The Georgians: The Deeds and Misdeeds of 18th-Century Britain

Abstract

close reading of particular texts – and the analysis of these can seem to lose sight of the main development of chapters, as features of the individual works seem to be covered for their own sakes. Perhaps the worst example of this is the conclusion, looking at Walter Scott’s writings. These were produced well after the main period of study here, they are not advertised in the title of the work, and there is little account of trends in the intervening decades to link them into the analysis. A more contextual historical methodology might also have allowed a stronger defence of the central assertion that the years from 1688 to 1745 were key to the emergence of print as the determinant of cultural memory in Britain. Print certainly expanded greatly in this period, and it was perhaps true that writers such as David Hume were developing more sophisticated understandings of how perceptions of the past built communities, so the processes of creating cultural memory might have been becoming more self-aware. Yet we all want the period we study to be crucial, so we need to guard against the biases this brings by considering the claims of other eras. This reviewer works on the late seventeenth century and is enthusiastic for its importance. Yet he would still assert that print’s role in using history to create images of the nation was more significant and innovative at other times: particularly during the sixteenth-century reformation. Maybe these are simply the gripes of a mainstream and old-fashioned religious and political historian: there is stimulating stuff in this volume despite these criticisms.