Arbuthnotiana: The Story of the St. Alb-ns Ghost (1712) A Catalogue of Dr. Arbuthnot's Library (1779) — Background and Themes

(0 User reviews)   1700
In Category - Government
Köster, Patricia, 1932- [Author of introduction, etc.] Project Gutenberg 2012 Not confirmed
Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1702-1714 -- Humor; Early printed books -- England -- Bibliography -- Catalogs; Private libraries -- England -- Catalogs; Arbuthnot, John, 1667-1735 -- Library -- Catalogs; Satire, English -- Bibliography -- Catalogs; Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1702-1714 -- Pamphlets Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 16,162
Reading time 71 min
Text sections 3

Before opening Arbuthnotiana: The Story of the St. Alb-ns Ghost (1712) A Catalogue of Dr. Arbuthnot's Library (1779) — Background and Themes, the edition data offers a quick orientation: 16,162 words, 1 hr 11 min estimated reading time, and 3 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 17.1 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1702-1714 -- Humor,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Two rare 18th-century pieces: a Tory squib of disputed authorship (possibly by Swift or Arbuthnot) and a posthumous auction catalogue of Dr. Arbuthnot's library. The introduction by Patricia Köster examines the textual history and political context of the ghost story, while the catalogue reveals the reading habits of a physician-satirist.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.5/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

Oldisworth had apparently given up the struggle against unwilling printers. Arbuthnot, Roper and Manley are not very interested in the matter, and neither are other pamphleteers published by Morphew during the months immediately following Swift's _Proposal_. The items included in the so-called _Miscellaneous Works of Dr. Wagstaffe_, on the other hand, fall into three groups chronologically: those which precede Swift's _Proposal_, and include many apostrophied verb forms; those which immediately follow Swift's _Proposal_, and include abnormally few apostrophied verb forms; the two "late" pieces (1715, 1719), which are back to the proportion of apostrophied verbs to be found in the early items. If Pseudo-Wagstaffe was indeed a single writer, then he followed the same pattern as Oldisworth, but began later and continued longer to use verbs with an _-ed_ ending. Since the genuine signed prose works of Dr. Wagstaffe come "late" (1717, 1721) and have a fairly large (i.e., normal) number of apostrophied verbs, there is no evidence here as to whether or not Pseudo-Wagstaffe is Wagstaffe; at least there is no contradiction. In the light of these facts, we can see that neither Swift nor Arbuthnot is a probable author of the _Story_; Swift would presumably have altered verb typography in the first and all editions, and Arbuthnot would not have altered it at all.[7] In these two projects on authorship we find that authors other than Wagstaffe tend to be eliminated, but that Wagstaffe himself is not strongly confirmed. The authorship remains as problematic as before, and the _Story_ may as well for this century continue with the Arbuthnotiana, as it did during the nineteenth with the Swiftiana.

The device of using a ghost story as vehicle for political satire was by 1712 a well-established one. Elias F. Mengel Jr. refers to "the 'ghost' convention, so popular in the Restoration,"[8] and an important poem of Queen Anne's reign shows some similarities with and perhaps provided a model for the _Story_. In _Moderation Display'd_ (London, 1705) the recently deceased second Earl of Sunderland rises from Hell to confound his guilty Whig companions. Tonson (Bibliopolo) is the most terrified, and as in the _Story_ Wharton (Clodio) is so wicked that he is not frightened at all. The _Story_, however, is both more subtle and more flexible than most other satiric "ghost" narratives. It compresses the actual apparition into the last quarter of the narrative, despite the perhaps deliberately misleading title. Nearly half of the _Story_ deals with previous events; much of the rest is machinery, introduction of seemingly irrelevant details with a mischievous verisimilitude which actually advances the main satiric aims. The opening paragraph, for example, first denounces Roman Catholic superstition, a denunciation which almost every Englishman could join, and then turns the fire toward "Our Sectarists." The war on heterodoxy continues in the references to Dr. Garth, the Whig poet and physician noted for his scepticism in religion, to William Whiston who during the winter of 1711-1712 was transcribing documents and writing elaborate treatises to uphold his view that Christian churches and theologians had all been essentially heretical since the time of Athanasius, and to the Reverend and Honourable Lumley Lloyd, a low-church minister whose sermons attracted at least two Tory satires.[9] None of these men belongs in the narrative, and only Garth was even remotely connected with the Marlboroughs, but all of them were Whigs, and in various ways serve to "demonstrate" that Whigs must be false brethren to the Church of England.

This charge, although a cliché of Tory satires, is here made indirect and witty, as are the staple charges against the Duke and Duchess of Marlborough. Whereas, however, the wickedness of nonconformity had been attacked for decades, the Duke of Marlborough had been associated with the Whigs for a relatively short time. As late as 1706 Wagstaffe could generously declare that "_Woodstock's_ too little" a reward (_Ramelies, a Poem_), but since Swift's "Bill of British Ingratitude" in the _Examiner_ (17 November 1710) the Tory press had begun to say that the rewards were too many and too great. The _Story_ repeats the charge that Avaro and Haggite "grew Richer than their Mistress" (p. 11), together with the ridiculous insinuations of cowardice and incompetence found constantly reiterated in the second volume of _Examiners_. The Duchess of Marlborough attracted massive satire earlier than her husband, in such books as _The Secret History of Queen Zarah_ (London, 1705),[10] and her habit of saying "Lawrd" with an affected drawl is mentioned in _The Secret History of Arlus and Odolphus_ (n.p., 1710), pp. 21, 22, 23.

The two pieces bound together in this volume—a political ghost story from 1712 and a posthumous library catalogue from 1779—are linked by their association with Dr. John Arbuthnot, but they differ sharply in genre and purpose. The first, The Story of the St. Alb-ns Ghost, is a Tory squib whose authorship remains uncertain; Swift himself wrote to Stella that he thought he had written it, but did not. The second, A Catalogue of the ... Library of ... Dr. Arbuthnot, is a straightforward auction list, never before reprinted. Patricia Köster’s introduction situates both within Arbuthnot’s circle and the political pamphlet wars of Queen Anne’s reign.

A Ghost with Political Teeth

The anonymous Story of the St. Alb-ns Ghost is not a supernatural tale but a partisan allegory. Its narrative vigor, as Köster notes, can carry a modern reader over topical obscurities. The pamphlet was pirated within a week of its first appearance, suggesting immediate demand. Swift’s diary entry for 22 February 1712 records that Lady Masham made him read it aloud, and that both he and she suspected he was the author—though he denied it. The ambiguity has persisted: later editors regularly included the piece among Swift’s minor works. The text itself offers few internal clues to authorship, but its brisk, ironic tone and its focus on political maneuvering align it with the Scriblerian mode.

The Catalogue as Autobiography

The second item, A Catalogue of the ... Library of ... Dr. Arbuthnot, records the sale that began on Tuesday, 21 December 1779. It lists hundreds of lots, from pamphlets and medical texts to multi-volume sets of classical authors. The range is telling: alongside Boerhaave’s Praxis Medica and works on anatomy and physic stand editions of Horace, Virgil, Racine, and Molière, as well as Pope’s Homer and Swift’s works. The presence of French titles—Fénelon, Voltaire, Scarron—suggests a reader comfortable with continental letters. The catalogue also includes a copy of Arbuthnot’s own Miscellaneous Works (lot 14), as if the physician’s library was being offered back to the world that had known him.

Diction and the Scriblerian Voice

Köster’s introduction draws attention to the stylistic features that connect the ghost story to Arbuthnot’s known writings. The pamphlet’s diction is pointed and economical, its sentences balanced between mock-heroic gravity and colloquial thrust. Phrases such as “a pretty 2 penny Pamphlet” (Swift’s description) hint at the slightness of the format, but the political stakes were real: the story targets the Duke of Marlborough and the Whig ministry. The author’s choice to frame attack as ghostly testimony is itself a Scriblerian device, allowing satire to wear a mask of supernatural authority. Even without certainty of authorship, the piece exemplifies the tactical use of persona in early eighteenth-century political writing.

Evidence of a Reader’s Habits

The catalogue entries reveal not only what Arbuthnot owned but how he organized his books. The lots are grouped by format—folios, octavos, duodecimos—and by language. Medical works sit alongside poetry; theology next to travel narratives. Lot 32, “Malcolm’s treatise of music, sewed 1721,” suggests a practical interest in the art, while lot 38, “Mitchell’s poems, 2 v. l. p. 1729,” indicates a taste for contemporary verse in large-paper copies. The presence of multiple editions of classical historians (Livy, Polybius, Thucydides) points to a scholarly bent. Yet the catalogue is also a commercial document: the auctioneer’s language is brisk, the lots numbered consecutively, and the sale clearly designed to attract bidders beyond Arbuthnot’s immediate circle.

Readers approaching these texts should attend to the interplay between the two halves: the ghost story shows Arbuthnot’s world in motion, while the catalogue freezes it at a later moment. Neither piece is self-contained; both gain meaning from the political and intellectual contexts that Köster sketches. The volume rewards those who read for detail—a telling lot number, a disputed attribution, a phrase that echoes through the Scriblerian canon.

I keep thinking about how a library catalog can feel like a ghost story—what a person chose to keep, and what that says about them. The Arbuthnot pieces left that ache of quiet intimacy, and it surfaced again while I lingered over Sketches in the House: The Story of a Memorable Session (1893) — Context and Discussion. Both feel like peeking into rooms where the owners have just stepped out.

There are no reviews for this eBook.

0
0 out of 5 (0 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

How will you remember this book?

Save your reaction, strongest insight, and memorable passage.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

What is your current status with this title?

2

How much did you enjoy the reading experience?

3

Is this a title you would suggest to others?

4

How demanding did the text feel?

Related eBooks