Reading Early Modern Literature Historically

Abstract

Recently the interrelationship between early modern literature and history has been much considered, but the dialogue between the disciplines of English and History has not always been harmonious. Disputes have been fuelled in part by the divisive nature of some of the work that has been carried out in a literary-historical vein. In particular, New Historicist approaches, which might be criticised on methodological and conceptual grounds, have caused alarm among scholars from both departments. However, there are reasons to think that historians and literary critics might be able to enjoy better relations. First, the criticisms that may be levelled at New Historicism do not apply to the work of a number of scholars who, from the 1980s on, have sought to locate literature in precise historical contexts. Secondly, both sides might view positively the fact that new texts and contexts are being examined: radical writing is being recovered; the use of gender as a key category of analysis has led to a reconfiguring of the texts which are routinely studied; literature is being discussed within ever widening geographical contexts (British, European, global); and debate over the early modern ‘public sphere’ has led to a broadening of the political and social contexts in which literature is situated. Finally, those literary critics who remain suspicious of historicisation actually have little to fear: the text, and close analysis of it, remains at the heart of any effective literary-historical work.