Search Results

This chapter discusses John Milton's writings on ancient Britons. The dispute over British history is demonstrated. Milton's early references to the British myth give it increasing political significance. In the late 1630s, his high regard for the British legends remains untroubled. In addition, Book I and Book III of the History of Britain is also described. In this book, Milton dissociates his authority as historian from the texts on which he must rely. The early Britons' lack of records shows a corresponding lack of civil virtue. Milton's History forbids any heroic interpretation of the Arthurian age. Milton's impatience with the patriotic myths indicates his growth as a reformer dedicated to the truer understanding of English history, with a historical perspective enhanced by an open-eyed view of his compatriots, ancient and modern.

The final three books of the History of Britain cover the period from the Saxon invasions to the Norman Conquest. They have often disappointed students of Milton. Milton's position on the Saxons needs situating in the longer history of Saxon studies. His failure to achieve more stems in part from his characteristic response to the study of Saxon history as it had developed in the preceding century. This is the first subject tackled in this chapter, after a preliminary note on the date of the later books of the History. Milton's greater difficulties in addressing the complexities of constitutional reform in the 1650s are also explained. He is sceptic about the Saxons' religious and civil discipline. It is stated that the Milton of the History and poetry finds little to cheer in Saxon history and culture.

By working back from the separate publication of the History of Britain (1670) and the Character of the Long Parliament and Assembly of Divines (1681), it is possible to reconstitute a fuller History of Britain that takes to the heart of Milton's republican thought at the crisis of the English Revolution. As so often happens, the political turmoil of the latter end of the 17th century provides vital information about a mid-century text. The political reasons for publishing the 1681 Character needs to be explored in order to understand the History. In particular, the publication of the Character needs to be considered in light of the events of 1681: only then do its omissions and other misleading features, especially its editorial preface, come into focus. The Digression was indeed written ‘Unbrib'd’. The misgivings about the Character are explored. Importance of determining the original context for the History and the Digression in the revolutionary years of 1648–9 is stated.

Introducing Book III of the History of Britain, John Milton sees himself as writing with a special purpose in ‘this intereign’. Milton wrote the History as advice literature to the nation in the ensuing interregnum. The History should be recognized as part of Milton's achievement in 1649, the annus mirabilis in which he writes the Tenure, the first four books of the History, the Observations, and Eikonoklastes, and in which he further assists the new government in preparing Latin letters of state. It is unfortunate that questions about the date of the History have much blunted its message. The freedom at the beginning of the interregnum was soon to be eroded by the lack of true progress in the revolution. The Digression's context in the History itself indicates the frustration of Milton's hopes for his country in the late 1640s. The doubts voiced in the History lie behind much of Milton's later political thought.

Gildas deeply impressed John Milton with the fervour of his jeremiad. At the crisis of the Revolution, Milton was undeterred by the more hortatory than historical style of Gildas' De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae ac flebili Castigatione in Reges, Principes et Sacerdotes. Milton pointed out the confusion Gildas described in ancient Britain that could not be reconciled with the heroic splendour of an Arthurian age. The De Excidio in early modern historiography is described. Milton's use of De Excidio reflects both the historians' and the Reformers' interest in Gildas. In addition, explanations regarding the De Excidio in Milton's History of Britain is provided.

This chapter discusses the salient inconsistency between John Milton's political tracts and the History of Britain. In the Defensio especially, Milton presents a very different, much more positive account of early English history and the Saxon legacy. The Defensio provides a common version of the myth of the ancient constitution, a belief in which appears to underlie references to English history in the later tracts. This historical argument in the Defensio has been related to Milton's reading of Hotman's influential Francogallia. History illustrates Milton in political retreat from his engagement with the parliamentary cause in the early 1650s.