The most inconsistent of men’: William Godwin and the ‘Apology’ of Sir Thomas More

Abstract

Godwin’s discussion of “The Apology of Syr Thomas More, Knight” in the manuscript essay “On the Composition of History: An Occasional Reflection” (MS. Abinger c.29, undated, watermarked 1808) explores Godwin’s theories of historical biography, historians’ methodology, and the authority of sources. Beginning with a brief survey of historians’ accounts of More’s punishment of James Bainham, Godwin presents More’s apology as a sincere and reliable source amidst accusations of inconsistency and savagery. From this starting point for an investigation into historiography, authority, and party bias, Godwin develops a reading of More’s character and actions situated within the framework of his theory of memorialization in “Essay on Sepulchres” (1809). The subject of “reasonable expectation” arises, and with it questions of agent-centered and authorial judgment, moral consistency, and historical understanding. Drawing upon recent scholarship on the subject of character and agent-centered history, this article addresses questions of how Godwin positions himself as an historian in relation to Hume, and how he uses testimony, evidence, and sympathetic engagement to reconstruct the past.