UNIVERSAL AND PROFANE: THE HISTORIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF NATURAL RELIGION

Natural religion in the eighteenth century was seemingly unhistorical or even antihistorical: it “dehistoricized” morality. It posited a morality that was uniform in all ages, not dependent on any particular revelation, watermarked onto the fabric of our nature, and accessible merely by the light of reason. Even so, natural religion played an important role in the secular historiographical turn in eighteenth-century England. There was in fact an organic relationship between the two, one that historians have failed to articulate. Precisely because natural religion was thought to rest on timeless and universally valid rational foundations, it became possible to treat traditional religion (meaning above all, but not only, Christianity) as a subject of secular historical study, in the sense that it was subject to the same laws of historical knowledge and historical development as all other subjects of historical study, and left no room for miracles. A central figure in this conceptual relationship was Conyers Middleton, a once-famous, now-obscure Cambridge librarian. Middleton's account of natural religion has been swamped by the attention lavished on Matthew Tindal, and his turn to secular historiography lies in the shadows cast by Edward Gibbon. Yet Middleton played a crucial and distinctive role in laying historiographical foundations without which Gibbon could not have written as he did. His understanding of natural religion differed from that of other participants in the “deist controversy” in ultimately far-reaching ways. Those differences explain why he could treat Cicero as a kind of saint in the church of natural religion, reversing, as it were, the elevation of the Bible above Cicero that Augustine had put into effect at the beginning of medieval history. They explain above all why Middleton could approach the history of Christianity in a manner that anticipated both Voltaire and Gibbon and made their historical writings possible.     

Jacobite Politics in the Age of Anne

Every political movement has watershed moments when decisions are taken with very long-term consequences. This article explores one such moment with respect to the jacobite movement during the reign of Queen Anne. Implicitly building on Geoffrey Holmes's model of the workings of the whig and tory parties in the age of Anne, the article analyses the turn to the Scots that took place within jacobite politics between 1702 and 1710. Throughout the 1690s the English jacobites had dominated the politics of the jacobite movement. Cementing their hold on the jacobite court's outlook and policies there was, too, an intrinsic anglocentrism at royal and ministerial level. Yet by 1715 the Scots jacobites were clearly equal partners with the English within the movement, and this parity was to shape the entire subsequent history of the jacobite cause. This shift within the politics of the movement was, moreover, not simply a corollary of the union. This article argues that the shift to the Scots was far more fundamental in terms of the outlook and policies of the movement, and ultimately did not depend on the immediate military utility of the Scots jacobites, but on a new perception of them as a uniquely important resource.