Owen Felltham, a volume of selections, published in 1818 by one “J. A.” The text of the third edition was published in a handsome volume in 1840 (Resolves, Divine, Moral, Political. By Owen Felltham, Esq. [London: Whittaker & Co., 1840]).

2. Owen Felltham, Resolves: Divine, Moral, Political. Eighth Impression (London: A. Seile, 1661), sig. A2^[r].

3. Ibid.

4. Notably in Cornu, pp. 1-12, 27, 43; Cumming, pp. xxii-xxiii; The Retrospective Review (London: Charles Baldwyn, Newgate Street, 1824), X, 344; E. N. S. Thompson, The Seventeenth Century Essay (“University of Iowa Humanistic Studies,” Vol. III, No. 3 [1928]), p. 74; Hugh Walker, The English Essay and Essayists (New York, 1915), p. 63; and Jacob Zeitlin, Seventeenth Century Essays from Bacon to Clarendon (New York, 1926), p. xxiii.

5. The following is a check list of the relationships between the first century of the Resolves and the 1661 revision of this century. Roman numerals indicate the original pieces. Arabic numerals indicate the revised pieces. The resolves fall into three groups.

   1. Those resolves which were rewritten for the 1661 edition.—I. 1, II. 2, III. 3, IV. 4, V. 5, VII. 6, IX. 7, X. 8, XI. 9, XII. 10, XIII. 11, XIV. 12, XV. 14, XVI. 13, XVII. 15, XXII. 47, XXIII. 21, XXV. 22, XXVI. 23, XXVII. 27, XXVIII. 24, XXIX. 25, XXX. 26, XXXI. 28, XXXIII. 29, XXXIV. 30, XXXV. 31, XXXVI. 32, XXXVII. 33, XXXVIII. 34, XXXIX. 35, XL. 37, XLII. 39, XLIII. 40, XLVI. 41, XLVII. 43, XLVIII. 44, L. 45, LI. 49, LII. 46, LIV. 48, LVI. 51, LVIII. 52, LIX. 53, LXI. 55, LXIII. 56, LXVII. 59, LXXII. 60, LXXV. 63, LXXVII. 77, LXXXII. 69, LXXXIV. 64, LXXXVIII. 78, LXXXIX, 66, XCII. 74, XCIII. 68, XCVIII. 81.

   2. Those resolves which were discarded in the preparation of the 1661 edition.—VI, VIII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXIV, XXXII, XLI, XLIV, XLV, XLIX, LIII, LV, LVII, LX, LXII, LXIV, LXV, LXVI, LXVIII, LXIX, LXX, LXXI, LXXIII, LXXIV, LXXVI, LXXVIII, LXXIX, LXXX, LXXXI, LXXXIII, LXXXV, LXXXVI, LXXXVII, XC, XCI, XCIV, XCV, XCVI, XCVII, XCIX, C.

   3. Those resolves which appear for the first time in the 1661 edition.—16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 36, 38, 42, 50, 54, 57, 58, 61, 62, 65, 67, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85.

   It is possible that there may be a few resolves in group 2 related to others in group 3. Felltham's revisions were in some cases so complete as to preserve only a phrase or clause of the original. Such slight connections might escape even the most painstaking comparison. Note that the revision resulted in 85 instead of the original 100 resolves.

6. Joseph Hall, The Works of Joseph Hall Doctor of Divinitie and Dean of Worcester … (London: R. Moore, 1625), I, 23, sig. [O6^r].

7. Owen Felltham, Resolves, a Duple Century, the Third Edition (London: Henry Seile, 1628), pp. 378-79.

8. Ibid., p. 379.

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid., pp. 329-30.

11. Ibid., p. 340.

12. Felltham's style has been discussed in John Constable, Reflections upon the Accuracy of Style (London: Henry Lintot, 1731), pp. 69 ff.; and George Williamson, The Senecan Amble (Chicago, 1951), pp. 201-3.

13. Feltham, Resolves … the Third Edition, p. 323.

14. Ibid., pp. 329-30.

15. Ibid., p. 319.

16. Ibid., p. 322.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid.

19. Felltham, Resolves … the Third Edition, pp. 33-37.

20. Felltham, Resolves … Eighth Impression, p. 197.

21. “He hath often us'd to say, They were written to the middle sort of people. For the wisest, they are not high enough; nor yet so flat and low, as to be only fit for fools: whosoever pleaseth only these, is miserable”

    (ibid., sigs. A2^r-A2^v).

22. Felltham, Resolves … the Third Edition, p. 324.

23. Felltham, Resolves … Eighth Impression, p. 176.

24. Ibid., pp. 6-8.

25. Ibid., pp. 173-76.

26. Ibid., pp. 283-86.

27. “Rejoyce, O young man in thy youth, and let thy heart chear thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: But know that for all these things, God will bring thee to judgment”

    (ibid., p. 283).

28. Feltham, Resolves … the Third Edition, p. 330.

29. Felltham, Resolves … Eighth Impression, pp. 186-87.

30. Thompson, p. 39.

31. Benjamin Boyce, The Theophrastan Character in England to 1642 (Cambridge, Mass., 1947), p. 287.

32. Richard Whitlock, Zootomia, or Observations on the Present Manners of the English (London: Humphrey Moseley, 1654), pp. 1-44.