posted on 2025-09-24, 08:57authored byDaniel R, Rignall
<p dir="ltr">Moses was an important and frequently discussed figure in the intellectual and civic discourse of eighteenth-century Britain. This thesis is the first scholarly study to identify the major engagements with Moses in the eighteenth century. Surveying the many mentions of Moses in the printed sermons, pamphlets and polemical theological tracts of the period, the project explores the significant role of Moses in British intellectual life, showing that he was regularly seen as both a revered symbol and a point of controversy. References to Moses were pervasive in civic literature: he was held up as a model for political leadership as well as being seen as a pillar of constitutional thought. He was also the subject of vigorous debate. Divines struggled with the figure of Moses as they grappled with the place of the Old Testament law within British Protestantism. This was mirrored by ongoing virulent debates about the authority of revealed religion, in which discussions over Moses’ role as a prophet and historian played a major part. He could be the subject of both subtle and irreverent attacks from deists and sceptics, while also being passionately and creatively defended by orthodox churchmen. As the century progressed, Moses’ traditional authority was increasingly challenged, with an overall decline of deference and more frequent criticisms of the traditional understanding of revelation. However, the thesis also shows that Moses was adapted for the eighteenth century to suit contemporary sensibilities and the evolving intellectual landscape, with writers such as William Warburton and John Fletcher of Madeley highlighted as key examples of this practice. The thesis therefore argues that there was much more continuity with the Hebraism and biblicism of the seventeenth century than is usually assumed, while also documenting the changing complexion of religious thought in the era of the Enlightenment.</p>
History
Supervisor(s)
Roey Sweet; Jeremy Gregory; John Coffey
Date of award
2025-07-04
Author affiliation
School of History, Politics and International Relations