Dr Porscha Fermanis and William Goldwin

Dr Porscha Fermanis argues for the inclusion of historical writing into discussions of history, in her paper ‘History, Psychology and Romance in William Godwin’s History of the Commonwealth (1824-28)’. It observes the boundaries between history and literature, and although the literariness of the text is Dr Fermanis’ focus, she believes Godwin’s historical writing in the romantic period paints a more comprehensive picture of the times.

The history of 17^th century is very important for definition in the 19^th century as Godwin began writing his History in 1822 – the era of the Great Reform Act, parliamentary reform and emancipation. Godwin long rejected the political parties of the commonwealth, believing that they were essentially repeating the same arguments of previous republicans and monarchists.

History is the mode for some of Godwin’s other writing on political justice, but moving away from the philosophical, he is more concerned with motive, cause and effect. Fermanis states Godwin’s belief that all knowledge can be reduced to probability. He accuses Hume of over-identifying at the expense of impartiality, and repudiates him for the use of specific historical actors instead of noting more generic experiences.

Prior to his History of the Commonwealth (1824-28), Godwin had experimented with historical biographies, writing one on his completely unknown nephews - The Lives of Edward & James Philips – and another, bolder work, The Life of Chaucer. Bold in that it was neither a social nor political history, but was in fact a history of the possible, which was consequently attacked on the basis of being speculative. Godwin espouses a historiography of presence and wants to make the reader feel he is ‘there’ with the character, and criticizes other authors who neglect this attention to presence.

Godwin’s History morphed from a two- into a four-volume history of the Commonwealth that had the author anxious very early on to assert himself primarily as a historian. It is in this endeavour that he becomes much more conservative compared to his previous experiments. Godwin takes matters very seriously, conducting copious amounts of primary research, rather than relying on the research of others before him, believing that the primary sources and eyewitness accounts will give a more accurate portrayal of the feeling of the times. He is also very clear about his difficulty with sources, for example, about Cromwell much is unknown. Despite this, he is aware of Cromwell’s charisma and models him as a kind of romantic, heroic figure; however, rejects sentimental, ‘affective’ moments when it comes to Cromwell’s final demise.

In Volume 4 of the History, radicalism remains thwarted and the republican moment continues to be denied. Godwin ends his History with the limitations of historical writing, and the rejection of the sentimental ending. He combines different models of history, drawing on sources that helped to shape the novel and in turn demonstrating the shift from Enlightenment philosophy to romantic psychology - two approaches Godwin attempts to reconcile in his History of the Commonwealth.