The ensuing Life was written for amusement, duringa period of convalescence in 1785; and publishedanonymously by Stockdale, before The Historyof the Union, in 1786. As the Author fearsno reproach for such amusement, during such aperiod, he made no strong objections to Stockdale'ssolicitations, that it might be annexed, withthe author's name, to his splendid edition of RobinsonCrusoe. The reader will now have thebenefit of a few corrections, with some additions,and a List of De Foe's Writings.
It is lamented by those who labour the fields ofBritish biography, that after being entangled inbriars they are often rewarded with the scanty productsof barrenness. The lives of literary men aregenerally passed in the obscurities of the closet,which conceal even from friendly inquiries the artificesof study, whereby each may have risen to eminence.And during the same moment that the diligentbiographer sets out to ask for information, withregard to the origin, the modes of life, or the variousfortunes of writers who have amused or instructedtheir country, the housekeeper, the daughter, orgrandchild, that knew connections and traditions,drop into the grave.
These reflections naturally arose from my inquiriesabout the life of the author of The History of TheUnion of Great Britain; and of The Adventures ofRobinson Crusoe. Whether he were born on theneighbouring continent, or in this island; in London,or in the country; was equally uncertain. Andwhether his name were Foe, or De Foe, was somewhatdoubtful. Like Swift, he had perhaps reasonsfor concealing what would have added little to hisconsequence. It is at length known, with sufficientcertainty, that our author was the son of James Foe,of the parish of St. Giles's, Cripplegate, London,[2]citizen and butcher. The concluding sentiment ofThe True-born Englishman, we now see, was then asnatural as it will ever be just:—
If we may credit the gazette, Daniel Foe, or DeFoe, as he is said by his enemies to have calledhimself, that he might not be thought an Englishman,was born in London[1], about the year 1663. Hisfamily were probably dissenters[2], among whom he[3]received no unlettered education; at least it is plain,from his various writings, that he was a zealous defenderof their principles, and a strenuous supporterof their politics, before the liberality of our rulersin church and state had freed this conduct fromdanger. He merits the praise which is due tosincerity in manner of thinking, a