Scholarlink

In 1788 the Della Cruscan poet Robert Merry wrote to his friend and fellow poet, Samuel Rogers, about the apparent lack of political radicalism in England, complaining: “if Hayley is deemed a furious Democrat what must be the state of patriotism in this country?” Merry was almost certainly referring to Hayley’s poem commissioned by the Revolutionary Society, Occasional Stanzas, composed to commemorate the centenary of the glorious revolution (1788). In this poem Hayley sets out the traditional Whig position supporting constitutional monarchy, commerce, and imperialism while simultaneously offering, as the occasion called for, an encomiastic treatment of William of Orange and Mary, who are hailed as “The champions of our Rights, the Founders of our Fame”. The poem compresses British history from Hayley’s own time to Magna Carta and depicts Catholicism as an existential threat. At stake in Hayley’s timeline is “Freedom”, the gendered, personified progeny of “Fortitude and Heavenly Truth” enshrined in the body politic and the nation state. Perhaps reflecting on his abandoned poem on the same subject, which he called The Charter and describes as “a national epic on the freedom of England”, Magna Carta in Hayley’s view establishes the foundations for liberty: “the Barons bravely fix’d the ground-work of that glorious fane” and since the Glorious Revolution, the transformative effect of freedom’s progeny, “Safety, Honour, Wealth, and Force” flourish in “Britain! blest isle, where social virtues bloom”. Between Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution, freedom is presented as under assault from apostate kings, and “Superstition’s rage”, which seek “To poison Liberty’s life-feeding springs”. In opposition to these threats, William of Orange is characterized as “purest of princely names! unsway’d / by base ambition’s sordid springs”. Yet, Hayley tempers his valourization of monarchy by stressing parliament’s role in William of Orange’s ascent to the throne. For Hayley, William’s successful invasion revives Liberty’s voice as established by Magna Carta, “To fix in free debate the sovereign of her choice”. The irony, of course, in Hayley’s version of history is that the conditions for “free debate” to select a sovereign can only occur because of the invasion of the only viable candidate for the crown.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

William Hayley: Milton Biographer and ‘Violent Republican’

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Mark Crosby

摘要

In 1788 the Della Cruscan poet Robert Merry wrote to his friend and fellow poet, Samuel Rogers, about the apparent lack of political radicalism in England, complaining: “if Hayley is deemed a furious Democrat what must be the state of patriotism in this country?” Merry was almost certainly referring to Hayley’s poem commissioned by the Revolutionary Society, Occasional Stanzas, composed to commemorate the centenary of the glorious revolution (1788). In this poem Hayley sets out the traditional Whig position supporting constitutional monarchy, commerce, and imperialism while simultaneously offering, as the occasion called for, an encomiastic treatment of William of Orange and Mary, who are hailed as “The champions of our Rights, the Founders of our Fame”. The poem compresses British history from Hayley’s own time to Magna Carta and depicts Catholicism as an existential threat. At stake in Hayley’s timeline is “Freedom”, the gendered, personified progeny of “Fortitude and Heavenly Truth” enshrined in the body politic and the nation state. Perhaps reflecting on his abandoned poem on the same subject, which he called The Charter and describes as “a national epic on the freedom of England”, Magna Carta in Hayley’s view establishes the foundations for liberty: “the Barons bravely fix’d the ground-work of that glorious fane” and since the Glorious Revolution, the transformative effect of freedom’s progeny, “Safety, Honour, Wealth, and Force” flourish in “Britain! blest isle, where social virtues bloom”. Between Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution, freedom is presented as under assault from apostate kings, and “Superstition’s rage”, which seek “To poison Liberty’s life-feeding springs”. In opposition to these threats, William of Orange is characterized as “purest of princely names! unsway’d / by base ambition’s sordid springs”. Yet, Hayley tempers his valourization of monarchy by stressing parliament’s role in William of Orange’s ascent to the throne. For Hayley, William’s successful invasion revives Liberty’s voice as established by Magna Carta, “To fix in free debate the sovereign of her choice”. The irony, of course, in Hayley’s version of history is that the conditions for “free debate” to select a sovereign can only occur because of the invasion of the only viable candidate for the crown.