The BARS ‘On This Day’ Blog series celebrates the 200th anniversary of literary and historical events of the Romantic period. Want to contribute a future post? Get in touch.
Edward Hardiman celebrates the 200 year anniversary of the founding of the Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society by discussing the relationship that these societies have with Romanticism.
The 12th of December marks the bicentenary of the Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society. The inaugural meeting at Cutler’s Hall was presided over by Dr. Arnold Knight wherein the opening resolutions were passed: ‘The present advanced state of society renders it highly desirable that every populous district should contain some Public Institution, dedicated to the cultivation and advancement of literature and science.’
The foundation of the society was not just a matter of local importance, instead it was one aspect of a much larger movement within forms of urban sociability. The 12th of December did not mark the establishment of the first Literary and Philosophical Society (Lit Phil) nor did it even mark Sheffield’s first attempt. The first Lit Phil was founded in Manchester (1781) by a few gentlemen who had a ‘taste for Literature and Philosophy’ and had decided to form themselves into a kind of ‘weekly club’ to discuss their interests.[1] With the exception of the Newcastle (1793) and Liverpool Lit Phil (1811) there were no further societies that lasted more than a year, Sheffield’s original Lit Phil disbanded the year it was established in 1805. A lack of funding and membership, combined with the political suppression of voluntary associations during the Coalition Wars (1792-1815), made it extremely difficult to sustain a complex network of learned institutions.[2]
Despite this, the persistence of local communities eventually resulted in the formation of more stable learned societies. Beginning again in Leeds (1819) Lit Phils became more permanent fixtures of provincial club life. The establishment of the Sheffield society marked a high point in their intellectual and cultural purchase, particularly within the north of England. Lit Phils served as ‘institutional nodes’ across the transpennine region, allowing for the exchange of useful information through lectures, conversation, and the circulation of print.[3] This phenomenon was not lost on its members either, speeches and print matter were acutely aware of the unprecedented increase of these societies.
Although Lit Phils were administratively independent from one other, they shared a broad collection of rules and guidelines. A hierarchy of membership, elected officers, and a prohibition on political or religious subject matters during meetings were all featured in each society’s code of laws. Beyond logistical or administrative similarities, the emphasis on all of forms of useful knowledge (literary and philosophical) was certainly unique. What constituted “useful” was therefore not limited to practical knowledge. Lit Phils predated the breakup of knowledge into distinct disciplines which are now ubiquitous in modern academic institutions. Prolific poet and newspaper proprietor James Montgomery justified the constitution of the society within his opening address by listing a number of Sheffield’s most important learned men.[4] Montgomery went further by turning Byron’s mocking remark about ‘classical Sheffield’ on its head, using the title sincerely. Although Lit Phils were not inherently opposed to certain aspects of Romanticism, the emphasis on moral improvement and useful knowledge meant there was little room for the appreciation of passion and the display of emotion. There are a number of rather stuffy letters and lectures complaining about speakers being too emotive, or warning against a ‘love of display’.[5]
However, Lit Phils and Romanticism were in complete opposition. One important point of overlap can be found within William Godwin’s ideas about conversation and the creation of knowledge. Unlike public lectures, papers delivered in monthly meetings were shorter and followed by a discussion. In this context, the speaker would serve as a chair for debate, rather than strict figure of authority. In doing so, ‘the constant collision of minds’ could be facilitated, ‘the action and re-action of thought upon thought, the transmission of truth from individual to individual’ could take place. Conversation as a means of creating knowledge was an idea developed not just by Godwin, but also Joseph Priestley and Isaac Watts.[6]
Returning to the 12th of December, the foundation of the Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society served as an important addition to the growing network of learned societies in England. They were no longer a small gentlemen’s club, but a vast web of societies intent on the circulation and creation of knowledge.
[1] Memoirs of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, Vol. 1 (Warrington: W. Eyres, 1785), vii.
[2] Emsley, “‘Terror’ and the Rule of Law in England during the Decade of the French Revolution.”, 802-3.
[3] Jon Mee and Jennifer Wilkes, Transpennine Enlightenment: The Literary and Philosophical Societies and Knowledge Networks in the North, 1781-1830.” Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies. Vol. 38, Issue, 4. (2015), 1.
[4] Specifically the sculptor Francis Chantrey, botanist Jonathan Salt, and antiquarian Joseph Hunter.
[5] C. T. Thackrah, An Introductory Discourse, Delivered to Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society, April 6 1821, (Leeds: W. Gawtrees and co., 1821) 46-7.
[6] Fourth Report of the Council, on the General State of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society (Leeds: Robinson and Hernaman, 1824), 11-12.