No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
GLADSTONE, DEVELOPMENT, AND THE DISCIPLINE OF HISTORY, 1840–1896
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 January 2020
Abstract
Between 1885 and 1891, the Liberal statesman William Ewart Gladstone debated the scientific status of the Book of Genesis with the natural historian Thomas Henry Huxley in a series of articles published in the Nineteenth Century. Viewed in isolation, this episode has been seen as a case of a professional scientist dismissing an amateur interloper. This article repositions this familiar dispute as one chapter in Gladstone's lifelong engagement with the concept of historical ‘development’, the unfolding or evolution of Providence to human reason over time, a concept which came to prominence in the 1840s, in both Tractarian theology and in natural history. Gladstone consistently advocated an accommodation between transmutation and natural theology based on a probabilist ontology derived from the eighteenth-century Anglican churchman Joseph Butler (1692–1752). That understanding of historical truth to which Gladstone credited his ability to discern when political issues became ripe for agitation demanded a humble, Christian moral temper that embraced doubt and salutary suffering, rather than certainty and whiggish celebration of progress.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020
Footnotes
The author would like to thank Gareth Atkins and David Bebbington for their helpful comments on drafts, and the Gladstone Library, Hawarden, for the award of The Revd Canon Dr Stewart Lawton Memorial Scholarship.
References
1 Gladstone, William, ‘Universitas hominum; or, the unity of history’, North American Review, 373 (1887), pp. 589–602Google Scholar, at pp. 589–90.
2 Shannon, Richard, Gladstone: God and politics (London, 2007), pp. 261, 267, 292, 332, 401Google Scholar.
3 Gladstone, ‘Unity’, p. 599.
4 Momigliano, Arnaldo, ‘Two types of universal history’, Journal of Modern History, 58 (1986), pp. 235–46, at p. 235CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Gladstone, ‘Unity’, pp. 590 (‘picture’), 600 (‘forces’ and ‘energies’).
6 Shannon, God and politics, p. 24.
7 Smith, Goldwin, Rational religion (Oxford, 1861), p. 76Google Scholar. See Garnett, Jane, ‘Bishop Butler and the Zeitgeist: Butler and the development of Christian moral philosophy in Victorian Britain’, in Cunliffe, Christopher, ed., Joseph Butler's moral and religious thought (Oxford, 1992), pp. 63–96Google Scholar.
8 Gladstone, William, Studies subsidiary to the works of Bishop Butler (hereafter SSB) (Oxford, 1896)Google Scholar.
9 Gladstone, William, ed., The works of Joseph Butler (hereafter WJB) (2 vols., Oxford, 1896), i, p. 251Google Scholar.
10 WJB, i, p. 244.
11 Huxley, T. H., ‘The lights of the church and the light of science’ [1890], in Huxley, T. H., Collected essays (9 vols., London, 1893–4), iv, p. 236Google Scholar.
12 Stephen, M. D., ‘Gladstone's relations with Manning and Acton, 1832–1870’, Journal of Religious History, 1 (1961), pp. 217–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 217.
13 Hilton, Boyd, ‘Gladstone's theological politics’, in Bentley, Michael and Stevenson, John, eds., High and low politics in modern Britain (Oxford, 1983), pp. 28–57Google Scholar, at p. 30. For a similar conclusion, see Ramm, Agatha, ‘Gladstone's religion’, Historical Journal, 28 (1985), pp. 327–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 340. For a discussion of earlier historiography, see Vidler, Alec R., The orb and the cross (London, 1945)Google Scholar. For recent developments, see McCarthy, John-Paul, ‘History and pluralism’, in Boyce, D. G. et al. , eds., Gladstone and Ireland (Basingstoke, 2010), pp. 15–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at pp. 15–19.
14 Windscheffel, Ruth Clayton, Reading Gladstone (Basingstoke, 2008)Google Scholar.
15 Butterfield, Herbert, The Whig interpretation of history (London, 1931)Google Scholar; Burrow, John, A liberal descent: Victorian historians and the English past (Cambridge, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, A history of histories (London, 2007), ch. 23Google Scholar.
16 As Bernard Lightman notes in a recent discussion, David Wilson, James R. Moore, and John Hedley Brooke began challenging the consensus ‘conflict thesis’ in the 1970s. Lightman, Bernard, ‘Victorian sciences and religion’, Osiris, 16 (2001), pp. 343–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Turner, Frank M., ‘The late Victorian conflict of science and religion’, in Dixon, Thomas, Cantor, Geoffrey, and Pumfrey, Stephen, eds., Science and religion (Cambridge, 2010), pp. 87–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Moore, James R., The post-Darwinian controversies (Cambridge, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Livingstone, David N., Darwin's forgotten defenders (Edinburgh, 1987)Google Scholar; Brooke, John Hedley, Science and religion (Cambridge, 1991)Google Scholar; Turner, Frank, ‘The Victorian conflict between science and religion’, in Turner, Frank, Contesting cultural authority (Cambridge, 1993), ch. 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
17 For a somewhat positivist account, see Levine, Philippa, The amateur and the professional: antiquaries, historians and archaeologists in Victorian England, 1838–1886 (Cambridge, 1986), p. 3Google Scholar. For more nuanced perspectives, see Goldstein, Doris S., ‘The professionalization of history in Britain’, Storia della Storiografia, 3 (1983), pp. 3–27Google Scholar; Howsam, Leslie, ‘The establishment of boundaries in historical writing’, Victorian Literature and Culture, 32 (2004), pp. 525–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hesketh, Ian, The science of history in Victorian Britain (London, 2011)Google Scholar. See also Parker, C., The English historical tradition since 1850 (Edinburgh, 1990)Google Scholar; Bentley, Michael, Modernizing England's past (Cambridge, 2005)Google Scholar.
18 Collini, Stephan, Public moralists: political thought and intellectual life in Britain, 1850–1930 (Oxford, 1991), p. 217Google Scholar.
19 Bebbington, David, ‘Introduction’, in Bebbington, David and Swift, Roger, eds., Gladstone centenary essays (Liverpool, 2000), p. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schreuder, Deryck M., ‘Gladstone's “greater world”’, in Quinault, Roland, Swift, Roger, and Windscheffel, Ruth Clayton, eds., William Gladstone: new studies and perspectives (Farnham, 2012), pp. 267–90Google Scholar.
20 Gladstone, William, Church principles considered in their results (London, 1840), pp. 2–3Google Scholar.
21 Ibid., p. 1.
22 Arnold, Thomas, Introductory lectures on modern history (2nd edn, London, 1843)Google Scholar. For the embryonic state of the discipline at the university, see Slee, Peter R. H., Learning and a liberal education (Manchester, 1986)Google Scholar. For discussion of Liberal Anglican history, see Forbes, Duncan, The liberal Anglican idea of history (Cambridge, 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Heyck, Thomas, The transformation of intellectual life in Victorian England (London, 1982), ch. 5Google Scholar.
23 Garnett, Jane, ‘Protestant histories: James Anthony Froude, partisanship and national identity’, in Ghosh, Peter and Goldman, Lawrence, eds., Politics and culture in Victorian Britain (Oxford, 2006), pp. 171–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 173.
24 Young, Brian, ‘Gibbon, Newman and the religious accuracy of the history’, in Womersley, David, ed., Edward Gibbon: bicentenary essays (Oxford, 1997), pp. 309–30Google Scholar. For Freeman's Tractarian sympathies, see Bremner, Alex and Conlin, Jonathan, eds., Making history: Edward Augustus Freeman and Victorian cultural politics (Oxford, 2014), esp. chs. 2–4Google Scholar; Conlin, Jonathan, ‘E. A. Freeman and the debate on church restoration, 1839–1851’, Oxoniensia, 77 (2012), pp. 137–52Google Scholar.
25 Kirby, J. E., ‘An ecclesiastical descent: religion and history in the work of William Stubbs’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 65 (2014), pp. 84–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at p. 85. See also Bentley, Michael, ‘Victorian historians and the larger hope’, in Bentley, ed., Public and private doctrine (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 127–48Google Scholar.
26 Kirby, ‘Stubbs’, p. 110.
27 Gladstone, Principles, p. 385.
28 Ibid., p. 118. For context, see Garnett, ‘Histories’, p. 190.
29 Levine, Professional, p. 37.
30 Nockles, Peter, The Oxford movement in context (Cambridge, 1994), ch. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
31 For surveys, see Chadwick, Owen, The development of doctrine from Bossuet to Newman (Cambridge, 1957)Google Scholar; Walgrave, Jan Hendrik, Unfolding revelation: the nature of doctrinal development (London, 1972)Google Scholar. Chadwick's account of the circumstances of Newman's engagement with development has been corrected by Pereiro, James, ‘Ethos’ and the Oxford movement (Oxford, 2008), pp. 164, 166, 171Google Scholar. See also Lash, Nicholas, Newman on development (London, 1975)Google Scholar.
32 Perrero, Movement, pp. 133, 146, 150.
33 Newman, J. H., Fifteen sermons preached before the University of Oxford between ad 1826 and 1843 (Notre Dame, 1997), pp. 312–51Google Scholar, at p. 313.
34 Ibid., p. 317.
35 Newman, J. H., Apologia pro vita sua (Glasgow, 1977), p. 238Google Scholar.
36 Newman, J. H., Essay on the development of doctrine (London, 1845), p. 170Google Scholar.
37 Ibid., p. 37.
38 Ibid., pp. 44, 116.
39 Ibid., p. 117.
40 Matthew, H. C. G. and Foot, M. R. D., eds., The diaries of William Gladstone (hereafter GD) (14 vols., Oxford, 1968–87), iii, p. 268Google Scholar.
41 GD, iii, p. 273. For Gladstone and Tractarianism, see Lynch, M. J., ‘Was Gladstone a Tractarian?’, Journal of Religious History, 8 (1975), pp. 364–89Google Scholar.
42 William Gladstone, ‘Eccl. notes of certain points in a conversation with Rio. July 1845’, London, British Library (hereafter BL), Add MS 44735, fo. 50. For Gladstone's discussions of art history, see Conlin, Jonathan, ‘Gladstone and Christian art, 1832–1854’, Historical Journal, 46 (2003), pp. 341–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Döllinger, see Erb, Peter C., ‘Gladstone and German liberal Catholicism’, Recusant History, 23 (1997), pp. 450–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
43 BL, Add MS 44735, fo. 272v. For similar critiques by other Anglicans, see Nicholls, David, ‘Gladstone and the Anglican critics of Newman’, in Bastaple, James D., ed., Gladstone and Newman: centennial essays (Dublin, 1978), pp. 121–44Google Scholar, at p. 139.
44 William Gladstone, ‘Protestantische Beantwortung p. 179’ [8 Aug. 1847], BL, Add MS 44736, fos. 265–333, at fo. 267v.
45 Shea, C. Michael, Newman's early Roman Catholic legacy, 1845–1854 (Oxford, 2017), p. 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; [Chambers, Robert], Vestiges of the natural history of Creation (4th edn, New York, NY, 1846), p. 232CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
46 GD, iii, pp. 634–5, at p. 635.
47 W. Gladstone, ‘On “Vestiges of natural Creation” in relation to Butler’, undated memo, BL, Add MS 44731, fos. 74–82, at fo. 75v. This is presumably the memo which he began at Fasque on 17 July. GD, iii, pp. 635–7.
48 Gladstone, ‘Beantwortung’.
49 BL, Add MS 44731, fo. 74.
50 Ibid., fo. 76.
51 Secord, James A., Victorian sensation: the extraordinary publication, reception, and secret authorship of Vestiges of the natural history of Creation (Chicago, IL, 2001), ch. 7Google Scholar; Nicholls, ‘Gladstone’.
52 Gladstone to Samuel Wilberforce, 10 Dec. 1845, BL, Add MS 44343, fos. 84–6. For similar remarks, see Gladstone to Manning, 28 Dec. 1845, in Erb, Peter C., ed., The correspondence of Henry Edward Manning and William Ewart Gladstone (hereafter CMG) (4 vols., Oxford, 2013), ii, p. 178Google Scholar.
53 Gladstone to Manning, 21 Nov. 1845. CMG, ii, p. 172.
54 Manning, Henry, ‘The analogy of nature’, in Manning, Henry, Sermons. Volume the fourth (London, 1850), pp. 152–75Google Scholar.
55 Gladstone to Manning, 14 Nov. 1849. CMG, ii, pp. 320–1.
56 Gladstone to Manning, 28 Nov. 1852. CMG, ii, p. 513.
57 Bebbington, David, The mind of Gladstone: religion, Homer and politics (Oxford, 2004), p. 109CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
58 As Elizabeth Bellmer notes, Gladstone read fifty-three different works on human evolution between 1859 and 1877 alone. Bellmer, Elizabeth, ‘The statesman and the ophthalmologist: Gladstone and Magnus on the evolution of human colour vision’, Annals of Science, 56 (1999), pp. 25–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, at pp. 28–9.
59 Gladstone, William, ‘The declining efficiency of parliament’, Quarterly Review, 99 (1856), pp. 521–70Google Scholar, at pp. 554, 534. See also Matthew, H. C. G., Gladstone 1809–1874 (Oxford, 1986), p. 237Google Scholar.
60 Bebbington, Gladstone, p. 130.
61 Vidler, Orb, pp. 31 n. 1, 84 n. 4.
62 Maurice, J. F., The life of Frederick Denison Maurice (2 vols., London, 1884), i, pp. 108–10Google Scholar.
63 Young, David, F. D. Maurice and Unitarianism (Oxford, 1992), p. 92CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
64 Morris, Jeremy, F. D. Maurice and the crisis of Christian authority (Oxford, 2008), pp. 169, 177CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Brose, Olive, ‘F. D. Maurice and the Victorian crisis of belief’, Victorian Studies, 3 (1960), pp. 227–48Google Scholar, at p. 247.
65 Bebbington, Gladstone, pp. 105, 129–30.
66 Gladstone, ‘Homerica 1861’, BL, Add MS 44751, fos. 260 (‘humanity’), 261 (‘holiness’).
67 Gladstone, ‘Ph. Darwinism’, 17 Dec. 1881, BL, Add MS 44766, fo. 189.
68 Chapman, Mark D., The fantasy of reunion: Anglicans, Catholics, and ecumenism, 1833–1882 (Oxford, 2014), ch. 9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Matthew, H. C. G., ‘Gladstone, Vaticanism, and the question of the east’, Studies in Church History, 15 (1978), pp. 417–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at pp. 433–6.
69 Desmond, Adrian, Huxley: devil's disciple (London, 1994), p. 379Google Scholar. For the distinction between ‘men of science’ and ‘scientist’, see White, Paul, Thomas Huxley (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 170–4Google Scholar.
70 Gladstone, William, Address delivered at the distribution of prizes in the Liverpool Collegiate Institution (London, 1873), pp. 26 (‘denial’) 11 (‘science’)Google Scholar. Shannon claimed that it was Gladstone's reading of Darwin's Descent which triggered this salvo. Shannon, R., Gladstone: heroic minister, 1865–1898 (London, 1999), p. 116Google Scholar. John Gardner persuasively demurs. John Gardner, ‘William Ewart Gladstone and Christian Apologetics, 1859–1896’ (D.Phil. thesis, York, 2005), pp. 207–8.
71 Gladstone, Liverpool, pp. 22–3.
72 Shannon, God and politics, pp. 246–7.
73 Gladstone, Liverpool, p. 29.
74 Jevons, W. Stanley, The principles of science (2 vols., London, 1874), ii, pp. 429–30Google Scholar.
75 Gladstone, William, ‘The Olympian system versus the solar theory’, Nineteenth Century (hereafter NC), 6 (1879), pp. 746–68Google Scholar, at p. 768.
76 Ibid., p. 746.
77 Gardner, ‘Gladstone’, p. 210.
78 William Gladstone to Max Müller, 28 Sept. 1864, BL, Add MS 44251(2), fo. 276.
79 Gladstone, ‘Olympian’, p. 747.
80 Ibid., pp. 748–9.
81 Bebbington, Gladstone, p. 168.
82 Gladstone, ‘Olympian’, p. 751.
83 Burrow, John, ‘The clue to the maze’, in Collini, Stefan, Winch, Donald, and Burrow, John, eds., That noble science of politics (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 208–46Google Scholar. Freeman was clearly seduced by this vision. Freeman, E. A., The unity of history (London, 1872)Google Scholar.
84 J. Gruber, ‘Mivart, St George Jackson (1827–1900)’, ODNB.
85 Gladstone, William, ‘The courses of religious thought’, Contemporary Review, 28 (1876), pp. 1–26Google Scholar, at p. 14. See also Gladstone, W., ‘The sixteenth century arraigned before the nineteenth: a study’ (orig. Contemporary Review, 1878), in Gladstone, W., Gleanings of past years (7 vols., London, 1879), iii, pp. 217–73Google Scholar, at p. 261.
86 Gladstone, William, ‘Religion, achaian and semitic’, NC, 7 (1880), pp. 710–25Google Scholar, at pp. 715–16.
87 Douglas, George, 8th duke of Argyll, ‘A great lesson’, NC, 22 (1887), pp. 293–309Google Scholar, at p. 308; Desmond, Devil's disciple, pp. 367–8.
88 Douglas, George, 8th duke of Argyll, Unity of nature (London, 1884), pp. 34–5, 568Google Scholar. Hawarden, Gladstone Library (hereafter GL), E35/9.
89 Gladstone, William, ‘The colour-sense’, NC, 2 (1877), pp. 366–88Google Scholar. See also Bellmer, ‘Statesman’.
90 For clippings, see Hawarden, Flintshire Record Office, Glynne-Gladstone papers 1641.
91 Charles Darwin to William Gladstone, 2 and 25 Oct. 1877, BL, Add MSS 44455, fos. 120, 210.
92 Alfred Russel Wallace, ‘The colours of animals and plants’, Macmillan's Magazine (Sept. 1877), pp. 384–408, at p. 397.
93 Gladstone, William, ‘Dawn of creation and of worship’, NC, 18 (1885), pp. 685–706Google Scholar. For the ‘rule of relativity’, see idem, The impregnable rock of holy scripture (London, 1890), p. 71.
94 Gladstone, ‘Dawn’, p. 690.
95 Ibid., p. 696.
96 The error was not born of ignorance, as Gladstone had read Huxley's American addresses (1877), which included his lecture on Archaeopteryx. Entry for 16 Feb. 1879. GD, ix, p. 390.
97 Argyll to Gladstone, 6 Dec. 1885, BL, Add MSS 44106, fo. 32.
98 T. H. Huxley, ‘The interpreters of Genesis’ [1885], in Huxley, Essays, iv, pp. 139–63, at p. 140.
99 Gladstone, , ‘Proem to Genesis’, NC, 19 (1886), pp. 1–21Google Scholar, at pp. 16–17.
100 T. H. Huxley, ‘The evolution of theology’ [1886], in Huxley, Essays, iv, pp. 287–372, at pp. 287–9.
101 T. H. Huxley, ‘Agnosticism’ [1889], in Huxley, Essays, v, pp. 209–62, at p. 248.
102 For Huxley's defence of agnosticism as nescience, see Lightman, Bernard, ‘Huxley and scientific agnosticism’, British Journal of the History of Science, 35 (2002), pp. 271–89CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Lightman, Bernard, The origins of agnosticism: Victorian unbelief and the limits of knowledge (Baltimore, MD, 1987), ch. 2Google Scholar.
103 In April 1889, the critic and historian Leslie Stephen drew Huxley's attention to the similarities between Huxley's ‘Evolution of theology’ and Newman's Tract LXXXV of 1838. In ‘Agnosticism and Christianity’ (NC, 1889) Huxley claimed that this tract and the Essay on development contained material ideal for ‘a primer of “infidelity”’. For Huxley's notes on Newman see London, Imperial College Archives, Huxley papers, xlvii, fos. 196–212.
104 Huxley, ‘Agnosticism’, pp. 235–6; idem, ‘Mr Balfour's attack on agnosticism I’, NC, 37 (1895), pp. 527–40, at p. 534.
105 Garnett, ‘Butler’, p. 77. The same point is made by Lightman, with regard to Huxley's use of Mansel. Lightman, Agnosticism, p. 9.
106 See marginalia to Huxley, American addresses (New York, NY, 1877); and idem, Evidence as to man's place in nature (London, 1863), p. 108. GL, K13/2.
107 Famously in Kingsley, Charles, The water-babies: a fairy tale for a land-baby (London, 1863)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See Lightman, Bernard, Victorian popularizers of science (Chicago, IL, 2007), ch. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Conlin, Jonathan, ‘An illiberal descent: natural and national history in the work of Charles Kingsley’, History, 96 (2011), pp. 167–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
108 SSB, p. 306. See also Turner, Cultural authority, p. 148; Bowler, Peter J., Evolution: the history of an idea (rev. edn, Los Angeles, CA, 1989), p. 144Google Scholar; idem, Non-Darwinian revolution (Baltimore, MD, 1988), p. 63.
109 For a discussion of Argyll as a man of science, see Gillespie, Neal C., ‘The duke of Argyll, evolutionary anthropology, and the art of scientific controversy’, Isis, 68 (1974), pp. 40–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Gladstone's engagement with Argyll's evolutionary theories, see Douglas, George, 8th duke of Argyll, Autobiography and memoirs (2 vols., London, 1906), ii, p. 2Google Scholar; GD, vii, p. 43; GD, vi, p. 502; GD, xi, p. 108.
110 Illingworth, J. R., ‘The Incarnation and development’, in Gore, Charles, ed., Lux mundi: a series of studies in the religion of the Incarnation (London, 1889), pp. 179–214Google Scholar, at p. 181.
111 Edward S. Talbot, ‘Preparation in history for Christ’, in ibid., pp. 129–78, at p. 133.
112 Talbot, ‘History’, in ibid., pp. 134, 168 (qu.).
113 As he noted, ‘we cannot place ourselves outside [evolution]’. Illingworth, ‘Development’, p. 181.
114 Windscheffel, Gladstone, p. 188.
115 Parry, Jonathan, Democracy and religion: Gladstone and the Liberal party, 1867–1875 (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 57 (qu.), 58, 75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Desmond, Adrian, Huxley: evolution's high priest (London, 1997), p. 166Google Scholar.
116 Parry, Democracy, pp. 118–19.
117 Huxley, Leonard, ed., Life and letters of Thomas Henry Huxley (2 vols., London, 1900), i, p. 353Google Scholar. For similar sentiments, see Huxley to Albert Grey, 13 Apr. 1886, in ibid., ii, pp. 124–6. Desmond, High priest, pp. 167–8.
118 White, Huxley, p. 141.
119 T. H. Huxley, ‘The keepers of the herd of swine’ [1890], in Huxley, Essays, v, pp. 366–92, at p. 390.
120 Argyll to Gladstone, 18 Dec. 1885, BL, Add MS 44106, fo. 64.
121 Huxley, ‘Agnosticism’, p. 252. In 1895, he coined the term ‘demômism’ (related to a Greek verb meaning ‘to talk popularly’). Huxley, ‘Mr Balfour's attack on agnosticism I’, p. 531. See also Huxley, ‘Mr Gladstone and Genesis’ [1886], in Huxley, Essays, iv, pp. 164–200, at p. 166.
122 Hilton, ‘Theological politics’, p. 38.
123 Schreuder, ‘Gladstone's “greater world”’, p. 275.
124 Matthew, ‘Vaticanism’, p. 436.
125 Shannon, God and politics, pp. 276, 289.
126 Gladstone, William, ‘General retrospect’, in Brooke, John and Sorensen, Mary, eds., The prime ministers’ papers: W. E. Gladstone (4 vols., London, 1971), i, p. 136Google Scholar.
127 Hilton, ‘Theological politics’, pp. 50 (‘bread’), 51 (‘flurry’).
128 Parry, Democracy, p. 153.
129 Gladstone cited in ibid., p. 171.
130 Eugenio F. Biagini, Gladstone (London, 2000), p. 43.
131 Parry, Jonathan, The rise and fall of Liberal government in Victorian Britain (New Haven, CT, 1993), p. 12Google Scholar.
132 SSB, p. 76.
133 SSB, pp. 11 (‘unfolded’, ‘pride’), 3 (habit).
134 Collini, Moralists, p. 98.
135 WJB, i, p. 52.
136 Strikingly, Gladstone cited changing torture methods in support of this theory. SSB, pp. 83, 329.
137 Hilton, ‘Theological politics’, pp. 35, 38.
138 Erb, Peter C., ‘Politics and theological Liberalism: William Gladstone and Mrs Humphry Ward’, Journal of Religious History, 25 (2001), pp. 158–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
139 SSB, p. 106.
140 Erb, ‘Gladstone and Ward’, p. 163.
141 Gladstone, diary entry for 4 Jan. 1843, GD, iii, pp. 250–1.
142 Shannon, God and politics, pp. 154, 169.
143 Parry, Democracy, p. 171.
144 ‘Suffer, v.’, OED, definition 13a.
145 Gladstone, Rock, p. 56.
146 Matthew, ‘Vaticanism’, p. 417.
147 Jenkins, T. A., Gladstone, whiggery and the Liberal party, 1874–1886 (Oxford, 1988), p. 25Google Scholar.