The analogy seems to operate on two levels. Cromwell has been physically separated from Fairfax, as by association has the army, but neither party need be disquieted, for there is to this estrangement a divine purpose. Superficially this is an equitable stance towards the two men God has as clear a plan for Fairfax in his retirement as he does for his successor, – Cromwell, in his new role. Yet even here the conceit of privileging the new man over the old is preserved: the sermon makes it clear that Cromwell is portrayed in the senior role of Abraham, the Hebrew patriarch, with Fairfax figured in the more minor role of his nephew Lot. It is not merely a matter of semantics to suggest that, while Walker for the most part recounts that Abraham and Lot suffered a parity of dislocation, separated he from each other, nevertheless provides a potentially significant twist when adding that was separated ‘Lot from The implication is that it is Lot/Fairfax who has departed from the Abraham’. mainstream and chosen to follow his own path, not Abraham/Cromwell. Like Walker, in his official role as ‘A Second Defence’ (1654) Milton uses government propagandist to make all the right diplomatic noises about retirement, Fairfax’s at least initially. Comparing his withdrawal with that evergreen Renaissance exemplar of disinterested stoicism, Scipio Africanus, Milton declares that his subject has exhibited ‘the greatest modesty, the most exemplary sanctity of life, [and] the to conquer highest courage’ not merely the enemy, but ambition and glory. The former Commander-in-Chief is in the most delightful and glorious of retirements, [his] virtues and deservedly ‘enjoying, illustrious deeds, which is the end of all The Lord then, is a noble labours’ General’s retreat, withdrawal which outwardly has the full sanction of the government he steadfastly – – served. Yet, despite this apparent vindication of position, the next passage appears Fairfax’s to to come to terms with what has happened. In now transforming betray Milton’s struggle his narrative into praise of Cromwell, he barely manages to toe the official party line over the
The analogy seems to operate on two levels. Cromwell has been physically separated from Fairfax, as by association has the army, but neither party need be disquieted, for there is to this estrangement a divine purpose. Superficially this is an equitable stance towards the two men – God has as clear a plan for Fairfax in his retirement as he does for his successor, Cromwell, in his new role. Yet even here the conceit of privileging the new man over the old is preserved: the sermon makes it clear that Cromwell is portrayed in the senior role of Abraham, the Hebrew patriarch, with Fairfax figured in the more minor role of his nephew Lot. It is not merely a matter of semantics to suggest that, while Walker for the most part recounts that Abraham and Lot suffered a parity of dislocation, separated from each other, he nevertheless provides a potentially significant twist when adding that ‘Lot was separated from Abraham’. The implication is that it is Lot/Fairfax who has departed from the mainstream and chosen to follow his own path, not Abraham/Cromwell. Like Walker, in ‘A Second Defence’ (1654) Milton uses his official role as government propagandist to make all the right diplomatic noises about Fairfax’s retirement, at least initially. Comparing his withdrawal with that evergreen Renaissance exemplar of disinterested stoicism, Scipio Africanus, Milton declares that his subject has exhibited ‘the greatest modesty, the most exemplary sanctity of life, [and] the highest courage’ to conquer not merely the enemy, but ambition and glory. The former Commander-in-Chief is deservedly ‘enjoying, in the most delightful and glorious of retirements, [his] virtues and illustrious deeds, which is the end of all labours’ The Lord General’s retreat, then, is a noble withdrawal which – outwardly – has the full sanction of the government he steadfastly served. Yet, despite this apparent vindication of Fairfax’s position, the next passage appears to betray Milton’s struggle to come to terms with what has happened. In now transforming his narrative into praise of Cromwell, he barely manages to toe the official party line over the
Hopper%20%26%20Major%20Introduction.docx